4.6 Article

Genotyping of Francisella tularensis subsp. holarctica from Hares in Germany

期刊

MICROORGANISMS
卷 8, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8121932

关键词

Francisella tularensis; whole-genome-sequencing; Germany; genotyping

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
  2. project Ess-B.A.R. [FKZ 13N13983]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Francisella tularensis is the causative agent of the zoonotic disease tularemia. In Germany, most human infections are caused by contact with infected hares. The aim of this study was to characterize Francisella tularensis subsp. holarctica strains isolated from hares in Germany and to develop bioinformatics tools to analyze their genetic relatedness. In total, 257 German isolates-obtained mainly from hares (n = 233), other vertebrate animals, and ticks, but also from humans (n = 3)-were analyzed within this study. Publically available sequence data from 49 isolates were used to put our isolates into an epidemiological context and to compare isolates from natural foci and humans. Whole-genome sequences were analyzed using core-genome Multi-Locus-Sequence-Typing, canonical Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) typing and whole-genome SNP typing. An overall conformity of genotype clustering between the typing methods was found, albeit with a lower resolution for canonical single SNP typing. The subclade distribution, both on local and national levels, among strains from humans and hares was similar, suggesting circulation of the same genotypes both in animals and humans. Whilst close to identical isolates of the same subclade were found distributed over large areas, small geographical foci often harbored members of different subclades. In conclusion, although genomic high-resolution typing was shown to be robust, reproducible and allowed the identification of highly closely related strains, genetic profiling alone is not always conclusive for epidemiological linkage of F. tularensis strains.

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