| Literature DB >> 35630318 |
Jian-Wei Shao1, Yue-Hong Wei2, Xin-Yan Yao1, Hai-Yan Chen2, Hong Liu1, Jing Sun1, Shou-Yi Chen2,3.
Abstract
Leptospirosis is a neglected zoonotic disease with global importance caused by pathogenic Leptospira. Rodents are considered the most significant reservoirs for both human and animal infection. Historically, Guangzhou has been an endemic region of human leptospirosis. Although the incidence in humans has significantly decreased in the past decades in China, the epidemiology of pathogenic Leptospira in wild rodents is of great significance for the prevention and control of human leptospirosis. In this study, a total of 296 wild rodents were trapped in urban areas of Guangzhou, in southern China, in 2020. Three pathogenic Leptospira species, i.e., Leptospira interrogans, L. borgpetersenii, and L. kirschneri, were detected by nested PCR in this wild rodent population with an overall prevalence of 9.5%. Additionally, L. interrogans was detected in three of the four captured rodent species, and the relative high prevalence suggests that L. interrogans probably represents the preponderant species of the pathogenic Leptospira circulating in Guangzhou. Taken together, this study reveals a high genetic diversity of pathogenic Leptospira disseminated among wild rodents in the urban areas of Guangzhou and emphasizes that the risk for the occurrence of human leptospirosis in Guangzhou remains high.Entities:
Keywords: pathogenic Leptospira; southern China; urban areas; wild rodents
Year: 2022 PMID: 35630318 PMCID: PMC9147055 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10050873
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Figure 1Geographic maps showing the location of sampling sites from where the rodents were captured in this study. This map was plotted using a combination of Surfer software, Version-4 (Golden Software, Golden, CO, USA), and Adobe illustrator, Version CC2017 (Adobe, San Jose, CA, USA). The black dots indicate the sampling regions in this study.
Primers used in this study.
| Gene | Primers | Sequences (5′ → 3′) | Amplicon (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| nest-1F | GGCGGCGCGTCTTAAACATG | 525 | [ |
| nest-1R | GTCCGCCTACGCACCCTTTACG | [ | ||
| nest-2F | CAAGTCAAGCGGAGTAGCAA | 289 | [ | |
| nest-2R | CTTAACCTGCTGCCTCCCGTA | [ | ||
| nest-1F | GGCGGCGCGTCTTAAACATG | 1300 | [ | |
| GTACAAGGTCCGGGAACGTA | This study | |||
| nest-2F | CAAGTCAAGCGGAGTAGCAA | 1100 | [ | |
| GCGAGTTGGCTACCCTTTGT | This study | |||
|
| GAAGGWCTTCTCGGAATGGTGG | 1200 | This study | |
| CCKTCCCTTAATTTTAGACTTCTTC | This study | |||
| GCKCTYGGRATYATGCCTTA | 1100 | This study | ||
| TTCATRAAGCCTTCRTAATTTCTCA | This study |
Prevalence of pathogenic Leptospira in rodents by species and location in Guangzhou.
| Species | Location | Total (%,CI) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liwan | Huadu | Tianhe | Huangpu | Baiyun | Conghua | ||
|
| 3/46 | 7/50 | 4/50 | 2/48 | 3/46 | 3/10 | 22/250 |
|
| − | − | − | − | − | 5/40 | 5/40 |
|
| 0/2 | − | − | − | − | − | 0/2 (0) |
|
| 0/2 | − | − | 1/2 | − | − | 1/4 |
| Total | 3/50 | 7/50 | 4/50 | 3/50 | 3/46 | 8/50 | 28/296 |
Leptospira spp. DNA positive specimens/total specimens; ‘‘−’’ indicates that no animals were captured; CI: 95% confidence interval for apparent prevalence.
Figure 2Maximum-likelihood phylogenetic trees based on the nucleotide sequences of (A) rrs and (B) secY gene of pathogenic Leptospira. Bootstrap values were calculated with 1000 replicates of the alignment, and only bootstrap values >70% are shown at appropriate nodes. The trees were mid-point rooted for clarity only, and corresponding sequences of Leptonema illini were used as the ourgroup. Sequences of Leptospira determined in this study are shown with different labels.
Distribution of pathogenic Leptospira species among rodents.
| Species | No. of Individuals | No. per Species (Positive Rate per Species, %, CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 250 | 12 (4.8, 2.8−8.2) | 8 (3.2, 1.6−6.2) | 2 (0.8, 0.2−2.9) |
|
| 40 | 4 (10.0, 4.0−23.0) | 1 (2.5, 0.4−12.9) | − |
|
| 2 | − | − | − |
|
| 4 | 1 (25.0, 4.6−69.9) | − | − |
| Total (%, CI) | 296 | 17 (5.7, 3.6−9.0) | 9 (3.0, 1.6−5.7) | 2 (0.7, 0.2−2.4) |
‘‘−’’ indicates that no positive samples were detected; CI: 95% confidence interval for apparent prevalence.