| Title |
Designing and conducting in silico analysis for identifying of Echinococcus spp. with discrimination of novel haplotypes: an approach to better understanding of parasite taxonomic
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasitology Research, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00436-015-4334-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adel Spotin, Shirzad Gholami, Abbas Najafi Nasab, Esmaeil Fallah, Mahmoud Mahami Oskouei, Vahid Semnani, Seyyed Ali Shariatzadeh, Abbas Shahbazi |
| Abstract |
The definitive identification of Echinococcus species is currently carried out by sequencing and phylogenetic strategies. However, the application of polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) patterns is not broadly used as a result of heterogeneity traits of Echinococcus genome in different regions of the world. Therefore, designing and conducting a standardized pattern should indigenously be considered in under-studied areas. In this investigation, an in silico mapping was designed and developed for eight Echinococcus spp. on the basis of regional sequences in Iran and the world. The numbers of 60 Echinococcus isolates were collected from the liver and lungs of 15 human, 15 sheep, 15 cattle, and 15 camel cases in Semnan province, Central Iran. DNA samples were extracted and examined by polymerase chain reaction of ribosomal DNA (rDNA) internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS1) and PCR-RFLP via Rsa1 endonuclease enzyme. Moreover, 15 amplicons of cytochrome oxidase 1 (Cox1) were directly sequenced in order to identify the strains/haplotypes. PCR-RFLP and phylogenetic analyses revealed firmly the presence of the G1 and G6 genotypes with heterogeneity (three novel haplotypes) of Cox1 gene although no other expected genotypes were found in the region. Finding shows that the identification of novel haplotypes along with discrimination of Echinococcus spp. through regional patterns can unambiguously illustrate the real taxonomic status of parasite in Central Iran. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 24% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 5 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,395,895
of 22,786,087 outputs
Outputs from Parasitology Research
#2,371
of 3,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,622
of 352,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasitology Research
#40
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,087 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,782 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.