| Literature DB >> 23145200 |
Bonnie L Webster1, Aiden M Emery, Joanne P Webster, Anouk Gouvras, Amadou Garba, Oumar Diaw, Mohmoudane M Seye, Louis Albert Tchuem Tchuente, Christopher Simoonga, Joseph Mwanga, Charles Lange, Curtis Kariuki, Khalfan A Mohammed, J Russell Stothard, David Rollinson.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Schistosomiasis in one of the most prevalent parasitic diseases, affecting millions of people and animals in developing countries. Amongst the human-infective species S. haematobium is one of the most widespread causing urogenital schistosomiasis, a major human health problem across Africa, however in terms of research this human pathogen has been severely neglected. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPALEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23145200 PMCID: PMC3493392 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001882
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Overall and regional cox1 diversity.
| Region |
|
|
| ∏ |
|
| 1978 | 61 | 0.358±0.014 | 0.00435 |
|
| 1682 | 24 | 0.139±0.011 | 0.00068 |
|
| 296 | 43 | 0.926±0.009 | 0.01177 |
|
| 197 | 21 | 0.829±0.020 | 0.01129 |
| Kenya | 20 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Tanzania | 23 | 3 | 0.170±0.102 | 0.004 |
| Malawi | 5 | 2 | 0.400±0.237 | 0.00042 |
| Zambia | 71 | 2 | 0.028±0.027 | 0.00006 |
| Coastal Kenya | 78 | 15 | 0.874±0.021 | 0.01216 |
|
| 2 | 2 | 1.0±0.5 | 0.00113 |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 208 | 10 | 0.121±0.031 | 0.00013 |
| Cameroon | 207 | 10 | 0.121±0.031 | 0.00013 |
| Nigeria | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1353 | 10 | 0.026±0.006 | 0.00003 |
| Niger | 136 | 2 | 0.029±0.020 | 0.00003 |
| Senegal | 1211 | 7 | 0.023±0.006 | 0.00002 |
| Mali | 3 | 2 | 0.667±0.314 | 0.00070 |
| Gambia | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Liberia | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Guinea Bissau | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 214 | 27 | 0.893±0.013 | 0.01137 |
n = number of samples sequenced; u = number of unique haplotypes found within the region; h = haplotype diversity ± standard deviation; ∏ = nucleotide diversity.
samples form laboratory passaged or pooled larval stages. For these samples individual worms were not treated as individual samples but instead each different haplotype found was treated as an individual sample.
For Zanzibar the whole data set of Webster et al. [25], was used and due to the high number of worms sampled and high diversity found, individual worms were treated as individual samples. This was also used in the analysis of the diversity overall and in the Indian Island region.
This included samples from Zanzibar, Madagascar, Mauritius and Mafia.
Within locality cox1 diversity.
| Locality |
|
|
| ∏ |
|
| ||||
| Nder, SE3 | 397 | 2 | 0.005±0.005 | 0.00001 |
| Temeye, SE4 | 120 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Podor, SE5 | 104 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Tambacounda, SE6 | 288 | 2 | 0.014±0.010 | 0.00001 |
| Kolda, SE7 | 10 | 2 | 0.356±0.159 | 0.00037 |
| Barkedji SE8 | 288 | 3 | 0.055±0.019 | 0.00006 |
|
| ||||
| Libore, NI1 | 96 | 2 | 0.041±0.028 | 0.00004 |
| Falmado, NI2 | 40 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||
| Bessoum, CA1 | 193 | 10 | 0.130±0.033 | 0.00014 |
| Okuro, CA2 | 10 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
|
| ||||
| Taveta, KE1 | 20 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Coastal Kenya | ||||
| Rekeke, CK1 | 39 | 8 | 0.695±0.066 | 0.01207 |
| Kinango. CK2 | 24 | 4 | 0.576±0.097 | 0.00532 |
| Nimbodze, CK3 | 15 | 4 | 0.752±0.056 | 0.00312 |
|
| ||||
| Mwanza, TA1 | 21 | 2 | 0.095±0.084 | 0.00243 |
| Zanzibar, Zan | 214 | 27 | 0.893±0.013 | 0.01200 |
|
| ||||
| Katunga. ZA2 | 20 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Kafue, ZA3 | 18 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Lisiko, ZA4 | 32 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
n = number of samples sequenced; u = number of unique haplotypes found within the region; h = haplotype diversity ± standard deviation; ∏ = nucleotide diversity.
Only localities where miracidial populations were collected and the data from Zanzibar [25] were included.
The Genbank Accession numbers for the cox1 data are JQ397330–JQ397399 and for the nad1 data are JQ595387–595404 (see Table S1).
Figure 1Minimum spanning TCS networks incorporating all the cox1 haplotypes analyzed in this study.
Each line between haplotypes represents a single bp change and small circles between lines represent unsampled or extinct haplotypes. The network forms 2 distinct groups of haplotypes that cannot be linked. Group 1 is a simple network containing the main land African samples and a few of the Indian Ocean Island samples. The majority of the samples are closely clustered around the main haplotype (H1) by separate single links representing a single polymorphic position. There are 2 longer branches, “blue star”, leading off from the main cluster to form networks between Zanzibar, Coastal Kenya, Tanzania (+Mafia) and Zambian samples. H1 represents samples from 29 out of the 43 separate localities and represents 1574 out of the 1978 sequences analyzed (see figure 2 for the list of haplotype codes that represent H1). Group 2 forms a more complicated network containing the majority of the samples from the Indian Ocean Islands and samples from the closely located areas of Coastal Kenya and Tanzania. Identical haplotypes are grouped in the same oval.
Figure 2Neighbour-joining cox1 tree topology.
Nodal supports for the 2 groups are marked and details of the samples representing H1, “red dot”, are shown in the sub tree. Each terminal branch is labelled with the individual haplotype codes as detailed in Table S1.
Figure 3Neighbour-joining nad1 tree topology supporting the topology of the cox1 tree.
Nodal supports for the 2 groups are marked and details of the samples representing H1, “red dot”, are shown in the sub tree. Each terminal branch is labelled with the individual haplotype codes as detailed in Table S1.