4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Evolution of feline immunodeficiency virus in Felidae: Implications for human health and wildlife ecology

期刊

VETERINARY IMMUNOLOGY AND IMMUNOPATHOLOGY
卷 123, 期 1-2, 页码 32-44

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2008.01.010

关键词

FIV; evolution; lion; Felidae

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS [Z99 CA999999] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCI NIH HHS [N01-CO-12400, N01CO12400] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Genetic analyses of feline immunodeficiency viruses provide significant insights on the worldwide distribution and evolutionary history of this emerging pathogen. Large-scale screening of over 3000 samples from all species of Felidae indicates that at least some individuals from most species possess antibodies that cross react to FIV. Phylogenetic analyses of genetic variation in the pol-RT gene demonstrate that FIV lineages are species-specific and suggest that there has been a prolonged period of viral-host co-evolution. The clinical effects of FIV specific to species other than domestic cat are controversial. Comparative genomic analyses of all full-length FIV genomes confirmed that FIV is host specific. Recently sequenced lion subtype E is marginally more similar to Pallas cat FIV though env is more similar to that of domestic cat FIV, indicating a possible recombination between two divergent strains in the wild. Here we review global patterns of FIV seroprevalence and endemnicity, assess genetic differences within and between species-specific FIV strains, and interpret these with patterns of felid speciation to propose an ancestral origin of FIV in Africa followed by interspecies transmission and global dissemination to Eurasia and the Americas. Continued comparative genomic analyses of full-length FIV from all seropositive animals, along with whole genome sequence of host species, will greatly advance our understanding of the role of recombination, selection and adaptation in retroviral emergence. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.3
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