| Literature DB >> 33054259 |
Abiodun J Fatoba1, Oliver T Zishiri, Damer P Blake, Sunday O Peters, Jeffrey Lebepe, Samson Mukaratirwa, Matthew A Adeleke.
Abstract
This study was conducted from January to October 2018 with the objective to determine the prevalence and genetic diversity of Eimeria species in broiler and free-range chickens in KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa. A total of 342 faecal samples were collected from 12 randomly selected healthy broiler chicken farms and 40 free-range chickens from 10 different locations. Faecal samples were screened for the presence of Eimeria oocysts using a standard flotation method. The species of Eimeria isolates were confirmed by amplification of the internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS-1) partial region and sequences analysis. Among broiler and free-ranging chickens, 19 out of 41 pens (46.3%) and 25 out of 42 faecal samples (59.5%) were positive for Eimeria infection. Molecular detection revealed the following species: Eimeria maxima, Eimeria tenella, Eimeria acervulina, Eimeria brunetti and Eimeria mitis in all the samples screened. Similarly, polymerase chain reaction assays specific for three cryptic Eimeria operational taxonomic units were negative for all the samples. Phylogenetic analysis of the ITS-1 sequences supported species identity with the greatest variation detected for E. mitis. This study provides information on the range and identity of Eimeria species, and their genetic relatedness, circulating in commercially reared broilers and free-ranging chickens from different locations in KwaZulu-Natal province.Entities:
Keywords: Eimeria; chickens; coccidiosis; genetic diversity; molecular diagnosis; prevalence
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33054259 PMCID: PMC7564691 DOI: 10.4102/ojvr.v87i1.1837
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Onderstepoort J Vet Res ISSN: 0030-2465 Impact factor: 1.792
Summary of samples collected in broiler farms and the outcome of Eimeria detection.
| Location | Farms | No of pen per farm | No of sample per farm | Age (Weeks) | Positive pen |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pietermaritzburg | A | 5 | 40 | 3 | 0 |
| B | 3 | 41 | 4 | 3 | |
| Phoenix | C | 4 | 20 | 3 | 4 |
| D | 3 | 15 | 4 | 2 | |
| E | 3 | 15 | 4 | 1 | |
| Scottburgh | F | 4 | 25 | 4 | 4 |
| Stanger | G | 5 | 48 | 9 | 0 |
| H | 4 | 22 | 10 | 1 | |
| I | 3 | 15 | 9 | 1 | |
| Chatsworth | J | 3 | 28 | 10 | 1 |
| K | 1 | 7 | 9 | 1 | |
| Westville | L | 3 | 24 | 12 | 1 |
Summary of samples collected in free-range chickens and the outcome of Eimeria infection.
| Location | No of chicken | No of sample per location | No of positive samples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maphumulo | 10 | 10 | 7 |
| Umvoti | 10 | 10 | 3 |
| Port Sherpstone | 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Shongweni | 10 | 13 | 8 |
Genus- and species-specific internal transcribed spacer-1 primers used in the study.
| Genus-species | Primer strand | Primers | Annealing temperature (°C) | Length (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forward | AAGTTGCGTAAATAG AGCCCTC | 56.0 | Variable | |
| Reverse | AGACATCCATTGCTG AAAG | |||
| Forward | AATTTAGTCCATCGC AACCCT | 56.7 | 278 | |
| Reverse | CGAGCGCTCTGCATA CGACA | |||
| Forward | GGC TTGGATGATGTT TGCTG | 61.0 | 321 | |
| Reverse | CGAACGCAATAACAC ACGCT | |||
| Forward | GATCAG TTTGAGCAA ACCTTCG | 61.0 | 311 | |
| Reverse | TGGTCT TCCGTACGT CGGAT | |||
| Forward | CTACACCACTCAC AATGAGGCAC | 62.0 | 145 | |
| Reverse | GTGATATCGTTCTG GAGAAGTT TGC | |||
| Forward | GGGTTTATTTCCTGT CCGTCGTCTC | 55.0 | 328 | |
| Reverse | GCAAGAGAGAATCGG AATGCC | |||
| Forward | CCAAGCGATTTCATC ATTCGGGGAG | 61.0 | 116 | |
| Reverse | AAAAGCAACAGCGA TTCAAG | |||
| Forward | TACATCCCAATCTTT GAATCG | 61.0 | 383 | |
| Reverse | GGCATACTAGCTTCG AGCAAC |
Source: Lew, A.E., Anderson, G.R., Minchin, C.M., Jeston, P.J. & Jorgensen, W.K., 2003, ‘Inter-and intra-strain variation and PCR detection of the internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS-1) sequences of Australian isolates of Eimeria species from chickens’, Veterinary Parasitology 112(1–2), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017(02)00393-X
Primers were all designed by Lew et al. (2003).
Primers used for the detection of three cryptic Eimeria operational taxonomic units.
| Species | Primer ref | Primer sequences | Annealing temperature (°C) | Size (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OTUx | OTU_X_f1 | GTGGTGTCGTCTGCGCGT | 56 | 133 |
| OTU_X_r1 | ACCACCGTATCTCTTTCGTGA | |||
| OTUy | OTU_Y_f1 | CAAGAAGTACACTACCACAGCATG | 56 | 346 |
| OTU_Y_r1 | ACTGATTTCAGGTCTAAAACGAAT | |||
| OTUz | OTU_Z_f1 | TATAGTTTCTTTTGCGCGTTGC | 56 | 147 |
| OTU_Z_r1 | CATATCTCTTTCATGAACGAAAGG |
Source: Lew, A.E., Anderson, G.R., Minchin, C.M., Jeston, P.J. & Jorgensen, W.K., 2003, ‘Inter-and intra-strain variation and PCR detection of the internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS-1) sequences of Australian isolates of Eimeria species from chickens’, Veterinary Parasitology 112(1–2), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017(02)00393-X
Primers were all designed by Fornace et al. (2013).
OTUs, operational taxonomic units; bp, base pair.
Summary of samples collected in free-range chickens and the outcome of Eimeria infection.
| Serial No | Sequence ID | Species | GenBank accession no. |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PX1 | MK404734 | |
| 2 | WS1 | MK404736 | |
| 3 | WS2 | MK404737 | |
| 4 | PM2 | MK404739 | |
| 5 | CH1 | MK404741 | |
| 6 | SG1 | MK404742 | |
| 7 | ST3 | MK404743 | |
| 8 | PX2 | MK404744 | |
| 9 | CH2 | MK404745 | |
| 10 | ST4 | MK404748 | |
| 11 | SH | MN727032 | |
| 12 | PS | MN727033 | |
| 13 | MP1 | MN727034 | |
| 14 | MP2 | MN727035 | |
| 15 | MV | MN727036 | |
| 16 | SH | MN727037 | |
| 17 | PS | MN727038 | |
| 18 | MP | MN727039 | |
| 19 | PS | MN727040 | |
| 20 | MP | MN727041 | |
| 21 | MV | MN727042 | |
| 22 | SH | MN727043 | |
| 23 | PS | MN727044 | |
| 24 | MV | MN727045 | |
| 25 | MP | MN727046 | |
| 26 | SH | MN727047 | |
| 27 | PS | MN727048 | |
| 28 | MP | MN727049 |
PX, Phoenix; WS, Westville; PMB, Pietermaritzburg; CH, Chatsworth; SG, Stanger; ST, Scottburg; PS, Port Sherpstone; MV, Umvoti; MP, Maphumulo; SH, Shongweni.
FIGURE 1–A1Pairwise percentage identity of ITS-1 sequences of different Eimeria species.
ITS-1 sequences of Eimeria species downloaded from GenBank.
| No | Species | GenBank accession number | Origin of isolates |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FJ230372.1 | America | |
| 2 | JX853834.1 | India | |
| 3 | AF065093.1 | Sweden | |
| 4 | JX853828.1 | India | |
| 5 | FJ230340.1 | America | |
| 6 | GQ153635.1 | China | |
| 7 | JX853831.1 | India | |
| 8 | JQ061003.1 | Egypt | |
| 9 | AY779487.1 | America | |
| 10 | GQ856312.1 | India | |
| 11 | KY639280.1 | Sudan | |
| 12 | AF446058.1 | Australia | |
| 13 | GQ856314.1 | India | |
| 14 | JX853835.1 | India |
E. maxima, Eimeria maxima; E. acervulina, Eimeria acervulina; E. mitis, Eimeria mitis; E. brunette, Eimeria brunette; E. tenella, Eimeria tenella; US, United States.
FIGURE 1Images of unsporulated Eimeria oocysts detected in faecal samples from infected farms.
FIGURE 2Occurrence of Eimeria infection in different locations in KwaZulu-Natal.
FIGURE 3Amplification of Eimeria species by polymerase chain reaction. M: 100 bp DNA marker; L2: negative control; L3–7: samples. (a) Eimeria mitis 328 bp; (b) Eimeria tenella 278 bp; (c) Eimeria maxima 145 bp; (d) Eimeria acervulina 321 bp; (e) Eimeria brunetti 311 bp.
FIGURE 4Prevalence of Eimeria species in both broilers and free-range chickens in KwaZulu-Natal.
FIGURE 5Maximum likelihood tree (Tamura-3 model) of internal transcribed spacer-1 sequences of Eimeria species. Percentage of bootstrap (1000 replicate) values is indicated in each node. The scale bar indicates sequence substitution per site. Sequences in this study are in different colours and shapes.