| Literature DB >> 27846862 |
Fangyuan Yin1,2, Robin B Gasser1,3, Facai Li1,2, Min Bao4, Weiyi Huang5, Fengcai Zou6, Guanghui Zhao7, Chunren Wang8, Xin Yang1, Yanqin Zhou1, Junlong Zhao1, Rui Fang1, Min Hu9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studying genetic variation within and among Haemonchus contortus populations can inform some aspects of this parasite's population genetics and epidemiology. However, almost nothing is known about such variation in China.Entities:
Keywords: China; Genetic diversity; Haemonchus contortus; Microsatellites
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27846862 PMCID: PMC5111246 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-016-1864-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Population genetic data for eight microsatellite markers in seven populations of Haemonchus contortus from China. Deviations from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (significant deviations indicated by*, P < 0.002381, Bonferroni multiple tests correction) in seven Haemonchus contortus populations. Minus sign (–) indicates heterozygote deficiency, and a plus sign (+) indicates heterozygote excess
| Population | Hcms15 | Hcms40 | Hcms28 | Hcms22co3 | Hcms19 | Hcms36 | Hcms33 | Hcms37 | All | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hubei (26a) | A | 4 | 5 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 2 | 4 | 5.125 |
|
| 0.680 | 0.462 | 0.769 | 0.231 | 0.423 | 0.769 | 0.423 | 0.923 | 0.585 | |
|
| 0.533 | 0.581 | 0.815 | 0.531 | 0.474 | 0.674 | 0.491 | 0.541 | 0.580 | |
|
| –* | +* | ||||||||
|
| -0.283 | 0.209 | 0.057 | 0.570 | 0.110 | -0.144 | 0.141 | -0.732 | -0.009 | |
| Yunnan (26a) | A | 4 | 5 | 9 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5.250 |
|
| 0.615 | 0.192 | 0.654 | 0.154 | 0.500 | 0.615 | 0.654 | 0.615 | 0.500 | |
|
| 0.535 | 0.619 | 0.810 | 0.512 | 0.501 | 0.636 | 0.627 | 0.548 | 0.598 | |
|
| –* | –* | ||||||||
|
| -0.153 | 0.694 | 0.196 | 0.704 | 0.002 | 0.034 | -0.044 | -0.127 | 0.167 | |
| Guangxi (24a) | A | 4 | 6 | 11 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4.875 |
|
| 0.348 | 0.522 | 0.583 | 0.208 | 0.333 | 0.542 | 0.333 | 0.833 | 0.463 | |
|
| 0.390 | 0.708 | 0.831 | 0.490 | 0.332 | 0.660 | 0.507 | 0.529 | 0.556 | |
|
| –* | –* | +* | |||||||
|
| 0.111 | 0.268 | 0.302 | 0.580 | -0.005 | 0.183 | 0.348 | -0.594 | 0.171 | |
| Shaanxi (29a) | A | 6 | 5 | 7 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 5.375 |
|
| 0.483 | 0.414 | 0.655 | 0.276 | 0.793 | 0.552 | 0.414 | 0.897 | 0.560 | |
|
| 0.451 | 0.498 | 0.768 | 0.438 | 0.698 | 0.626 | 0.526 | 0.524 | 0.566 | |
|
| +* | |||||||||
|
| -0.073 | 0.171 | 0.149 | 0.374 | -0.139 | 0.121 | 0.216 | -0.731 | 0.010 | |
| Liaoning (23a) | A | 4 | 3 | 10 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4.750 |
|
| 0.478 | 0.261 | 0.783 | 0.217 | 0.696 | 0.739 | 0.435 | 0.739 | 0.543 | |
|
| 0.428 | 0.649 | 0.832 | 0.467 | 0.724 | 0.635 | 0.502 | 0.532 | 0.596 | |
|
| –* | –* | ||||||||
|
| -0.120 | 0.604 | 0.060 | 0.540 | 0.040 | -0.169 | 0.137 | -0.401 | 0.090 | |
| Heilongjiang (27a) | A | 5 | 4 | 10 | 3 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 5.375 |
|
| 0.346 | 0.259 | 0.815 | 0.148 | 0.667 | 0.630 | 0.444 | 0.815 | 0.515 | |
|
| 0.602 | 0.635 | 0.808 | 0.237 | 0.675 | 0.727 | 0.514 | 0.532 | 0.593 | |
|
| –* | –* | ||||||||
|
| 0.430 | 0.596 | -0.009 | 0.379 | 0.013 | 0.136 | 0.137 | -0.509 | 0.133 | |
| Inner Mongolia (29a) | A | 4 | 3 | 10 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 5 |
|
| 0.655 | 0.345 | 0.862 | 0.103 | 0.621 | 0.690 | 0.517 | 0.793 | 0.573 | |
|
| 0.581 | 0.503 | 0.848 | 0.731 | 0.707 | 0.667 | 0.584 | 0.506 | 0.641 | |
|
| –* | |||||||||
|
| -0.130 | 0.318 | -0.017 | 0.861 | 0.123 | -0.034 | 0.116 | -0.582 | 0.107 |
aTotal number of individuals for each population
bTotal number of alleles for each marker across all populations
Abbreviations: Hcms Haemonchus contortus microsatellite, A number of alleles, H observed heterozygosity, H expected heterozygosity, F inbreeding coefficient
Pairwise F values among seven Haemonchus contortus populations upon pairwise comparison
| Population | Hubei | Yunnan | Shaanxi | Liaoning | Heilongjiang | Inner Mongolia | Guangxi |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hubei | |||||||
| Yunnan | 0.0055 | ||||||
| Shaanxi | 0.0122 | 0.0421 | |||||
| Liaoning | 0.0159 | 0.0286 | 0.0120 | ||||
| Heilongjiang | 0.0238 | 0.0398 | 0.0030 | 0.0148 | |||
| Inner Mongolia | 0.0352 | 0.0640 | 0.0478 | 0.0454 | 0.0603 | ||
| Guangxi | 0.0024 | 0.0036 | 0.0328 | 0.0104 | 0.0331 | 0.0628 |
Fig. 1Genetic sub-structuring of Haemonchus contortus populations in China based on Bayesian cluster analysis. a Variation trend of lnP(D) values. lnP(D) was obtained by first computing the log-likelihood of the data in the program STRUCTURE. K values represent the number of clusters, and the vertical bars represent standard deviations. b Variation trend of ΔK values; ΔK is a predictor of the real number of clusters
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) of Haemonchus contortus using eight microsatellite loci
| Variance component | Variance | % of total |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among groupsa | 0.080 | 3.29 |
| < 0.0001* |
| Among populations within groups | 0.015 | 0.60 |
| 0.092 |
| Within populations | 2.363 | 96.11 |
| < 0.0001* |
aSeven populations were divided into three groups according to structure analysis, including (Hubei, Yunnan, Guangxi), (Shaanxi, Liaoning, Heilongjiang) and (Inner Mongolia)
*Significant effects (P < 0.0001)
Fig. 2Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of individual genotypes representing seven populations of Haemonchus contortus in China using eight microsatellite loci. Each data point represents an individual worm. Each population is indicated by a different colour
Fig. 3Nei’s genetic distance plotted as a function of linear geographical distance among seven populations of Haemonchus contortus in China
Bottleneck analyses of seven populations of Haemonchus contortus using eight microsatellite loci
| Population | Sign test | Wilcoxon signed-rank test | Mode-shift test | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IAM | TPM | SMM | IAM | TPM | SMM | ||
| Hubei | 0.516 | 0.012 | 0.011 | 0.313 | 0.074 | 0.039 | normal L-shaped |
| Yunnan | 0.089 | 0.000* | 0.000* | 0.195 | 0.004* | 0.004* | normal L-shaped |
| Guangxi | 0.232 | 0.065 | 0.066 | 0.383 | 0.250 | 0.055 | normal L-shaped |
| Shaanxi | 0.218 | 0.189 | 0.052 | 1.000 | 0.055 | 0.039 | normal L-shaped |
| Liaoning | 0.226 | 0.208 | 0.200 | 0.027 | 0.945 | 0.461 | normal L-shaped |
| Heilongjiang | 0.259 | 0.054 | 0.054 | 0.074 | 0.039 | 0.019 | normal L-shaped |
| Inner Mongolia | 0.009* | 0.080 | 0.210 | 0.004* | 0.055 | 0.945 | normal L-shaped |
*Significant effects (P < 0.01, indicating heterozygote excess)