4.0 Article

Phylogenetic congruence of Sarcocystis neurona Dubey et al., 1991 (Apicomplexa: Sarcocystidae) in the United States based on sequence analysis and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP)

Journal

SYSTEMATIC PARASITOLOGY
Volume 61, Issue 3, Pages 191-202

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11230-005-3163-5

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objectives of the present study were to assess the genetic diversity, phylogeny and phylogeographical relationships of available Sarcocystis neurona isolates from different localities in the United States. All 13 Sarcocystis isolates from different hosts were subjected to polymerase chain reaction restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) analyses using two published DNA markers (25/396 and 33/54). The 334 bp sequence of the 25/396 marker of these isolates and Besnoitia darlingi, B. bennetti, Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora caninum were sequenced and compared. Phylogenetic analysis was performed using neighbour-joining (NJ), maximum parsimony (MP) and minimum evolution (ME) methods based on the sequences of the 25/396 marker of the 13 Sarcocystis isolates obtained in this study and sequences of 10 related isolates from GenBank. Phylogenetic trees revealed a close relatedness among S. neurona isolates in the US (nucleotide sequence diversity < 5.0%). US isolates formed a monophyletic group and appeared more closely related to each other than to the South American isolates, which formed a separate lineage. NJ and ME trees with Kimura 2-parameter model separated S. neurona into two separate groups: a northern US group and a Southern US group. These findings suggest a correlation between grouping of the isolates and geographical segregation and were consistent with a genetic bottleneck hypothesis during opossum colonisation of North America. These data do not support either the view of S. neurona as a single super-species or its division into multiple subspecies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available