Skip to main content
Iranian Journal of Parasitology logoLink to Iranian Journal of Parasitology
. 2016 Apr-Jun;11(2):186–194.

Echinococcus granulosus Sensu Stricto in Dogs and Jackals from Caspian Sea Region, Northern Iran

Shirzad GHOLAMI 1, Hefzallah JAHANDAR 2, Mahdi ABASTABAR 3, Abdolsatar PAGHEH 4, Iraj MOBEDI 5,*, Mitra SHARBATKHORI 6,7
PMCID: PMC5236095  PMID: 28096852

Abstract

Background:

The aim of the present study was genotyping of Echinococcus granulosus isolates from dogs and jackals in Mazandaran Province, northern Iran, and using partial sequence of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene (cox1).

Methods:

E. granulosus isolates (n = 15) were collected from 42 stray dogs and 16 jackals found in south of the Caspian Sea in northern Iran. After morphological study, the isolates were genetically characterized using consensus sequences (366bp) of the cox1 gene. Phylogenetic analysis of cox1 nucleotide sequence data was performed using a Bayesian Inference approach.

Results:

Four different sequences were observed among the isolates. Two genotypes [G1 (66.7%) and G3 (33.3%)] were identified among the isolates. The G1 sequences indicated three sequence profiles. One profile (Maz1) had 100% homology with reference sequence (AN: KP339045). Two other profiles, designated Maz2 and Maz3, had 99% homology with the G1 genotype (ANs: KP339046 and KP339047). A G3 sequence designated Maz4 showed 100% homology with a G3 reference sequence (AN: KP339048).

Conclusion:

The occurrence of the G1 genotype of E. granulosus sensu stricto as a frequent genotype in dogs is emphasized. This study established the first molecular characterization of E. granulosus in the province.

Keywords: Echinococcus granulosus, Genotyping, Dog, Jackal, cox1, Iran

Introduction

Echinococcus granulosus, the causative agent of a zoonotic disease known as cystic echinococcosis/hydatidosis, is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in humans globally, particularly in regions of extensive livestock husbandry (1). Echinococcosis is endemic in all Middle Eastern countries, including Iran (2). Domestic and wild livestock play the role of intermediate host and can retain the larval stage or hydatid cyst in internal organs, particularly lung and liver. Domestic and wild carnivores, especially dogs, serve as the definitive hosts and harbor adult stage of the parasite in their intestines (3, 4).

A more complete understanding of the transmission cycle of the E. granulosus complex in each region will assist the development of preventive and control strategies for echinococcosis. Widespread isolation of adult E. granulosus from dogs, jackals and wolves has been reported from different parts of Iran (2). In a comprehensive study conducted in 13 provinces of the country, the prevalence of E. granulosus in sheepdogs was 27.2% (5).

To date, investigations employing mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences have characterized ten different genotypes (G1–G10) within E. granulosus sensu lato (6, 7). These include two ovine strains (G1 and G2), two bovid strains (G3 and G5), an equine strain (G4), a camel strain (G6), two porcine strains (G7 and G9) and two cervid strains (G8 and G10) (8, 9). However, a taxonomic revision made mainly on the basis of mitochondrial data suggests that the E. granulosus complex could be split into four distinct species, including E. granulosus sensu stricto (G1–G3), E. equinus (G4), E. ortleppi (G5), and E. canadensis (G6–G10) (10, 11). E. felidis is closely related to E. granulosus sensu stricto and is clustered within the E. granulosus complex (12). Thompson (9) and Saarma et al. (13) recently recommended that genotypes G6–G10 be divided to two different species based on nuclear sequences and epidemiological criteria. These species include E. canadensis, which comprises the cervid genotypes (G8 and G10), and E. intermedius, which comprises the camel/porcine genotypes (G6/G7).

Most of the previous genetic characterizations were carried out on larval stages in intermediate hosts because of the high risk of hydatid infection during experimentation with definitive hosts. However, genetic identification of adult worms is necessary to provide more complete knowledge of the genotypes present and the cycles occurring in endemic regions. There are few reports describing the genetic characterization of E. granulosus complex in dogs around the world (1418). In Iran, human hydatidosis is responsible for about 1% of surgical admissions and the range of human infection is 0.6–1.2%. The overall annual cost of cystic echinococcosis in the country has been estimated to be US$232.3 million (19). Most of the molecular characterizations of E. granulosus complexes have been performed using the protoscoleces of cystic echinococcoses isolated from humans or different livestock species, including sheep, cattle, goats, camels, and buffalo, and have indicated the presence of different genotypes (G1, G3, and G6) in Iran (2031). The only previous study on adult E. granulosus worms revealed the existence of G1 (75%), G2 (10%), and G3 (15%) genotypes among 20 dog isolates from Lorestan Province, western Iran (18). Mazandaran province in northern Iran could be a hotspot for echinococcosis in the country, as many people live in villages and human and dogs are always in close contact. Very limited information is available concerning E. granulosus complexes isolated from definitive hosts in the country, including Mazandaran province, which is located south of the Caspian Sea.

The aim of the present study was to perform the genetic characterization of E. granulosus isolates from definitive hosts, including dog and jackal, using a partial sequence of the cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene (cox1). This study will improve our understanding of the identification and evaluation of local strains and of the parasite’s life cycle in Mazandaran province, northern Iran.

Materials and Methods

Source of isolates

The small intestines from the carcasses of 42 stray dogs and 16 jackals (Canisaureus) killed in car accidents on the roads of Mazandaran Province, northern Iran, were examined for adult worms of the genus Echinococcus during the period from September 2013 to March 2014 (6 months).

Adult E. granulosus worms were collected from a total of 12 naturally infected dogs and 3 jackals. The worms were removed from each infected animal, transferred to two separate tubes, washed three times with normal saline, and kept in 10% formalin and 70% ethanol at 4 °C until further analysis (32).

DNA extraction and mitochondrial PCR amplification

Before DNA extraction, the worms were thoroughly washed in distilled water to remove ethanol. Genomic DNA was extracted using a DNA mini Kit (Bioneer; Daejeon, Korea) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. A partial sequence of the mitochondrial cox1 gene was amplified from the genomic DNA isolates using primers JB3 (5′–TTTTTTGGGCATCCTGAGGTTTAT–3′) and JB4.5 (5′–TAAAGAAAGAACATAATGAAAATG–3′) (33). PCR reactions were performed in a final volume of 20 μl containing 50–100 ng (7 μl) of genomic DNA, 25 pmol of each primer, 3.5 mM MgCl2 250 μM of each deoxynucleoside triphosphate, and 2 units of Taq polymerase.

PCR amplifications were conducted under following conditions: 94 °C for 5 min (initial denaturation) followed by 35 cycles of [94 °C for 60 s (denaturation), 50 °C for 60 s (annealing), and 72 °C for 60 s (extension)] and a final extension at 72 °C for 5 min. Negative (no-DNA) and positive (control DNA) controls were included in each set of PCR reactions.

PCR products (5 ul aliquots) and a 100 bp DNA ladder (Fermentas; Vilnius, Lithuania) were electrophoresed on 1% (w/v) agarose gels and stained with ethidium bromide (0.5 μg/ml). The gels were visualized using a UV transilluminator (UVitec; Cambridge, UK) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1:

Fig. 1:

Agarose gel electrophoresis of cox1–PCR products. Lanes 1 and 2–8 E. granulosus isolated from jackal and dogs, respectively. Lane N, negative control; Lane P, positive control, Lane M, 100-bp DNA ladder

Sequencing and phylogenetic analysis

PCR products were subjected to DNA sequencing using the same primers used in the primary PCR. The electropherogram of each sequence was checked manually. The sequences were compared with each other using the program BioEdit and with other sequences in GenBank (34) using the online Blast system (http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). The representative partial cox1 gene sequences were submitted to GenBank (accession numbersKP339045 to KP339048).

A phylogenetic analysis was conducted using a dataset containing the cox1 sequences representing the isolates detected in this study and key reference sequences from previous studies (10, 17, 33, 35). This dataset represented all currently recognized Echinococcus species and E. granulosus genotypes, along with Taenia saginata as the outgroup. A phylogenetic tree was constructed with the software package MrBayes v.3.1.2 (http://mrbayes.csit.fsu.edu/index.-php) by employing the Bayesian Inference (BI) method. Posterior probabilities (pp) were inserted for 2,000,000 generations (ngen: 2,000,000; burnin: 20000) employing the Monte Carlo Markov Chain procedure and four simultaneous tree-building chains (nchains: 4), with every 100 th tree saved (samplefreq: 100). Treeview X v.0.5.0 software (36) was used to display the trees. All GenBank accession numbers for the sequences inferred from this study and for the reference genotypes/species used in the phylogenetic analysis are shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2:

Fig. 2:

Phylogenetic tree of E. granulosus isolates from Caspian Sea area, Mazandaran Province, northern Iran (shown as underlined) and reference sequences for E. granulosus sensu lato and other species of Echinococcus using the (BI) method. The relationships were obtained according to phylogenetic analysisof cox1 sequence data using Bayesian Inference method. All sequence profiles defined as Maz 1–4 represent genotypes G1–G3 (G1–G3 complex, E. granulosus sensu stricto).Theaccession numbers of sequences are indicated in parenthesis. The scale bar indicates distance. Taenia saginata sequence was taken from reference Bowles and McManus 1994. Nodal support is given as a pp value

Results

Twelve (28.6%) of the 42 stray dogs and 3 (18.7%) of the 16 jackals were infected with Echinococcus granolosus. A fragment of about 450 bp within mitochondrial cox1 region was successfully amplified from 8 and 1 Echinococcus isolates obtained from dogs and a jackal, respectively (Fig. 1). All 9 isolates were subjected to sequencing and a consensus sequence fragment of 366 nocleotides was used for the sequence analysis. Alignments of the sequences with those of known E. granulosus genotypes revealed the presence of the G1 and G3 genotypes. G1 genotype was found in 5 dog and 1 jackal isolates. G3 genotype was observed in 3 dog isolates. Four representative sequences profiles from this study, designated Maz1 to Maz4, were submitted to GenBank under accession numbers KP339045 to KP339048. A consensus phylogenetic tree indicating the relationships among the isolates from the present study and the reference sequences from E. granulosus genotypes is shown in Fig. 2. All isolates grouped with the reference sequences of the G1–G3 complex, with maximal statistical support (PP = 1).

Discussion

Mazandaran Province has a wet and humid climate and contains pastures suitable for the traditional rearing of domestic livestock. The presence of stray dogs infected with E. granulosus creates the potential for transferring the parasite. The prevalence of cystic echinococcosis has been reported to range from 3.3% to 63.3% in farm dogs in Iran, with an infection rate of 43.3% in Mazandaran Province (5). Another study from western Iran reported frequency of 19.1% and 2.3% for echinococcosis in dogs and golden jackals, respectively (37). A recent study in East Azerbaijan Province in northwestern Iran reported a frequency of 20% for E. granulosus among 80 stray dogs (38). In the present study, the infection rate was 28.6% among dogs, which is somewhat higher than previous reports from this province (5). In addition, an infection rate of 18.7% was obtained for jackals in the present study, which is much higher than the previously reported rate in western Iran (2.3%) (37). Despite the high prevalence of the disease, there have been no studies characterizing the E. granulosus strains in definitive hosts within the study area. Thus, the current study is the first specific identification, using morphological and molecular methods, of E. granulosus in isolates from definitive hosts (dog and jackal) from the north of Iran.

In the present study, the genetic characterization of eight dog and a jackal isolates of E. granulosus employing partial cox1 sequences revealed that the G1–G3 complex (E. granulosus sensu stricto) is present in Mazandaran Province, Northern Iran. The data indicate that 66.7% and 33.3% of the isolates belong to the G1 and G3 genotypes, respectively. In a previous study, all of the 6 sheep and 8 goat isolates of E. granulosus from Noor in Mazandaran Province were of the G1 genotype (39). A pervious study using partial sequences of the cox1 and nad1 genes indicated that all 5 cattle and 10 sheep isolates from Golestan Province, the eastern neighbor of Mazandaran Province, belonged to the G1 genotype (22). Another study conducted in Golestan Province using an ITS1-RFLP analysis showed that all of the isolates from human, sheep, and cattle belonged to the G1 genotype and all of the camel isolates belonged to the G6 genotype (40). However, ITS1-RFLP lacks the ability to distinguish the G1–G3 genotypes (25). This issue can explain results of another study in Ahvaz province, southwestern Iran that reported G1 genotype in all 141 sheep, 104 cattle, 84 goats and 5 human isolates of E. granulosus using ITS1-RFLP (41). In a recent study of E. granulosus isolates from human, sheep and cattle in Zanjan Province located in northwestern Iran, using partial cox1 sequence, 93.35 and 4.65% of isolates belonged to G1 and G3 genotypes, respectively (42). Another study of E. granulosus isolates in East Azerbaijan province, northwestern Iran, indicated G1, G3 and G6 genotypes among 16 infected dogs (38).

In this study, G1 was the most prevalent genotype among the isolates, indicating that the sheep–dog cycle is the dominant cystic echinococcosis cycle in the area. This is in concordance with a study in Isfahan province, central Iran indicating G1 as the most prevalent genotype of E. granulosus affecting human, sheep, cattle, goats and occasionally camels (43). In addition, other studies have indicated the predominance of G1 genotype in different parts of Iran (18, 44). G1 is the most common genotype reported in animals and human throughout the world (4547), although, the G6 genotype is the most prevalent in sheep, cattle, camels and humans in some countries of North Africa, such as Mauritania and Sudan (4851).

All of the isolates in the present study, designated Maz1 to Maz4, formed a strongly supported clade (pp = 1.00) with the reference sequences representing E. granulosus genotypes G1–G3 (E. granulosus sensu stricto), to the exclusion of E. felidis (pp = 1.00). These findings provide further support for considering the G1–G3 “complex” as a separate species and do not confirm the hypothesis that G2 or G3 are separate species (13, 17, 22, 52).

This study records the occurrence of G1 and G3 genotypes in dogs as definitive host by sequencing a portion (366 bp) of the cox1 gene. Bowles & McManus (53) first reported the G3 genotype as an Indian buffalo strain of E. granulosus. However, there have been many reports of the presence of the E. granulosus G3 genotype in intermediate hosts, such as humans, sheep, goat, cattle, buffalo, the Nile lechwe (Kobus megaceros), and pigs (5458). Moreover, some authors have demonstrated the presence of the G3 genotype in intermediate hosts such as sheep, cattle, camel, buffalo and humans in some parts of Iran (25, 26, 28, 31).

Our results are in agreement with previous studies in Iran indicating that G1 is the predominant E. granulosus genotype in intermediate and definitive hosts (18, 23, 27, 39, 43, 44). The occurrence of E. granulosus complex has been described in fecal samples of wild canids in northeast Iran, but no genotypic characterization were performed on the isolates (59).

Conclusion

The existence of two genotypes of E. granulosus sensu stricto in dogs and the absence of the G6 genotype in this study warrant more research on the nature of the interactions between different genotypes in dogs and other carnivores as the definitive hosts. More research is also needed to clarify the transmission dynamics of G3 genotypes in the area and to develop appropriate strategies for the prevention and control of the disease.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all people who helped to collect the samples and perform the molecular study. This research, which constitutes a portion of a student MSc thesis, was supported by the Invasive Fungi Research Center and Toxoplasmosis Research Centre, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests.

