2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.meegid.2017.08.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Leptospira species molecular epidemiology in the genomic era

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
9
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly enough, the subclades P1 and P2 seem to be constituted by multiple small subgroups, representing a high level of diversity. As a note the segmentation of the subclade P1 in groups have been already described [9, 11, 15, 43]. Also, the species forming the new subclade S2 are clearly among the most diverse in ANI values, consistent with the long branches in the phylogenetic tree.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…Interestingly enough, the subclades P1 and P2 seem to be constituted by multiple small subgroups, representing a high level of diversity. As a note the segmentation of the subclade P1 in groups have been already described [9, 11, 15, 43]. Also, the species forming the new subclade S2 are clearly among the most diverse in ANI values, consistent with the long branches in the phylogenetic tree.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 75%
“…The classical MLST schemes were developped using six or seven genes with a focus on pathogenic Leptospira species [29, 45, 73]. More recently, a new MLST scheme was proposed and applied to a wider collection of strains, including a few intermediate species [46, 62]. However, none of these MLST methods enables the inclusion of all major Leptospira lineages, including saprophytic strains.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Out of 27 retrieved strains from NCBI FTP server, 16 are observed to be pathogenic in nature, 5 are intermediate and 6 are saprophytic in nature (Table 1). Sixteen pathogenic strains of Leptospira were selected for putative drug target mining [21–22,48].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Up to 2016, global character was lacking in classification of Leptospira . Fouts et al (2016) and Caimi et al (2017) have established the classification of Leptospira by wide range inter-species genomic comparison of all known infectious and non-infectious species of the bacterium [21–22]. In the present study, we have followed the systems established by Fouts and Caimi to classify various species of Leptospira as pathogenic, intermediate and saprophytic to humans.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%