| Literature DB >> 35346375 |
Félicité Flore Djuikwo Teukeng1, Manon Blin2, Nicolas Bech3, Marta Reguera Gomez4, Rima Zein-Eddine5, Alain Michel Kouam Simo6, Jean-Francois Allienne2, Louis Albert Tchuem-Tchuenté7, Jérôme Boissier2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hybrids between Schistosoma haematobium (Sh) and S. bovis (Sb) have been found in several African countries as well as in Europe. Since the consequences of this hybridization are still unknown, this study aims to verify the presence of such hybrids in Cameroonian humans, to describe the structure of S. haematobium populations on a large geographic scale, and to examine the impact of these hybrids on genetic diversity and structure of these populations.Entities:
Keywords: Cameroon; Genetic diversity; Hybridization; Miracidium; Schistosoma bovis; Schistosoma haematobium
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35346375 PMCID: PMC8962594 DOI: 10.1186/s40249-022-00958-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Dis Poverty ISSN: 2049-9957 Impact factor: 4.520
Description of the sampled localities
| Site code | Locality name | Geographic coordinates | Prevalence (%) | Snail host ( | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loum | 4°42′ N, 9°44′ E | 34.2 | [ | |
| 2 | Matta Barrage | 5°57′ N, 11°13′ E | 95.2 | [ | |
| 3 | Bessoum | 9°7′30″ N, 13°15′11″ E | 83.6 | [ | |
| 4 | Gounougou | 9°4′33″ N, 13°42′25″ E | 78.8 | [ | |
| 5 | Ouroudoukoudje | 9°5′53″ N, 13°43′22″ E | 77.2 | [ | |
| 6 | Djiporde | 9°29′46″ N, 13°38′23″ E | 83.6 | [ | |
| 7 | Moutourwa | 10°11′56″ N, 14°10′40″ E | 50–100 | [ | |
| 8 | Guereme | 10°2′48″ N 14°31′45″ E | 25–49 | Unknown | [ |
| 9 | Gawaza | 10°13′0″ N 14°51′0″ E | 25–49 | Unknown | [ |
| 10 | Mokolo | 10°44′9″ N, 13°46′33″ E | 25–49 | [ |
Fig. 1Localities involved in the collection of miracidia
Number of hybrids and pure schistosome genotypes recovered in each sampled locality
| Site code | Locality name | Number of | Hybrid genotypes | Pure genotypes | Number of hybrids (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Children | Miracidia | |||||||||
| 1 | Loum | 9 | 160 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 151 | 0 | 9 (5.6) |
| 2 | Matta Barrage | 9 | 99 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 0 | 78 | 0 | 21 (21.2) |
| 3 | Bessoum | 5 | 169 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0 | 144 | 0 | 25 (14.8) |
| 4 | Gounougou | 8 | 239 | 33 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 196 | 0 | 43 (18.0) |
| 5 | Ouroudoukoudje | 4 | 134 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 127 | 0 | 7 (5.2) |
| 6 | Djiporde | 5 | 136 | 9 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 118 | 0 | 18 (13.2) |
| 7 | Moutourwa | 5 | 113 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 110 | 0 | 3 (2.7) |
| 8 | Guereme | 2 | 43 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 38 | 0 | 5 (11.6) |
| 9 | Gawaza | 6 | 178 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | 161 | 0 | 17 (9.6) |
| 10 | Mokolo | 2 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 54 | 0 | 2 (3.6) |
| Total | 55 | 1,327 | 50 | 6 | 94 | 0 | 1,177 | 0 | 150 (11.3) | |
Sb Schistosoma bovis, Sh S. haematobium
Mean allelic richness (Ar) and heterozygosity (He) recorded for the ten miracidia populations coming from ten endemic localities in Cameroon
| Population no | Locality name | Sample size | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loum | 160 | 5.55 ± 0.79 | 0.537 ± 0.24 |
| 2 | Matta Barrage | 99 | 7.74 ± 0.92 | 0.593 ± 0.22 |
| 3 | Bessoum | 169 | 6.83 ± 0.82 | 0.568 ± 0.21 |
| 4 | Gounougou | 239 | 7.26 ± 0.82 | 0.570 ± 0.20 |
| 5 | Ouroudoukoudje | 134 | 6.60 ± 0.76 | 0.556 ± 0.24 |
| 6 | Djiporde | 136 | 7.60 ± 0.76 | 0.590 ± 0.20 |
| 7 | Moutourwa | 113 | 6.14 ± 0.75 | 0.538 ± 0.24 |
| 8 | Guereme | 43 | 5.72 ± 0.72 | 0.559 ± 0.23 |
| 9 | Gawaza | 178 | 6.90 ± 0.74 | 0.558 ± 0.24 |
| 10 | Mokolo | 56 | 6.33 ± 0.84 | 0.545 ± 0.25 |
Fig. 2Relationship between heterozygosity (A) or allelic richness (B) and the percentage of Schistosoma haematobium × S. bovis hybrids in Cameroon. The number associated to the dots refers to the population number (see Table 1)
Pairwise genetic differentiation estimates (FST: above the diagonal) and geographic distances (Km: under the diagonal) between the 10 sampled populations. All FST values are significant (P < 0.001)
| Population code | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.0555 | 0.0329 | 0.0420 | 0.0329 | 0.0350 | 0.0794 | 0.0789 | 0.0432 | 0.0974 | |
| 2 | 215 | 0.0363 | 0.0150 | 0.0338 | 0.0152 | 0.0649 | 0.0764 | 0.0494 | 0.0929 | |
| 3 | 626 | 418 | 0.0201 | 0.0163 | 0.0118 | 0.0276 | 0.0308 | 0.0140 | 0.0478 | |
| 4 | 654 | 442 | 50 | 0.0165 | 0.0065 | 0.0376 | 0.0517 | 0.0206 | 0.0715 | |
| 5 | 658 | 445 | 51 | 3 | 0.0102 | 0.0427 | 0.0502 | 0.0198 | 0.0734 | |
| 6 | 685 | 476 | 59 | 47 | 45 | 0.0354 | 0.0419 | 0.0138 | 0.0610 | |
| 7 | 783 | 573 | 156 | 135 | 132 | 97 | 0.0175 | 0.0235 | 0.0415 | |
| 8 | 795 | 583 | 173 | 140 | 137 | 115 | 42 | 0.0288 | 0.0300 | |
| 9 | 833 | 620 | 213 | 178 | 175 | 154 | 73 | 39 | 0.0479 | |
| 10 | 805 | 602 | 188 | 184 | 182 | 138 | 74 | 112 | 130 |
Fig. 3Relationship between geographic distances (measured as Euclidian distances between sites) and genetic distance (estimated with FST values between sites)