| Literature DB >> 25522841 |
Erasto V Mbugi1, Bugwesa Z Katale2, Keith K Siame3, Julius D Keyyu4, Sharon L Kendall5, Hazel M Dockrell6, Elizabeth M Streicher7, Anita L Michel8, Mark M Rweyemamu9, Robin M Warren10, Mecky I Matee11, Paul D van Helden12.
Abstract
This study was part of a larger cross-sectional survey that was evaluating tuberculosis (TB) infection in humans, livestock and wildlife in the Serengeti ecosystem in Tanzania. The study aimed at evaluating the genetic diversity of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates from TB patients attending health facilities in the Serengeti ecosystem. DNA was extracted from 214 sputum cultures obtained from consecutively enrolled newly diagnosed untreated TB patients aged ≥18 years. Spacer oligonucleotide typing (spoligotyping) and Mycobacterium Interspersed Repetitive Units and Variable Number Tandem Repeat (MIRU-VNTR) were used to genotype M. tuberculosis to establish the circulating lineages. Of the214 M. tuberculosis isolates genotyped, 55 (25.7%) belonged to the Central Asian (CAS) family, 52 (24.3%) were T family (an ill-defined family), 38 (17.8%) belonged to the Latin American Mediterranean (LAM) family, 25 (11.7%) to the East-African Indian (EAI) family, 25 (11.7%) comprised of different unassigned ('Serengeti') strain families, while 8 (3.7%) belonged to the Beijing family. A minority group that included Haarlem, X, U and S altogether accounted for 11 (5.2%) of all genotypes. MIRU-VNTR typing produced diverse patterns within and between families indicative of unlinked transmission chains. We conclude that, in the Serengeti ecosystem only a few successful families predominate namely CAS, T, LAM and EAI families. Other types found in lower prevalence are Beijing, Haarlem, X, S and MANU. The Haarlem, EAI_Somalia, LAM3 and S/convergent and X2 subfamilies found in this study were not reported in previous studies in Tanzania.Entities:
Keywords: Genotyping; Human–animal interface; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Serengeti ecosystem
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25522841 PMCID: PMC4364622 DOI: 10.1016/j.tube.2014.11.006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tuberculosis (Edinb) ISSN: 1472-9792 Impact factor: 3.131
Figure 1Map of the Serengeti ecosystem comprising of the Serengeti National Park, Ngorongoro Conservation Area, Ikorongo-Grumeti Game Reserves, Maswa Game Reserve. The District Designated Hospitals and Health Centres are indicated by arrows and marked by letters A: Endulen Heath Centre; B: Bunda DDH; C: Mugumu DDH; D: Waso DDH.
Representative M. tuberculosis families as was detected by spoligotyping in this study. SITs = spoligotype international types; * = families with no (un-assigned) SITS. Black squares and white squares represent the presence and absence of specific spacer along positions 1 to 43 in the DR locus, respectively. All M. tuberculosis isolates were obtained from human subjects.
| S/N | Family (clades) | SITs | Octal code | No. of strains | % | Spoligotype pattern | Host |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BEIJING | 1 | 000000000003771 | 08 | 3.7 | Human | |
| 2 | CAS1_KILI | 21 | 703377400001771 | 38 | 17.8 | Human | |
| 3 | CAS | 2269 | 703777740001771 | 02 | 0.9 | Human | |
| 4 | CAS1_DELHI | 26 | 703777740003771 | 14 | 6.5 | Human | |
| 5 | CAS2 | 288 | 700377740003771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 6 | EAI5 | 126 | 477777777413671 | 20 | 9.3 | Human | |
| 7 | EAI5 or EAI3 | 8 | 400037777413771 | 04 | 1.9 | Human | |
| 8 | EAI1_SOM | 1801 | 777777777413731 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 9 | LAM11_ZWE | 2196 | 777777606060771 | 29 | 13.6 | Human | |
| 10 | LAM6 | 64 | 777777607560771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 11 | LAM9 | 42 | 777777607760771 | 07 | 3.3 | Human | |
| 12 | LAM3 and s/convergent | 4 | 000000007760771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 13 | H1 | 727 | 777737774020731 | 02 | 0.9 | Human | |
| 14 | H3 | 50 | 777777777720771 | 03 | 1.4 | Human | |
| 15 | H3-T3 | 36 | 777737777720771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 16 | MANU2 | 1192 | 777777677763771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 17 | S | 34 | 776377777760771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 18 | T1 | 53 | 777777777760771 | 23 | 10.7 | Human | |
| 19 | T2 | 135 | 777777777760730 | 12 | 5.6 | Human | |
| 20 | T2-T3 | 73 | 777737777720771 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 21 | T3 | 37 | 777737777760771 | 02 | 0.9 | Human | |
| 22 | T3_ETH | 345 | 777000377760771 | 11 | 5.1 | Human | |
| 23 | T2-Uganda | 437774777760730 | 03 | 1.4 | Human | ||
| 24 | U | 458 | 777777607740771 | 02 | 0.9 | Human | |
| 25 | X2 | 137 | 777776777760601 | 01 | 0.5 | Human | |
| 26 | Serengeti | no SITs | 703377400000771 | 25 | 11.7 | Human* | |
| 214 | 100 |
Distribution of various M. tuberculosis families based on spoligotype pattern by district (n = 214).
| SITs | Ngorongoro | Serengeti | Bunda | Total | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAS | 33 | 11 | 11 | 55 | 25.7 |
| T | 14 | 17 | 21 | 52 | 24.3 |
| LAM | 18 | 6 | 14 | 38 | 17.8 |
| EAI | 6 | 5 | 14 | 25 | 11.7 |
| Beijing | 1 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 3.7 |
| Haarlem | 3 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 2.8 |
| X | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| U | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0.9 |
| S | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 |
| MANU | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| Serengeti | 15 | 0 | 10 | 25 | 11.7 |
| Total | 93 | 46 | 75 | 214 | 100.0 |
Distribution of spoligotype patterns of subfamilies in the three districts in the Serengeti ecosystem.
| Sub-family | Ngorongoro | Serengeti | Bunda | Total | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BEIJING | 1 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 3.7 |
| CAS | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.9 |
| CAS1_DELHI | 5 | 8 | 1 | 14 | 6.5 |
| CAS1_KILI | 26 | 3 | 9 | 38 | 17.8 |
| CAS2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 |
| EAI1_SOM | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| EAI5 | 4 | 4 | 12 | 20 | 9.3 |
| EAI5 or EAI3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1.9 |
| H1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0.9 |
| H3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1.4 |
| H3-T3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| LAM11_ZWE | 11 | 6 | 12 | 29 | 13.6 |
| LAM3 and S/convergent | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| LAM6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| LAM9 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 3.3 |
| MANU2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| S | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 |
| T1 | 8 | 3 | 12 | 23 | 10.7 |
| T2 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 12 | 5.6 |
| T2-T3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| T2-Uganda | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1.4 |
| T3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0.9 |
| T3_ETH | 5 | 2 | 4 | 11 | 5.1 |
| U | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0.9 |
| X2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 |
| Serengeti | 15 | 0 | 10 | 25 | 11.7 |
| Total | 93 | 46 | 75 | 214 | 100.0 |
Figure 2A NJ-Tree dendrogram of 18 representative samples from MIRU-VNTR typing showing relationships among families. The categorical based NJ-phylogenetic tree was generated from MIRU-VNTRPlus-24 (http://www.miru-vntrplus.org/). Selected strains were used from each constituent site in the ecosystem to assess whether there was a defined transmission link for the circulating strains in the ecosystem.
Combined typing results of 24-loci MIRU-VNTR and spoligotyping analysis of 18 representative Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates from the Serenegti ecosystem.
| SN | Isolate | Origin | Family | MIRU-VNTR (std 24-loci) | Spoligotype patterns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 656 | Bunda | Beijing | 223325163633424563544432 | |
| 2 | 705 | Serengeti | Beijing | 224325173533423463444433 | |
| 3 | 710 | Serengeti | Beijing | 224325163533423463444433 | |
| 4 | 700 | Serengeti | Beijing | 223325163533423463444433 | |
| 5 | 697 | Serengeti | Beijing | 223325163533423463344433 | |
| 6 | N1254 | Ngorongoro | Beijing | 223325171531424553444433 | |
| 7 | 724 | Bunda | Beijing | 223335171531424553444433 | |
| 8 | 725 | Bunda | Beijing | 224325171741424553544432 | |
| 9 | 703 | Serengeti | CAS1_Kili | 229325113344524522524235 | |
| 10 | 481 | Ngorongoro | CAS1_Kili | 229325113344524322544235 | |
| 11 | 588 | Bunda | CAS1_Kili | 223525113344524322524235 | |
| 12 | 255 | Serengeti | CAS1_DELHI | 223525173423724524524455 | |
| 13 | N1367 | Ngorongoro | CAS1_DELHI | 226525123733723523524235 | |
| 14 | 677 | Serengeti | EAI5 | 245327223523642644643131 | |
| 15 | B732 | Bunda | EAI5 | 245327223523642534643131 | |
| 16 | 068 | Ngorongoro | LAM11_ZWE | 225525113324224322224253 | |
| 17 | 374 | Bunda | LAM11_ZWE | 225126141322214342244153 | |
| 18 | 264 | Serengeti | LAM11_ZWE | 225126152321312332244153 |
Comparison of genotyping results of our study and of two previous studies conducted in Tanzania.
| Family | Eldihom et al., 2006 | Kibiki et al., 2007 | Current study |
|---|---|---|---|
| CAS | 52 (35.4%) | 49 (37.7%) | 55 (25.7%) |
| T | 21 (14.3%) | 15 (11.5%) | 52 (24.3%) |
| LAM | 33 (22.4%) | 31 (23.8%) | 38 (17.8%) |
| EAI | 25 (17.0%) | 13 (10.0%) | 25 (11.7%) |
| Beijing | 7 (4.8%) | 7 (5.4%) | 8 (3.7%) |
| Haarlem | 0 | 0 | 6 (2.8%) |
| X | 1 (0.7%) | 0 | 1 (0.5%) |
| S | 3 (2.0%) | 0 | 1 (0.5%) |
| MANU | 0 | 3 (2.3%) | 1 (0.5%) |
| Others (Orphans) | 5 (3.4%) | 12 (9.2%) | 25 (11.7%) |
| Total | 147 | 130 | 214 |
Only spoligotyping was done.
Both spoligotyping and standard MIRU-VNTR were done.
‘Serengeti strains’ in the current study.
Figure 3The map of Tanzania indicating where each of the three studies was conducted. The population characteristics of the three study sites differ. While the Serengeti ecosystem comprise of mostly pastoral communities, Dar es Salaam (Eldholm et al. study [14]) and Kilimanjaro (Kibiki et al. study [15]) are cities and townships with no pastoral activities at all and minimal animal-human contacts. (Map Source: www.Googlemaps.com).