↓ Skip to main content

Multiple-clone infections of Plasmodium vivax: definition of a panel of markers for molecular epidemiology

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Multiple-clone infections of Plasmodium vivax: definition of a panel of markers for molecular epidemiology
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12936-015-0846-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aracele M. de Souza, Flávia C. F. de Araújo, Cor J. F. Fontes, Luzia H. Carvalho, Cristiana F. A. de Brito, Taís N. de Sousa

Abstract

Plasmodium vivax infections commonly contain multiple genetically distinct parasite clones. The detection of multiple-clone infections depends on several factors, such as the accuracy of the genotyping method, and the type and number of the molecular markers analysed. Characterizing the multiplicity of infection has broad implications that range from population genetic studies of the parasite to malaria treatment and control. This study compared and evaluated the efficiency of neutral and non-neutral markers that are widely used in studies of molecular epidemiology to detect the multiplicity of P. vivax infection. The performance of six markers was evaluated using 11 mixtures of DNA with well-defined proportions of two different parasite genotypes for each marker. These mixtures were generated by mixing cloned PCR products or patient-derived genomic DNA. In addition, 51 samples of natural infections from the Brazil were genotyped for all markers. The PCR-capillary electrophoresis-based method was used to permit direct comparisons among the markers. The criteria for differentiating minor peaks from artifacts were also evaluated. The analysis of DNA mixtures showed that the tandem repeat MN21 and the polymorphic blocks 2 (msp1B2) and 10 (msp1B10) of merozoite surface protein-1 allowed for the estimation of the expected ratio of both alleles in the majority of preparations. Nevertheless, msp1B2 was not able to detect the majority of multiple-clone infections in field samples; it identified only 6 % of these infections. The merozoite surface protein-3 alpha and microsatellites (PvMS6 and PvMS7) did not accurately estimate the relative clonal proportions in artificial mixtures, but the microsatellites performed well in detecting natural multiple-clone infections. Notably, the use of a less stringent criterion to score rare alleles significantly increased the sensitivity of the detection of multi-clonal infections. Depending on the type of marker used, a considerable amplification bias was observed, which may have serious implications for the characterization of the complexity of a P. vivax infection. Based on the performance of markers in artificial mixtures of DNA and natural infections, a minimum panel of four genetic markers (PvMS6, PvMS7, MN21, and msp1B10) was defined, and these markers are highly informative regarding the genetic variability of P. vivax populations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 8%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 August 2015.
All research outputs
#2,270,044
of 5,557,318 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#997
of 2,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,998
of 194,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#69
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,557,318 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 58th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,206 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 194,363 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.