| Literature DB >> 21658284 |
Lin Ai1, Mu-Xin Chen, Samer Alasaad, Hany M Elsheikha, Juan Li, Hai-Long Li, Rui-Qing Lin, Feng-Cai Zou, Xing-Quan Zhu, Jia-Xu Chen.
Abstract
Liver flukes belonging to the genus Fasciola are among the causes of foodborne diseases of parasitic etiology. These parasites cause significant public health problems and substantial economic losses to the livestock industry. Therefore, it is important to definitively characterize the Fasciola species. Current phenotypic techniques fail to reflect the full extent of the diversity of Fasciola spp. In this respect, the use of molecular techniques to identify and differentiate Fasciola spp. offer considerable advantages. The advent of a variety of molecular genetic techniques also provides a powerful method to elucidate many aspects of Fasciola biology, epidemiology, and genetics. However, the discriminatory power of these molecular methods varies, as does the speed and ease of performance and cost. There is a need for the development of new methods to identify the mechanisms underpinning the origin and maintenance of genetic variation within and among Fasciola populations. The increasing application of the current and new methods will yield a much improved understanding of Fasciola epidemiology and evolution as well as more effective means of parasite control. Herein, we provide an overview of the molecular techniques that are being used for the genetic characterization, detection and genotyping of Fasciola spp..Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21658284 PMCID: PMC3121690 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-4-101
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Summary of molecular approaches used for the detection and/or genetic differentiation of Fasciola spp..
| Molecular | Species investigated | Developmental stage | DNA target regions | References | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intermediate | Adult | Cercaria | Eggs | |||||
| Conventional PCR | √ | √ | ITS2 | 38 | ||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS2 | 14, 27 | |||
| √ | √ | √ | ITS1, ITS2 | 25 | ||||
| √ | √ | 28 | ||||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | 13, 17 | ||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS2, | 9 | |||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS1, | 16 | |||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | 15 | ||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | 18 | ||||
| √ | √ | Complete mitochondrial genome | 30 | |||||
| √ | √ | 124 bp repetitive DNA sequence | 49 | |||||
| √ | √ | 124 bp repetitive DNA sequence | 50 | |||||
| √ | √ | 28S | 39 | |||||
| Multiplex PCR | √ | √ | 52 | |||||
| Specific PCR | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS2 | 47 |
| PCR-RFLP | √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS2 | 22 | ||
| √ | √ | 23 | ||||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS1 | 8, 21 | |||
| PCR-SSCP | √ | √ | √ | Repetitive DNA sequences | 46 | |||
| RAPD-PCR | √ | √ | Random nucleotide sequence | 43 | ||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | Random nucleotide sequence | 53 | |||
| SRAP | √ | √ | Random nucleotide sequence | 42 | ||||
| √ | √ | √ | √ | Random nucleotide sequence | 10 | |||
| DNA probe | √ | √ | Repetitive DNA fragments | 48 | ||||
| TaqMan real-time PCR | √ | √ | √ | √ | ITS2 | 54 | ||
| LAMP | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | IGS | 58 |
| PCR | √ | √ | Microsatellites | 59 | ||||