References

  • 1. Dakkak A. Echinococcosis/hydatidosis: a severe threat in Mediterranean countries. Vet Parasitol. 2010; 174( 2– 11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Sadjjadi S. Present situation of echinococcosis in the Middle East and Arabic North Africa. Parasitol Int. 2006; 55 Suppl( S197– S202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. WHO/OIE, Manual on Echinococcosis in Humans and Animals: a Public Health Problem of Global Concern, MAG Eckert J., Meslin F.-X., Pawłowski Z.S., Editor, 2002. p. Chapter 2: 20– 26. [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Eckert J, Deplazes P. Biological, epidemiological, and clinical aspects of echinococcosis, a zoonosis of increasing concern. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004; 17 (1): 107– 35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Eslami A, Hosseini SH. Echinococcus granulosus infection of farm dogs of Iran. Parasitol Res. 1998; 84 (3): 205– 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Scott JC, Stefaniak J, Pawlowski ZS, McManus DP. Molecular genetic analysis of human cystic hydatid cases from Poland: identification of a new genotypic group (G9) of Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology. 1997; 114 (Pt 1): 37– 43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Lavikainen A, Lehtinen MJ, Meri T, Hirvela-Koski V, Meri S. Molecular genetic characterization of the Fennoscandian cervid strain, a new genotypic group (G10) of Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology. 2003; 127 (Pt 3): 207– 215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. McManus D, Thompson R. Molecular epidemiology of cystic echinococcosis. Parasitol. 2003; 127 Suppl( S37– S51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Thompson RCA. The taxonomy, phylogeny and transmission of Echinococcus. Exp Parasitol. 2008; 119 (4): 439– 46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Nakao M, McManus DP, Schantz PM, Craig PS, Ito A. A molecular phylogeny of the genus Echinococcus inferred from complete mitochondrial genomes. Parasitology. 2007; 134 (05): 713– 722. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Moks E, Jogisalu I, Valdmann H, Saarma U. First report of Echinococcus granulosus G8 in Eurasia and a reappraisal of the phylogenetic relationships of ‘genotypes’ G5–G10. Parasitology. 2008; 135 (5): 647– 54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Huttner M, Romig T. Echinococcus species in African wildlife. Parasitology. 2009; 136( 1089– 95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Saarma U, Jogisalu I, Moks E, Varcasia A, Lavikainen A, Oksanen A, Simsek S, Andresiuk V, Denegri G, Gonzalez LM, Ferrer E, Garate T, Rinaldi L, Marvilla P. A novel phylogeny for the genus Echinococcus, based on nuclear data, challenges relationships based on mitochondrial evidence. Parasitology. 2009; 136 (3): 317– 328. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Abbasi I, Ranzburg A, Campos-Ponce M, Hafez SKA, Raoul F, Craig PS, Hamburger J. Copro-diagnosis of Echinococcus granulosus infection in dogs by amplification of a newly identified related DNA sequence. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2003; 69 (3): 324– 30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Stefanic S, Shaikenov BS, Deplazes P, Dinkel A, Torgerson PR, Mathis A. Polymerase chain reaction for detection of patent infections of Echinococcus granulosus (“sheep strain”) in naturally infected dogs. Parasitol Res. 2004; 92 (4): 347– 51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Mathis A, Deplazes P. Copro-DNA tests for diagnosis of animal taeniid cestodes. Parasitol Int. 2006; 55 Suppl( S87– 90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Hüttner M, Nakao M, Wassermann T, Siefert L, Boomker JDF, Dinkel A, Sako Y, Mackenstedt U, Romig T, Ito A. Genetic characterization and phylogenetic position of Echinococcus felidis (Cestoda: Taeniidae) from the African lion. Int J Parasitol. 2008; 38 (7): 861– 68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Parsa F, Fasihi Harandi M, Rostami S, Sharbatkhori M. Genotyping Echinococcus granulosus from dogs from Western Iran. Exp Parasitol. 2012; 132 (2): 308– 12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Fasihi Harandi M, Budke CM, Rostami S. The Monetary Burden of Cystic Echinococcosis in Iran. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012; 6 (11): e1915. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Zhang L, Eslami A, Hosseini SH, McManus DP. Indication of the presence of two distinct strains of Echinococcus granulosus in Iran by mitochondrial DNA markers. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1998; 59 (1): 171– 74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Harandi MF, Hobbs RP, Adams PJ, Mobedi I, Morgan-Ryan UM, Thompson RCA. Molecular and morphological characterization of Echinococcus granulosus of human and animal origin in Iran. Parasitology. 2002; 125 (04): 367– 73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Sharbatkhori M, Mirhendi H, Jex AR., Pangasa A, Campbell BE., Kia E, Eshraghian M, Fasihi Harandi M, Gasser RB. Genetic categorization of Echinococcus granulosus from humans and herbivorous hosts in Iran using an integrated mutation scanning-phylogenetic approach. Electrophoresis. 2009; 30 (15): 2648– 55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Sharbatkhori M, Mirhendi H, Harandi MF, Rezaeian M, Mohebali M, Eshraghian M, Rahimi H, Kia EB. Echinococcus granulosus genotypes in livestock of Iran indicating high frequency of G1 genotype in camels. Exp Parasitol. 2010; 124 (4): 373– 79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Sharbatkhori M, Kia E, Fasihi Harandi M, Jalalizand N, Zahabiun F, Mirhendi H. Comparison of Five Simple Methods for DNA Extraction from Echinococcus granulosus Protoscoleces for PCR Amplification of Ribosomal DNA. Iran J Parasitol. 2009; 4 (2): 54– 60. [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Sharbatkhori M, Fasihi Harandi M, Mirhendi H, Hajialilo E, Kia E. Sequence analysis of cox1 and nad1 genes in Echinococcus granulosus G3 genotype in camels (Camelus dromedarius) from central Iran. Parasitol Res. 2011; 108 (3): 521– 27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Pezeshki A, Akhlaghi L, Sharbatkhori M, Razmjou E, Oormazdi H, Mohebali M, Meamar AR. Genotyping of Echinococcus granulosus from domestic animals and humans from Ardabil Province, northwest Iran. J Helminthol. 2013; 87( 387– 91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Kia EB, Rahimi H, Sharbatkhori M, Talebi A, Fasihi Harandi M, Mirhendi H. Genotype identification of human cystic echinococcosis in Isfahan, central Iran. Parasitol Res. 2010; 107 (3): 757– 60. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Hajialilo E, Fasihi Harandi M, Sharbatkhori M, Mirhendi H, Rostami S. Genetic characterization of Echinococcus granulosus in camels, cattle and sheep from the south-east of Iran indicates the presence of the G3 genotype. J Helminthol. 2012; 86( 263– 70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Sharifiyazdi H, Oryan A, Ahmadnia S, Valinezhad A. Genotypic Characterization of Iranian Camel (Camelus dromedarius) Isolates of Echinoccocus granulosus. J Parasitol. 2011; 97 (2): 251– 55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Rostami Nejad M, Nazemalhosseini Mojarad E, Nochi Z, Fasihi Harandi M, Cheraghipour K, Mowlavi G, Zali M. Echinococcus granulosus strain differentiation in Iran based on sequence heterogeneity in the mitochondrial 12S rRNA gene. J Helminthol. 2008. 82 (4): 343– 7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Amin Pour A, Hosseini SH, Shayan P. Comparative genotyping of Echinococcus granulosus infecting buffalo in Iran using cox1 gene. Parasitol Res. 2011; 108 (5): 1229– 34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Thompson R. Growth, segmentation and maturation of te British horse and sheep strain of Echinococcus geranulosus in dogs. Int J Parasitol. 1977; 7( 281– 85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Bowles J, Blair D, McManus DP. Genetic variants within the genus Echinococcus identified by mitochondrial DNA sequencing. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 1992; 54 (2): 165– 73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Hall TA. BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucleic Acids Symp Ser. 1999; 41( 95– 98. [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Lavikainen A, Haukisalmi V, Lehtinen MJ, Henttonen H, Oksanen A, Meri S. A phylogeny of members of the family Taeniidae based on the mitochondrial cox1 and nad1 gene data. Parasitology. 2008; 135 (12): 1457– 67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Page R. TreeView: an application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Comput Appl Biosci. 1996; 12 (4): 357– 58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Dalimi A, Motamedi G, Hosseini M, et al. Echinococcosis/hydatidosis in western Iran. Vet Parasitol. 2002; 105 (2): 161– 71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Shariatzadeh S, Spotin A, Gholami S, Fallah E, Hazratian T, Mahami-Oskouei M, Montazeri F, Moslemzadeh H, Shahbazi A. The first morphometric and phylogenetic perspective on molecular epidemiology of Echinococcus granulosus sensu lato in stray dogs in a hyperendemic Middle East focus, northwestern Iran. Parasites & Vectors. 2015; 8 (1): 409. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Rostami Nejad M, Taghipour N, Nochi Z, Nazemalhosseini Mojarad E, Mohebbi SR, Fasihi Harandi M, Zali MR. Molecular identification of animal isolates of Echinococcus granulosus from Iran using four mitochondrial genes. J Helminthol. 2012; 86 (04): 485– 92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Gholami S, Sosari M, Fakhar M, Sharif M, Daryani A, Hashemi M, Vahadi M. Molecular Characterization of Echinococcus granulosus from Hydatid Cysts Isolated from Human and Animals in Golestan Province, North of Iran. Iran J Parasitol. 2012; 7 (4): 8– 16. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Khademvatan S, Yousefi E, Rafiei A, Rahdar M, Saki J. Molecular characterization of livestock and human isolates of Echinococcus granulosus from south-west Iran. J Helminthol. 