4.6 Article

Comparison of Viromes in Ticks from Different Domestic Animals in China

期刊

VIROLOGICA SINICA
卷 35, 期 4, 页码 398-406

出版社

KEAI PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s12250-020-00197-3

关键词

Ticks; Viral metagenomics; Virome

类别

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC1200202]
  2. Shanghai Pudong New Area Science and Technology Development Fund [PKJ2018-N02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ticks are involved in the transmission of various arboviruses and some tick-borne viruses pose significant threats to the health of humans or livestock. This study aimed to investigate the geographical distribution of tick species and tick-associated viruses in central and eastern China. Total 573 ticks from domestic animals including dogs, sheep and cattle were collected in 2017. Two genera of ticks were identified includingRhipicephalusandHaemaphysalis. Sequencing was performed on Miseq Illumina platform to characterize the tick viromes from the four different sampling locations. Following trimming, 13,640 reads were obtained and annotated to 19 virus families. From these sequences, above 37.74% of the viral reads were related to the RNA viruses. Virome comparison study revealed that the tick viral diversity was considerably different in the two identified tick genera. The viral diversity ofR. micropluswas significantly different from that of otherRhipicephalusspecies. On the other hand, substantial overlap in viral species was observed between the same genera. In addition, we found no evidence that the natural host played a major role in shaping virus diversity based on the comparison of their viromes. Rather, the geographic location seems to significantly influence the viral families. Phylogenetic study indicated that the novel negative-sense RNA viruses identified in this study was closely related to Bole tick virus 1 and 3 viruses. In conclusion, the present study provides a baseline for comparing viruses detected in ticks, according to species, natural hosts, and geographic locations.

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