Complete Genomic Characterization of a Pathogenic A.II Strain of Francisella tularensis Subspecies tularensis
2007

Complete Genomic Characterization of a Pathogenic A.II Strain of Francisella tularensis

publication Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Beckstrom-Sternberg Stephen M., Auerbach Raymond K., Godbole Shubhada, Pearson John V., Beckstrom-Sternberg James S., Deng Zuoming, Munk Christine, Kubota Kristy, Zhou Yan, Bruce David, Noronha Jyothi, Scheuermann Richard H., Wang Aihui, Wei Xianying, Wang Jianjun, Hao Jicheng, Wagner David M., Brettin Thomas S., Brown Nancy, Gilna Paul, Keim Paul S.

Primary Institution: Translational Genomics Research Institute, Phoenix, Arizona, United States of America

Hypothesis

What are the genomic differences between the A.II strain of Francisella tularensis and the A.I strain?

Conclusion

The A.II strain of Francisella tularensis has extensive genomic variation compared to the A.I strain, with significant differences in SNPs, indels, and chromosomal rearrangements.

Supporting Evidence

  • The A.II genome is 1,898,476 bp in size with 1,820 genes.
  • There is only one whole gene difference between the A.II and A.I strains.
  • The A.II strain has 3,367 SNPs and 1,015 small indels compared to the A.I strain.
  • Numerous chromosomal rearrangements were identified, including inversions and translocations.
  • The pathogenicity island duplicated regions are essentially identical in the A.II strain but vary at 60 nucleotide positions compared to the A.I strain.

Takeaway

Scientists studied the genes of a bacteria that can make people very sick and found many differences between two types of this bacteria, which might help explain why one type is more dangerous than the other.

Methodology

The complete genome of the A.II strain was sequenced and compared to the A.I strain using various genomic analysis techniques.

Potential Biases

There may be risks of bias due to the historical context of the strains studied and their representation in repositories.

Limitations

The study may be limited by the availability of genomic data from other strains and the potential biases in the sample set used for comparison.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0000947

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication