4.5 Article

High-throughput bacterial SNP typing identifies distinct clusters of Salmonella Typhi causing typhoid in Nepalese children

期刊

BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-10-144

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust
  2. PneumoADIP
  3. University of Oxford Department of Paediatrics
  4. Chiron Vaccines
  5. NHMRC of Australia [628930]
  6. OAK foundation through the University of Oxford

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Salmonella Typhi (S. Typhi) causes typhoid fever, which remains an important public health issue in many developing countries. Kathmandu, the capital of Nepal, is an area of high incidence and the pediatric population appears to be at high risk of exposure and infection. Methods: We recently defined the population structure of S. Typhi, using new sequencing technologies to identify nearly 2,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that can be used as unequivocal phylogenetic markers. Here we have used the GoldenGate (illumina) platform to simultaneously type 1,500 of these SNPs in 62 S. Typhi isolates causing severe typhoid in children admitted to Patan Hospital in Kathmandu. Results: Eight distinct S. Typhi haplotypes were identified during the 20-month study period, with 68% of isolates belonging to a subclone of the previously defined H58 S. Typhi. This subclone was closely associated with resistance to nalidixic acid, with all isolates from this group demonstrating a resistant phenotype and harbouring the same resistance-associated SNP in GyrA (Phe83). A secondary clone, comprising 19% of isolates, was observed only during the second half of the study. Conclusions: Our data demonstrate the utility of SNP typing for monitoring bacterial populations over a defined period in a single endemic setting. We provide evidence for genotype introduction and define a nalidixic acid resistant subclone of S. Typhi, which appears to be the dominant cause of severe pediatric typhoid in Kathmandu during the study period.

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