| Literature DB >> 22389739 |
Victor H Peña1, Geysson J Fernández, Andrés M Gómez-Palacio, Ana M Mejía-Jaramillo, Omar Cantillo, Omar Triana-Chávez.
Abstract
Methods to determine blood-meal sources of hematophagous Triatominae bugs (Chagas disease vectors) are serological or based on PCR employing species-specific primers or heteroduplex analysis, but these are expensive, inaccurate, or problematic when the insect has fed on more than one species. To solve those problems, we developed a technique based on HRM analysis of the mitochondrial gene cytochrome B (Cyt b). This technique recognized 14 species involved in several ecoepidemiological cycles of the transmission of Trypanosoma cruzi and it was suitable with DNA extracted from intestinal content and feces 30 days after feeding, revealing a resolution power that can display mixed feedings. Field samples were analyzed showing blood meal sources corresponding to domestic, peridomiciliary and sylvatic cycles. The technique only requires a single pair of primers that amplify the Cyt b gene in vertebrates and no other standardization, making it quick, easy, relatively inexpensive, and highly accurate.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22389739 PMCID: PMC3289613 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Source of the sample of the standard species used in the HRM analysis.
| Standard species | Common name | Tissue | blood | Total |
|
| Opossum | - | 3 | 3 |
|
| Mouse | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|
| Cow | 2 | 1 | 3 |
|
| Goat | - | 3 | 3 |
|
| Dog | - | 3 | 3 |
|
| Sheep | - | 1 | 1 |
|
| Horse | - | 3 | 3 |
|
| Pig | 3 | - | 3 |
|
| Rabbit | - | 2 | 2 |
|
| Cat | - | 3 | 3 |
|
| Rat | - | 1 | 1 |
|
| Donkey | - | 2 | 2 |
|
| Human | - | 3 | 3 |
|
| Chicken | 2 | 1 | 3 |
-: sample not used.
Fourteen standard species included in the study and its respective Tm and HRM analysis.
| Tm analysis | HRM analysis | |||||||
| Sp | Tm | SD | 95% CI of Tm | VC | Tm genotype | HRM genotype | %C | %C SD |
| Opossum | 81.02 | 0.09 | 80.97–81.06 | 0.10 | Opossum | Opossum | 81.24 | 15.02 |
| Mouse | 81.63 | 0.12 | 81.57–81.69 | 0.14 | Mouse | Mouse | 94.19 | 4.94 |
| Cow | 81.76 | 0.49 | 81.51–82.00 | 0.60 | Cow | Cow | 83.07 | 16.63 |
| Goat | 81.88 | 0.05 | 81.86–81.91 | 0.06 | Goat | Goat | 88.24 | 13.25 |
| Dog | 82.29 | 0.08 | 82.25–82.33 | 0.09 | Dog | Dog | 90.92 | 13.86 |
| Sheep | 82.29 | 0.03 | 82.26–82.33 | 0.04 | Sheep | Sheep | 98.69 | 1.50 |
| Horse | 82.56 | 0.08 | 82.52–82.60 | 0.10 | Horse | Horse | 93.46 | 9.04 |
| Pig | 82.58 | 0.05 | 82.55–82.60 | 0.06 | Pig | Pig | 95.18 | 9.50 |
| Rabbit | 82.69 | 0.05 | 82.66–82.72 | 0.06 | Rabbit | Rabbit | 98.55 | 1.33 |
| Cat | 83.46 | 0.09 | 83.41–83.50 | 0.11 | Cat | Cat | 78.81 | 22.40 |
| Rat | 83.55 | 0.05 | 83.50–83.59 | 0.05 | Rat | Rat | 89.90 | 6.51 |
| Donkey | 84.39 | 0.04 | 84.36–84.41 | 0.05 | Donkey | Donkey | 87.85 | 22.14 |
| Human | 85.79 | 0.05 | 85.76–85.82 | 0.06 | Human | Human | 96.58 | 2.22 |
| Chicken | 86.27 | 0.05 | 86.24–86.29 | 0.06 | Chicken | Chicken | 93.05 | 18.01 |
SD: standard deviation, CI: confidence interval, VC: variability correlation, %C: confidence percentage, %C SD: standard deviation of confidence percentage, Tm Genotype: Genotype according to Tm from all the replicas.
Figure 1Tm distribution of 14 genotypes included in the study.
Tm: melting temperature, Sp: species.
Figure 2Dissociation curve of 13 of the 14 genotypes included in the study.