2013; 87 (02): 240– 44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Farhadi M, Fazaeli A, Haniloo A. Genetic characterization of livestock and human hydatid cyst isolates from northwest Iran, using the mitochondrial cox1 gene sequence. Parasitol Res. 2015; 114 (12): 4363– 70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Shahnazi M, Hejazi H, Salehi M, Andalib AR. Molecular characterization of human and animal Echinococcus granulosus isolates in Isfahan, Iran. Acta Trop. 2011; 117 (1): 47– 50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Fasihi Harandi M, Hobbs R, Adams P, Mobedi I, Morgan-Ryan U, Thompson R. Molecular and morphological characterization of Echinococcus granulosus of human and animal origin in Iran. Parasitology. 2002; 125( 367– 73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Casulli A, Manfredi MT, La Rosa G, Cerbo ARD, Genchi C, Pozio E. Echinococcus ortleppi and E. granulosus G1, G2 and G3 genotypes in Italian bovines. Vet Parasitol. 2008; 155 (1–2): 168– 72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Alvarez Rojas CA, Romig T, Lightowlers MW. Echinococcus granulosus sensu lato genotypes infecting humans – review of current knowledge. Int J Parasitol. 2014; 44 (1): 9– 18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Sánchez E, Cáceres O, Náquira C, Garcia D, Patiño G, Silvia H, Volotáo AC, Fernandes O. Molecular characterization of Echinococcus granulosus from Peru by sequencing of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 gene. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2010; 105( 806– 10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Bardonnet K, Piarroux R, Dia L, Schneegans F, Beurdeley A, Godot V, Vuitton DA. Combined eco-epidemiological and molecular biology approaches to assess Echinococcus granulosus transmission to humans in Mauritania: occurrence of the camel strain and human cystic echinococcosis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2002; 96 (4): 383– 86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Omer RA, Dinkel A, Romig T, Mackenstedt U, Elnahas AA, Aradaib IE, Ahmed ME, Elmalik KH, Adam A. A molecular survey of cystic echinococcosis in Sudan. Vet Parasitol. 2010; 169 (3–4): 340– 46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Elmahdi IE, Ali QM, Magzoub MMA, Ibrahim AM, Saad MB, Romig T. Cystic echinococcosis of livestock and humans in central Sudan. Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 2004; 98 (5): 473– 79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Khalifa NO, Khater HF, Fahmy HA, Radwan MEI, Afify JSA. Genotyping and phylogenetic analysis of cystic echinococcosis isolated from camels and humans in Egypt. Am J Epidemiol Infect Dis. 2014; 2 (3): 74– 82. [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Abushhewa MH, Abushhiwa MHS, Nolan MJ, Jex AR, Campbell BE, Jabbar A, Gasser RB. Genetic classification of Echinococcus granulosus cysts from humans, cattle and camels in Libya using mutation scanning-based analysis of mitochondrial loci. Mol Cell Probes. 2010; 24 (6): 346– 51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Bowles J, McManus DP. NADH dehydrogenase 1 gene sequences compared for species and strains of the genus Echinococcus. Int J Parasitol. 1993; 23 (7): 969– 72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Busi M, Snabel V, Varcasia A, Garippa G, Perrone V, De Liberato C, D’Amelio S. Genetic variation within and between G1 and G3 genotypes of Echinococcus granulosus in Italy revealed by multilocus DNA sequencing. Vet Parasitol. 2007; 150 (1–2): 75– 83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Pednekar RP, Gatne ML, Thompson RCA, Traub RJ. Molecular and morphological characterisation of Echinococcus from food producing animals in India. Vet Parasitol. 2009; 165 (1–2): 58– 65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Singh BB, Sharma JK, Ghatak S, Sharma R, Bal MS, Tuli A, Gill JPS. Molecular epidemiology of Echinococcosis from food producing animals in north India. Vet Parasitol. 2012; 186 (3–4): 503– 06. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Espinoza S, Salas A, Vargas A, Freire V, Diaz E, Sánchez G, Venegas J. Detection of the G3 genotype of Echinococcus granulosus from hydatid cysts of Chilean cattle using cox1 and nd1 mitochondrial markers. Parasitol Res. 2014; 113 (1): 139– 47. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Latif AA, Tanveer A, Maqbool A, Siddiqi N, Kyaw-Tanner M, Traub RJ. Morphological and molecular characterisation of Echinococcus granulosus in livestock and humans in Punjab, Pakistan. Vet Parasitol. 2010; 170( 44– 49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Beiromvand M, Akhlaghi L, Fattahi Massom SH, Mobedi I, Meamar AR, Oormazdi H, Motevalian A, Razmjou E. Detection of Echinococcus multilocularis in Carnivores in Razavi Khorasan Province, Iran Using Mitochondrial DNA. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2011; 5( e1379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Iranian Journal of Parasitology are provided here courtesy of Tehran University of Medical Sciences

RESOURCES