| Literature DB >> 35300704 |
Yilong Zhang3, Canglin Zhang2, Rui Yang2, Chunhai Luo2, Yan Deng2, Yan Liu2, Yilong Zhang3, Hongning Zhou4, Dongmei Zhang5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have been conducted to investigate the distribution of mosquito vectors and the population structure of secondary vectors in the border region of Cambodia-Laos. The aim of this work was to study the mosquito diversity and molecular phylogeny of secondary vectors, i.e., Anopheles nivipes in this area.Entities:
Keywords: COII; Malaria; Molecular phylogeny; Mosquitoes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35300704 PMCID: PMC8932176 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-022-04121-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Sampling sites and diversity of adult mosquitoes in Cambodia-Laos border. a The red label indicated the sampling site in Siem Pang County (Stung treng Province, 14°17′ N, 106°23′ E). The map was prepared by using Google Earth Pro (7.3.0.3832). b The pie charts showed the genus composition of adult mosquitoes and species composition of Anopheles mosquitoes collected from Human rooms and/or Cattle/pig pens. All the adult mosquitoes were trapped using overnight trapping with the battery-operated CDC light traps (Model: 1012, Origin: John W. Hock Inc, USA)
Genetic diversity indices and neutrality tests (Fu’s Fs and Tajima’s D) based on the COII gene of An. nivipes
| Species | n | Haplotype code | S | Pi | h | Hd | k | Fu's | Tajima's |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 86 | H1(19), H2(13), H3(1), H4(1), H5(1), H6(8), H7(1), H8(1), H9(1), H10(1), H11(1), H12(2), H13(1), H14(1), H15(1), H16(1), H17(1), H18(1), H19(1), H20(1), H21(1), H22(1), H23(1), H24(1), H25(1), H26(1), H27(1), H28(2), H29(1), H30(1), H31(1), H32(1), H33(1), H34(1), H35(1), H36(1), H37(1), H38(1), H39(1), H40(1), H41(1), H42(1), H43(1), H44(1), H45(1), H46(1), H47(1) | 223 | 0.01560 | 47 | 0.92370 | 8.12558 | − | − |
| KH_St_Sp | 53 | H1(19), H2(12), H3(1), H4(1), H5(1), H6(8), H7(1), H8(1), H9(1), H10(1), H11(1), H12(2), H13(1), H14(1), H15(1), H16(1) | 19 | 0.00243 | 16 | 0.80700 | 1.50363 | − | − |
| IN_Tri | 4 | H24(1), H25(1), H26(1), H27(1) | 8 | 0.00701 | 4 | 1.00000 | 4.33333 | − 0.715 | − 0.06867 |
| IN_Pun_Ch | 2 | H21(1), H22(1) | 13 | 0.01268 | 2 | 1.00000 | 7.00000 | 1.946 | n.d |
| IN_Pun_Ba | 2 | H20(1), H23(1) | 65 | 0.04415 | 2 | 1.00000 | 23.00000 | 3.135 | n.d |
| IN_Nag | 6 | H36(1), H37(1), H38(1), H39(1), H40(1), H41(1) | 14 | 0.01079 | 6 | 1.00000 | 6.66667 | − 1.623 | 0.53608 |
| IN_Ass | 7 | H33(1), H34(1), H35(1), H44(1), H45(1), H46(1), H47(1) | 28 | 0.02350 | 7 | 1.00000 | 14.52381 | − 0.938 | 0.09554 |
| MM | 2 | H17(1), H18(1) | 2 | 0.00324 | 2 | 1.00000 | 2.00000 | 0.693 | n.d |
| TH | 2 | H2(1), H19(1) | 3 | 0.00485 | 2 | 1.00000 | 3.00000 | n.d | |
| IN_Miz | 2 | H42(1), H43(1) | 3 | 0.00485 | 2 | 1.00000 | 3.00000 | n.d | |
| IN_Meg | 6 | H28(2), H29(1), H30(1), H31(1), H32(1) | 11 | 0.00744 | 5 | 0.93330 | 4.60000 | − 0.496 | − 0.27307 |
n.d., not determined; n.s., P > 0.10; #P < 0.10; *P < 0.05; **P < 0.02; ***P < 0.001. KH_St_Sp, Siem Pang County (Stung treng, Cambodia); IN_Tri, Tripura (India); IN_Pun_Ch, Cheema (Punjab, India); IN_Pun_Ba, Bathinda (Punjab, India); IN_Nag, Nagaland (India); IN_Ass, Assam (India); MM, Myanmar; TH, Thailand; IN_Miz, Mizoram (India); IN-Meg, Meghalaya (India)
n number of sequences, S number of polymorphic sites, pi nucleotide diversity, h number of haplotypes, Hd haplotype diversity
Fig. 2Phylogenetic network of 47 mitochondrial haplotypes of the COII gene in Anopheles nivipes. Localities are indicated by different colours (bottom-right). The area of each circle is approximately proportional to the frequency of the haplotype. #Samples available in Genbank. *Samples from Cambodia-Laos border. KH_St_Sp, Siem Pang County (Stung treng, Cambodia); IN_Tri, Tripura (India); IN_Pun_Ch, Cheema (Punjab, India); IN_Pun_Ba, Bathinda (Punjab, India); IN_Nag, Nagaland (India); IN_Ass, Assam (India); MM, Myanmar; TH, Thailand; IN_Miz, Mizoram (India); IN_Meg, Meghalaya (India)
Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) of ten An. nivipes populations based on COII
| Source of variation | d. f | Sum of squares | Variance components | % of variation | Fixation index ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among groups | 2 | 336.833 | 40.15792 Va | 86.72 | |
| Among populations within groups | 7 | 200.265 | 4.03898 Vb | 8.720 | |
| Within populations | 76 | 160.332 | 2.10964 Vc | 4.560 | |
| Total | 85 | 697.430 | 46.30654 |
FCT Fixation index among groups; FSC among populations within groups; FST within populations
Fig. 3Neighbour-joining phylogenetic tree of Anopheles nivipes based on COII sequences from GenBank and our original data. Bootstrap values (1000 replicates) of neighbour-joining analyses are shown above/below the main lineages. Lineage designation is indicated on the right. Bars represent 3.0 substitutions per site based on COII. Different colours indicated different population groups of An. nivipes. An. lindesayi and An. claviger were used as the outgroup taxa. KS, Siem Pang County (Stung treng, Cambodia); IN_Tri, Tripura (India); IN_Pun_Ch, Cheema (Punjab, India); IN_Pun_Ba, Bathinda (Punjab, India); IN_Nag, Nagaland (India); IN_Ass, Assam (India); MM, Myanmar; TH, Thailand; IN_Miz, Mizoram (India); IN_Meg, Meghalaya (India)
Population groups identified by spatial analysis of molecular variance (SAMOVA) algorithm based on COII
| K | Population grouping | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| k = 2 | [IN_Pun_Ba, IN_Pun_Ch][KH_St_Sp, MM, TH, IN_Tri, IN_Meg, IN_Ass, IN_Nag, IN_Miz] | 0.84809* | 0.68162*** |
| k = 3 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][KH_St_Sp, MM, TH, IN_Tri, IN_Meg, IN_Ass, IN_Nag, IN_Miz] | 0.867* | 0.65541*** |
| k = 4 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][KH_St_Sp, MM, TH, IN_Tri, IN_Meg, IN_Ass, IN_Nag][IN_Miz] | 0.81663** | 0.65331*** |
| k = 5 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][KH_St_Sp, TH, IN_Tri, IN_Meg, IN_Ass, IN_Nag][MM][IN_Miz] | 0.75603** | 0.66771*** |
| k = 6 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][IN_Tri][IN_Meg][IN_Nag][KH_St_Sp, TH, IN_Ass, MM, IN_Miz] | 0.74758* | 0.48268*** |
| k = 7 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][IN_Tri][IN_Meg][IN_Nag][IN_Ass][KH_St_Sp, TH, MM, IN_Miz] | 0.7595* | 0.35732*** |
| k = 8 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][IN_Tri][IN_Meg][IN_Nag][IN_Ass][KH_St_Sp, TH, MM][IN_Miz] | 0.82893** | 0.06355** |
| k = 9 | [IN_Pun_Ba][IN_Pun_Ch][IN_Tri][IN_Meg][IN_Nag][IN_Ass][KS,TH][MM][IN_Miz] | 0.85191* | − 0.12893ns |
Significant values *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001, ns: Not significant
KH_St_Sp, Siem Pang County (Stung treng, Cambodia); IN_Tri, Tripura (India); IN_Pun_Ch, Cheema (Punjab, India); IN_Pun_Ba, Bathinda (Punjab, India); IN_Nag, Nagaland (India); IN_Ass, Assam (India); MM, Myanmar; TH, Thailand; IN_Miz, Mizoram (India); IN_Meg, Meghalaya (India)
Fig. 4Isolation by distance, the relationship between geographical and genetic distances based on COII sequences in Anopheles nivipes populations. Isolation by distance (IBD) was examined using a nonparametric Mantel with the web-based computer program IBDWS v.3.16. a All populations based on COII sequences; b All populations without Punjab samples based on COII sequences