4.2 Article

Genetic Diversity of Artybash Virus in the Laxmann's Shrew (Sorex caecutiens)

期刊

VECTOR-BORNE AND ZOONOTIC DISEASES
卷 16, 期 7, 页码 468-475

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2015.1903

关键词

Hantavirus; Japan; RT-PCR; Russia; Shrew

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DEB0415668]
  2. Health Labour Sciences Research Grant in Japan [H22-Shinko-Ippan-006, H25-Shinko-Ippan-008]
  3. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED)
  4. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [S13205]
  5. U.S. Public Health Service from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [R01AI075057]
  6. National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health [P20GM103516, P30GM114737]
  7. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [16H05655, 26560137] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although based on very limited M and L segment sequences, Artybash virus (ARTV) was proposed previously as a unique hantavirus harbored by the Laxmann's shrew (Sorex caecutiens). To verify this conjecture, lung tissues from 68 Laxmann's shrews, captured during 2006 to 2014 in eastern Siberia, Russia, and Hokkaido, Japan, were analyzed for ARTV RNA using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). ARTV RNA was detected in six Laxmann's shrews. Pairwise alignment and comparison of partial-and full-length S, M, and L segment sequences from these Laxmann's shrews, as well as phylogenetic analyses, using maximum likelihood and Bayesian methods indicated that ARTV was distinct from other soricine shrew-borne hantaviruses and representative hantaviruses harbored by rodents, moles, and bats. Taxonomic identity of the ARTV-infected Laxmann's shrews was confirmed by full-length cytochrome b mitochondrial DNA sequence analysis. Our data indicate that the hantavirus previously known as Amga virus (MGAV) represents genetic variants of ARTV. Thus, the previously proposed designation of ARTV/MGAV should be replaced by ARTV.

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

4.2
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