4.7 Article

PfHMGB2 has a role in malaria parasite mosquito infection

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.1003214

关键词

gametocyte; differentiation; transmission; mosquito; oocyst

资金

  1. Seattle Children's via award
  2. [24010119]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article investigates the importance of differentiation of asexually replicating parasites in the sexual phase of the malaria parasite life cycle and identifies the role of PfHMGB2 in parasite development and transmission.
Differentiation of asexually replicating parasites into gametocytes is critical for successful completion of the sexual phase of the malaria parasite life cycle. Gametes generated from gametocytes fuse to form a zygote which differentiates into ookinetes and oocysts. The sporozoites are formed inside oocysts which migrate to the salivary glands for next cycle of human infection. These morphologically and functionally distinct stages require stage-specific gene expression via specific transcriptional regulators. The capacity of high mobility group box (HMGB) proteins to interact with DNA in a sequence independent manner enables them to regulate higher order chromosome organization and regulation of gene expression. Plasmodium falciparum HMGB2 (PfHMGB2) shows a typical L- shaped predicted structure which is similar to mammalian HMG box proteins and shows very high protein sequence similarity to PyHMGB2 and PbHMGB2. Functional characterization of PfHMGB2 by gene deletion (Pfhmgb2 over bar ) showed that knockout parasites develop normally as asexual stages and undergo gametocytogenesis. Transmission experiments revealed that Pfhmgb2 over bar can infect mosquitoes and develop as oocyst stages. However, transmission was reduced compared to wild type (WT) parasites and as a consequence, the salivary gland sporozoites were reduced in number. In summary, we demonstrate that PfHMGB2 has no role in asexual growth and a modest role in sexual phase development and parasite transmission to the mosquito.

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