Skip to main content
Genome Announcements logoLink to Genome Announcements
. 2018 Feb 1;6(5):e01503-17. doi: 10.1128/genomeA.01503-17

Draft Genome Sequences of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, A. marginale, and A. ovis Isolates from Different Hosts

Sandra Diaz-Sanchez a,#, Angélica Hernández-Jarguín a,#, Isabel G Fernández de Mera a, Pilar Alberdi a, Erich Zweygarth b,c, Christian Gortazar a, José de la Fuente a,d,
PMCID: PMC5794941  PMID: 29437094

ABSTRACT

Here, we report the draft genome sequences of isolates of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Anaplasma marginale, and Anaplasma ovis. The genomes of A. phagocytophilum (human), A. marginale (cattle), and A. ovis (goat) isolates from the United States were sequenced and characterized. This is the first report of an A. ovis genome sequence.

GENOME ANNOUNCEMENT

The genus Anaplasma (Rickettsiales: Anaplasmataceae) comprises obligatory intracellular Gram-negative bacteria that are mainly transmitted by ticks, so far including seven species, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, A. marginale, A. ovis, A. bovis, A. centrale, A. platys, and A. capra (1, 2). These pathogens cause different forms of anaplasmosis in humans and domestic and wild animals worldwide (3). Recently, several studies have reported genome sequence information for Anaplasma spp. to advance the identification of candidate protective antigens and knowledge of genetic diversity, host tropism, virulence, and tick transmissibility of these pathogens (49). Currently, sequence information is available for 29 and 14 genomes for A. phagocytophilum and A. marginale, respectively, and 1 genome for A. centrale. However, genome sequence information is not available for other Anaplasma spp. such as A. ovis, which was included in this study.

Here, we report the draft genome sequences of the strains A. phagocytophilum NY18 (10), A. marginale Oklahoma-2 (11, 12), and A. ovis Idaho (12, 13), which were isolated in the United States from human, cow, and goat, respectively. The isolates were grown in cultured Ixodes scapularis IDE8 or ISE6 cells as previously described (11), and chromosomal DNA samples were obtained by using the DNeasy blood and tissue and MinElute PCR purification kits (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA) according to the manufacturer’s protocols. Genomic DNA was subjected to fragmentation using Agencourt AMPure XP (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, USA) to obtain DNA fragments of an average final size of about 500 bp. Samples were then used to prepare sequencing-amenable TruSeq libraries (NEB-Next, New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA, USA). The libraries were quantitated with quantitative PCR (qPCR), and DNA was then denatured and equilibrated so that a final library concentration of 10 pM was loaded onto a MiSeq version 3 flow cell (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) and sequenced using a 2 × 250 paired-end sequencing protocol with >74% of the bases showing a Q30 factor of >30. Genome assembly and analysis were conducted by CD Genomics (Shirley, NY, USA). After processing with FastQC (https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc/) for quality control, high-quality reads were assembled using the short oligonucleotide analysis package SOAPdenovo2 (version 2.04) (http://soap.genomics.org.cn/soapdenovo.html). The assembled results were optimized according to the paired-end and overlap relations of the reads by using GapCloser (version 1.12) (http://soap.genomics.org.cn/soapdenovo.html) to repair the results of the assembly hole and remove the redundant sequences from the final assembly. The protein-coding genes were predicted using Glimmer 3.02 (https://ccb.jhu.edu/software/glimmer/), and tRNAscan-SE (http://lowelab.ucsc.edu/tRNAscan-SE/) and RNAmmer (http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/services/RNAmmer/) were used to identify tRNA and rRNA, respectively. The genome sequences were also uploaded into Rapid Annotations using Subsystems Technology (RAST) (14) to check the annotated sequences. The assembled genomes were mapped to reference genomes (Anaplasma phagocytophilum strain HZ [GenBank accession number NC_007797] and Anaplasma marginale strain Florida [NC_012026]) using SOAPaligner (version 2.21) (http://soap.genomics.org.cn/soapaligner.html).

The sequenced genomes consisted of 1,210 (A. phagocytophilum NY18), 1,033 (A. marginale Oklahoma-2), and 1,034 (A. ovis Idaho) genes. The availability of these genome sequences from field Anaplasma isolates will allow comparative analysis to other Anaplasma species to expand the study of the evolution and host specificity of these pathogens and to find correlates with phenotypic variation with implications for anaplasmosis disease risk assessment and control.

Accession number(s).

The genome sequences were deposited in GenBank under accession numbers PKOG00000000 (A. phagocytophilum NY18), PKOF00000000 (A. marginale Oklahoma-2), and PKOE00000000 (A. ovis Idaho).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was supported by the COllaborative Management Platform for detection and Analyses of (Re-) emerging and foodborne outbreaks in Europe (COMPARE) grant 643476.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Footnotes

Citation Diaz-Sanchez S, Hernández-Jarguín A, Fernández de Mera IG, Alberdi P, Zweygarth E, Gortazar C, de la Fuente J. 2018. Draft genome sequences of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, A. marginale, and A. ovis isolates from different hosts. Genome Announc 6:e01503-17. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.01503-17.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Dumler JS, Barbet AF, Bekker CPJ, Dasch GA, Palmer GH, Ray SC, Rikihisa Y, Rurangirwa FR. 2001. Reorganization of genera in the families Rickettsiaceae and Anaplasmataceae in the order Rickettsiales: unification of some species of Ehrlichia with Anaplasma, Cowdria with Ehrlichia and Ehrlichia with Neorickettsia, descriptions of six new species combinations and designation of Ehrlichia equi and “HGE agent” as subjective synonyms of Ehrlichia phagocytophila. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 51:2145–2165. doi: 10.1099/00207713-51-6-2145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Li H, Zheng YC, Ma L, Jia N, Jiang BG, Jiang RR, Huo QB, Wang YW, Liu HB, Chu YL, Song YD, Yao NN, Sun T, Zeng FY, Dumler JS, Jiang JF, Cao WC. 2015. Human infection with a novel tick-borne Anaplasma species in China: a surveillance study. Lancet Infect Dis 15:663–670. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)70051-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kocan KM, de la Fuente J, Cabezas-Cruz A. 2015. The genus Anaplasma: new challenges after reclassification. Rev Sci Tech 34:577–586. doi: 10.20506/rst.34.2.2381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Dark MJ, Al-Khedery B, Barbet AF. 2011. Multistrain genome analysis identifies candidate vaccine antigens of Anaplasma marginale. Vaccine 29:4923–4932. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.04.131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Dugat T, Loux V, Marthey S, Moroldo M, Lagrée AC, Boulouis HJ, Haddad N, Maillard R. 2014. Comparative genomics of first available bovine Anaplasma phagocytophilum genome obtained with targeted sequence capture. BMC Genomics 15:973. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-15-973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Battilani M, De Arcangeli S, Balboni A, Dondi F. 2017. Genetic diversity and molecular epidemiology of Anaplasma. Infect Genet Evol 49:195–211. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2017.01.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lockwood S, Brayton KA, Broschat SL. 2016. Comparative genomics reveals multiple pathways to mutualism for tick-borne pathogens. BMC Genomics 17:481. doi: 10.1186/s12864-016-2744-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Dugat T, Rossignol MN, Rué O, Loux V, Marthey S, Moroldo M, Silaghi C, Höper D, Fröhlich J, Pfeffer M, Zweygarth E, Lagrée AC, Boulouis HJ, Haddad N. 2016. Draft Anaplasma phagocytophilum genome sequences from five cows, two horses, and one roe deer collected in Europe. Genome Announc 4:e00950-16. doi: 10.1128/genomeA.00950-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Al-Khedery B, Barbet AF. 2014. Comparative genomics identifies a potential marker of human-virulent Anaplasma phagocytophilum. Pathogens 3:25–35. doi: 10.3390/pathogens3010025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Asanovich KM, Bakken JS, Madigan JE, Aguero-Rosenfeld M, Wormser GP, Dumler JS. 1997. Antigenic diversity of granulocytic Ehrlichia isolates from humans in Wisconsin and New York and a horse in California. J Infect Dis 176:1029–1034. doi: 10.1086/516529. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Blouin EF, Barbet AF, Yi J, Kocan KM, Saliki JT. 2000. Establishment and characterization of an Oklahoma isolate of Anaplasma marginale in cultured Ixodes scapularis cells. Vet Parasitol 87:301–313. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4017(99)00183-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.de la Fuente J, García-García JC, Blouin EF, Saliki JT, Kocan KM. 2002. Infection of tick cells and bovine erythrocytes with one genotype of the intracellular Ehrlichia Anaplasma marginale excludes infection with other genotypes. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 9:658–668. doi: 10.1128/CDLI.9.3.658-668.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ndung’u LW, Aguirre C, Rurangirwa FR, McElwain TF, McGuire TC, Knowles DP, Palmer GH. 1995. Detection of Anaplasma ovis infection in goats by the major surface protein 5 competitive inhibition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Clin Microbiol 33:675–679. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Aziz RK, Bartels D, Best AA, DeJongh M, Disz T, Edwards RA, Formsma K, Gerdes S, Glass EM, Kubal M, Meyer F, Olsen GJ, Olson R, Osterman AL, Overbeek RA, McNeil LK, Paarmann D, Paczian T, Parrello B, Pusch GD, Reich C, Stevens R, Vassieva O, Vonstein V, Wilke A, Zagnitko O. 2008. The RAST server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology. BMC Genomics 9:75. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genome Announcements are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES