4.5 Article

A comparison of microsatellite polymorphism and heterozygosity among field and laboratory populations of Schistosoma mansoni

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PARASITOLOGY
Volume 34, Issue 5, Pages 595-601

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2003.11.026

Keywords

Schistosoma mansoni; microsatellite markers; allelic diversity; population genetics

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01-AI 42768] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The genetic diversity of a field population (recently collected in Melquiades, Brazil) and two laboratory strains (LE and NMRI) of a human blood fluke. Schistosoma mansoni, were analysed using microsatellite markers. Data from the three groups showed an extreme and consistent discrepancy in the level of polymorphism at all microsatellite loci between the field population and laboratory populations. The numbers of alleles detected in LE and NMRI populations averaged only 14 and 10% of those found in the field population, respectively. Especially apparent was the abundance of rare alleles in the Melquiades population when compared with the laboratory strains. The reduction in allelic diversity in the laboratory strains is most likely due to the founder effect and potential bottlenecks that may have occurred during decades of laboratory maintenance. Surprisingly, a much less drastic difference was found when comparing the average heterozygosity of the held population with the laboratory strains. This apparent anomaly may be explained by observed population substructuring (and a potential resultant Wahlund effect) in the natural population. Our comparison of genetic diversity between laboratory and field populations of S. mansoni emphasizes the need for studies of representative populations in schistosome vaccine development. (C) 2004 Australian Society for Parasitology Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available