Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T17:01:52.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic heterogeneity within Echinococcus granulosus: isolates from different hosts and geographical areas characterized with DNA probes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

D. P. McManus  and
A. K. Rishi
D. P. McManus
Affiliation:
Department of Pure and Applied Biology, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2AZ
A. K. Rishi
Affiliation:
Department of Pure and Applied Biology, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London SW7 2AZ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A segment of the ribosomal RNA gene of Schistosoma mansoni and a DNA fragment specific to Echinococcus granulosus, cloned in plasmids, have been used as DNA probes to assess the extent of genetic variability within E. granulosus and some distinct strains have been identified. The DNA analysis, involving restriction endonuclease digestion and Southern blot hybridization with the probes, did not demonstrate any significant genetic variation within the U.K. horse/dog or sheep/dog strains but confirmed the distinctiveness of the two strains shown in previous studies. The sheep/dog strain was shown to be cosmopolitan in its distribution and fertile bovine material originating from the United Kingdom, Kenya, Spain and India conformed to this strain by DNA hybridization. In contrast, cattle isolates from Holland produced markedly different DNA hybridization banding profiles indicating that cattle can harbour more than one strain of E. granulosus. Similarly, it was shown that goats can harbour two different strains of E. granulosus, the sheep/dog strain and a form which infects camels. The strain of E. granulosus infecting equines in Spain and Ireland is genetically identical to that infecting horses in the United Kingdom. There is also a different strain infecting pigs in Poland and Yugoslavia. This pig/dog strain appears to be very similar genetically to the forms of E. granulosus which use camels and goats as intermediate hosts and is similar, though not identical, to the variant infecting Dutch cattle. It has been shown that E. granulosus material, fixed for a prolonged period in ethanol, or lyophilized, is amenable to DNA analysis and that it is possible to characterize the DNA of a single adult worm.

Keywords

Echinococcus granulosuscharacterizationgenetic heterogeneityDNA probes.
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 99 , Issue 1 , August 1989 , pp. 17 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anonymous (1987). Report of the WHO informal consultation on research requirements for echinoccosis/hydatidosis, Montreal, Canada, 13 August, 1987. VPH/87.72. pp. 1–19. World Health Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
Baldock, F. C., Thompson, R. C. A., & Kumaratilake, L. M., (1985). Strain identification of Echinococcus granulosus in determining origin of infection in a case of human hydatid disease in Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 79, 238–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, C., & Flockhart, H. A., (1986). Biochemical strain variation in helminths. Advances in Parasitology 25, 275–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuesta-Bandera, C., McManus, D. P., & Rishi, A. K., (1988). Characterization of Echinococcus granulosus of Spanish origin by DNA restriction endonuclease analysis and Southern blot hybridisation. International Journal for Parasitology 18, 137–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, J., & Thompson, R. C. A., (1988). Echinococcus strains in Europe. Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 39, 1–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Harrison, L. J. S., Le Riche, P. D., & Sewell, M. M. H., (1986). Variations in Echinococcus granulosus of bovine origin identified by enzyme electrophoresis. Tropical Animal Health and Production 18, 48–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumaratilake, L. M., Thompson, R. C. A., & Eckert, J., (1986). Echinococcus granulosus of equine origin from different countries possess uniform morphological characteristics. International Journal for Parasitology 16, 529–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lymbery, A. J., & Thompson, A. J. G., (1988). Electrophoretic analysis of genetic variation in Echinococcus granulosus from domestic hosts in Australia. International Journal for Parasitology 18, 803–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macpherson, C. N. L., (1983). An active intermediate host role for man in the lifecycle of Echinococcus granulosus in Turkana, Kenya. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 32, 397–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macpherson, C. N. L., & McManus, D. P., (1982). A comparative study of Echinococcus granulosus from human and animal hosts in Kenya using isoelectric focusing and isoenzyme analysis. International Journal for Parasitology 12, 515–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macpherson, C. N. L., & Smyth, J. D., (1985). In vitro culture of the strobilar stage of Echinococus granulosus from protoscoleces of human, camel, sheep, and goat origin from Kenya and buffalo origin from India. International Journal for Parasitology 15, 137–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, D. P., (1981). A biochemical study of adult and cystic stages of Echinococcus granulosus of human and animal origin from Kenya. Journal of Helminthology 55, 21–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, D. P., Knight, M., & Simpson, A. J. G., (1985). Isolation and characterisation of nucleic acids from the hydatid organisms, Echinococcus spp. (Cestoda). Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology 16, 251–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, D. P., & Macpherson, C. N. L., (1984). Strain characterization in the hydatid organism, Echinococcus granulosus: current status and new perspectives. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 78, 193–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, D. P., & Simpson, A. J. G., (1985). Identification of the Echinococcus (hydatid disease) organisms using cloned DNA markers. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology 17, 171–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, D. P., Simpson, A. J. G., & Rishi, A. K., (1987). Characterisation of the hydatid disease organism, Echinococcus granulosus, from Kenya using cloned DNA markers. In Helminth Zoonoses (ed. Geerts, S., Kumar, V., & Brandt, J.), pp. 29–36. Dordrecht: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, D. P., & Smyth, J. D., (1979). Isoelectric focusing of some enzymes from Echinococcus granulosus (horse and sheep strains) and E. multilocularis. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 73, 259–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, D. P., & Smyth, J. D., (1986). Hydatidosis: changing concepts in epidemiology and speciation. Parasitology Today 2, 163–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, G. S., (1986). Hydatid disease: research and control in Turkana, Kenya 1. Epidemiological observations. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 80, 177–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pawlowski, Z. S., (1985). Epidemiological basis for chemotherapy of human echinococcosis. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Research 5, 75–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Rausch, R. L., (1985). Parasitology: retrospect and prospect. Journal of Parasitology 71, 139–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rishi, A. K., & McManus, D. P., (1987). Genomic cloning of human Echinococcus granulosus DNA: isolation of recombinant plasmids and their use as genetic markers in strain characterization. Parasitology 94, 369–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rishi, A. K., & McManus, D. P., (1989). DNA probes for detection and identification of human parasites. Current Science 58, 3–11.Google Scholar
Simpson, A. J. G., Dame, J. B., Lewis, F. A., & Mccutchan, T. F., (1984). The arrangement of ribosomal RNA genes in Schistosoma mansoni. Identification of polymorphic structural variants. European Journal of Biochemistry 139, 41–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smyth, J. D., (1977). Strain differences in Echinococcus granulosus, with special reference to the status of equine hydatidosis in the United Kingdom. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 71, 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smyth, J. D., (1987). Changing concepts in the microecology, macroecology and epidemiology of hydatid disease. In Helminth Zoonoses (ed. Geerts, S., Kumar, V., & Brandt, J.), pp 1–11. Dordrecht: NijhofT.Google Scholar
Smyth, J. D., & Smyth, M. M., (1964). Natural and experimental hosts of Echinococcus granulosus and E. multilocularis, with comments on the genetics of speciation in the genus Echinococcus. Parasitology 54, 493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southern, E. M., (1975). Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. Journal of Molecular Biology 98, 503–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, R. C. A., (1986). Biology and systematics of Echinococcus. In The Biology of Echinococcus and Hydatid Disease, (ed. Thompson, R. C. A.,), pp. 5–43. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. C. A., & Lymbery, A. J., (1988). The nature, extent and significance of variation within the genus Echinococcus. Advances in Parasitology 27, 210–63.Google ScholarPubMed
Thompson, R. C. A., Kumaratilake, L. M., & Eckert, J., (1984). Observations on Echinococcus granulosus of cattle origin in Switzerland. International Journal for Parasitology 14, 283–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed