| Literature DB >> 36175887 |
Penglin Wang1,2, Ling Zheng1,2, Linke Liu1,2, Fuchang Yu1,2, Yichen Jian1,2, Rongjun Wang1,2, Sumei Zhang1,2, Longxian Zhang1,2, Changshen Ning1,2, Fuchun Jian3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have molecularly characterized the potential zoonotic protozoa, Cryptosporidium spp., Giardia duodenalis and Enterocytozoon bieneusi in sheep and goats in China, therefore total 472 fecal samples were collected from eight provinces and infection rates of three protozoa were determined by PCR analysis of corresponding loci. All PCR positive samples were sequenced to identify the genotype.Entities:
Keywords: Cryptosporidium spp.; Enterocytozoon bieneusi; Genotype; Giardia duodenalis; Goats; Sheep
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36175887 PMCID: PMC9524073 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-022-03447-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.792
Infection rates and mixed infections of Cryptosporidium, G. duodenalis, and E. bieneusi in different regions
| Region | N/T (%) of positive specimens | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Henan | 0.64 (1/156) | 67.31 (105/156) | 21.79 (34/156) | 17.95 (28/156) | 0.64 (1/156) | – |
| Llaoning | – | 12.50 (2/16) | 31.25 (5/16) | 6.25 (1/16) | – | – |
| Qinghai | – | 11.11 (1/9) | 33.33 (3/9) | – | – | – |
| Gansu | – | 7.70 (1/13) | 46.15 (6/13) | 7.69 (1/13) | – | – |
| Jilin | – | 11.11 (2/18) | 33.33 (6/18) | 5.56 (1/18) | – | – |
| Jiangsu | 47.50 (57/120) | 30.00 (36/120) | 14.17 (17/120) | – | 2.50 (3/120) | |
| Guizhou | – | 26.42 (14/53) | 9.43 (5/53) | 1.89 (1/53) | – | – |
| Hainan | 32.18 (28/87) | 2.30 (2/87) | – | – | – | |
| Total | 1.91 (9/472) | 44.49 (210/472) | 20.55 (97/472) | 10.38 (49/472) | 0.64 (3/472) | – |
“-“: negative; N Number of positive, T Total of analyzed samples
Prevalence and genotype distribution of Cryptosporidium, G. duodenalis, and E. bieneusi in goats and sheep in different provinces
| Species | Geographic source | No. of farms | No. (%) of positive specimens(n) | Species/assemblages/genotypes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goats | Henan | 156 | 0.64 (1) | 66.67 (104) | 21.79 (34) | BEB6(6)CD6(24)CHC8(1)CHG3(60)CHG5(3)peru6(1)CHG1(2)CHG2(4)CHG27(1)CHG26(1)CHG28(1) | E(34) | |
| Qinghai | 3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Gansu | 10 | – | 10.00 (1) | 30.00 (3) | – | CHG3(1) | E(3) | |
| Jiangsu | 51 | 9.80 (5) | 45.10 (23) | 49.02 (25) | BEB6(6)CHG1(2)CHG2(2)CHG3(11)CHG5(1)CHG28(1) | E(25) | ||
| Hainan | 87 | 3.45 (3) | 32.18 (28) | 2.30 (2) | CHG3(16)BEB6(4)CHG5(7) CHG28(1) | E(2) | ||
| Guizhou | 45 | – | 26.67 (12) | 8.89 (4) | – | BEB6(5)CHG1(4)CHG3(3) | E(4) | |
| Total | 352 | 1.91 (9) | 47.73 (168) | 19.32 (68) | BEB6(21)CD6(24)CHC8(1)CHG3(90)CHG5(11)peru6(1)CHG1(8)CHG2(6)CHG26(1)CHG27(1)CHG28(3) | E(68) | ||
| Sheep | Liaoning | 16 | – | 12.50 (2) | 31.25 (5) | – | BEB6(2) | E(5) |
| Qinghai | 6 | – | 16.67 (1) | 50.00 (3) | – | COS-I(1) | E(3) | |
| Gansu | 3 | – | – | 100.00 (3) | – | – | E(3) | |
| Jilin | 18 | – | 11.11 (2) | 33.33 (6) | – | BEB6(2) | E(5) A(1) | |
| Jiangsu | 69 | – | 50.72 (35) | 15.94 (11) | – | BEB6(20)CHG2(2)CHG3(4)CHG5(8)CHS18(1) | E(10) A(1) | |
| Guizhou | 8 | – | 25.00 (2) | 13.50 (1) | – | CHG3(1)CHG5(1) | E(1) | |
| Total | 120 | – | 35.00 (42) | 24.17 (29) | – | BEB6(24)COS-I(1)CHG2(2)CHG3(5)CHG5(9)CHS18(1) | E(28) A(1) | |
Correlation analysis of different factors on the infection of three intestinal pathogens
| Variables | No. tested | (n)No. (%) of positive specimens and 95% Cl | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breed | ||||
| Sheep | 120 | 42 (35.0) [28.7-46.] | 29 (24.2) [16.4-31.9] | |
| Goat | 352 | 168 (47.7) [42.5-53.0] | 68 (19.3) [15.2-23.5] | |
| Total | 472 | 9 (1.9) [0.7-3.1] | 210 (44.5) [40.0-49.0] | 97 (20.6) [16.9-24.2] |
| Gender | ||||
| Female | 265 | 2 (0.8) [0.0-1.8] | 115 (43.4) [37.4-49.4] | 34 (12.8) [8.8-16.9] |
| Male | 60 | 3 (5.5) [0.0-10.7] | 35 (58.3) [45.5-71.2] | 22 (36.7) [24.1-49.2] |
| Total | 325 | 5 (1.5) [0.2-2.9] | 150 (46.2) [40.7-51.6] | 56 (17.2) [13.1-21.4] |
| Region | ||||
| Henan | 156 | 1 (0.6) [0.0-1.9] | 105 (67.3) [59.9-74.8] | 34 (21.8) [15.2-28.3] |
| Liaoning | 16 | – | 2 (12.5) [0.0-30.7] | 5 (31.3) [5.7-56.8] |
| Qinghai | 9 | – | 1 (11.1) [0.0-36.7] | 3 (33.3) [0.0-71.8] |
| Gansu | 13 | – | 1 (7.7) [0.0-24.5] | 6 (46.2) [14.8-77.5] |
| Jilin | 18 | – | 2 (11.1) [0.0-27.2] | 6 (33.3) [9.2-57.5] |
| Jiangsu | 120 | 6 (5.0) [1.0-9.0] | 57 (47.5) [38.4-56.6] | 36 (30.0) [21.7-38.3] |
| Guizhou | 53 | – | 14 (26.4) [14.1-38.7] | 5 (9.4) [1.3-17.6] |
| Hainan | 87 | 2 (2.3) [0.0-5.5] | 28 (32.2) [22.2-42.2] | 2 (2.3) [0.0-5.5] |
| Total | 472 | 9 (1.9) [0.7-3.1] | 210 (44.5) [40.0-49.0] | 97 (20.6) [16.9-24.2] |
p < 0.05, the difference is significant; P > 0.05: no difference
Fig. 1Phylogenetic relationship between G. duodenalis assemblage E multilocus genotype (MLG). The phylogenetic tree was constructed using a mosaic dataset of bg, gdh and tpi gene sequences, and the topology obtained by the adjacency analysis was the same. ▲: The known genotypes identified in this study. △:Reference sequences are from the studies of Jin [14]. HN: Hainan, JS: Jiangsu, GS:Gansu. qh:Qinghai
Fig. 2Phylogenetic relationship between G. duodenalis assemblage A multilocus genotype (MLG). The phylogenetic tree was constructed using a mosaic dataset of bg, gdh and tpi gene sequences, and the topology obtained by the adjacency analysis was the same. Novel 1 represent isolates from this study. Reference sequences are from the studies of Cacciò [15] and Lebbad M [16]
Fig. 3Phylogenetic analysis of E.bieneusi based on the ribosomal internal transcribed spacer (ITS) nucleotide sequence. Genotypes were based on the genetic distance calculated by the Kimura two-parameter model (Saitou and Nei, 1987), and contiguous trees were constructed using the ITS locus. The self-test value is 1000 repetitions. ▲: new genotype identified in this study. △: Known genotype identified in this study
Fig. 4Distribution of sampling locations in China. The figure was designed by Arcgis 10.2, and the original vector diagram imported in Arcgis was adapted from Natural Earth (http://www.naturalearthdata.com)