Optimization of 18 S rRNA metabarcoding for the simultaneous diagnosis of intestinal parasites
Rattachement africain : kr. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Recent advancements in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have created new opportunities for comprehensive screening of multiple parasite species. In this study, we cloned the 18 S rDNA V9 region of 11 species of intestinal parasites into plasmids. Equal amounts and concentrations of these 11 plasmids were pooled, and amplicon NGS targeting the 18 S rDNA V9 region was performed using the Illumina iSeq 100 platform. A total of 434,849 reads were identified, and all 11 parasite species were detected, although the number of output reads for each parasite varied. The read count ratio, in descending order, was as follows: Clonorchis sinensis, 17.2%; Entamoeba histolytica, 16.7%; Dibothriocephalus latus, 14.4%; Trichuris trichiura, 10.8%; Fasciola hepatica, 8.7%; Necator americanus, 8.5%; Paragonimus westermani, 8.5%; Taenia saginata, 7.1%; Giardia intestinalis, 5.0%; Ascaris lumbricoides, 1.7%; and Enterobius vermicularis, 0.9%. We found that the DNA secondary structures showed a negative association with the number of output reads. Additionally, variations in the amplicon PCR annealing temperature affected the relative abundance of output reads for each parasite. These findings can be applied to improve parasite detection methodologies and ultimately enhance efforts to control and prevent intestinal parasitic infections.
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
- Optimization of 18 S rRNA metabarcoding for the simultaneous diagnosis of intestinal parasites
- Date Crossref
- 23/10/2024
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- 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.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.