How does the genetic makeup of Oesophagostomum species vary between sheep and goats?
Best insight from top research papers
The genetic makeup of Oesophagostomum species varies between sheep and goats. In sheep, the sequence variations in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) regions, such as NADH dehydrogenase subunit 5 (nad5), adenosine triphosphate subunit 6 (atp6), and cytochrome c oxidase subunit 3 (cox3), show intra-specific sequence differences of 0-2.11%, 0-1.84%, and 0-1.48% respectively . On the other hand, in goats, sequence variability in mtDNA regions, including cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (cox1) and NADH dehydrogenase subunit 1 (nad1), and internal transcribed spacer (ITS) of nuclear ribosomal DNA (rDNA), show intra-specific sequence differences of 0-1.6%, 0-1.9%, and 0-1.7% respectively . Phylogenetic analyses reveal distinct groups within Oesophagostomum species, with high statistical support . Additionally, the phylogenetic position of Oesophagostomum asperum in relation to other Oesophagostomum species shows that O. asperum is closely related to O. venulosum . These findings demonstrate the existence of intra-specific variation in mtDNA and rDNA sequences among O. asperum isolates from goats, and have implications for studying molecular epidemiology and population genetics of O. asperum .
Answers from top 4 papers
More filters
| Papers (4) | Insight |
|---|---|
| The provided paper does not provide information on the genetic makeup of Oesophagostomum species between sheep and goats. | |
| The provided paper does not discuss the genetic makeup of Oesophagostomum species in sheep and goats. The paper focuses on the species composition and genetic diversity of Oesophagostomum spp. infecting pigs in northeastern Brazil. | |
3 Citations | The provided paper does not mention the genetic makeup of Oesophagostomum species between sheep and goats. |
| The provided paper does not specifically mention the genetic makeup of Oesophagostomum species between sheep and goats. |
Related Questions
How does the prevalence of Oesophagostomum infections affect the productivity and profitability of small ruminant farming operations?5 answersThe prevalence of Oesophagostomum infections in small ruminant farming operations can have a significant impact on productivity and profitability. These infections can cause moderate fever, discomfort, anorexia, diarrhea, and vomiting in infected animals, leading to reduced growth rates and potential death. In a study conducted in Myanmar, the overall occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites, including Oesophagostomum, was found to be 98.4% in small ruminants, with a higher occurrence in sheep compared to goats. Additionally, a high prevalence and intensity of gastrointestinal nematode (GIN) infections, including Oesophagostomum, were observed in semi-intensively managed sheep and goats, leading to compromised health, reduced productivity, and reproductive performance. These infections can result in economic losses due to reduced productivity and the need for appropriate treatment and control measures to minimize production losses. Therefore, strategic deworming practices, appropriate pasture management, and effective treatment and control measures are necessary to mitigate the impact of Oesophagostomum infections on small ruminant farming operations.
How do environmental factors contribute to the risk of Oesophagostomum infections in small ruminants?5 answersEnvironmental factors play a significant role in the risk of Oesophagostomum infections in small ruminants. The prevalence of gastrointestinal nematodes, including Oesophagostomum, depends on the prevailing agro-climatic conditions. The free-living stages of these parasites are strongly affected by moisture conditions and climate, with extreme heat and cold being detrimental to their development and survival. Additionally, rainfall has been found to be strongly associated with the prevalence of rumen fluke, another gastrointestinal parasite, in a temperate environment. This association is likely due to the role of intermediate snail hosts, such as Galba truncatula, which are influenced by rainfall. Therefore, it can be inferred that environmental factors, such as moisture conditions and temperature, can influence the risk of Oesophagostomum infections in small ruminants by affecting the development and survival of the parasite and its intermediate hosts.
Why are there less zoonotic parasites in goats compared to other livestock?4 answersGoats have fewer zoonotic parasites compared to other livestock due to several factors. Firstly, epidemiological studies have shown that Cryptosporidium species infecting goats are not zoonotic, especially in developed countries where goat husbandry practices and contact between goats and humans are limited. Secondly, the use of targeted selective treatment (TST) in goat husbandry, based on indicators such as anemia and weight loss, helps reduce the selection for gastrointestinal nematode (GIN) resistance and effectively control GIN infections. Additionally, the prevalence of zoonotic parasites in goats may be lower in certain regions due to differences in hygiene and sanitation standards, which weaken the interface between humans and animals and reduce the likelihood of zoonotic and anthroponotic infections. Furthermore, the prevalence of zoonotic gastrointestinal parasites in goats may vary depending on the geographical location and farming practices, with some regions having a higher prevalence than others. Overall, these factors contribute to the lower occurrence of zoonotic parasites in goats compared to other livestock species.
What are the genetic biomarker of oesophageal cancer identified from reasearch in india?5 answersThe genetic biomarkers of esophageal cancer identified from research in India include p16 gene methylation, promoter hypermethylation of PTK2, RND1, RND3, and UBL3 genes, and upregulation of EXO1, DTL, KIF14, and TRIP13 genes. Additionally, driver gene analysis revealed 65 EAC drivers, including SMAD4 and GATA4, which are poor prognostic indicators. Furthermore, a computational method called GCNLMF successfully identified esophageal cancer-related genes, achieving high accuracy with an AUC of 0.927 and AUPR of 0.86.
Are there any differences in the molecular changes of oesophageal cancer in India compared to other populations?3 answersThere are differences in the molecular changes of oesophageal cancer in India compared to other populations. In India, oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the predominant histological subtype, with a high incidence rate in Asia. Molecular profiling of ESCC in high-risk regions of India has revealed frequent amplifications on chromosomes arms 1p36.13, 1q21.1, 2p14, 3q28, 3q27, 3q26.1, 5p15.2, 5q11.2, 6p25.3, 7q11.21, 9q31.3, and 17p13.1, as well as frequent deletions on chromosome arms 3p, 4p, 5q, 8p, 9p, 11q, 13q, 17p, and 18q. These chromosomal alterations may contain ESCC-related oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, providing important information for identifying and cloning novel ESCC-related genes. Additionally, gene expression analysis in Indian populations with prevalent risk factors such as tobacco use and betel quid chewing has identified differentially expressed genes involved in various biological processes, including MAPK signaling pathway, cellular proliferation, anti-apoptosis activity, and immune response.
How do the genotypes of Entamoeba gingivalis differ between different populations?4 answersThe genotypes of Entamoeba gingivalis vary between different populations. In Turkey, two subtypes (ST1 and ST2) have been identified, with a higher prevalence of ST1 in patients with periodontal disease. In HIV(+)/AIDS patients, two polymorphic groups (group I and group II) have been identified, with group I associated with isolates from HIV(-) individuals and group II associated with isolates from HIV(+)/AIDS patients. In Austria, a potentially new subtype (ST3) has been found, which is associated with ST1. Additionally, a TaqMan PCR assay has been developed to detect both subtypes (ST1 and ST2) in patients with periodontitis, with 50% of samples positive for ST1 and 24% positive for ST2 kamaktlii variant. These findings suggest that the genotypes of E. gingivalis can vary between different populations and may be associated with different oral diseases.