Echinococcus granulosus genotypes in livestock of Iran indicating high frequency of G1 genotype in camels

Sharbatkhori, Mitra; Mirhendi, Hossein; Harandi, Majid Fasihi; Rezaeian, Mostafa; Mohebali, Mehdi; Eshraghian, M R; Rahimi, Hamid Reza; Kia, Eshrat Beigom

doi:10.1016/j.exppara.2009.11.020

Cited by 55 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the previous study, the pig strain G7 was reported in one human isolate and two isolates from sheep (13). Our results are consistent with the data obtained by other authors who used different techniques, such as PCR-RFLP (15,(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37) and SSCP (17,22,(38)(39)(40) analyses for the genotyping of E. granulosus. In addition, we examined 13 isolates of E. granulosus from different intermediate hosts using sequence analysis of the mitochondrial ND1 and CO1 genes.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Molecular Characterization of Human and Animal Isolates of Echinococcus granulosus in the Thrace Region, Turkey

Eryıldız¹,

Şakru²

2012

Balkan Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Molecular Characterization of Human and Animal Isolates of Echinococcus granulosus in the Thrace Region, Turkey

Eryıldız¹,

Şakru²

2012

Balkan Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…1,26 Several molecular epidemiological studies have been performed on E. granulosus isolates in Iran using sequence data of mitochondrial and nuclear genes. Overall, four different genotypes of E. granulosus (genotype G1, G3, and G6) have been reported from different livestock [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] and dogs (genotype G1, G2, and G3) 37 from Iran. To date, only a few human isolates of E. granulosus have been genetically characterized in Iran that indicated G1, G3, and G6 genotypes ( Table 1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Characterization of Echinococcus granulosus from a Large Number of Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tissue Samples of Human Isolates in Iran

Rostami¹,

Torbaghan²,

Dabiri³

et al. 2015

The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Cystic echinococcosis (CE), caused by the larval stage of Echinococcus granulosus, presents an important medical and veterinary problem globally, including that in Iran. Different genotypes of E. granulosus have been reported from human isolates worldwide. This study identifies the genotype of the parasite responsible for human hydatidosis in three provinces of Iran using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples. In this study, 200 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples from human CE cases were collected from Alborz, Tehran, and Kerman provinces. Polymerase chain reaction amplification and sequencing of the partial mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene were performed for genetic characterization of the samples. Phylogenetic analysis of the isolates from this study and reference sequences of different genotypes was done using a maximum likelihood method. In total, 54.4%, 0.8%, 1%, and 40.8% of the samples were identified as the G1, G2, G3, and G6 genotypes, respectively. The findings of the current study confirm the G1 genotype (sheep strain) to be the most prevalent genotype involved in human CE cases in Iran and indicates the high prevalence of the G6 genotype with a high infectivity for humans. Furthermore, this study illustrates the first documented human CE case in Iran infected with the G2 genotype.

show abstract

“…Also, using the same technique, strains of Leishmania donovani could be distinguished in Sudan (74). In Iran, it was possible to genotype 112 isolates of Echinococcus granulosus in sheep, goats, cattle and camels (75). In Latin America, Bobes et al (76) investigated the genetic diversity of Taenia solium in pigs in central Mexico.…”

Section: Random Amplified Polymorphic Dna (Rapd)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular techniques for the study and diagnosis of parasite infection

Tavares¹,

Staggemeier²,

Borges³

et al. 2011

J. Venom. Anim. Toxins incl. Trop. Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In parasitology, routine laboratory diagnosis involves conventional methods, such as optical microscopy, used for the morphological identification of parasites. Currently, molecular biology techniques are increasingly used to diagnose parasite structures in order to enhance the identification and characterization of parasites. The objective of the present study was to review the main current and new diagnostic techniques for confirmation of parasite infections, namely: polymerase chain reaction (PCR), real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), Luminex xMAP, random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), in addition to microsatellites. Molecular assays have comprehensively assisted in the diagnosis, treatment and epidemiological studies of parasitic diseases that affect people worldwide, helping to control parasitic disease mortality.Key words: parasite infection, diagnosis, molecular techniques, molecular epidemiology. Review ARticle The Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases ISSN 1678-9199 | 2011 | volume 17 | issue 3 | pages 239-248 INTRODUCTIONIn parasitology, routine laboratory diagnosis involves conventional methods, such as optical microscopy, used for the morphological identification of parasites (1). However, the occasional difficulty of identifying these parasite structures may decrease the sensitivity of such methods. Currently, because of these difficulties, molecular biology has been employed to detect parasites responsible for parasitic diseases (2).Traditional parasitological analyses have the advantage of being less costly without requiring expensive reagents and equipment. Additionally, such analyses can be easily performed when a trained microscopist is available. On the other hand, molecular technology demonstrates the presence of parasites based on their antigenic components or DNA segments (3). These tests are not influenced by environmental factors that usually can interfere with the results of a stool test, for example, thus ensuring highly reliable results (4).Current laboratory diagnostic methods for the identification of parasites include: polymerase chain reaction (PCR), random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), microsatellite marker method, Luminex xMAP-based technology (areas of multianalyte profiling), loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and the recently added real-time PCR (5-12).The objective of the present article was to review the applications of molecular biology techniques in parasitology by evaluating and discussing their uses and benefits. MOLECULAR METHODS FOR DETECTION OF PARASITE STRUCTURESSeveral molecular tests to detect parasites have been developed in the last decade. Their specificity and sensitivity have gradually increased, and parasites that were previously difficult to diagnose usi...

show abstract

Echinococcus granulosus genotypes in livestock of Iran indicating high frequency of G1 genotype in camels

Cited by 55 publications

References 33 publications

Molecular Characterization of Human and Animal Isolates of Echinococcus granulosus in the Thrace Region, Turkey

Molecular Characterization of Human and Animal Isolates of Echinococcus granulosus in the Thrace Region, Turkey

Genetic Characterization of Echinococcus granulosus from a Large Number of Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tissue Samples of Human Isolates in Iran

Molecular techniques for the study and diagnosis of parasite infection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About