Using museum collections to detect pathogens.
|Article Type:||Letter to the editor|
Chagas' disease (Causes of)
Chagas' disease (Research)
Natural history museums (Analysis)
Trypanosoma cruzi (Health aspects)
Trypanosoma cruzi (Identification and classification)
Pinto, C. Miguel
Baxter, B. Dnate'
Hanson, J. Delton
Mendez-Harclerode, Francisca M.
Suchecki, John R.
Grijalva, Mario J.
Fulhorst, Charles F.
Bradley, Robert D.
|Publication:||Name: Emerging Infectious Diseases Publisher: U.S. National Center for Infectious Diseases Audience: Academic; Professional Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Health Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2010 U.S. National Center for Infectious Diseases ISSN: 1080-6040|
|Issue:||Date: Feb, 2010 Source Volume: 16 Source Issue: 2|
|Topic:||Event Code: 310 Science & research|
|Geographic:||Geographic Scope: United States Geographic Code: 1USA United States|
To the Editor: Natural history museum collections have evolved in
recent years to meet the challenges of current and future
interdisciplinary scientific studies. Many natural history museums have
built tissue collections and made digital information (e.g.,
photographs, publications, geographic coordinates) freely available on
the Internet. These collections provide endless opportunities to conduct
studies, including temporal and spatial surveys of emerging and
reemerging pathogens (1). We report an example of a museum collection
being useful in detecting Trypanosoma cruzi, the etiologic agent of
Chagas disease, in the southern plains woodrat (Neotoma micropus) in
southern Texas. This finding is of interest in the epidemiology of
Chagas disease because the climatic characteristics and demographics of
the region are similar to areas in Latin America where Chagas disease is
an important zoonotic agent that infects [approximately equal to] 20
million persons (2).
Tissue samples from N. micropus woodrats archived in the Natural Science Research Laboratory at the Museum of Texas Tech University were evaluated for T. cruzi DNA by PCR methods. All samples were originally collected during March 2001-June 2003 from the Chaparral Wildlife Management Area in southern Texas (28[degrees]18'N, 99[degrees]24'W), 86 km west of the Mexico-US border; some samples had been used previously in other research projects (3). Individual rodents were captured with live traps (n = 13) or by excavating middens in which all the nest occupants were collected by hand (n = 146). Animals were later euthanized and tissue samples (heart, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, spleen) were obtained. Tissues were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen and permanently stored in ultralow-temperature freezers. We extracted 1 DNA sample from each animal's liver for use in this survey. DNA amplification was performed by using primers specific to T. cruzi (TCZ1 and TCZ2) (4) under previously standardized conditions and positive controls (5). T. cruzi DNA was detected in 42 (26.4%) of 159 woodrat samples tested. Males were infected significantly more often (31/82) than females (11/73); sex was not determined for 4 individuals (Score test for a binomial proportion, z = -4.0, p<0.01). Adults had a nonsignificant higher prevalence (24/92) than all other individuals in the remaining age categories combined (14/54) (age was not determined for 13 individuals) (Score test for a binomial proportion, z = -0.02, p = 0.98). Middens that harbored infected individuals (n = 28, mean = 1.8) were not significantly (t = 0.79, df = 84, p = 0.43) more populated than middens that harbored uninfected individuals (n = 58, mean = 1.6).
Woodrats had been shownby using microscopy to be infected by T. cruzi and T. cruzi-like organisms (6); however, no definitive DNA-based confirmation had been performed (6,7). The results of this research confirm the infection of N. micropus woodrats with T. cruzi and show a higher prevalence than that reported in previous studies that used other diagnostic methods. These results also point to woodrats as a potentially important reservoir of T. cruzi in North America. We hypothesize that the high prevalence is a consequence of the nest-building habits of these rodents. These nests are complexes of dry branches, grasses, and leaves, with a mean diameter of 84 cm, and offer easy access and permanent refuge to triatomine bugs. Woodrats have been found in association with at least 5 triatomine species: Triatoma gerstaeckeri, T. lecticularia, T. neotomae, T. protracta, and T. sanguisuga (8). Another factor for consideration is woodrats' multigenerational midden use, which may enable the permanent occurrence of triatomine colonies and therefore maintain long-term circulation of T. cruzi. Whereas recent characterizations of North American strains have included isolates from other mammalian reservoir hosts (9), the genotyping of parasites from N. micropus woodrats and other woodrats is still to be done.
Despite successful results from tracking pathogens by using material deposited in natural history museum collections (10), this practice is not common. We suggest that natural history museum collections be used more frequently, especially for surveying and genotyping T. cruzi in mammals, because of the importance of such information in clarifying the epidemiology and the evolutionary history of this pathogen.
Nisha Garg, Jian-Jun Wen, and Carlos Machado graciously supplied positive controls. Robert Baker, Heath Garner, and Kathy MacDonald provided access to DNA samples. Special thanks to Lisa Longhofer, Brian Amman, Darin Carroll, Michelle Haynie, Nevin Durish, Mary Lou Milazzo, and Ciro Milazzo for collecting specimens. Thanks to David Synatske and Donald Ruthven for access to the study area.
Specimens were collected by using funds provided by a National Institutes of Health grant (AI-41435, "Ecology of emerging arenaviruses in the southwestern United States") to C.F.F. and R.D.B.; funding for laboratory work was provided by Texas Tech University Association of Biologists to C.M.P.
(1.) Suarez AV, Tsutsui ND. The value of museum collections for research and society. Bioscience. 2004;54:66-74. DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0066: TVOMCF]2.0.CO;2
(2.) Hanford EJ, Zhan FB, Lu Y, Giordano A. Chagas disease in Texas: recognizing the significance and implications of evidence in the literature. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65:60-79. DOI: 10.1016/j. socscimed.2007.02.041
(3.) Baxter BD, Mendez-Harclerode F, Fulhorst CF, Bradley RD. Genetics of social behavior: a molecular examination of relatedness, multiple maternity, and cohabitation of the southern plains woodrat (Neotoma micropus). Journal of Mammalogy. 2009. 90:819-831.
(4.) Moser DR, Kirchhoff LV, Donelson JE. Detection of Trypanosoma cruzi by DNA amplification using the polymerase chain reaction. J Clin Microbiol. 1989;27:1477-82.
(5.) Virreira M, Torrico F, Truyens C, Alonso-Vega C, Solano M, Carlier Y, et al. Comparison of polymerase chain reaction methods for reliable and easy detection of congenital Trypanosoma cruzi infections. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2003;68:574-82.
(6.) Eads RB, Hightower BG. Blood parasites of southwest Texas rodents. J Parasitol. 1952;38:89-90. DOI: 10.2307/3274189
(7.) Burkholder JE, Allison TC, Kelly VP. Trypanosoma cruzi (Chagas) (Protozoa: Kinetoplastida) in invertebrate, reservoir, and human hosts of the lower Rio Grande valley of Texas. J Parasitol. 1980;66:305-11. DOI: 10.2307/3280824
(8.) Lent H, Wygodzinsky P. Revision of the Triatominae (Hemiptera, Reduviidae), and their significance as vectors of Chagas' disease. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History. 1979;163:123-520.
(9.) Roellig DM, Brown EL, Barnabe C, Tibayrenc M, Steurer FJ, Yabsley MJ. Molecular typing of Trypanosoma cruzi isolates, United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14:1123-5. DOI: 10.3201/ eid1407.080175
(10.) Yates TL, Mills JN, Parmenter CA, Ksiazek TG, Parmenter RR, Vande Castle JR, et al. The ecology and evolutionary history of an emergent disease: Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome. Bioscience. 2002;52:989-98. DOI: 10.1641/0006-3568 (2002)052[0989:TEAEHO]2.0.CO;2
Author affiliations: American Museum of Natural History and City University of New York, New York, New York, USA (C.M. Pinto); Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA (C.M. Pinto, B.D. Baxter, J.D. Hanson, F.M. Mendez-Harcleorode, J.R. Suchecki, R.D. Bradley); Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador (C.M. Pinto, M.J. Grijalva); Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, USA (M.J. Grijalva); and University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, USA (C.F. Fulhorst).
Address for correspondence: C. Miguel Pinto, Department of Mammalogy and Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics, American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY 10024, USA; email: email@example.com
|Gale Copyright:||Copyright 2010 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.|