Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T13:15:59.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of restriction fragment length polymorphisms of ribosomal DNA between Diphyllobothrium nihonkaiense and D. latum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

T. Matsuura ,
G. Bylund  and
K. Sugane
T. Matsuura
Affiliation:
Department of Parasitology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Asahi 3-I-I, Matsumoto City, Nagano Prefecture 390, Japan
G. Bylund
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, Åbo Academy, Porthansgatan 3, SF-206000 Åbo, Finland
K. Sugane
Affiliation:
Department of Parasitology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, Asahi 3-I-I, Matsumoto City, Nagano Prefecture 390, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) of ribosomal DNA (rDNA) were compared between Diphyllobothrium latum and D. nihonkaiense using seven kinds of restriction endonucleases. No intra-specific variation in restriction fragment profiles was shown within both species of Diphyllobothrium. Digestion of the genomic DNA with three endonucleases, Smal, Hinfl and Hhal, provided one or two different bands between two species, although the hybridization patterns generated with the others, Hindlll, Xbal, Styl and Haelll, were the same in both. RFLPs in the digested profiles with Smal, Hinfl and Hhal could be used as species-specific markers even if only fragments of strobilae with morphological similarity were available. Other cestodes, Spirometra erinacei and Taenia saginata, used as controls showed quite different restriction fragment patterns with all the enzymes used.

Keywords

DiphyllobothriumRFLPsrDNAnucleotide diversityCestoda
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , December 1992 , pp. 261 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, K. (1977) A marine Diphyllobothrium pierocercoid (Cestoda, Pseudophyllidea) from blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou). Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde, 52, 289–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, K., Ching, H. L. & Vik, R. (1987) A review of freshwater species of Diphyllobothrium with redescriptions and the distribution of D. dendriticum (Nitzsch. 1984) and D. ditremum (Creplin. 1825) from North America. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 65, 2216–2228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, K. I. & Gibson, D. I. (1989) A key to three species of larval Diphyllobothrium Cobbold, 1858 (Cestoda: Pseudophyllidea) occurring in European and North American freshwater fishes. Systematic Parasitology. 13, 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, D. C. (1989) Molecular approaches to DNA diagnosis. Parasirology. 99, S125–S146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beverley, S. M., Ismach, R. B. & Mcmahon-Pratt, D. (1987) Evolution of the genus Leishmania as revealed by comparisons of nuclear DNA restriction fragment patterns. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 84, 484–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, W. C., Mclain, D. K. & Rai, K. S. (1989) Patterns of variation in the rDNA cistron within and among world populations of a mosquito, Aedes albopiclus (Skuse). Genetics, 121, 539–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, D. & Mcmanus, D. P. (1989) Restriction enzyme mapping of ribosomal DNA can distinguish between fasciolid (liver fluke) species. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology, 36, 201–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chomczynski, P. & Sacchi, N. (1987) Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidinium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. Analytical Biochemistry, 162, 156–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuestra-Bandera, C., Mcmanus, D. P. & Rishi, A. K. (1988) Characterization of Echinococcus granulosus of Spanish origin by DNA restriction endonuclease analysis and Southern blot hybridization. International Journal for Parasilology, 18, 137–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devos, T. & Dick, T. A. (1989) Differentiation between Diphyllohoihrium dendriticum and D. latum using isozymes, restriction profiles and rihosomal gene probes. Systematic Parasitology, 13, 161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dick, T. A. & Poole, B. C. (1985) Identification of Diphyllohothrium dendriticum and Diphyllobothrium latum from some freshwater fishes of central Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 63, 196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukumoto, S., Yazaki, S., Nagai, D., Takeuchi, M., Kamo, H. & Yamane, Y. (1987) Comparative studies on soluble protein profiles and isozyme patterns in 3 related species of the genus Diphyllobothrium. Japanese Journal of Parasitology, 36, 222–230.Google Scholar
Fukumoto, S., Yazaki, S., Kamo, H., Yamane, Y. & Tsji, M. (1988) Distinction between Diphyllobothrium nihonkaiense and Diphyllobothrium latum by immunoelectrophoresis. Japanese Journal of Parasitology, 37, 91–95.Google Scholar
Gerbi, S. A. (1986) The evolution of eukaryotic ribosomal DNA. BioSystems, 19, 247–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kamo, H. (1988) Diphyllohothriasis. In: Laboratory Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases, Principal and Practice. (editors Balows, A. et al.) Vol. 1, pp. 821–830. Springer-Verlag: New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, E. O. & Dawid, I. B. (1980) Repeated genes in eukaryotes. Annual Review of Biochemistry, 49, 727–764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maniatis, T., Fritsh, E. F. & Sambrook, J. (1982) Molecular Cloning, A Laboratory Manual. pp. 194–195. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, USA.Google Scholar
Margolis, L. & Arthur, J. R. (1979) Synopsis of the parasites of fishes in Canada. Bulletin of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, No. 199, 269 pp.Google Scholar
Mcmanus, D. P. & Rishi, A. K. (1989) Genetic heterogeneity within Echinococcus granulosus: isolates from different hosts and geographical areas characterized with DNA probes. Parasitology, 99, 17–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nei, M. & Li, W. H. (1979) Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 76, 5269–5273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nei, M. & Tajima, F. (1981) DNA polymorphism detectable by restriction endonucleases. Genetics, 97, 145–163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paindavoine, P., Pays, E., Laurent, M., Geltmeyer, Y., Le Ray, D., Mehlitz, D. & Steinert, M. (1986) The use of DNA hybridization and numerical taxonomy in determining relationships between Trypanosoma brucei stocks and subspecies. Parasitology, 92, 31–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E. F. & Maniatis, T. (1989) Molecular Cloning. A Laboratory Manual. Second edition. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: USA.Google Scholar
Southern, E. M. (1975) Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. Journal of Molecular Biology, 98, 503–517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suzuki, H., Moriwaki, K. & Nevo, E. (1987) Rihosomal DNA (rDNA) spacer polymorphism in mole rats. Molecular Biological Evolution, 4, 602–610.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. C. A. & Lymbery, A. J. (1990) Intraspecific variation in parasites—What is a strain? Parasitology Today, 6, 345–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, T. K., Rollinson, D. & Simpson, A. J. G. (1986) Differentiation of Schistosoma haematobium from related species using cloned ribosomal RNA gene probes. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology, 20, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yamane, Y., Kamo, H., Bylund, G. & Wikgren, P. (1986) Diphyllohothrium nihonkaiense sp. nov. (Cestoda: Diphyllobothriidae)-revised identification of Japanese broad tapeworm. Shimane Journal of Medical Science, 10, 29–48.Google Scholar
Yap, K. W., Thompson, R.C.A., Rood, J. I. & Pawlowski, I. D. (1987) Taenia hydatigena: Isolation of mitochondrial DNA, molecular cloning and physical mitochondrial genome mapping. Experimental Parasitology, 63, 288–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed