MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2076080768 · doi:10.14411/fp.2000.057

House fly (Musca domestica) as a transport vector of Giardia lamblia

2000· article· en· W2076080768 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olga Doiz, Antonio Clavel, Santiago Morales, Marzo Varea, Francisco Javier Castillo, Carmen Rubio, R Gómez-Lus

Notice bibliographique

RevueFolia Parasitologica · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMuscaBiologyGiardia lambliaVector (molecular biology)ZoologyGiardiaMicrobiologyEcologyLarvaGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The role of arthropods in the indirect transmission of giardiasis has been long suspected but little investigated. A polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay specific for a heatshock protein (HSP) gene of Giardia lamblia (Lambl, 1859) was used for the direct detection of G. lamblia DNA in house flies (Musca domestica L.) captured in two towns in Aragon (Spain). Six hundred flies were captured and clustered in groups of ten, and each group was processed separately. An amplification product of the expected size (163 bp) was detected in 13 of the 60 groups (22%). Giardia lamblia (Lambl, 1859) is an enteric parasitic protozoon from humans and animals, and is a common cause of parasitic infections in humans in Spain and other countries (Jarabo M.T., Garcia-Moran N.P., Garcia-Moran J.L. 1995: Enferm. Infecc. Microbiol. Clin. 13: 464-468; RodriguezHernandez J., Canut-Blasco A., Martin-Sanchez A.M. 1996: Eur. J. Epidemiol. 12: 291-295; Del Aguila C., Navajas R., Gurbindo D., Ramos J.T., Mellado M.J., Fenoy S., Munoz Fernandez M.A., Subirats M., Ruiz J., Pieniazek N.J. 1997: J. Euk. Microbiol. 44: 84S-85S). Numerous waterborne outbreaks of giardiasis have been documented (Kirner J.C., Littler J.D., Angelo L.A. 1978: J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 70: 3540; Dykes A.C., Juranek D.D., Lorenz R.A., Sinclair S.P., Jakubowski W., Davies R.B. 1980: Ann. Intern. Med. 92: 165170; Hibler C.P. 1988: In: P.M. Wallis and B.R. Hammond (Eds.), Advances in Giardia Research, University of Calgary Press, Calgary, pp. 197-204; Kent G.P., Greenspan J.R., Herndon J.L., Mofenson L.M., Harris J.A., Eng T.R., Waskin H.A. 1988: Am. J. Public Health 78: 139-143), but the role of other indirect transmission mechanisms (for example arthropods) has not been extensively studied. Giardia cysts have been found in flies (Khan A.R., Huq F. 1978: Bangladesh Med. Res. Counc. Bull. 4: 86-93; Sterling C.R., Miranda E., Gilman R.H. 1987: Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 36, Suppl.: 233) and cockroaches (Kasprzak W., Majewska A. 1981: Wiad. Parazytol. 27: 555-563). Given the low infective dose of Giardia cysts (Rendtorff R.C. 1954: Am. J. Hyg. 59: 209-220), arthropods, and especially flies, could be an important vehicle between faeces and food; promiscuouslanding synanthropic flies are recognised as transport hosts for a variety of protozoan and metazoan parasites in addition to viral and bacterial pathogens of public health importance (Graczyk T.K., Cranfield M.R., Fayer R., Bixler H. 1999: Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 61: 500-504). It was the purpose of this work to detect possible Giardia lamblia cysts naturally occurring in house flies in our geographical area. In July and August, 1998, twenty adhesive fly traps were set outdoors in two towns in Aragon (north-eastern Spain) where cattle and sheep are raised. House flies (Musca domestica L.) captured in them were selected and crushed in a mortar in groups of ten; each group was resuspended separately in 4.5 ml of PBS. Approximately 200 μl of the suspension, 900 μl of L6 lysis buffer (10 M guanidinium thiocyanate, 0.1 M Tris-hydrocholoride pH 6.4, 35 mM EDTA pH 8, and 2.6% (w/v) Triton X-100) (Boom R., Sol C.J.A., Salimans M.M.M., Jansen C.L., Wertheim-van Dillen P.M.E., van der Noordaa J. 1990: J. Clin. Microbiol. 28: 495-503), 60 μl of isoamyl alcohol and 0.5 g of 0.5 mm diameter zirconia/silica beads (Biospec Products, Inc., Bartlesville, Oklahoma) were added into 1.9 ml Eppendorf tubes. The tubes were then shaken in a MiniBeadbeater (Biospec Products, Inc.) for 2 min at maximum speed, left at room temperature for 5 min and centrifuged at 12,000 g for 15 s. The supernatant was transferred to another tube, to which 40 μl of coarse activated silica suspension (Boom et al. 1990, op. cit.) were added. The suspension was then mixed in a Vortex mixer and allowed to stand at room temperature for 10 min and, after centrifugation (as above), the supernatant was discarded. The pellet was washed by centrifugation, twice with 200 μl of L2 washing buffer (10 M guanidinium thiocyanate, 0.1 M Trishydrochloride) (Boom et al. 1990, op. cit.), twice with 200 μl of ice-cold 80% ethanol, and once with 200 μl of acetone. The acetone was discarded and the pellet dried at 55oC for 5 min; 100 μl of water were added and, after vortexing briefly, the tube was incubated at 55oC for 5 min. It was then centrifuged for 2 min at 12,000 g and the supernatant was transferred to another tube. In a second phase, the nucleic acid sample was treated with polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP) to remove potential inhibitors of the PCR (Young C.C., Burghoff R.L., Keim L.G., MinakBernero V., Lute J.R., Hinton S.M. 1993: Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59: 1972-1974). A 50 μl aliquot of the extracted sample was added to 150 μl of PVP-TE (10% (w/v) PVP (Sigma) in TE buffer), mixed and incubated at room temperature for 10 min. The DNA was then selectively precipitated with isopropanol (Sambrook J., Maniatis T., Fritsch E.F. 1982: Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, pp. E.10-E.15), 100 μl of 2.0 M ammonium acetate and 600 μl of isopropanol were added, mixed well and held at –20oC for 30 min. The tube was centrifuged (12,000 g for 10 min) and the supernatant fluid discarded carefully with a pipette. The precipitated DNA was dried with hot air and then reconstituted in 50 μl of TE buffer and stored at –20oC (Lawson A.J., Linton D., Stanley J., Owen R.J. 1997: J. Appl. Microbiol. 83: 375-380). The primers selected for the PCR were GLC-1 (5’-AGG GCT CCG GCA TAA CTT TCC-3’) and GLC-2 (5’-GTA TCT GTG ACC CGT CCG AG-3’) (Abbaszadegan M., Huber FOLIA PARASITOLOGICA 47: 330-331, 2000

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,174
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,995

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,264
Écart entre enseignants0,254 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations35
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFolia ParasitologicaMême sujetParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsTravaux en français237 207