4.6 Article

Modern and Ancestral Genotypes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from Andhra Pradesh, India

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 6, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027584

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Biotechnology of the Indian Government [BT/01/CoE/07/02]
  2. Indian Council of Medical Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Traditionally, the distribution of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis genotypes in India has been characterized by widespread prevalence of ancestral lineages (TbD1+ strains and variants) in the south and the modern forms (TbD1(-) CAS and variants) predominating in the north of India. The pattern was, however, not clearly known in the south-central region such as Hyderabad and the rest of the state of Andhra Pradesh where the prevalence of both tuberculosis (TB) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection is one of the highest in the country; this area has been the hotspot of TB vaccine trials. Spoligotyping of 101 clinical isolates obtained from Hyderabad and rural Andhra Pradesh confirmed the occurrence of major genogroups such as the ancestral (or the TbD1+ type or the East African Indian (EAI) type), the Central Asian (CAS) or Delhi type and the Beijing lineage in Andhra Pradesh. Sixty five different spoligotype patterns were observed for the isolates included in this study; these were further analyzed based on specific genetic signatures/mutations. It was found that the major genogroups, CAS and ancestral,'' were almost equally prevalent in our collection but followed a north-south compartmentalization as was also reported previously. However, we observed a significant presence of MANU lineage in south Andhra Pradesh, which was earlier reported to be overwhelmingly present in Mumbai. This study portrays genotypic diversity of M. tuberculosis from the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh and provides a much needed snapshot of the strain diversity that will be helpful in devising effective TB control programs in this part of the world.

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

4.6
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