| Literature DB >> 30509304 |
Mame Thierno Bakhoum1,2,3, Mamadou Sarr4, Assane Gueye Fall4, Karine Huber5, Moussa Fall4, Mbacké Sembène6, Momar Talla Seck4, Karien Labuschagne7,8, Laetitia Gardès9,5, Mamadou Ciss4, Geoffrey Gimonneau10,11, Jérémy Bouyer9,5, Thierry Baldet9,5, Claire Garros5,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biting midge species of the genus Culicoides Latreille (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) comprise more than 1300 species distributed worldwide. Several species of Culicoides are vectors of various viruses that can affect animals, like the African horse sickness virus (AHSV), known to be endemic in sub-Saharan Africa. The ecological and veterinary interest of Culicoides emphasizes the need for rapid and reliable identification of vector species. However, morphology-based identification has limitations and warrants integration of molecular data. DNA barcoding based on the mitochondrial gene cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (cox1) is used as a rapid and authentic tool for species identification in a wide variety of animal taxa across the globe. In this study, our objectives were as follows: (i) establish a reference DNA barcode for Afrotropical Culicoides species; (ii) assess the accuracy of cox1 in identifying Afrotropical Culicoides species; and (iii) test the applicability of DNA barcoding for species identification on a large number of samples of Culicoides larvae from the Niayes area of Senegal, West Africa.Entities:
Keywords: African horse sickness; Afrotropical; Barcoding; Culicoides; Senegal
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30509304 PMCID: PMC6276223 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-018-3176-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Haplotype characteristics and levels of intra- and interspecific diversity of reference DNA sequences
| Taxon |
|
| Intraspecific | H | Interspecific |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.2 |
|
| 13 | 9 | 0–0.006 (0.001) | 0.91 | 0.075–0.087 (0.077) |
|
| 3 | 3 | 0.002–0.018 (0.007) | 1 | 0.134–0.145 (0.141) |
|
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.188 |
|
| 7 | 5 | 0–0.043 (0.012) | 0.904 | 0.124–0.132 (0.128) |
|
| 3 | 2 | 0–0.002 (0.001) | 0.666 | 0.156–0.159 (0.157) |
|
| 21 | 20 | 0.002–0.05 (0.01) | 0.995 | 0.104–0.12 (0.109) |
|
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.148 |
|
| 3 | 3 | 0.022–0.031 (0.025) | 1 | 0.166–0.180 (0.171) |
|
| 3 | 3 | 0.004–0.009 (0.006) | 1 | 0.161 |
|
| 17 | 13 | 0–0.004 (0.002) | 0.963 | 0.101–0.114 (0.107) |
|
| 2 | 2 | 0.002 | 1 | 0.163–0.166 (0.164) |
|
| 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.174 |
|
| 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.153 |
|
| 7 | 6 | 0.004–0.009 (0.005) | 0.952 | 0.092–0.097 (0.094) |
|
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.099 |
|
| 3 | 3 | 0.004–0.011 (0.007) | 1 | 0.124–0.127 (0.126) |
|
| 2 | 2 | 0.006 | 1 | 0.101–0.109 (0.105) |
|
| 3 | 3 | 0.004 | 1 | 0.153–0.156 (0.155) |
|
| 6 | 3 | 0–0.007 (0.002) | 0.6 | 0.134–0.142 (0.136) |
|
| 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.169 |
|
| 13 | 4 | 0–0.002 (0.0005) | 0.423 | 0.114–0.116 (0.114) |
|
| 6 | 5 | 0.004–0.006 (0.003) | 0.933 | 0.193–0.199 (0.195) |
|
| 15 | 6 | 0–0.002 (0.0004) | 0.79 | 0.142–0.147 (0.144) |
|
| 2 | 2 | 0.099 | 1 | 0.161–0.169 (0.165) |
|
| 9 | 9 | 0.011–0.013 (0.012) | 1 | 0.045–0.164 (0.052) |
|
| 5 | 4 | 0–0.064 (0.016) | 0.9 | 0.160–0.164 (0.162) |
|
| 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.175 |
|
| 14 | 12 | 0–0.022 (0.005) | 0.978 | 0.082–0.104 (0.088) |
|
| 13 | 8 | 0–0.009 (0.001) | 0.935 | 0.063–0.072 (0.068) |
|
| 2 | 2 | 0.009 | 1 | 0.153–0.156 (0.154) |
|
| 3 | 2 | 0–0.033 (0.011) | 0.666 | 0.132–0.137 (0.135) |
|
| 2 | 2 | 0.018 | 1 | 0.087–0.094 (0.09) |
|
| 7 | 4 | 0–0.107 (0.017) | 0.809 | 0.132–0.164 (0.152) |
| 6 | 5 | 0–0.004 (0.002) | 0.933 | 0.137–0.145 (0.141) | |
| 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.101 | |
| 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.166 | |
|
| 6 | 6 | 0.004–0.011 (0.006) | 1 | 0.045–0.049 (0.047) |
|
| 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.163 |
|
| 3 | 2 | 0–0.013 (0.004) | 0.666 | 0.127 |
|
| 4 | 3 | 0–0.011 (0.003) | 0.833 | 0.063–0.075 (0.071) |
|
| 8 | 6 | 0–0.015 (0.004) | 0.928 | 0.169–0.201 (0.185) |
aCulicoides sp. #20, Culicoides sp. #22 and Culicoides sp. #54 are putative new species whose status needs still to be clarified in future taxonomic studies [18]
Abbreviations: n number of cox1 sequences, n number of cox1 haplotypes; Intraspecific, range of genetic divergence within taxa (mean), H haplotype diversity values; Interspecific, range of genetic divergence between taxa (mean)
Fig. 1Barplots of measures of identification success. Abbreviations: NN, nearest-neighbour; TA, threshold analysis with 1% threshold; TA.threshVal, threshold analysis with 4.4% threshold; TA.localMinima, threshold analysis with 3.59% threshold; BCM, best close match (1% threshold); BCM.threshVal, best close match with 4.4% threshold; BCM.localMinima, threshold analysis with 3.59% threshold; Mono, proportion of monophyly on a NJ tree
Nucleotide sequence similarity between Culicoides larvae sequences and reference partial cox1 sequences
| Percent similarity | No. of individuals | |
|---|---|---|
|
| 98–99 (98.75) | 32 (3.5) |
|
| 97–99 (98.27) | 26 (2.9) |
|
| 99 | 1 (0.1) |
|
| 98–99 (98.94) | 17 (1.9) |
|
| 97–100 (99.01) | 195 (21.5) |
|
| 97–100 (98.85) | 605 (66.8) |
|
| 97 | 1 (0.1) |
|
| 96–99 (98.34) | 29 (3.2) |
Fig. 2Geographical location of study sites in the Niayes region of Senegal, West Africa. Parc de Hann sites (Ph1 and Ph2) were classified as freshwater lake edge habitats. Mb1, Ng2, Ng3, Ng4 and Ng5 were pond edge while Mb2, Mb3 and Ng1were saltwater lake edge. In Pout, all habitats were puddle edge (Pt1, Pt2, Pt3 and Pt4)
Fig. 3Number of Culicoides larvae collected and subsampled per site. A maximum of 30 individuals, irrespective of the numbers collected, were considered for molecular analyses at each of the sites sampled. If less than 30 individuals were collected, all individuals were analyzed