4.7 Article

High-throughput metagenome analysis of the Sarcoptes scabiei internal microbiota and in-situ identification of intestinal Streptomyces sp.

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-47892-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Government National Health and Medical Research Council [1098804]
  2. Australian Research Council Future Fellowship [FT130101875]
  3. Australian Research Council [FT130101875] Funding Source: Australian Research Council
  4. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1098804] Funding Source: NHMRC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multiple parasitic arthropods of medical importance depend on symbiotic bacteria. While the link between scabies and secondary bacterial infections causing post infective complications of Group A streptococcal and staphylococcal pyoderma is increasingly recognized, very little is known about the microbiota of Sarcoptes scabiei. Here we analyze adult female mite and egg metagenome datasets. The majority of adult mite bacterial reads matched with Enterobacteriaceae (phylum Proteobacteria), followed by Corynebacteriaceae (phylum Actinobacteria). Klebsiella was the most dominant genus (78%) and Corynebacterium constituted 9% of the assigned sequences. Scabies mite eggs had a more diverse microbial composition with sequences from Proteobacteria being the most dominant (75%), while Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes accounted for 23% of the egg microbiome sequences. DNA sequences of a potential endosymbiont, namely Streptomyces, were identified in the metagenome sequence data of both life stages. The presence of Streptomyces was confirmed by conventional PCR. Digital droplet PCR indicated higher Streptomyces numbers in adult mites compared to eggs. Streptomyces were localized histologically in the scabies mite gut and faecal pellets by Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH). Streptomyces may have essential symbiotic roles in the scabies parasite intestinal system requiring further investigation.

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

4.7
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