Samples from intestinal content and feces at different times after feeding.
| Tm Analysis | HRM Analysis | ||||||||||
| Feed | Sample Source | Time course(days) | Tm1 | SD | Tm1 Genotype | Tm2 | SD | Tm2 Genotype | HRM Genotype | HRM %C | %C SD |
| H | IC | 1 | 86.24 | 0.02 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 55.23 | 10.84 |
| H | IC | 5 | 86.28 | 0.03 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 89.49 | 8.73 |
| H | IC | 5 | 86.3 | 0.03 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 82.15 | 8.77 |
| H | IC | 15 | 81.17 | 0.06 | M | 85.89 | 0.06 | H | ND | ND | ND |
| H | IC | 15 | 81.43 | 0.04 | M | 86.47 | 0.02 | C | ND | ND | ND |
| H | IC | 30 | 86.26 | 0.01 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 61.32 | 3.10 |
| H | IC | 30 | 85.79 | 0.01 | HG | - | - | - | HG | 63.65 | 5.66 |
| H | F | 30 | 81.54 | 0.01 | M | 85.97 | 0.03 | H | ND | ND | ND |
| H | F | 30 | 85.9 | 0.05 | HG | - | - | - | HG | 21.75 | 1.93 |
| C | IC | 1 | 86.32 | 0.03 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 94.49 | 3.60 |
| C | IC | 1 | 86.32 | 0.03 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 96.83 | 1.80 |
| C | IC | 1 | 86.28 | 0.02 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 89.45 | 5.88 |
| C | IC | 5 | 86.34 | 0.01 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 93.85 | 1.11 |
| C | IC | 5 | 86.34 | 0.04 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 95.56 | 4.01 |
| C | IC | 15 | 86.35 | 0.00 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 97.11 | 1.80 |
| C | IC | 15 | 86.31 | 0.01 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 96 | 2.75 |
| C | IC | 30 | 86.34 | 0.04 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 91.93 | 8.59 |
| C | IC | 30 | 86.32 | 0.02 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 98.37 | 0.05 |
| C | F | 30 | 86.41 | 0.05 | CG | - | - | - | CG | 33.37 | 18.35 |
H: human, C: chicken, IC: intestinal content, F: feces, CG: chicken genotype, HG: human genotype, M: mixed feeding determined by two peaks in the melting curve, Tm1: melting temperature of peak 1, Tm2: melting temperature of peak 2, SD: standard deviation, HRM %C: confidence percentage HRM, %C SD standard deviation of confidence percentage, ND: not determined, -: No secondary peak.
Amplification results from field samples (Table S1) showing one or two peaks in the melting curve.
| Lowest temperature peak analysis | Highest temperature peak analysis | |||||||||||
| Sample | Tm1 | SD | Tm1 genotype | HRM genotype | HRM %C | SD | Tm2 | SD | Tm2 genotype | HRM genotype | HRM %C | SD |
| 1 | 86.07 | 0.07 | Human | Human | 83.29 | 14.60 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2 | 85.96 | 0.06 | Human | Human | 90.98 | 5.02 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 3 | 85.96 | 0.05 | Human | Human | 81.84 | 6.48 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 4 | 86.15 | 0.06 | Human | Human | 75.41 | 2.02 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 5 | 86.03 | 0.04 | Human | Human | 90.91 | 3.56 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 6 | 82.04 | 0.08 | Dog | Dog | 56.48 | 3.30 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 7 | 82.02 | 0.15 | Dog | Dog | 53.68 | 25.81 | 86.14 | 0.04 | Human | Human | 64.56 | 14.75 |
| 9 | 84.74 | 0.02 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 86.13 | 0.03 | Human | Human | 63.11 | 9.50 |
| 10 | 84.87 | 0.21 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 86.10 | 0.04 | Human | Human | 78.90 | 15.17 |
| 12 | 81.16 | 0.01 | Opossum | Opossum | 86.02 | 11.19 | 86.10 | 0.03 | Human | Human | 82.24 | 3.30 |
| 14 | 86.15 | 0.02 | Human | Human | 56.35 | 6.93 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 15 | 84.85 | 0.09 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 86.20 | 0.06 | Human | Human | 40.76 | 11.44 |
| 16 | 86.19 | 0.06 | Human | Human | 57.23 | 11.38 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 19 | 84.85 | 0.08 | ND | ND | ND | ND | 86.16 | 0.01 | Human | ND | ND | ND |
| 20 | 86.58 | 0.02 | Chicken | Chicken | 88.71 | 7.08 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
Tm1: melting temperature of peak 1, Tm2: melting temperature of peak 2, SD: standard deviation, HRM %C: confidence percentage of HRM analysis, ND: not determined or not recognized, -: No secondary peak.
Figure 3Field sample showing mixed feeding including opossum and human with their respective controls.
Blastn results of ten insects collected from the field.
| Sample | Blastn description | e-Value | Accessionnumber | Identity with the standard used to HRM identification |
| 2 |
| 0 | AY509658.1 | 98.30% |
| 3 |
| 0 | AY509658.1 | 98.32% |
| 4 |
| 0 | AY509658.1 | 98.89% |
| 5 |
| 0 | AY509658.1 | 98.32% |
| 10 |
| 0 | AY509658.1 | 98.89% |
| 12_1 |
| 2.00E-161 | AY509658.1 | 94.69% |
| 12_2 |
| 2.00E-167 | DQ236278.1 | 98.60% |
| 15 |
| 0 | AY509658.1 | 98.89% |
| 16 |
| 9.00E-175 | HQ384199.1 | 97.49% |
| 19 |
| 9.00E-180 | AY509658.1 | 98.04% |
| 20 |
| 4.00E-33 | FM205717.1 | 59.78% |
For each sample the identity with the standard species used for HRM identification is shown.