BMC infectious diseases · 2019
The inference of HIV-1 transmission direction between HIV-1 positive couples based on the sequences of HIV-1 quasi-species.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wu Jianjun, Hu Zhongwang, Yao Hui, Wang Hai, Lei Yanhua, Zhong Ping, Feng Yi, Xing Hui, Shen Yuelan, Jin Lin, Liu Aiwen, Qin Yizu, Miao Lifeng, Su Bin, Zhang Yibo, Guo Hongxiong
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To infer transmission direction of a HIV transmission chain is helpful not only in legal jurisdiction but also in precise intervention to prevent HIV spread. Recently, the direction of transmission is inferred by whether paraphyletic-monophyletic (PM) or a combination of paraphyletic and polyphyletic (PP) topologies is observed or not between the sequences of source and recipient in the phylogenetic tree. However, paraphyly between them often declines over time and may disappear between spouses due to bidirectional transmission after primary infection. In this study, our aim is to test the reliability of inferring HIV transmission direction between epidemiologically linked HIV-1 positive couples using whether or not paraphyly is observed in phylogenetic tree.
METHODS: HIV quasi-species were sequenced using PCR product clones, and then Bayesian analysis of molecular sequences with MCMC was employed to construct phylogenetic relationship of env, gag, pol gene fragments of HIV-1 positive couples using BEAST software.
RESULTS: Our results showed that all sequences of seven couples except pol sequences of couple 12 and 13 form their own monophyletic cluster in phylogenetic tree including the closest control sequences from GenBank or other studies on local samples, which are supported by significant Bayesian posterior probabilities more than 0.9932. Of seven couples, paraphyly is only observed in phylogenetic tree constructed with env and pol gene sequences of three couples and gag gene sequences of four couples. Paraphyly is not observed in half of HIV positive couples. Pol sequences of couple 13 is separated by Blast selected controls; pol sequences of couple 12 in phylogenetic tree is supported by a lower Bayesian posterior value.
CONCLUSION: Paraphyly relationship between sequences of donator and recipient is only observed among partial HIV-1 positive couples with epidemiological link. Phylogenetic relationship is not always the same when various gene regions of HIV are used to conduct phylogenetic analysis. The combination of phylogenetic analysis based on various gene regions of HIV and enough epidemiology investigation is essential when inferring transmission direction of HIV in a transmission chain or in one couple. However, while observed paraphyly can be used to infer transmission direction in HIV-1 positive couple, no observed paraphyly cannot deny it.
METHODS: HIV quasi-species were sequenced using PCR product clones, and then Bayesian analysis of molecular sequences with MCMC was employed to construct phylogenetic relationship of env, gag, pol gene fragments of HIV-1 positive couples using BEAST software.
RESULTS: Our results showed that all sequences of seven couples except pol sequences of couple 12 and 13 form their own monophyletic cluster in phylogenetic tree including the closest control sequences from GenBank or other studies on local samples, which are supported by significant Bayesian posterior probabilities more than 0.9932. Of seven couples, paraphyly is only observed in phylogenetic tree constructed with env and pol gene sequences of three couples and gag gene sequences of four couples. Paraphyly is not observed in half of HIV positive couples. Pol sequences of couple 13 is separated by Blast selected controls; pol sequences of couple 12 in phylogenetic tree is supported by a lower Bayesian posterior value.
CONCLUSION: Paraphyly relationship between sequences of donator and recipient is only observed among partial HIV-1 positive couples with epidemiological link. Phylogenetic relationship is not always the same when various gene regions of HIV are used to conduct phylogenetic analysis. The combination of phylogenetic analysis based on various gene regions of HIV and enough epidemiology investigation is essential when inferring transmission direction of HIV in a transmission chain or in one couple. However, while observed paraphyly can be used to infer transmission direction in HIV-1 positive couple, no observed paraphyly cannot deny it.