| Literature DB >> 21264354 |
Shu-Qing Zuo1, Li-Qun Fang, Lin Zhan, Pan-He Zhang, Jia-Fu Jiang, Li-Ping Wang, Jia-Qi Ma, Bing-Cai Wang, Ri-Min Wang, Xiao-Ming Wu, Hong Yang, Zhi-Wei Cao, Wu-Chun Cao.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) is highly endemic in mainland China, and has extended from rural areas to cities recently. Beijing metropolis is a novel affected region, where the HFRS incidence seems to be diverse from place to place. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21264354 PMCID: PMC3019113 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000945
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Figure 1Spatial clustered areas with higher incidence of HFRS using spatial scan statistics.
Spatial scan analysis was performed by moving windows statistics approach. It determined three statistically significant cluster areas (hotspots), designed as cluster area A with a Relative Risk (RR) of 5.45 (P<0.001) (the red area), cluster area B with RR of 3.57 (P = 0.002) (the yellow area) and cluster area C with RR of 3.3 (P<0.001) (the green area). The dots and triangles represent the sites from which sequence data are available, not all human cases or rodent captures in Beijing. The dots represented HFRS cases and the triangles represented the sites where the rodent hosts were captured. HuBJ15 and HuBJ22 were diagnosed in Beijing but their exposed sites fall outside of Beijing. They were included in the figure because they were in vicinity. HuBJ20 were diagnosed in Beijing but the exposed sites of the case were far away from Beijing, thus was not included in the figure.
Figure 2The Phylogenetic tree constructed by Mr. Bayes 3.1 software.
It set the GTR evolutionary model with gamma-distributed rate variation across sites and a proportion of invariable sites. Numbers indicated posterior probalities for Bayesian inference. A: The phylogenetic tree based on the entire coding region of the 1,290-nucleotide S segment. B: The Phylogenetic tree based on 430-nucleotide L genomic sequence. Sequences from Genbank included 76–118 (M14626, NC_005222), IR461 (AF329388), SR11 (M34881), TCH (AF329389), 80-39 (NC-005236, X56492), Z37 (AF187082, AF285266), ZT10 (AY766368, EF581094 ), ZT71 (AY750171, EF190551), K24-e7 (AF288653), Gou3 (AB027522), Hb8610 (AF288643), R22 (AF488707), L99 (AF288299, AF288297), zy27 (AF406965), Pf26 (AY006465), 93HBX12 (EF192308). Sequences obtained in this study included CUI (GQ279395, ), SD201 GQ279385, HM748794), BjHD01 (AY627049, HM748802), HuBJ3 (GQ279391, HM748803), HuBJ7 (GQ279381), HuBJ9 (GQ279384, HM748795), HuBJ15 (GQ279390, HM748800), HuBJ16 (GQ279380, HM748804), HuBJ19 (GQ279389, HM748796), HuBJ20 (GQ279394, HM748805), HuBJ22 (GQ279379, HM748792), Rn-M11 (GQ279383), Rn-DC8 (GQ279386), Rn-YUE12(GQ279387, HM748801), Rn-CP7 (GQ279382, HM748793), Rn-HD11 (GQ279392, HM748798), Rn-HD27 (GQ279393, HM748799) and Rn-SHY17 (GQ279388, HM748791), SD5-153 (HM748797).
Recombination Statistics of strains HuBJ16, HuBJ7 and HuBJ22.
| Algorithm | HuBJ16 | HuBJ7 | HuBJ22 | |||
| P-value | Breakpoint | P-value | Breakpoint | P-value | Breakpoint | |
| MaxChi | 1.885×10−2 | 114, 1031 | 8.490×10−3 | 444, 1315 | 8.490×10−3 | 566, 1408 |
| Chimaera | 2.138×10−2 | 113, 1031 | 1.318×10−3 | 459, 1311 | 1.318×10−3 | – |
| SiScan | 2.639×10−5 | 116, 1020 | 2.726×10−4 | 460, 1310 | 2.726×10−4 | 385, 1542 |
| LARD | 6.701×10−5 | 116, 1043 | 9.780×10−3 | 435, 1327 | 9.780×10−3 | – |
| 3Seq | 5.457×10−6 | 114, 1031 | 2.931×10−3 | 460, 1310 | 2.931×10−3 | 385, 1408 |
Figure 3Phylogenetic trees from spliced alignments.
Recombination event 1 involved the strain HuBJ16 and recombination event 2 involved the strain HuBJ22 and HuBJ7. A: Phylogenetic tree based on 116–1,020 nucleotide of the S segment. B: Phylogenetic tree based on concatenated sequence of the remainder of our sequence alignment. C: Phylogenetic tree based on 460–1,310 nucleotide of the S segment. D: Phylogenetic tree based on concatenated sequence of the remainder. Recombination daughter sequences were indicated in red pane.