| Literature DB >> 26766548 |
Christopher Delgado-Ratto1, Dionicia Gamboa2,3, Veronica E Soto-Calle2, Peter Van den Eede4, Eliana Torres2, Luis Sánchez-Martínez2, Juan Contreras-Mancilla2, Anna Rosanas-Urgell4, Hugo Rodriguez Ferrucci5, Alejandro Llanos-Cuentas2, Annette Erhart4, Jean-Pierre Van Geertruyden1, Umberto D'Alessandro6,7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Characterizing the parasite dynamics and population structure provides useful information to understand the dynamic of transmission and to better target control interventions. Despite considerable efforts for its control, vivax malaria remains a major health problem in Peru. In this study, we have explored the population genetics of Plasmodium vivax isolates from Iquitos, the main city in the Peruvian Amazon, and 25 neighbouring peri-urban as well as rural villages along the Iquitos-Nauta Road. METHODOLOGY/Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26766548 PMCID: PMC4713096 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0004376
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Fig 1Study areas and human migration patterns in and around Iquitos city and along the Iquitos-Nauta road (Loreto, Peru).
(A) Number of genotyped P. vivax isolates per area. Overall = 292: A1 = 105 (36.0%), A2 = 70 (24.0%), A3 = 32 (11.0%), A4 = 55 (18.8%) and A5 = 30 (10.3%). For detailed information of the villages that compose each area and frequency of isolates, see S1 Table. (B) The current human migration patterns are described by arrows indicating the direction and the occurrence of transit (thickness). Dotted blue arrows indicate that the transit involves crossing and/or navigating through a river while the solid black arrows indicate transit through the Iquitos Nauta road.
Fig 2Distribution of monoclonal and polyclonal infections and allelic patterns between the study areas.
All samples were considered for the analysis (A1 = 105, A2 = 70, A3 = 32, A4 = 55, A5 = 30). (A) Frequency of monoclonal (MOI = 1) and polyclonal infections (MOI≥2) per area. (B) Allelic patterns per area: Na = No. of different alleles, No. Private alleles = Number of alleles unique to a single area, He = Expected heterozygosity.
Summary of hierarchical AMOVA for different geographical groupings and genetic clustering.
| Grouping | Source of variation | df | Sum of squares | Estimated variation (%) | Statistic | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Between areas | 4 | 93.9 | 17% | 0.0001 | |||
| Within areas | 123 | 525.9 | 83% | ||||
| Between areas | 4 | 136.8 | 22% | 0.0002 | |||
| Between villages within areas | 7 | 43.6 | 4% | 0.0036 | |||
| Within villages | 116 | 482.3 | 73% | 0.0001 | |||
| Between clusters | 1 | 73 | 37% | 0.0001 | |||
| Within clusters | 87 | 355.3 | 63% | ||||
| Between clusters | 1 | 53.3 | 26% | 0.0001 | |||
| Within clusters | 79 | 338.7 | 74% | ||||
| Between clusters | 6 | 224.9 | 59% | 0.0001 | |||
| Within clusters | 80 | 167.2 | 41% | ||||
At 2-level hierarchical AMOVA: PHIPT = estimate of the proportion of the parasites’ genetic variance between areas/clusters relative to the total variance. At 3-level hierarchical AMOVA: PHIRT, PHIPR and PHIPT = proportion of variance between the areas, between villages and within villages, respectively.
1Number of isolates: A1 (n = 60), A2 (n = 16), A3 (n = 10), A4 (n = 38), A5 (n = 4)
2Number of isolates: A1 (MN = 20, FM = 7, SR = 20, LP = 7, SP = 6), A2 (VS = 4, others A2 = 12), A3 (VA = 7, others A3 = 3), A4 (SC = 36, VBP = 2), A5 = 4.
3Genetic clustering assignment performed using STRUCTURE. Parasites classified as admixed were not considered for AMOVA. When K = 2 the clusters contained: 71 and 18 isolates; when K = 3: 58 and 23 isolates; and when K = 7: 23, 18, 15, 11, 10, 7 and 3 isolates.
* For K = 3, only two clusters were considered since no isolate was assigned as full member of the third cluster.
PHIPT values obtained from pairwise comparison between study areas (A1–A5) and between villages within each area.
| A1 | A2 | A3 | A4 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | MN | FM | SR | LP | SP | A2 | VS | others A2 | A3 | VA | others A3 | A4 | SC | VBP | ||
| FM | ||||||||||||||||
| SR | 0.03 | 0.01 | ||||||||||||||
| A1 | LP | 0 | 0.01 | |||||||||||||
| SP | 0.05 | 0 | 0.02 | 0 | ||||||||||||
| A2 | VS | |||||||||||||||
| others A2 | ||||||||||||||||
| A3 | ||||||||||||||||
| VA | ||||||||||||||||
| others A3 | 0.26 | 0.10 | ||||||||||||||
| A4 | SC | |||||||||||||||
| VBP | ||||||||||||||||
| A5 | 0.10 | 0.17 | 0.13 | -0.02 | 0.25 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.17 | 0.06 | 0.29 | 0.04 | |||||
PHIPT values given in bold were significantly greater than 0 at the 5% significance level. Areas (A1, A2…) are defined in Fig 1A and villages abbreviations are detailed in S1 Table.
Fig 3PCoA of the parasite population at village and individual haplotype level.
(A) Principal coordinate analysis of the study areas resulted from intercomparison of individual villages. Percentages in the parenthesis indicate the proportion of total variation explained by each principal coordinate. The term “others…” was used to group villages within specific areas that had less than 2 isolates with known haplotype. (B) PCoA among the individual haplotypes within the areas. Areas are defined in Fig 1A and village abbreviations are detailed in S1 Table.
Multilocus linkage disequilibrium assessed using the Index of association ().
| Area | All isolates | MOI = 1 | Unique haplotypes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # isolates | # isolates | # isolates | |||||||
| A1 | 60 | 0.15 | <0.0001 | 59 | 0.19 | <0.0001 | 46 | 0.10 | <0.0001 |
| A2 | 16 | 0.08 | <0.0001 | 10 | 0.05 | 0.0078 | 16 | 0.08 | <0.0001 |
| A3 | 10 | 0.24 | <0.0001 | 3 | 0.83 | 0.0002 | 9 | 0.17 | <0.0001 |
| A4 | 38 | 0.49 | <0.0001 | 36 | 0.49 | <0.0001 | 12 | 0.14 | <0.0001 |
| A5 | 4 | 0.01 | 0.58 | 3 | 0.27 | 0.11 | 4 | 0.01 | 0.58 |
| All areas | 128 | 0.12 | <0.0001 | 111 | 0.17 | <0.0001 | 87 | 0.06 | <0.0001 |
LD analysis for each area at three levels: all isolates, monoclonal isolates only (MOI = 1) and unique haplotypes only. p-Values to test the null hypothesis of linkage equilibrium. Isolates with missing alleles were excluded from the analysis.
Fig 4Pairwise-locus linkage disequilibrium analysis by study areas.
Significant association between alleles at pairs of loci in each isolate (LD) was tested using FSTAT. p-Values were adjusted after Bonferroni corrections and depicted by a colour as described in the legend. Isolates with missing alleles where included in the analysis.
Fig 5Phylogenetic relationship and PCoA of the P. vivax haplotypes arranged by the geographic origin and the genetic clustering.
(A) Network analysis displaying the phylogenetic relationship of the P. vivax haplotypes. The haplotypes are coloured following the area colour code displayed in the legend. The size of the nodes denotes the number of haplotypes transformed in logarithmic scale. (B) Phylogenetic relationships and PCoA of the isolates assigned into 2, 3 and 7 genetic clusters following STRUCTURE criteria. The nodes were coloured to discriminate their assignment to a genetic cluster (K1, K2…) or as an admixed haplotype and the node’s size varied as described previously. When K = 3 only 2 clusters are described (K1 and K2) since no isolate achieved effective assignment to K3. (C) The genetic distances among the haplotypes are described by the PCoA graphs and coloured according to the assignment to a specific genetic cluster or as admixed haplotypes. Percentages in the parentheses indicate the proportion of total variation explained by each principal coordinate.
Fig 6Genetic clustering analysis by STRUCTURE.
The graph depicts the clustering models when the isolates were assigned into 2 to 7 clusters (K = 2, 3 and 7 being the best models). Each isolate is represented by a single vertical line broken into K coloured segments, with lengths proportional to each of the K inferred clusters.
Fig 7Comparison of 13 parasite migration models and summary estimates of gene flow.
(A) The study areas were pooled as an unique population and in 3–5 populations. The arrows represent the direction of migration and the models are displayed by its rank order. The marginal log-likelihoods and LBF used to rank the models are tabulated in S4 Table. The model XIII (panmixia) has the highest model probability (>0.99) while all the rest have near zero probability. (B) The estimated number of immigrants per generation are described for the models XI and III. The thicknesses of the arrows are proportional to the number of immigrants. The Θ and M estimates for the models XIII, XI and III are tabulated in S5 Table.