Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
Rev. argent. microbiol ; 41(4): 218-225, oct.-dic. 2009. ilus, tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-634636

ABSTRACT

In the present study we have compared cattle isolates of Echinococcus granulosus from Argentina and Spain. The aim was to compare and determine if there exist phenotypic and genetic differences within E. granulosus cattle isolates between an endemic area of Spain (where the disease is mainly restricted to a sheep-dog cycle) and an endemic area of Argentina (where cattle are the most abundant intermediate hosts). The Spanish samples were previously identified as G1 genotype. The Argentinean samples were also identified as G1, but some variants were found for the cytochrome c oxidase-1 (CO1) and NADH dehydrogenase-1 (ND1) mitochondrial genes. When comparing the cyst features and the morphology of the larval rostellar hooks in both regions, some differences were found. The morphometric analyses of the larval rostellar hooks showed the existence of two distinct clearly separated groups (one corresponding to the Argentinean samples and the other to the Spanish ones). In conclusion, there are some genetic and phenotypic differences within E. granulosus cattle isolates from Argentina and Spain. Probably these differences, more important from an epidemiological point of view, are related to different steps in the disease control in both countries. Further studies involving other epidemiological, morphometric and molecular data, including other types of livestock, would contribute to clarify and expand the present work.


El objetivo del presente trabajo fue determinar si existen diferencias fenotípicas y genéticas entre los aislados de Echinococcus granulosus de origen bovino provenientes de dos regiones geográficas donde la hidatidosis es endémica, una de España (donde predomina el ciclo perro-oveja) y una de Argentina (donde el bovino es el hospedador intermediario más importante). Las muestras españolas fueron previamente identificadas como pertenecientes al genotipo G1. Las muestras argentinas también correspondían al genotipo G1, pero entre ellas se registraron algunas microvariantes de los genes mitocondriales citocromo c oxidasa-1 (CO1) y NADH deshidrogenasa- 1 (ND1). La comparación de las características de los quistes y de la morfología de los ganchos rostelares del metacestode mostró ciertas diferencias. En conclusión, existen algunas diferencias genéticas y fenotípicas entre los aislados de E. granulosus de Argentina y España. Probablemente estas diferencias, más importantes desde el punto de vista epidemiológico, podrían estar relacionadas con diferentes etapas en los programas de control de la enfermedad en los dos países. Estudios adicionales que involucren datos epidemiológicos, morfométricos y moleculares provenientes de otros tipos de ganado contribuirán a clarificar y ampliar la información aportada por este trabajo.


Subject(s)
Animals , Dogs , Cattle Diseases/parasitology , Cattle/parasitology , Echinococcosis, Hepatic/veterinary , Echinococcosis, Pulmonary/veterinary , Echinococcus granulosus/isolation & purification , Argentina/epidemiology , Cattle Diseases/epidemiology , Disease Reservoirs/veterinary , Endemic Diseases , Echinococcosis, Hepatic/epidemiology , Echinococcosis, Hepatic/parasitology , Echinococcosis, Pulmonary/epidemiology , Echinococcosis, Pulmonary/parasitology , Echinococcus granulosus/classification , Echinococcus granulosus/genetics , Echinococcus granulosus/ultrastructure , Genotype , Haplotypes/genetics , Larva/ultrastructure , Phenotype , Sequence Analysis, DNA , Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid , Spain/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL