https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5316-2703
Figures
Abstract
Bartonella are generally recognized as zoonotic pathogens of mammals, including many rodent species. However, data on the genetic diversity of Bartonella in some regions are still absent in China. In this study, we collected rodent samples (Meriones unguiculatus, Spermophilus dauricus, Eolagurus luteus, and Cricetulus barabensis) from Inner Mongolia located in Northern China. The Bartonella were detected and identified by sequencing the gltA, ftsZ, ITS, and groEL genes in them. An overall 47.27% (52/110) positive rate was observed. This may be the first report that M. unguiculatus and E. luteus harbor Bartonella. Phylogenetic and genetic analysis on gltA, ftsZ, ITS, and groEL genes indicated that the strains were divided into seven distinct clades, suggesting the diverse genetic genotypes of Bartonella species in this area. Of those, Clade 5 meets the criteria for identification as a novel species based on gene sequence dissimilarity to known Bartonella species and herein we name it “Candidatus Bartonella mongolica”.
Author summary
Bartonella spp. are emerging zoonotic causative agents distributed worldwide and they pose a significant threat to human health worldwide. In this study, the Bartonella carried by rodents in Inner Mongolia were detected and studied. The high positive rate (47.27%) and the remarkable genetic diversity (seven phylogenetic clades) of Bartonella in rodents indicate that rodent-borne Bartonella may potentially be exposed to local peoples.
Citation: Li J, Zhang C, Lu M, Wang Y, Wang W, Liu F, et al. (2023) The diverse genetic genotypes of Bartonella species circulating in rodents from Inner Mongolia, Northern China. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 17(6): e0011462. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011462
Editor: Emily Gurley, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, UNITED STATES
Received: March 16, 2023; Accepted: June 14, 2023; Published: June 29, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Li et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All sequence files are available from the GenBank database (Accession Numbers are shown in S2 Table).
Funding: This work was funded by the National Key Research and Development Program (2021YFC2301202 [K.L.], 2021YFC1200200 [J.L.]), the Inner Mongolia Major Science & Technology Project (2021ZD0006) [J.L.], the Natural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia (2018MS08059) [J.L.], the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 82102390) [W.W.], and the Key Supporting Scientific Research Projects of Beijing Road Medical Sector, General Hospital of Xinjiang Military Region (2022jzbjl16) [K.L.]. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
The genus Bartonella belonging to family Bartonellaceae, order Rhizobiales (Hyphomicrobiales) represents a group of Gram-negative, facultative intracellular bacteria with worldwide distribution. To date, this genus is composed of at least 53 species, 7 subspecies, and some unnamed Bartonella spp. according to the National Center for Biotechnology Information database [1]. With the expanded sampling and improved detecting methods, novel species from all over the world are still being discovered. Many Bartonella species have been recognized as etiologic agents of emerging infectious diseases for both humans and domestic animals. Until 2021, at least 20 Bartonella species have been reported to infect humans [1,2], with the syndromes varying from mild and unspecific clinical signs to life-threatening symptoms [3]. First identified in 1905 by Alberto Leonardo Barton Thompson, B. bacilliformis transmitted by sandflies is proved to be the agent of Carrion’s disease with high lethality in the absence of adequate treatment [4]. As the most common Bartonella species infecting humans, B. quintana is the agent of trench fever mainly representing endocarditis and chronic bacteremia, while B. henselae causes cat scratch disease representing endocarditis, bacillary angiomatosis, and peliosis hepatis [5,6]. In the past decades, more Bartonella species have been described to infect humans, including B. clarridgeiae, B. elizabethae, B. grahamii, B. koehlerae, B. kosoyi, B. melophagi, B. rochalimae, B. tamiae, and B. washoensis, mainly manifesting with symptoms of fever, fatigue, and endocarditis [7–15]. Of those, B. elizabethae, B. grahamii, B. kosoyi, and B. washoensis are all hosted by rodents.
Epidemiological studies have demonstrated that Bartonella are mainly transmitted by hematophagous arthropods such as fleas and lice by their bites [16]. Bartonella species have been detected in multiple mammalian hosts including carnivores, rodents, bats, deer, and even marine animals [17–19]. In the past decades, a remarkable diversity of Bartonella has been reported in rodents, which were considered one of the major reservoir hosts. However, increasing research efforts in bats and other taxa might reveal similarly high diversity [18–21]. Bartonella infects the erythrocytes and endothelial cells of these animals, and then establishes persistent infections producing bacteremia that may last for months [22]. In some rodents, vertical transmission of Bartonella was also observed [22]. These characteristics strongly suggest that rodents play an important role in preserving and transmitting Bartonella in nature.
In recent years, lots of studies have been performed on molecular investigations of Bartonella in rodents from China. Up to 2021, multiple Bartonella species have been detected in various provinces including Heilongjiang, Shaanxi, Fujian, Xinjiang, Henan, Zhejiang, Yunnan, Guangdong, Hainan, and Qinghai Provinces, China [23–28]. However, some of the studies are preliminary and only one single short gene fragment was analyzed. Furthermore, in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region located in Northern China, a region of plague epidemic with an area of 1183, 000 km2, almost no studies on Bartonella have been performed except for one study reporting Meriones unguiculatus rats harboring Bartonella tribocorum and B. grahamii in this area [29]. To improve our knowledge on the diversity and epidemiology of Bartonella in China, we collected rodent samples in this region and studied the Bartonella bacteria in them.
Methods
Ethics declaration
This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, the Chinese CDC (Approval No. 2021–011), and the General Center for Disease Control and Prevention of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. All the rodents were treated in a humane manner in accordance with the “Rules for Implementation of Laboratory Animal Medicine” from the National Health Commission, China. The studies in this manuscript adhere to the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines for the reporting of animal experiments.
Sample collection and DNA extraction
In an ongoing plague surveillance project in 2021, rodents were live-trapped using fried food as baits in the desert steppe in three locations (Hunger, Baiyin Chaoketu, and Naomugeng) of Siziwang Banner (111.71°E, 41.53°N, near the China-Mongolia border), Ulanqab City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Northern China. The steel traps (150 mm×80 mm) were produced by Li’s Mousetrap Equipment Manufacturer in Guixi City, Jiangxi Province, China. Traps were checked for rodents each day and cages containing rodents were transported to the lab. After morphological identification [30], the rodents were anesthetized using pentobarbital sodium (40 mg/kg) to minimize their suffering and then sacrificed by cervical dislocation. The leftover liver tissues were then collected and stored at -20°C until DNA extraction. After being washed three times with Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS) and ground, liver samples (25 mg) were then subjected to DNA extraction. The DNeasy Blood &Tissue kit (QIAGEN, Germany) was used to extract the DNA according to the manufacturer´s instructions. The eluted DNA samples were stored in a -80°C refrigerator until PCR detection of Bartonella.
Molecular detection of Bartonella bacteria by amplifying gltA gene
As previously indicated, the primers forward BhCS871.p and reverse BhCS1137.n [31] were used for the detection of Bartonella amplifying a conserved region of the citrate synthase gene (gltA). PCR amplification was performed using a conventional Sensoquest PCR System LabCycler (Germany). Positive and negative controls were set in each PCR run. The PCR parameters are as follows: denaturing at 95°C for three minutes, 40 cycles of 95°C for one minute, 56°C for one minute, and 72°C for one minute. PCR amplification was completed after a final incubation at 72°C for 10 minutes. The PCR products were analyzed by electrophoresis on agarose gel and then observed under UV light. All the PCR products of the expected size (approximately 380 bp) were sent for DNA sequencing. The obtained gltA sequences, which were commonly used for the taxonomic identification of Bartonella species [32], were then analyzed by BLASTn (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi?PROGRAM = blastn&PAGE_TYPE = BlastSearch&LINK_LOC = blasthome) to preliminarily determine their genetic similarity to known species. The DNA of Bartonella sp. we previously detected in Guizhou Province was used as the positive control [33] and ddH2O was used as the negative control.
PCR amplification and genetic analysis of ftsZ, groEL, and ITS genes
Based on genetic analysis of the obtained gltA sequences, 23 representative Bartonella strains were selected for further characterization. The cell division protein (ftsZ) gene was amplified using the BaftsZF and BaftsZR primers as shown [34]. The primers used for 16S-23S intergenic spacer region (ITS) gene amplification were as shown [35]. The PCR conditions were as described previously. For amplification of the 60 kDa chaperonin protein (groEL) gene, hemi-nested primers were designed in this study (as shown in S1 Table) according to the conserved regions of all available Bartonella sequences downloaded from the GenBank Database, amplifying approximately 415 bp region. All the PCR products of the expected size were subjected to DNA sequencing and then analyzed by BLASTn algorithm.
All the sequences recovered in this study have been submitted to the GenBank Database and the Accession Numbers have been assigned (Shown in S2 Table).
Phylogenetic analysis
The gltA, ftsZ, groEL, and ITS gene sequences, as well as those from known Bartonella strains deposited in the GenBank database, were manually aligned using ClustalW method within MEGA7.0 and trimmed using SeqMan software (DNASTAR Inc., Madison, USA) to remove poor quality sequences [36]. A phylogeny was constructed based on the nucleotide sequences using the maximum-likelihood (ML) method implemented in PhyML software [37]. The best-fit phylogenetic model was determined by the substitution model test. Bootstrap analysis was carried out with 100 re-samplings. All the trees were mid-point rooted. Accession numbers and rodent hosts of the sequences in this study were shown in the trees.
Results
Sample collection
From August to September 2021, a total of 110 rodents were collected in suburban areas of three towns (Hunger, Baiyin Chaoketu, and Naomugeng) of Siziwang Banner, Ulanqab City, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. Morphological identification confirmed the existence of four rodent species: 67 Meriones unguiculatus, 21 Spermophilus dauricus, 21 Eolagurus luteus, and 1 Cricetulus barabensis.
Detection of Bartonella strains and analysis of gltA sequences
Based on DNA sequencing and BLASTn alignment of the gltA gene (340 bp), a total of 52 rodent samples tested positive for Bartonella: 24 of 67 (35.82%) M. unguiculatus, 10 of 21 (47.62%) S. dauricus, and 18 of 21 (85.71%) E. luteus (Table 1). Of those, 23 representative strains whose gltA sequences represent genetically distinct genotypes were selected based on their nucleotide sequences for further investigations.
Phylogenetic analysis based on the gltA sequences showed that these strains were clearly divided into 7 distinct clades (Fig 1). Genetic analysis indicated clade 1 (strain 18) has the highest similarity to Bartonella rochalimae, an emerging zoonotic pathogen, with a nucleotide homology of 98.24%. Clade 2 composed of strains 16, 23, and 25 is mostly related to Bartonella senegalensis with identities between 91.18–91.45%. Clade 3 (strains 72, 73, 74, 75, and 77) is only detected in E. luteus and is closely related to Bartonella grahamii (97.06–97.35% nucleotide similarity), a validated human pathogen [11]. For clade 4, all three strains (strains 20, 27, and 32) clustered together with Bartonella krasnovii, with an identity of 98.24%. Clades 5, 6, and 7 are all detected in M. unguiculatus. Clade 5 comprising Strains 35 and 39 is mostly related to Candidatus Bartonella negeviensis, with nucleotide similarity as low as 92.94%. Clade 6 (strains 42, 46, and 51) and clade 7 (strains 8, 28, 34, 41, 48, and 53) are both closely related to Candidatus Bartonella gerbillinarum, with the highest identities of 96.18% and 97.65%, respectively (Table 2).
The units of the branch lengths are substitutions per site.
Analysis of ftsZ, ITS, and groEL genes
For further characterization of the detected Bartonella strains, the sequences of ftsZ (818–830 bp), ITS (394–526 bp), and groEL (415 bp) genes were successfully obtained from representative strains of all 7 clades (Clade 1: 1 strain, Clade 2: 3 strains, Clade 3: 5 strains, Clade 4: 3 strains; Clade 5: 2 strains, Clade 6: 3 strains, Clade 7: 6 strains), except that the ftsZ and ITS sequences of Clade 1 (strain 18) are unavailable, probably due to the limited universality of primers. Interestingly, phylogenetic trees based on ftsZ and ITS genes are both well consistent with the tree based on the gltA gene (Fig 2). Namely, all the strains belonging to certain clades in the gltA tree are still clustered together in these phylogenetic trees. To be noticed, clades 5, 6, and 7 are all located in a major clade in phylogenetic trees based on gltA, ftsZ, and ITS genes.
The units of the branch lengths are substitutions per site.
For the ftsZ gene, Clades 2, 3, and 4 showed the highest nucleotide homologies with B. washoensis (97.20%), B. grahamii (96.13%), and B. krasnovii (95.74%), respectively. Clades 5, 6, and 7 are all mostly related to B. taylorii, with the highest nucleotide similarities of 87.09%, 86.71%, and 87.55–87.56%, respectively (Table 2). As to the ITS gene, clades 2, 3, 4, and 5 share 99.24–99.75% with Bartonella washoensis, 89.79% with B. grahamii, 90.08–91.94% with B. krasnovii, and 88.89–89.35% to Candidatus Bartonella negeviensis, respectively, while Clades 6 and 7 are both mostly related to Candidatus Bartonella gerbillinarum (identities 89.78% and 89.03–89.78%, respectively).
Unexpectedly, the phylogenetic tree based on groEL sequences showed that the positions of Bartonella strains are obviously inconsistent with gltA, ftsZ, and ITS trees (Fig 3). Clade 1 (strain 18) and clade 2 (strains 16, 23, and 25) clustered together. Both of them are closely related to B. washoensis with the identities of 98.55% and 98.55–98.79%. Remarkably, strains from clade 6 (strains 42, 46, and 51) and clade 7 (strains 8, 28, 34, 41, 48, and 53) are dispersed into different lineages. For example, strains 42 and 46 belonging to Clade 6 clustered with strain 48 belonging to clade 7, while strains 28, 34, and 41 (Clade 7) are in the same lineage together with strain 51 belonging to Clade 6. This result may result from several reasons: 1. It is possible that co-infection of different Bartonella strains may present in the rodent blood and the groEL primers may have been more sensitive to a minor variant present; 2. Lack of some important reference sequences in the GenBank Database and in the phylogenetic trees; 3. Possible recombination or mutations of the groEL gene may exist. Clades 3 and 5 are almost unchanged, and they share highest 96.63–97.11% and 94.39–94.63% to B. grahamii and Bartonella vinsonii subsp. arupensis, respectively (Table 2). According to the criteria for Bartonella species definition reported in the previous study [32], we suppose that clade 5 undoubtedly represents a novel species. Herein we name it “Candidatus Bartonella mongolica” based on the area where it was first detected.
The units of the branch lengths are substitutions per site.
Discussion
Bartonella are considered emerging zoonotic causative agents distributed worldwide. Small mammals such as rodents and bats are the primary hosts of Bartonella, and approximately two-thirds of currently reported Bartonella species are harbored by rodents. Over the past decades, an increasing number of Bartonella species has been reported worldwide. However, despite the species abundance of rodents in China (more than 200 species), the geographical distribution and genetic diversity of rodent-borne Bartonella in many areas are still pending.
In this study, a high prevalence of Bartonella spp. was observed in rodents from Inner Mongolia, with an overall positive rate of 47.27% (52/110). This rate is similar to those previously reported in rodents from Yunnan Province (43.5%) [38] and Shanxi Province (49.52%) [39]. Three of the four rodent species tested positive for Bartonella, with the positive rate varying from 35.82%-85.71%. As is currently known, this may be the first report that M. unguiculatus and E. luteus harboring Bartonella, which may expand our knowledge on the host range of Bartonella. Furthermore, the host specificity of Bartonella was also observed in this study. For example, all strains belonging to Clade 3 were detected in E. luteus, which only account for 19.09% (21/110) of the rodent samples. This is well consistent with previous reports that each Bartonella specie only infects one or a few rodent species [40]. Notably, Siziwang Banner is an epidemic area of plague. In this area, M. unguiculatus and S. dauricus are the main hosts of Yersinia pestis, the etiologic agent of plague [41]. As these rodents live in proximity to humans (mostly herdsmen) in this area, human-rodent interactions are supposed to be frequent. The high infection rate of Bartonella in these rodents makes it possible that Bartonella spp. may be transmitted to human beings in a similar pathway as plague. Bartonellosis such as cat scratch disease caused by B. henselae has been widely reported in multiple provinces of China, such as Hebei, Fujian, Anhui, Zhejiang, Guangdong, Hubei, Guizhou, and Beijing [42]. Meanwhile, human cases infected by other Bartonella species were also reported including Bartonella vinsonii subsp. berkhoffii, B. quintana, and B. coopersplainsensis [42–44]. Nonetheless, clinical cases of bartonellosis in Inner Mongolia have never been reported, probably due to minor symptoms (fever, malaise, etc.) and overlap with other infectious diseases. It is plausible to suppose that the risk of human infection by Bartonella is largely underestimated or ignored.
In this study, remarkable genetic diversity of Bartonella was observed, with seven distinct phylogenetic clades identified. Of those, the gltA, ftsZ, ITS, and groEL genes of Clade 5 showed the highest nucleotide identities of 92.94%, 87.09%, 88.89–89.35%, and 94.39–94.64% to reported species. According to the criteria for the definition of Bartonella species [31], these remarkable genetic divergences suggest that they represent a novel species. Herein we name it “Candidatus Bartonella mongolica”. Genetic and phylogenetic analysis indicated that all the key genes of clade 3 strains are closely related to B. grahamii. Namely, this clade should represent a variant of B. grahamii. As a validated human pathogen, B. grahamii has been reported to cause cat scratch disease, with the symptoms of neuroretinitis and enlarged lymph nodes [11]. The high positive rate of B. grahamii in E. luteus and its potential human pathogenicity may suggest the risk of human infection.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the National Institute for Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, the Chinese CDC (Approval No. 2021–011), and the General Center for Disease Control and Prevention of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. All the rodents were treated in a humane manner in accordance with the “Rules for Implementation of Laboratory Animal Medicine” from the National Health Commission, China.
Availability of data and materials
All sequence files are available from the GenBank database (Accession Numbers are shown in S2 Table).
Supporting information
S1 Table. The primers used for amplification of the groEL gene from Bartonella strains by hemi-nested PCR.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011462.s001
(DOCX)
S2 Table. Genbank numbers of the gltA, ftsZ, groEL, and ITS sequences of Bartonella strains in this study.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0011462.s002
(DOCX)
References
- 1. Majerová K, Gutiérrez R, Fonville M, Hönig V, Papežík P, Hofmannová L, et al. Hedgehogs and squirrels as hosts of zoonotic Bartonella Species. Pathogens. 2021; 10(6): 686. pmid:34205901
- 2. Okaro U, Addisu A, Casanas B, Anderson B. Bartonella species, an emerging cause of blood-culture-negative endocarditis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2022; 30: 709–746. pmid:28490579
- 3. Krügel M, Król N, Kempf VAJ, Pfeffer M, Obiegala A. Emerging rodent-associated Bartonella: a threat for human health? Parasit Vectors. 2022; 15(1): 113. pmid:35361285
- 4. Noguchi H, Battistini TS. Etiology of Oroya fever: I. Cultivation of Bartonella bacilliformis. J Exp Med. 1926; 43(6): 851–864. pmid:19869166
- 5. Foucault C, Barrau K, Brouqui P, Raoult D. Bartonella quintana bacteremia among homeless people. Clin Infect Dis. 2002; 35(6): 684–9. pmid:12203165
- 6. Pons I, Sanfeliu I, Nogueras MM, Sala M, Cervantes M, Amengual MJ, et al. Seroprevalence of Bartonella spp. infection in HIV patients in Catalonia, Spain. BMC Infect Dis. 2008; 8: 58. pmid:18452613
- 7. Avidor B, Graidy M, Efrat G, Leibowitz C, Shapira G, Schattner A, et al. Bartonella koehlerae, a new cat-associated agent of culture-negative human endocarditis. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42: 3462–3468.
- 8. Daly JS, Worthington MG, Brenner DJ, Moss CW, Hollis DG, Weyant RS, et al. Rochalimaea elizabethae sp. nov. isolated from a patient with endocarditis. J Clin Microbiol. 1993; 31: 872–881.
- 9. Eremeeva ME, Gerns HL, Lydy SL, Goo JS, Ryan ET, Mathew SS, et al. Bacteremia, fever, and splenomegaly caused by a newly recognized Bartonella species. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356: 2381–2387. pmid:17554119
- 10. Kandelaki G, Malania L, Bai Y, Chakvetadze N, Katsitadze G, Imnadze P, et al. Human lymphadenopathy caused by rat-borne Bartonella, Tbilisi, Georgia. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016; 22: 544–546. pmid:26889959
- 11. Kerkhoff FT, Bergmans AMC, Van Der Zee A, Rothova A. Demonstration of Bartonella grahamii DNA in ocular fluids of a patient with neuroretinitis. J Clin Microbiol. 1999; 37: 4034–4038.
- 12. Kordick DL, Hilyard EJ, Hadfield TL, Wilson KH, Steigerwalt AG, Brenner DJ, et al. Bartonella clarridgeiae, a newly recognized zoonotic pathogen causing inoculation papules, fever, and lymphadenopathy (cat scratch disease). J Clin Microbiol. 1997; 35: 1813–1818.
- 13. Kosoy M, Murray M, Gilmore JRD, Bai Y, Gage KL. Bartonella Strains from ground squirrels are identical to Bartonella washoensis isolated from a human patient. J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41: 645–650.
- 14. Kosoy M, Morway C, Sheff KW, Bai Y, Colborn J, Chalcraft L, et al. Bartonella tamiae sp. nov., a newly recognized pathogen isolated from three human patients from Thailand. J Clin Microbiol. 2007; 46: 772–775. pmid:18077632
- 15. Maggi R, Kosoy M, Mintzer M, Breitschwerdt EB. Isolation of Candidatus Bartonella melophagi from human blood. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009; 15: 66–68. pmid:19116054
- 16. Abbot P, Aviles AE, Eller L, Durden LA. Mixed infections, cryptic diversity, and vector-borne pathogens: evidence from Polygenis fleas and Bartonella species. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73(19): 6045–6052. pmid:17693558
- 17. Carrasco SE, Chomel BB, Gill VA, Kasten RW, Maggi RG, Breitschwerdt EB, et al. Novel Bartonella infection in northern and southern sea otters (Enhydra lutris kenyoni and Enhydra lutris nereis). Vet Microbiol. 2014; 170(3–4): 325–334. pmid:24629902
- 18. Greco G, Zarea AAK, Sgroi G, Tempesta M, D’Alessio N, Lanave G, et al. Zoonotic Bartonella species in Eurasian wolves and other free-ranging wild mammals from Italy. Zoonoses Public Health. 2021; 68(4): 316–326. pmid:33779044
- 19. Gonçalves-Oliveira J, Rozental T, Guterres A, Teixeira BR, Andrade-Silva BE, Costa-Neto SFD, et al. Investigation of Bartonella spp. in Brazilian mammals with emphasis on rodents and bats from the Atlantic Forest. Int J Parasitol Parasites Wildl. 2020; 13: 80–89. pmid:32904298
- 20. Mitchell MM, Vicente-Santos A, Rodríguez-Herrera B, Corrales-Aguilar E, Gillespie TR. Genetic diversity of Bartonella spp. in cave-dwelling bats and bat flies, Costa Rica, 2018. Emerg Infect Dis. 2022; 28(2): 488–491.
- 21. Poofery J, Narapakdeesakul D, Riana E, Arnuphapprasert A, Nugraheni YR, Ngamprasertwong T, et al. Molecular identification and genetic diversity of Bartonella spp. in 24 bat species from Thailand. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022; 69(4): e717–e733. pmid:34755483
- 22. Gutiérrez R, Krasnov B, Morick D, Gottlieb Y, Khokhlova IS, Harrus S. Bartonella infection in rodents and their flea ectoparasites: an overview. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2015; 15(1): 27–39. pmid:25629778
- 23. An CH, Chen BB, Lyu W, Nie SM, Li SZ, Fan SP, et al. Bartonella species investigated among rodents from Shaanxi Province of China. Biomed Environ Sci. 2020; 33(3): 201–205. pmid:32209180
- 24. Hao L, Yuan D, Guo L, Hou W, Mo X, Yin J, et al. Molecular detection of Bartonella in ixodid ticks collected from yaks and plateau pikas (Ochotona curzoniae) in Shiqu County, China. BMC Vet Res. 2020; 16(1): 235. pmid:32646425
- 25. Li DM, Hou Y, Song XP, Fu YQ, Li GC, Li M, et al. High prevalence and genetic heterogeneity of rodent-borne Bartonella species on Heixiazi Island, China. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015; 81(23): 7981–7992. pmid:26362983
- 26. Liu H, Han T, Liu W, Xu G, Zheng K, Xiao F. Epidemiological characteristics and genetic diversity of Bartonella species in rodents from southeastern China. Zoonoses Public Health. 2022; 69(3): 224–234. pmid:35040279
- 27. Rao H, Li S, Lu L, Wang R, Song X, Sun K, et al. Genetic diversity of Bartonella species in small mammals in the Qaidam Basin, western China. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1): 1735. pmid:33462399
- 28. Yao XY, Liu H, Sun J, Zhang YQ, Lv ZH, Zhang XL, et al. Epidemiology and genetic diversity of Bartonella in rodents in urban areas of Guangzhou, Southern China. Front Microbiol. 2022; 13: 942587. pmid:35859747
- 29. Lu X, Peng Y, Geng Y, Zhao H, Shen X, Li D, et al. Co-localization of sampling and sequencing for zoonotic pathogen identification in the field monitoring using mobile laboratories. China CDC Wkly. 2022; 4(12): 259–263. pmid:35433082
- 30.
Zheng Z, Jiang Z, Chen A. Rodentology. 1st ed. China: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press; 2008. [in Chinese]
- 31. Norman AF, Regnery R, Jameson P, Greene C, Krause DC. Differentiation of Bartonella-like isolates at the species level by PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism in the citrate synthase gene. J Clin Microbiol. 2002; 33(7): 1797–1803.
- 32. La Scola B, Zeaiter Z, Khamis A, Raoult D. Gene-sequence-based criteria for species definition in bacteriology: the Bartonella paradigm. Trends Microbiol. 2003; 11(7): 318–321. pmid:12875815
- 33. Lu M, Tang G, Ren Z, Zhang J, Wang W, Qin X, et al. Ehrlichia, Coxiella and Bartonella infections in rodents from Guizhou Province, Southwest China. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2022; 13(5): 101974. pmid:35662068
- 34. Saengsawang P, Kaewmongkol G, Inpankaew T. Molecular detection of Bartonella spp. and hematological evaluation in domestic cats and dogs from Bangkok, Thailand. Pathogens. 2021; 10(5): 503. pmid:33922245
- 35. Harrus S, Bar-Gal GK, Golan A, Elazari-Volcani R, Kosoy MY, Morick D, et al. Isolation and genetic characterization of a Bartonella strain closely related to Bartonella tribocorum and Bartonella elizabethae in Israeli commensal rats. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2009; 81(1): 55–58.
- 36. Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 7.0 for Bigger Datasets. Mol Biol Evol. 2016; 33: 1870–1874. pmid:27004904
- 37. Guindon S, Delsuc F, Dufayard JF, Gascuel O. Estimating maximum likelihood phylogenies with PhyML. Methods Mol Biol. 2009; 537: 113–137. pmid:19378142
- 38. Ying B, Kosoy MY, Maupin GO, Tsuchiya KR, Gage KL. Genetic and ecologic characteristics of Bartonella communities in rodents in southern China. Am Trop Med Hyg. 2002; 66: 622–627. pmid:12201602
- 39. Yu J, Zhang XY, Chen YX, Cheng HB, Li DM, Rao HX. Molecular detection and genetic characterization of small rodents associated Bartonella species in Zhongtiao Mountain, China. PLoS One. 2022; 17: e0264591. pmid:35226692
- 40. Zhang L, Peng Q, Gu XL, Su WQ, Cao XQ, Zhou CM, et al. Host specificity and genetic diversity of Bartonella in rodents and shrews from Eastern China. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022; 69(6): 3906–3916. pmid:36355627
- 41. Li J, Wang Y, Liu F, Shen X, Wang Y, Fan M, et al. Genetic source tracking of human plague cases in Inner Mongolia-Beijing, 2019. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021; 15(8): e0009558. pmid:34343197
- 42. Liu Q, Eremeeva ME, Li D. Bartonella and Bartonella infections in China: From the clinic to the laboratory. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012; 35(2): 93–102. pmid:22304899
- 43. Shi Y, Yang J, Qi Y, Xu J, Shi Y, Shi T, et al. Detection of Bartonella vinsonii subsp. berkhoffii in an HIV patient using metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing. Emerg Microbes Infect. 202; 11(1): 1764–1767. pmid:35736664
- 44. Chan WS, Au CH, Leung HC, Ho DN, Li D, Chan TL, et al. Potential utility of metagenomic sequencing for improving etiologic diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Future Cardiol. 2019; 15(6): 411–424. pmid:31691592