Phylogenetic analysis of bluetongue virus serotype 4 field isolates from Argentina
Le résumé fourni par la source
Bluetongue is an insect-transmitted viral disease of ruminant species, which represents a major barrier to the international trade of animals and their products. Bluetongue virus (BTV) has a genome composed of ten linear segments of dsRNA, which code for at least ten different viral proteins. In South America, serological evidence for the presence of BTV has been found in Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador and Chile. Brazil and Argentina are the only South American countries where BTV has been isolated. In Brazil, only one BTV isolate, serotype 12, has been reported, whereas in Argentina five BTV serotype 4 isolates have been obtained from cattle without clinical signs. Three of these five isolates were isolated during 1999-2001, whereas two of them were obtained as part of the present work. This study describes sequence comparisons and phylogenetic analyses of segment (Seg)-2, Seg-3, Seg-6, Seg-7 and Seg-10 of the first Argentinian field isolates of BTV. The analysis of Seg-2 and Seg-6 resulted in a single cluster of Argentinian sequences into the serotype 4 clade. In addition, the Argentinian sequences grouped within the nucleotype A clade, along with reference strains. The analysis of Seg-3, Seg-7 and Seg-10 showed that the Argentinian isolates grouped into the western topotype, indicating that the circulating virus had an African/European origin. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that the Argentinian sequences present a South American genetic identity, suggesting an independent lineage evolution.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Phylogenetic analysis of bluetongue virus serotype 4 field isolates from Argentina
- Date Crossref
- 01/03/2013
- Éditeur
- Microbiology Society
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.