4.5 Article

Molecular Detection of Bartonella quintana among Long-Tailed Macaques (Macaca fascicularis) in Thailand

期刊

PATHOGENS
卷 10, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10050629

关键词

Bartonella quintana; long-tailed macaque; Macaca fascicularis; Thailand

资金

  1. Kasetsart University Research Development Institute [49.60]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bartonella quintana, a zoonotic pathogen with a global distribution, was found in long-tailed macaques in Thailand, indicating the potential role of these primates as reservoir hosts. Despite a low infection rate, the study suggests that long-tailed macaques may serve as a reservoir for B. quintana.
Bartonella quintana is a zoonotic pathogen with a worldwide distribution. Humans and non-human primates are considered to be natural reservoir hosts for B. quintana. However, information on the molecular epidemiology of this organism is very limited in regard to long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) in Thailand. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the occurrence and genetic diversity of Bartonella spp. among long-tailed macaques in Thailand. In total, 856 blood samples were collected from long-tailed macaques in Thailand. All specimens were screened for Bartonella spp. using a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay targeting the 16S rRNA, gltA and ftsZ genes. All positive samples were further analyzed based on nucleotide sequencing, phylogenetic analysis and multiple sequence alignment analysis. Only one macaque showed a positive result in the PCR assays based on the 16S rRNA, gltA and ftsZ genes. Nucleotide sequencing and phylogenetic analysis revealed that the obtained sequences were closely related to B. quintana previously detected in non-human primates. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were detected in the gltA and ftsZ gene sequences. This study revealed that long-tailed macaques in Thailand carried B. quintana. Despite the low infection rate detected, long-tailed macaques may be a reservoir of B. quintana.

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

4.5
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