4.4 Article

Characterization of 'Candidatus Neoehrlichia lotoris' (family Anaplasmataceae) from raccoons (Procyon lotor)

Publisher

SOC GENERAL MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1099/ijs.0.65836-0

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Southeast Center for Emerging Biological Threats
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI042792] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recently, a novel ehrlichial organism was isolated from a raccoon (Procyon lotor) and the isolate (RAC413) was infectious to two naive raccoons but not laboratory mice, rats or rabbits. In this study, amplification and sequencing of four gene targets (16S rRNA gene, groESL, gltA and rpoB) confirmed that the novel ehrlichial organism was a member of the family Anaplasmataceae and was most closely related to, but distinct from, 'Candidatus Neoehrlichia mikurensis' TK4456(R) and IS58. RAC413 shared the highest sequence similarity with members of the genus Ehrlichia (94.2-95.1, 80.9-83.1, 67.9-71.9 and 39.9-40.7 % similarity for the 16S rRNA gene, groESL, gltA and rpoB, respectively). No sequence variation in three sequences (16S rRNA gene, groESL and g1tA) was observed between the RAC413 isolate and five additional sequences amplified from blood of naturally infected raccoons from several geographically isolated populations in the south-eastern USA. Serum samples from four experimentally infected raccoons did not react to Ehrlichia canis, Ehrlichia chaffeensis, Anaplasma marginale or Anaplasma phagocytophilum antigens in an immunofluorescence assay or an Ehrlichia ewingii peptide in an ELISA format. On the basis of the distinctive molecular and serological characteristics and apparent host specificity of this ehrlichial organism, it is proposed that this organism be designated 'Candidatus Neoehrlichia lotoris' (reference strain RAC413(R)).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available