4.1 Article

Molecular Characterization of the VP2 Gene of Infectious Pancreatic Necrosis Virus (IPNV) Isolates from Mexico

期刊

JOURNAL OF AQUATIC ANIMAL HEALTH
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 43-51

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1080/08997659.2013.860060

关键词

-

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACYT) [CB-2009-01-134099]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV) is one of the most important viruses in the Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp., Atlantic Salmon Salmo salar, and Rainbow Trout O. mykiss industry. This virus has been shown to produce high mortality among salmonid fry and juveniles, and survivors might become carriers. Since 2000, IPNV has affected Mexican Rainbow Trout culture, resulting in considerable economic losses. In the current study, molecular characterization of the VP2 gene of a number of Mexican IPNV isolates was done and the virus's phylogenetic relationships to IPNV reference strains were investigated. The phylogenetic analysis indicated that Mexican IPNV isolates are closely related to strains from the United States and Canada and that all Mexican IPNV isolates belong to genogroup 1. Furthermore, low genetic diversity was found between the Mexican isolates (identity, 95.8-99.8% nucleotides and 95.8-99.6% aminoacids). The result of the analysis of the amino acid residues found at positions 217, 221, and 247 (alanine, threonine, and glutamic acid, respectively) could be associated with virulence, although the expression of virulence factors is more complex and may be influenced by the agent and host factors. The high percentage of identity among the VP2 genes from geographically distant IPNV isolates and the evidence of wide distribution in the country might have been facilitated by carrier trout. This hypothesis is supported by the identification of the amino acid threonine at position 221 in all Mexican isolates, a factor related to the carrier state for IPNV, as reported by other studies. Received July 14, 2013; accepted October 24, 2013

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据