4.8 Article

Comparative genomic analysis of Helicobacter pylori from Malaysia identifies three distinct lineages suggestive of differential evolution

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 324-335

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gku1271

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Biotechnology, Government of India [BT/PR6921/MED/29/699/2013]
  2. Senior Research Fellowship, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, India
  3. HIR Project of the University of Malaya [UM.C/625/1/HIR/MOHE/CHAN-02]
  4. University of Malaya [UM.C/625/1/HIR/MOHE/CHAN-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The discordant prevalence of Helicobacter pylori and its related diseases, for a long time, fostered certain enigmatic situations observed in the countries of the southern world. Variation in H. pylori infection rates and disease outcomes among different populations in multi-ethnic Malaysia provides a unique opportunity to understand dynamics of host-pathogen interaction and genome evolution. In this study, we extensively analyzed and compared genomes of 27 Malaysian H. pylori isolates and identified three major phylogeographic lineages: hspEastAsia, hpEurope and hpSouthIndia. The analysis of the virulence genes within the core genome, however, revealed a comparable pathogenic potential of the strains. In addition, we identified four genes limited to strains of East-Asian lineage. Our analyses identified a few strain-specific genes encoding restriction modification systems and outlined 311 core genes possibly under differential evolutionary constraints, among the strains representing different ethnic groups. The cagA and vacA genes also showed variations in accordance with the host genetic background of the strains. Moreover, restriction modification genes were found to be significantly enriched in East-Asian strains. An understanding of these variations in the genome content would provide significant insights into various adaptive and host modulation strategies harnessed by H. pylori to effectively persist in a host-specific manner.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据