4.5 Article

Analysis of developmentally regulated genes of the parasite Haemonchus contortus

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PARASITOLOGY
卷 31, 期 11, 页码 1236-1245

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0020-7519(01)00248-X

关键词

Haemonchus contortus; parasitic nematode; differential display; stage-associated gene expression; expressed sequence tag

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Differential regulation of gene expression in the development of Haemonchus contortus was analysed using RNA arbitrarily-primed PCR. A study of third-stage larval and adult H. contortus revealed large differences between the two stages: 32 and 30% unique third-stage larval and adult RNA arbitrarily-primed PCR products, respectively. This finding is consistent with a high degree of differential gene expression between these developmental stages. A number of adult products were sequenced, revealing I I molecules to be similar to deposits within sequence databases. Four other molecules that did not have significant similarity to sequences in the databases may represent developmentally regulated genes specific to H. contortus. Northern analysis of the putative adult-expressed molecules with homologues in the databases confirmed that four were expressed only in adults, while four were expressed in both stages, but had different sized transcripts. This may reflect differential splicing, or expression of closely related but different molecules at different life cycle stages. Two molecules were present in mRNA populations from both stages, suggesting these were false stage-associated molecules. No transcript was detected for one molecule by Northern analysis, probably due to low level of expression. In situ hybridisation analysis was used to localise expression of transcripts in the adult parasite, in particular, to gain some insight into the nature of those molecules with no known predicted function. (C) 2001 Australian Society for Parasitology Inc. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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