Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T07:45:19.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Echinococcus granulosus in Spain: strain differentiation by SDS-PAGE of somatic and excretory/secretory proteins

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

M. Siles-Lucas  and
C. Cuesta-Bandera
M. Siles-Lucas
Affiliation:
Departamento de Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avda. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
C. Cuesta-Bandera
Affiliation:
Departamento de Parasitología, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Avda. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A comparison was made, by sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE), of excretory/secretory (ES) – crude and immunopurified (with the corresponding anti-host serum) hydatid fluids – and somatic (S) – protoscoleces – proteins, from several ovine, equine, swine, bovine and human Echinococcus granulosus Spanish isolates. Likewise, the host influence on parasitic ES protein expression was studied, comparing purified hydatid fluids from ovine and equine cysts obtained from natural hosts and in RNMI mice. Purified hydatid fluids patterns, under reducing conditions, yielded the most precise differentiation of Spanish strains of E. granulosus into three groups (ovine—bovine-human, equine and swine), the finding of a characteristic 82 kDa band in equine isolates, and an unusual arrangement of bands between 50 and 6 kDa in swine samples. In addition, differences were found amongst crude and purified hydatid fluids, especially in bovine and swine isolates. The total protein patterns of protoscoleces were most complex, and therefore could not be used for strain differentiation. Finally, the purified hydatid fluids from cysts developed in natural and experimental hosts showed similar protein patterns, suggesting the lack of host influence, under our experimental conditions, on the expression of parasitic ES proteins.

Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 70 , Issue 3 , September 1996 , pp. 253 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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

Bradford, M.M. (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Annals of Biochemistry 72, 284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuesta-Bandera, C. (1988) Especiación, epidemiologia y control de la hidatidosis en España. Hidatidologia, Libro V, 38–42.Google Scholar
Cuesta-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 Parasitology 18, 137–141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuesta-Bandera, C. & Martinez-Fernandez, A.R. (1982) Diagnóstico de la hidatidosis natural y experimental. Análisis de los resultados obtenidos por distintas pruebas. Revista Ibérica de Parasitologia 42, 325–334.Google Scholar
Janssen, D., De Wit, M. & De Rycke, P.H. (1990) Hydatidosis in Belgium: analysis of larval Echinococcus granulosus by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting. Annals de la Societe Belge de Medicine Tropical 70, 121–129.Google ScholarPubMed
Laemmli, U.K. (1970) Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 277, 680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, D.P. & Barrett, N.J. (1985) Isolation, fractionation and partial characterization of the tegumental surface from protoscoleces of the hydatid organism, Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology 90, 111–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McManus, D.P. & Bryant, C. (1986) Biochemistry and physiology of Echinococcus. pp. 114–143 in Thompson, R.C.A. (Ed.) The biology of Echinococcus and hydatid disease. London, George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Rickard, M.D. & Lightowlers, M.W. (1986) Immunodiagnosis of hydatid disease. pp. 217–249 in Thompson, R.C.A. (Ed.) The biology of Echinococcus and hydatid disease. London, George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Schantz, P.M., Colli, C., Cruz-Reyes, A. & Prezioso, U. (1976) Sylvatic echinococcosis in Argentina. II. Susceptibility of wild carnivores to Echinococcus granulosus (Batsch 1786) and host-induced morphological variation. Tropenmedizin und Parasitologie 27, 70–78.Google ScholarPubMed
Siles-Lucas, M., Cuesta-Bandera, C. & Cesar-Benito, M. (1993) Random amplified polymorphic DNA technique for speciation studies of Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology Research 79, 343–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siles-Lucas, M., Felleisen, R., Cuesta-Bandera, C., Gottstein, B. & Eckert, J. (1994) Comparative genetic analysis of Swiss and Spanish isolates of Echinococcus granulosus by Southern hybridization and random amplified polymorphic DNA technique. Applied Parasitology 35, 107–117.Google ScholarPubMed
Siles-Lucas, M., Benito, M.C. & Cuesta-Bandera, C.Echinococcus granulosus: genomic and isoenzymatic study of Spanish strains isolated from different intermediate hosts. Veterinary Parasitology (In press).Google Scholar
Thompson, R.C.A. (1986) Biology and systematics of Echinococcus. pp. 5–44 in Thompson, R.C. A. (Ed.) The biology of Echino-coccus and hydatid disease London, George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar