2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2021.106203
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular detection and genotype diversity of hemoplasmas in non-hematophagous bats and associated ectoparasites sampled in peri-urban areas from Brazil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

2
16
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
2
16
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This low bacteraemia might be related to the low pathogenicity of the involved haemoplasmas in this group of animals, or even to the more effective e1887 F I G U R E 5 Distance analysis by SplitsTree4 software with the parameters "Neighbor -Net" and "Uncorrected p-distance" for the 16S rRNA gene F I G U R E 6 Distance analysis by SplitsTree4 software with the parameters "Neighbor -Net" and "Uncorrected p-distance" for the 23S rRNA gene immune response of this group of animals to haemotropic mycoplasmas. Such difficulty has already been reported in the molecular detection and sequencing of haemoplasmas in wild carnivores and bats(Carneiro et al, 2020;Ikeda et al, 2021).The phylogenetic positioning of both 16S rRNA and 23S rRNA haemoplasma sequences detected in the present study associated with the low identity values obtained by BLASTn analysis of the obtained 16S rRNA sequences (<97%)(Drancourt & Raoult, 2005;Hanage et al, 2006) suggests the circulation of possible new haemotropic Mycoplasma species in T. tetradactyla and P. maximus.…”
supporting
confidence: 41%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This low bacteraemia might be related to the low pathogenicity of the involved haemoplasmas in this group of animals, or even to the more effective e1887 F I G U R E 5 Distance analysis by SplitsTree4 software with the parameters "Neighbor -Net" and "Uncorrected p-distance" for the 16S rRNA gene F I G U R E 6 Distance analysis by SplitsTree4 software with the parameters "Neighbor -Net" and "Uncorrected p-distance" for the 23S rRNA gene immune response of this group of animals to haemotropic mycoplasmas. Such difficulty has already been reported in the molecular detection and sequencing of haemoplasmas in wild carnivores and bats(Carneiro et al, 2020;Ikeda et al, 2021).The phylogenetic positioning of both 16S rRNA and 23S rRNA haemoplasma sequences detected in the present study associated with the low identity values obtained by BLASTn analysis of the obtained 16S rRNA sequences (<97%)(Drancourt & Raoult, 2005;Hanage et al, 2006) suggests the circulation of possible new haemotropic Mycoplasma species in T. tetradactyla and P. maximus.…”
supporting
confidence: 41%
“…This low bacteraemia might be related to the low pathogenicity of the involved haemoplasmas in this group of animals, or even to the more effective immune response of this group of animals to haemotropic mycoplasmas. Such difficulty has already been reported in the molecular detection and sequencing of haemoplasmas in wild carnivores and bats (Carneiro et al., 2020; Ikeda et al., 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…A high diversity of genotypes ( n = 22) was found in the present work by analysis of 30 partial 16S rRNA sequences of hemoplasmas obtained from tapirs’ samples. Richness on genotype diversity was also reported for hemoplasmas detected in bats from Brazil [ 56 ]. Although the genotypes found in tapirs from the Pantanal diverged from those found in tapirs from the Cerrado, a genetic proximity between these genotypes was demonstrated on the genotype network analysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…Meanwhile, 23S rRNA sequences that fit in Ca2 presented similarity ranges of 90.20–90.57% with a sequence of Mycoplasma haemofelis from the USA (NR103993). In fact, putative novel hemoplasma species may present lower similarity rates in BLASTn analysis for 23S rRNA sequences when compared to 16S rRNA sequences [ 22 , 55 , 56 ]. These differences may be explained by the fact that, although the 23S rRNA is considered as phylogenetically conserved as 16S rRNA, it presents a higher degree of sequence variability [ 57 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation