Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T15:45:54.233Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Identification of putative markers of triclabendazole resistance by a genome-wide analysis of genetically recombinant Fasciola hepatica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2013

J. HODGKINSON*
Affiliation:
Veterinary Parasitology, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 5RF, UK
K. CWIKLINSKI
Affiliation:
Veterinary Parasitology, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 5RF, UK
N. J. BEESLEY
Affiliation:
Veterinary Parasitology, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 5RF, UK
S. PATERSON
Affiliation:
Centre for Genomic Research, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK
D. J. L. WILLIAMS
Affiliation:
Veterinary Parasitology, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 5RF, UK
*
*Corresponding author. Veterinary Parasitology, Department of Infection Biology, Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L3 5RF, UK. Tel: +44 (0)151 7950223. E-mail: jhodgkin@liverpool.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Despite years of investigation into triclabendazole (TCBZ) resistance in Fasciola hepatica, the genetic mechanisms responsible remain unknown. Extensive analysis of multiple triclabendazole-susceptible and -resistant isolates using a combination of experimental in vivo and in vitro approaches has been carried out, yet few, if any, genes have been demonstrated experimentally to be associated with resistance phenotypes in the field. In this review we summarize the current understanding of TCBZ resistance from the approaches employed to date. We report the current genomic and genetic resources for F. hepatica that are available to facilitate novel functional genomics and genetic experiments for this parasite in the future. Finally, we describe our own non-biased approach to mapping the major genetic loci involved in conferring TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

INTRODUCTION

The liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica is an economically important trematode parasite pathogen of livestock which frequently impacts on the health and welfare of cattle and sheep worldwide. Evidence from various sources suggests that the prevalence of infection has increased considerably in recent years for a variety of reasons – changing climate, changing farming practices and increased animal movements (van Dijk et al. Reference van Dijk, Sargison, Kenyon and Skuce2010). It is suggested that climate change is at least partly responsible for the increase in the prevalence of F. hepatica in the UK; moreover, warmer winters and wetter summers, which are predicted to occur in the UK over the next 50 years, combined with growing concerns about drug resistance (Charlier et al. Reference Charlier, Hostens, Jacobs, Van Ranst, Duchateau and Vercruysse2012) are likely to exacerbate the financial and welfare impact of fasciolosis on livestock production (Fox et al. Reference Fox, White, McClean, Marion, Evans and Hutchings2011). We also know that flukes modulate the host immune system and affect diagnosis and susceptibility to other pathogens including bovine tuberculosis (Claridge et al. Reference Claridge, Diggle, McCann, Mulcahy, Flynn, McNair, Strain, Welsh, Baylis and Williams2012).

The life cycle of F. hepatica includes many pre-parasitic stages which develop in the environment or the snail intermediate host, Galba truncatula, where they undergo a clonal expansion (Fig. 1). The infective stage is the metacercaria which is found encysted on herbage and following ingestion by grazing herbivores develops to patency in 10–14 weeks. Temperature and rainfall are the principle determinants affecting the life cycle and hence the prevalence and intensity of F. hepatica infection (McCann et al. Reference McCann, Baylis and Williams2010).

Fig.1. (A) Schematic showing the life cycle of F. hepatica. Eggs are produced by adults in the bile ducts of the definitive host (e.g. sheep) and are passed in the faeces. A key aspect of the life cycle that lends it to genetic manipulation is the ability of a single miracidium to hatch from an egg, infect the snail intermediate host and give rise to several hundred clonal cercariae that are subsequently released from the snail. These metacercariae encyst on pasture and are ingested by the definitive host; (B) Selected images from experimental infections: 1. Embryonated egg containing miracidium, 2. Free miracidum, 3. Redia from an infected snail, 4. Cercaria released from an infected snail.

F. hepatica is regarded by the WHO as a re-emerging zoonosis and of major concern in many developing countries. It has been estimated that 17 million people are at risk of infection and new hyper-endemic regions have been identified in Vietnam, Egypt and Iran, in addition to the well established hyper-endemic region in the altiplano of the South American Andes. The drug of choice to treat human fasciolosis, triclabendazole (TCBZ), is identical to one used to control fasciolosis in livestock. The emergence of anthelmintic resistance, in particular to TCBZ, by F. hepatica populations is an urgent concern to UK agriculture and a threat to human and animal health and welfare in endemic areas (González et al. Reference González, Esteban, Bargues, Valero, Ortiz, Náquira and Mas-Coma2011)

The majority of anthelmintic resistance studies focus on nematode species, where association of mutations in target genes are made with a resistance phenotype. The assumption that resistance is conferred primarily by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or deletions in the coding regions of target genes has advanced our understanding for some parasite:drug interactions, such as benzimidazole resistance in Haemonchus contortus, but is proving to be a less effective approach for other parasite:drug combinations (Gilleard, Reference Gilleard2006). The potential for anthelmintic resistance to be complex and multigenic in nature, differing between parasite species and/or isolates of the same species, and involving yet unidentified genes as potential candidates, identifies the need for alternative approaches.

In this review, we discuss a novel genetic mapping approach to identify the major genetic loci involved in conferring TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica. In order to appreciate this approach it is first necessary to review the current knowledge of TCBZ resistance mechanisms in F. hepatica based on either candidate gene approaches or descriptive studies of parasites exposed to TCBZ in vivo or in vitro. Given that the approach we have taken relies on genome-wide markers to map resistance-conferring genes it is important to consider the availability of genomic and genetic resources for this parasite.

TCBZ RESISTANCE

Since its introduction in the 1980s the benzimidazole, TCBZ, has been adopted worldwide as the drug of choice for controlling F. hepatica infection in livestock and humans. Whilst other drugs can be used to target parasitic stages later in the fluke life cycle TCBZ remains the only drug available for the control of acute fasciolosis due to its efficacy against flukes less than four weeks old. However, this heavy reliance on TCBZ to treat sheep and cattle in particular, has resulted in resistance to TCBZ, which was first reported in fluke populations in Australia in 1995 and is now well established in the Netherlands, Ireland, Spain and all UK regions (Fairweather, Reference Fairweather2005; Brennan et al. Reference Brennan, Fairweather, Trudgett, Hoey, McCoy, McConville, Meaney, Robinson, McFerran, Ryan, Lanusse, Mottier, Alvarez, Solana, Virkel and Brophy2007). In the UK, our own studies in England and Wales showed that TCBZ resistance was evident on seven out of 25 farms analysed (Daniel et al. Reference Daniel, van Dijk, Jenkins, Akca, Mearns and Williams2012). The movement of livestock around the country facilitates the spread of TCBZ resistant (TCBZ-R) F. hepatica populations throughout the UK with the potential for considerable economic consequences to livestock production such as that recently reported by Sargison and others (Sargison et al. Reference Sargison, Wilson, Penny and Bartley2010; Sargison and Scott, Reference Sargison and Scott2011). In humans, TCBZ is the only drug used to treat fascioliasis, the zoonotic disease caused by infection with F. hepatica, and the first report of the failure of TCBZ to treat human F. hepatica infection has now emerged (Winkelhagen et al. Reference Winkelhagen, Mank, de Vries and Soetekouw2012).

Detecting TCBZ resistance

The issue of guidelines for the detection of anthelmintic resistance in nematodes has been promoted by the World Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Parasitology (WAAVP) and remains an active discussion; however, in the case of F. hepatica no gold standard exists for defining an isolate based on its drug sensitivity in vivo or in vitro. A comprehensive review of methods for detecting resistance falls outside the scope of this article but key considerations in this area involve the ongoing evaluation of methods applicable to the live host such as the faecal egg count reduction tests (FECRT) and coproantigen reduction test (Flanagan et al. Reference Flanagan, Edgar, Gordon, Hanna, Brennan and Fairweather2011a, Reference Flanagan, Edgar, Forster, Gordon, Hanna, McCoy, Brennan and Fairweatherb; Daniel et al. Reference Daniel, van Dijk, Jenkins, Akca, Mearns and Williams2012). Whilst these approaches are open to interpretation, multiple studies demonstrate TCBZ efficacy in vivo using treatment and necropsy approaches. These studies involve either a natural host, commonly sheep (for example see Coles et al. Reference Coles, Rhodes and Stafford2000, Reference Coles and Stafford2001; McConville et al. Reference McConville, Brennan, Flanagan, Edgar, Hanna, McCoy, Gordon, Castillo, Hernandez-Campos and Fairweather2009; Gordon et al. Reference Gordon, Zadoks and Skuce2012) or the rat ‘model host’ system (for example see Meaney et al. Reference Meaney, Allister, McKinstry, McLaughlin, Brennan, Forbes and Fairweather2007). In most cases the in vivo efficacy of drugs is established using a procedure of experimental infection (∼200 and ∼20 metacercariae for sheep and rats, respectively) followed by TCBZ treatment, typically at 12 weeks post-infection, to establish efficacy against adult stages. Necropsy is performed typically at 14 days post-treatment followed by recovery of surviving adult fluke for enumeration and descriptive studies. Variations to these protocols exist when drug efficacy against different stages of the parasite and/or TCBZ metabolites are under evaluation (Halferty et al. Reference Halferty, Brennan, Hanna, Edgar, Meaney, McConville, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2008, Reference Halferty, Brennan, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2009). An important consideration of the in vitro or in vivo descriptive studies reporting structural or morphological changes in TCBZ-R vs triclabendazole-susceptible (TCBZ-S) F. hepatica is the question of the long-term effect of these alterations over the course of infection. Even though steps were taken recently to demonstrate the validity of these changes in an in vivo system (Devine et al. Reference Devine, Brennan, Lanusse, Alvarez, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2012), given that the flukes were still alive post-treatment these may merely reflect transient changes in fluke architecture in response to the drug from which the flukes may well recover. More recently, an in vitro tool for the diagnosis of TCBZ resistance was reported (Fairweather et al. Reference Fairweather, McShane, Shaw, Ellison, O'Hagan, York, Trudgett and Brennan2012), but this is proving difficult to take beyond a proof of concept due to the toxicity of DMSO required to dissolve TCBZ at the higher concentrations (Hartley, personal communication).

Mechanisms of TCBZ resistance

Understanding the basis of TCBZ resistance has been hampered because, despite extensive investigation, the mode of action of TCBZ remains unresolved. Extensive investigations into the mechanisms of TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica have been the focus of other reviews (Fairweather, Reference Fairweather2005, Reference Fairweather2009, Reference Fairweather2011) and are only outlined here.

Several α− and β-tubulin isotypes are expressed in adult flukes but, in contrast to the situation with ruminant nematodes and benzimidazole drugs, there is a lack of evidence to support the binding of TCBZ to tubulin molecules or a role for tubulin mutations in TCBZ resistance (Ryan et al. Reference Ryan, Hoey, Trudgett, Fairweather, Fuchs, Robinson, Chambers, Timson, Ryan, Fetwell, Ivens, Bentley and Johnston2008). There is more convincing evidence of a role for the altered uptake, efflux and metabolism of TCBZ (Alvarez et al. Reference Alvarez, Solana, Mottier, Virkel, Fairweather and Lanusse2005). It has been shown in vitro that metabolism of TCBZ to the active metabolites TCBZ.SO and TCBZ.SO2 occurs to a greater extent in TCBZ-R than TCBZ-S flukes (Robinson et al. Reference Robinson, Lawson, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2004; Alvarez et al. Reference Alvarez, Solana, Mottier, Virkel, Fairweather and Lanusse2005). A role for drug metabolism was further supported by detailed electron microscopic analysis of adult flukes incubated in vitro with combinations of TCBZ and TBCZ.SO and inhibitors of the cytochrome P450 (Devine et al. Reference Devine, Brennan, Lanusse, Alvarez, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2010a, Reference Devine, Brennan, Lanusse, Alvarez, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2011) and flavin monooxygenase metabolic pathways (Devine, Reference Devine, Brennan, Lanusse, Alvarez, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2010b). More recently, this has been demonstrated in an in vivo model system (Devine et al. Reference Devine, Brennan, Lanusse, Alvarez, Trudgett, Hoey and Fairweather2012). Drug efflux mechanisms have been highlighted as one of several potential contributory factors to TCBZ resistance (Alvarez et al. Reference Alvarez, Solana, Mottier, Virkel, Fairweather and Lanusse2005; Mottier et al. Reference Mottier, Alvarez, Fairweather and Lanusse2006) and are a current focus of anthelmintic resistance studies in other helminths (Prichard and Roulet, Reference Prichard and Roulet2007; James and Davey, Reference James and Davey2009). Possible transporters for drug efflux include the P-glycoproteins (Pgps), of which a homologue has been identified in F. hepatica, although this form is only expressed in immature flukes (Reed et al. Reference Reed, Spithill, Strugnell and Panaccio1998). A recent study reported single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the nucleotide-binding domain of Pgp genes that differed between TCBZ-S and TCBZ-R adult F. hepatica from the field (Wilkinson et al. Reference Wilkinson, Law, Hoey, Fairweather, Brennan and Trudgett2012). Given the small number of flukes examined in the study (n=3 TCBZ-R and n=1 TCBZ-S), the significance of these SNPs remains to be determined. Overall these biochemical results suggest that any combination of several potential pathways may be responsible for TCBZ resistance (Brennan et al. Reference Brennan, Fairweather, Trudgett, Hoey, McCoy, McConville, Meaney, Robinson, McFerran, Ryan, Lanusse, Mottier, Alvarez, Solana, Virkel and Brophy2007).

GENOMIC, TRANSCRIPTOMIC AND PROTEOMIC RESOURCES FOR F. HEPATICA

The limitations of candidate gene-association studies and the value of employing genetic and genomic approaches to anthelmintic resistance have already been highlighted (Gilleard, Reference Gilleard2006). This latter approach, combined with an understanding of the population genetics of a parasite offers an attractive complementary approach to understanding how parasites develop resistance. The added advantage is that not only are genes identified in a non-biased way but their relative importance to the resistant phenotype can also be assessed. In the case of the ruminant nematode H. contortus, these studies are already yielding interesting insights into the biology of this parasite and drug resistance mechanisms in particular (Redman et al. Reference Redman, Sargison, Whitelaw, Jackson, Morrison, Bartley and Gilleard2012). In order for this approach to be relevant to F. hepatica it is important to review the genomic and genetic tools available and identify the need for further development of these resources.

TCBZ has been reported to induce a broad range of effects, with several potential modes of action (Brennan et al. Reference Brennan, Fairweather, Trudgett, Hoey, McCoy, McConville, Meaney, Robinson, McFerran, Ryan, Lanusse, Mottier, Alvarez, Solana, Virkel and Brophy2007; Chemale et al. Reference Chemale, Perally, LaCourse, Prescott, Jones, Ward, Meaney, Hoey, Brennan, Fairweather, Trudgett and Brophy2010). Investigating the nature of resistance to this anthelmintic therefore requires a broad analysis of these helminths, using all available genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic datasets. To date, several studies have been carried out using proteomic tools to investigate the secretome of F. hepatica (Jefferies et al. Reference Jefferies, Campbell, van Rossum, Barrett and Brophy2001; Morphew et al. Reference Morphew, Wright, LaCourse, Woods and Brophy2007; Robinson et al. Reference Robinson, Menon, Donnelly, Dalton and Ranganathan2009), including the response to TCBZ (Chemale et al. Reference Chemale, Perally, LaCourse, Prescott, Jones, Ward, Meaney, Hoey, Brennan, Fairweather, Trudgett and Brophy2010) and ‘virulence’-associated proteins (reviewed by McVeigh et al. Reference McVeigh, Maule, Dalton and Robinson2012). One study integrated transcriptomic and proteomic data to analyse the potential differences in expression during migration of F. hepatica parasites in the liver (Robinson et al. Reference Robinson, Menon, Donnelly, Dalton and Ranganathan2009), but it was limited by the lack of available mRNA and EST sequences from Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute (WTSI; Table 1). In-depth sequencing of the F. hepatica and F. gigantica transcriptomes using next-generation sequencing technologies has only recently been carried out (Young et al. Reference Young, Halls, Jex, Cantacessi and Gasser2010, Reference Young, Jex, Cantacessi, Halls, Campbell, Spithill, Tangkawattana, Tangkawattana, Laha and Gasser2011; Paterson et al. unpublished data; Table 1). Young and colleagues interrogated the transcriptomic data using Gene Ontology (GO) and metabolic pathways to identify key biological processes and pathways, and used data from closely related helminths to investigate potential Fasciola species-specific genes (Young et al. Reference Young, Halls, Jex, Cantacessi and Gasser2010, Reference Young, Jex, Cantacessi, Halls, Campbell, Spithill, Tangkawattana, Tangkawattana, Laha and Gasser2011). In-depth analysis of the Fasciola species transcriptome has been limited to date to specific gene families; for example, the SCP/TAPS proteins (Cantacessi et al. Reference Cantacessi, Hofmann, Young, Broder, Hall, Loukas and Gasser2012), the glutathione transferase superfamily (Morphew et al. Reference Morphew, Eccleston, Wilkinson, McGarry, Perally, Prescott, Ward, Williams, Paterson, Raman, Ravikumar, Khalid Saifullah, Abbas Abidi, McVeigh, Maule, Brophy and LaCourse2012) and cathepsins (Morphew et al. Reference Morphew, Wright, LaCourse, Porter, Barrett, Woods and Brophy2011). As these analyses develop they are likely to reveal interesting insights into parasite biology, including resistance mechanisms, and will provide platforms for the discovery of novel diagnostics, vaccines and drugs to support intervention strategies in the future.

Table 1. Currently available nucleotide sequence for F. hepatica

NEJ, Newly excysted juveniles; EST,expressed sequence tags; bp, base pairs; NA, Not Available; NK, Not Known, NYA, Not Yet Available.

Recently there has been increased interest in microRNAs (miRNAs) and their involvement in anthelmintic resistance (Devaney et al. Reference Devaney, Winter and Britton2010). One study investigating miRNAs in F. hepatica and F. gigantica identified 16 and 19 miRNAs, respectively in the two helminth datasets (Xu et al. Reference Xu, Ai, Fu, Nisbet, Liu, Chen, Zhou and Zhu2012). Only a small number of ESTs (WTSI) were used for analysis of potential targets of the miRNAs and the genome of the related helminth, Schistosoma japonicum, was used as a reference - both of which are likely to have limitations.

Such studies have highlighted the fact that to elucidate the nature of complex gene families, such as the cathepsins (McVeigh et al. Reference McVeigh, Maule, Dalton and Robinson2012), to identify species-specific sequences of interest and to map genes associated with TCBZ resistance, a F. hepatica genomic resource is essential. To date, no publically available Fasciola species genome sequence datasets are available, although several groups, including ourselves, are currently sequencing the F. hepatica and F. gigantica genomes (Table 1).

GENETIC RESOURCES FOR F. HEPATICA

Population genetic analyses are a vital component of anthelmintic resistance studies, facilitating our understanding of the origin, evolution and, most importantly, spread of resistance genes in populations (Gilleard and Beech, Reference Gilleard and Beech2007). An understanding of the geographical variation of F. hepatica will also allow interpretation of candidate gene-association studies. Given that Fasciola species undergo parthenogenesis and can both self- and cross-fertilize, they are an interesting and complex group of parasites in which to study population genetic structure and gene flow. This is compounded by the fact that there is a clonal expansion in the snail intermediate host and infection can occur in multiple mammalian definitive hosts, which may impact on the levels of gene flow, aggregation of transmission and parasitic load. All these factors affect the effective population size and the degree of inbreeding which in turn impacts on the spread of resistance genes.

Ribosomal and mitochondrial DNA markers

A number of randomly amplified genetic markers or protein electrophoresis methods has been developed and employed over the last 15 years to facilitate characterization and differentiation of F. hepatica and/or F. gigantica isolates (Li and Quiros Reference Li and Quiros2001; Vilas et al. Reference Vilas, Paniagua, Outeiral and Sanmartín2002; Vargas et al. Reference Vargas, Vega and González2003; Ramadan and Saber, Reference Ramadan and Saber2004; Aldemir, Reference Aldemir2006; McGarry et al. Reference McGarry, Ortiz, Hodgkinson, Goreish and Williams2007; Alasaad et al. Reference Alasaad, Li, Lin, Martín-Atance, Granados, Díez-Baños, Pérez and Zhu2008). The ability of these markers to determine population sub-structuring and/or genetic diversity remains either untested or is limited (Ellsworth et al. Reference Ellsworth, Rittenhouse and Honeycutt1993; Backeljau et al. Reference Backeljau, De Bruyn, De Wolf, Jordaens, Van Dongen, Verhagen and Winnepenninckx1995; Beveridge, Reference Beveridge1998; Vázquez-Prieto et al. Reference Vázquez-Prieto, Vilas, Mezo, González-Warleta, Ubeira and Paniagua2011). Ribosomal and mitochondrial DNA of Fasciola species offer a more promising region to exploit for studying heterogeneity.

Amplification of the entire 28S rDNA (∼4 kb) gene revealed few polymorphisms within F. hepatica and F. gigantica isolates from different geographical locations (Marcilla et al. unpublished data cited in Marcilla et al. Reference Marcilla, Bargues and Mas-Coma2002) however, a 618 bp region was subsequently developed as a PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism assay (PCR-RFLP) (Marcilla et al. Reference Marcilla, Bargues and Mas-Coma2002). Similarly the complete mitochondrial genome of F. hepatica (∼14·5 kb) was sequenced from two geographically distinct isolates (Australia and Salt Lake City, Table 1) but showed limited (<1%) intra-specific variation (Le et al. Reference Le, Blair and McManus2001). More recently a PCR-RFLP of the ribosomal ITS-1 sequence was used to determine heterogeneity of Fasciola species in Asian countries (Ichikawa and Itagaki, Reference Ichikawa and Itagaki2010). Other ribosomal regions, such as the ITS-2 rDNA, have been sequenced and compared amongst isolates of F. hepatica (Erensoy et al. Reference Erensoy, Kuk and Ozden2009); used to investigate the origin of triploidy in Fasciola species (Itagaki and Tsutsumi, Reference Itagaki and Tsutsumi1998) and to differentiate between F. hepatica, F. gigantica and intermediate forms of Fasciola species from sheep and cattle (Itagaki and Tsutsumi, Reference Itagaki and Tsutsumi1998; Ali et al. Reference Ali, Ai, Song, Ali, Lin, Seyni, Issa and Zhu2008). Detection of SNPs in fragments of a 28S rDNA gene region identified two basic lineages of F. hepatica and showed a distinct difference between north-eastern and south-eastern European isolates (Walker et al. Reference Walker, Prodöhl, Fletcher, Hanna, Kantzoura, Hoey and Trudgett2007; Teofanova et al. Reference Teofanova, Kantzoura, Walker, Radoslavov, Hristov, Theodoropoulos, Bankov and Trudgett2011). However, no explicit lineages or genetic structuring were identified in these isolates based on the β-tubulin 3 gene (Teofanova et al. Reference Teofanova, Kantzoura, Walker, Radoslavov, Hristov, Theodoropoulos, Bankov and Trudgett2011). Analysis of SNPs in NAD1 and COX1 genes from twenty locations across eastern Europe and western Asia revealed little genetic structuring between the two populations (eastern Europe and western Asia) possibly indicating high gene flow between them due to the migration of the definitive host (Semyenova et al. Reference Semyenova, Morozova, Chrisanfova, Gorokhov, Arkhipov, Moskvin, Movsessyan and Ryskov2006).

Despite its widespread popularity as a genetic marker there are limitations to using mitochondrial DNA such is its potential to undergo genetic recombination and positive selection, thus reducing its value as a neutral marker of population diversity (Galtier et al. Reference Galtier, Nabholz, Glémin and Hurst2009).

Microsatellite markers

In order to study the spread of anthelmintic resistance, biparentally inherited markers such as microsatellites offer a more comprehensive approach (Johnson et al. Reference Johnson, Webster, Adam, Buckland, Dawson and Keller2006). To date, few microsatellite markers have been identified for F. hepatica and have been limited in their application (Hurtrez-Boussès et al. Reference Hurtrez-Boussès, Durand, Jabbour-Zahab, Guégan, Meunier, Bargues, Mas-Coma and Renaud2004; Dar et al. Reference Dar, Amer, Courtioux and Dreyfuss2011). The most extensive study to date used a combination of microsatellites (n=4) and allozymes (n=8) to analyse populations of F. hepatica (n=587) from sheep and cattle in north west Spain (Vilas et al. Reference Vilas, Vásquez-Prieto and Paniagua2012). Existing studies have concentrated on the adult stage of the F. hepatica life cycle, often with only small sample sizes and have identified a need for greater analysis and development of genome-wide microsatellites, to unravel the population genetic structure of F. hepatica. From our genomic data we have developed a reliable new panel of ∼15 markers (Cwiklinski et al. unpublished data) to genetically profile adult parasites which we are using to determine the current population genetic structure of F. hepatica in the UK. In addition, a sub-panel of microsatellite markers (8 polymorphic loci; Cwiklinski et al. unpublished data) has been optimized to genotype batches of 50 metacercariae, miracidia and eggs. This approach offers significant promise for population genetic and molecular epidemiological studies of F. hepatica in animals and humans in the future, avoiding the need to passage cercariae through a host to produce adults for analysis as has been described for Schistosoma haematobium (Dabo et al. Reference Dabo, Durand, Morand, Diakite, Langand, Imbert-Establet, Doumbo and Jourdane1997) and Opisthorcis viverrini (Jex et al. Reference Jex, Young, Sripa, Hall, Scheerlinck, Laha, Sripa and Gasser2012; Laoprom et al. Reference Laoprom, Sithithaworn, Andrews, Ando, Laha, Klinbunga, Webster and Petney2012).

Application of population genetic markers to TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica

The application of genetic markers to explore the development and spread of resistance genes in F. hepatica is limited to just a few studies on a small number of parasites. A 510 bp fragment of the 28S rDNA gene was sequenced for adult F. hepatica, from sheep in northwest Spain, which were either fully susceptible to albendazole (ALB), clorsulon (CLOR) and TCBZ (n=10); ALB/CLOR resistant (n=5); ALB/TCBZ resistant (n=5); or ALB/CLOR/TCBZ resistant (n=5). SNPs were detected but their significance in resistance remains unknown (Vara-Del Río et al. Reference Vara-Del Río, Villa, Martinez-Valladares and Rojo-Vázquez2007). An alternative RFLP approach using three loci of the mitochondrial genome was used to profile genetically small numbers of adult F. hepatica from sheep and cattle from several geographical locations and from two laboratory isolates; Fairhurst (TCBZ-S, n=18 fluke) and Oberon (TCBZ-R, n=18 fluke) (Walker et al. Reference Walker, Prodöhl, Fletcher, Hanna, Kantzoura, Hoey and Trudgett2007). The RFLP study was extended to F. hepatica (n=422) from cattle (n=29) displaying either a TCBZ-S or -R phenotype (Walker et al. Reference Walker, Johnston, Hoey, Fairweather, Borgsteede, Gaasenbeek, Prodöhl and Trudgett2011). Whilst it is tempting to speculate about how these studies impact on our understanding of the mechanisms and spread of TCBZ resistance (Walker et al. Reference Walker, Johnston, Hoey, Fairweather, Borgsteede, Gaasenbeek, Prodöhl and Trudgett2011; Vilas et al. Reference Vilas, Vásquez-Prieto and Paniagua2012) more comprehensive analyses are required to further our understanding of how resistant genes emerge and once established, how they flow both within and amongst different mammalian hosts from different geographical locations.

F. HEPATICA ISOLATES AND ANTHELMINTIC RESISTANCE STUDIES

A number of in vivo and in vitro studies has identified biological differences in isolates and genetic analysis showing that there is considerable heterogeneity of fluke populations in the field, both of which are important considerations when interpreting experimental studies. The wider liver fluke research community relies on a small number of providers of F. hepatica metacercariae (for example, Baldwin Aquatics, Oregon, US) and, as identified in a recent review, few isolates of F. hepatica are available for drug efficacy studies (Fairweather, Reference Fairweather2011). A summary of the isolates currently available for resistance studies can be found in Table 2. Historically, studies on TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica have relied on four laboratory isolates, the TCBZ–S Fairhurst and Cullompton isolates and the TCBZ-R, Sligo and Oberon isolates (Table 2). All of these isolates have been maintained in the laboratory for more than a decade and the serial passage required for their maintenance, in particular the clonal expansion in the snail, plus the self fertilization of adult parasites, is likely to render the isolate more homogenous with time and potentially less relevant to the field. To ensure the laboratory isolate is representative of the original population requires active steps to derive metacercariae from multiple miracidial:snail infections using eggs recovered from multiple hosts. Little reference is made to the production of metacercariae in any study and studies of population genetics on laboratory isolates are scarce. The observation of a single haplotype in 18 adult fluke of the Fairhurst isolate is consistent with increased homogeneity over time (Walker et al. Reference Walker, Prodöhl, Fletcher, Hanna, Kantzoura, Hoey and Trudgett2007) as is the lack of heterogeneity observed in the Shrewsbury fluke isolates (Cwiklinski, unpublished data). Whilst in vivo infection and drug-treatment studies serve to confirm an isolate's phenotype, the question of their relevance in a field context still remains. The maintenance of the widely used TCBZ-S Cullompton isolate has resulted in an isolate which is aspermic, where there is no meiosis and which is also triploid (Fletcher et al. Reference Fletcher, Hoey, Orr, Trudgett, Fairweather and Robinson2004); a situation which contrasts with diploid flukes found in naturally infected hosts (Fletcher et al. Reference Fletcher, Hoey, Orr, Trudgett, Fairweather and Robinson2004; Reblánová et al. Reference Reblánová, Špakulová, Orosová, Králová-Hromadová, Bazsalovicsová and Rajský2011; Beesley, unpublished data). The fact that a fluke isolate cannot be archived at any point necessitates serial passage but it is important that due consideration of this process is given by academic and commercial suppliers of metacercariae.

Table 2. A summary of the provenance of F. hepatica isolates available for TCBZ resistance studies

a References are cited for studies reporting resistance status, if no published studies available then personal communications cited. TCBZ-S, triclabendazole susceptible; TCBZ-R, triclabendazole resistant; CLOR-R(+IVM) , clorsulon resistant (given as combination with ivermectin); Diploid, 2n=20; Triploid, 3n=30; week, week; pi, post infection; ND, Not determined.

MAPPING TCBZ RESISTANCE GENES IN F. HEPATICA

Currently underway in our laboratory is a project which employs genome-wide SNPs to map TCBZ resistance genes in genetically manipulated F. hepatica (see Fig. 2). The advantage of this approach is that no assumption is made about the mechanisms of TCBZ resistance and our findings will be directly relevant in the current UK field situation. The approach controls for the complex reproductive biology and demography of F. hepatica that would complicate a study of field isolates alone. A draft genome sequence for F. hepatica has been produced in order to support SNP discovery and the application of genome-wide SNPs to map regions of the genome associated with resistance is underway. In order to dissect the spread of genes associated with TCBZ resistance we are taking an experimental approach by crossing TCBZ-S and TCBZ-R clones of F. hepatica and mapping TCBZ-R genes through subsequent F1 and F2 populations (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the experimental approach used to map TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica. The experiment is divided into three phases: (1) the production of clonal infections; (2) the production of F1 recombinants and (3) the production and phenotyping of F2 recombinants. Concurrent production of a genomic scaffold of F. hepatica supports discovery of SNPs in parental clones to allow association of SNPs in the pooled genotyping of phenotyped F2 recombinants either exposed or unexposed to TCBZ. The identification of F1 recombinants is performed using genome-derived microsatellites as neutral markers of parental clones. Metacercariae from self-fertilization or parthenogenesis, which display parental markers only, are shown for completeness but are not used for subsequent production of F2 recombinants. TCBZ, triclabendazole; TCBZ-S, triclabendazole susceptible; TCBZ-R, triclabendazole resistant.

A draft F. hepatica genome has been generated by a combination of Roche 454 and Illumina sequence data and assembled into contigs and scaffolds. Annotation is underway, using automated pipelines to generate gene models based on the F. hepatica transcriptome and schistosome protein sequence. Even in this rough form, this draft genome will greatly improve the sequence resources available to the research community (Table 1), although generating improved functional annotation will likely be a community effort requiring significant investment.

To ensure use of isolates representative of the current UK field situation and to avoid issues associated with laboratory isolates we have identified TCBZ-R field isolates from south Wales and northwest England, UK where high levels of TCBZ resistance have been reported (Daniel et al. Reference Daniel, van Dijk, Jenkins, Akca, Mearns and Williams2012). Following confirmation of their TCBZ resistance status in experimental infections in sheep (in collaboration with Ridgeway Research), we have exploited the life-cycle of F. hepatica to generate clonal lines of TCBZ-R and TCBZ-S isolates. Metacercariae from single TCBZ-resistant miracidial:snail infections have been used to infect sheep concurrently infected with a clone of the TCBZ-S Shrewsbury isolate (Table 2). Key to the success of this approach is the ability to distinguish F1 and F2 progeny that have undergone genetic recombination. These experiments are complicated by the fact that flukes can both self- and cross-fertilize, although there is evidence that cross fertilization predominates (Hanna et al. Reference Hanna, Edgar, Moffett, McConnell, Fairweather, Brennan, Trudgett, Hoey, Cromie, Taylor and Daniel2008). A sub-panel of 8 microsatellites (Cwiklinski, unpublished data) has been used to profile parental clones genetically and is being employed as neutral markers to track the genotypes of the recombinant progeny and allow subsequent identification of F1 and F2 recombinants. A snail infected with one miracidium can produce up to 600 cercariae, all genetic clones of the infecting miracidium, allowing a proportion of cercariae to be genotyped to identify F1 recombinants but leaving sufficient metacercariae to infect a host for the purposes of producing F2.

Ultimately, the project relies on comparing the frequency of SNP alleles derived from the resistant parental clone and linked to the TCBZ resistance locus (or loci) in TCBZ exposed parasites (only resistant parasites) relative to untreated controls (a mixture of resistant and susceptible parasites). Unlinked SNPs (neutral loci) will show no difference in frequency between TCBZ and control parasites. Pooled genotyping on a number of replicates followed by analysis of allele frequencies to associate SNPs (and hence genomic regions) to TCBZ-resistance will be performed on F2 populations. Once SNPs are identified they will be mapped to the draft F. hepatica genome sequence to identify contigs and scaffolds (and ultimately genes) associated with TCBZ resistance.

FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

The identification of genomic regions associated with TCBZ resistance will enable future work to investigate the biochemical function of candidate resistance genes and to perform finer-scale disequilibrium mapping of resistance in field samples. The genome-wide scan for SNPs linked to TCBZ resistance will highlight many genomic scaffolds and may determinate whether these scaffolds are physically linked, i.e. whether there is a single TCBZ resistance locus or several loci, and independent validation for the association between genomic regions and TCBZ resistance. Whilst an initial analysis of the predicted coding sequences lying within the contigs can be performed to determine whether they contain any obvious candidates for TCBZ resistance, the more detailed molecular analysis of candidate resistance loci will form the basis of future work. This newly available genomic resource, together with the recent developments in functional genomics tools such as RNAi and luciferase reporter gene activity assays (McGonigle et al. Reference McGonigle, Mousley, Marks, Brennan, Dalton, Spithill, Day and Maule2008; Rinaldi et al. Reference Rinaldi, Morales, Cancela, Castillo, Brindley and Tort2008) will promote studies at the molecular level to further facilitate our understanding of these important parasites.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank Dr James LaCourse for his contribution to the writing of the BBSRC project to map TCBZ resistance, Miss Katherine Allen for her work maintaining the snail colonies and fluke isolates at the University of Liverpool and Mrs Catherine Hartley for her work with the egg hatch assay and parasite recovery. We would like to thank Ms Paula Martin, Mr Oliver Gladstone and staff at Ridgeway Research for their support and advice with experimental infection and parasite maintenance. We would like to thank Roger Daniel and Rowan Wood at the AHVLA for their support in the identification of TCBZ-R field isolates.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT

The work described here was generously supported by the BBSRC grant number BB/I002480/1. Ms Nicola Beesley is a PhD student funded by the Institute of Infection and Global Health, University of Liverpool.

References

REFERENCES

Alasaad, S., Li, Q. Y., Lin, Q., Martín-Atance, P., Granados, J. E., Díez-Baños, P., Pérez, J. M. and Zhu, X. Q. (2008). Genetic variability among Fasciola hepatica samples from different host species and geographical localities in Spain revealed by the novel SRAP marker. Parasitology Research 103, 181186. doi: 10.1007/s00436-008-0952-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aldemir, O. S. (2006). Differentiation of cattle and sheep originated Fasciola hepatica by RAPD-PCR. Revue de Médecine Vétérinaire 157, 6567.Google Scholar
Ali, H., Ai, L., Song, H. Q., Ali, S., Lin, R. Q., Seyni, B., Issa, G. and Zhu, X. Q. (2008). Genetic characterisation of Fasciola samples from different host species and geographical localities revealed the existence of F. hepatica and F. gigantica in Niger. Parasitology Research 102, 10211024. doi: 10.1007/s00436-007-0870-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvarez, L. L., Solana, H. D., Mottier, M. L., Virkel, G. L., Fairweather, I. and Lanusse, C. E. (2005). Altered drug influx/efflux and enhanced metabolic activity in triclabendazole-resistant liver flukes. Parasitology 131, 501510. doi: 10.1017/S0031182005007997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alvarez-Sanchez, M. A., Mainar-Jaime, R. C., Perez-Garcia, J. and Rojo-Vazquez, F. A. (2006). Resistance of Fasciola hepatica to triclabendazole and albendazole in sheep in Spain. Veterinary Record 159, 424425. doi: 10.1136/vr.159.13.424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Backeljau, T., De Bruyn, L., De Wolf, H., Jordaens, K., Van Dongen, S., Verhagen, R. and Winnepenninckx, B. (1995). Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and parsimony methods. Cladistics 11, 119130. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1995.tb00083.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beveridge, I. (1998). Allozyme electrophoresis – difficulties encountered in studies on helminths. International Journal for Parasitology 28, 973979. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7519(98)00047-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boray, J. C. (1990). Drug resistance in Fasciola hepatica. In Resistance of Parasites to Antiparasitic Drugs (ed. Boray, J. C., Martin, P. J. and Roush, R. T.), pp. 5160. MSD AGVET, Rahway, NJ.Google Scholar
Brennan, G. P., Fairweather, I., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E., McCoy, , McConville, M., Meaney, M., Robinson, M., McFerran, N., Ryan, L., Lanusse, C., Mottier, L., Alvarez, L., Solana, H., Virkel, G. and Brophy, P. M. (2007). Understanding triclabendazole resistance. Experimental and Molecular Pathology 82, 104109. doi: 10.1016/jyexmp.2007.01.009X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cantacessi, C., Hofmann, A., Young, N. D., Broder, U., Hall, R. S., Loukas, A. and Gasser, R. B. (2012). Insights into SCP/TAPS proteins of liver flukes based on large-scale bioinformatic analyses of sequence datasets. PLoS ONE 7, e31164. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charlier, J., Hostens, M., Jacobs, J., Van Ranst, B., Duchateau, L. and Vercruysse, J. (2012). Integrating fasciolosis control in the dry cow management: the effect of closantel treatment on milk production. PLoS ONE 7, 8. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0043216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chemale, G., Perally, S., LaCourse, E. J., Prescott, M. C., Jones, L. M., Ward, D., Meaney, M., Hoey, E., Brennan, G. P., Fairweather, I., Trudgett, A. and Brophy, P. M. (2010). Comparative proteomic analysis of triclabendazole response in the liver fluke Fasciola hepatica. Journal of Proteome Research 9, 49404951. doi: 10.1021/pr1000785.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Claridge, J., Diggle, P., McCann, C. M., Mulcahy, G., Flynn, R., McNair, J., Strain, S., Welsh, M., Baylis, M. and Williams, D. J. (2012). Fasciola hepatica is associated with the failure to detect bovine tuberculosis in dairy cattle. Nature Communications 3, 853. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coles, G. C., Rhodes, A. C. and Stafford, K. A. (2000). Activity of closantel against triclabendazole-resistant Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Record 146, 504. doi: 10.1136/vr.146.17.504-a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coles, G. C. and Stafford, K. A. (2001). Activity of oxyclozanide, nitroxynil, clorsulon and albendazole against adult triclabendazole-resistant Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Record 148, 723724. doi: 10.1136/vr.148.23.723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dabo, A., Durand, P., Morand, S., Diakite, M., Langand, J., Imbert-Establet, D., Doumbo, O. and Jourdane, J. (1997). Distribution and genetic diversity of Schistosoma haematobium within its bulinid intermediate hosts in Mali. Acta Tropica 66, 1526. doi: 10.1016/S0001-706X(97)00670-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daniel, R., van Dijk, J., Jenkins, T., Akca, A., Mearns, R. and Williams, D. J. L. (2012). A composite faecal egg count reduction test to detect resistance to tricalbendazole in Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Record 171, 153. doi: 10.1136/vr.100588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dar, Y., Amer, S., Courtioux, B. and Dreyfuss, G. (2011). Microsatellite analysis of Fasciola spp. in Egypt. Parasitology Research 109, 17411744. doi: 10.1007/s00436-011-2520-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devaney, E., Winter, A. D. and Britton, C. (2010). microRNAs: a role in drug resistance in parasitic nematodes? Trends in Parasitology 26, 428433. doi: 10.1016/j.pt.2010.05.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devine, C., Brennan, G. P., Lanusse, C. E., Alvarez, L. I., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. and Fairweather, I. (2010 a). Enhancement of the drug susceptibility of a triclabendazole-resistant isolate of Fasciola hepatica using the metabolic inhibitor ketoconazole. Parasitology Research 107, 337353. doi: 10.1007/s00436-010-1866-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devine, C., Brennan, G. P., Lanusse, C. E., Alvarez, L. I., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. and Fairweather, I. (2010 b). Potentiation of triclabendazole sulphoxide-induced tegumental disruption by methimazole in a triclabendazole-resistant isolate of Fasciola hepatica. Parasitology Research 106, 13511363. doi: 10.1007/s00436-010-1806-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, C., Brennan, G. P., Lanusse, C. E., Alvarez, L. I., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. and Fairweather, I. (2011). Erratum to: inhibition of triclabendazole metabolism in vitro by ketoconazole increases disruption to the tegument of a triclabendazole-resistant isolate of Fasciola hepatica. Parasitology Research 109, 12091223. doi: 10.1007/s00436-011-2554-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, C., Brennan, G. P., Lanusse, C. E., Alvarez, L. I., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. and Fairweather, I. (2012). Potentiation of triclabendazole action in vivo against a triclabendazole-resistant isolate of Fasciola hepatica following its co-administration with the metabolic inhibitor, ketoconazole. Veterinary Parasitology 184, 3747. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.08.006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellsworth, D. L., Rittenhouse, K. D. and Honeycutt, R. L. (1993). Artifactual variation in randomly amplified polymorphic DNA banding patterns. Biotechniques 14, 214217.Google ScholarPubMed
Erensoy, A., Kuk, S. and Ozden, M. (2009). Genetic identification of Fasciola hepatica by ITS-2 sequence of nuclear ribosomal DNA in Turkey. Parasitology Research 105, 407412. doi: 10.1007/s00436-009-1399-8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairweather, I. (2005). Triclabendazole: new skills to unravel an old(ish) enigma. Journal of Helminthology 79, 227234. doi: 10.1079/JOH2005298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairweather, I. (2009). Triclabendazole progress report, 2005–2009: an advancement of learning? Journal of Helminthology 83, 139150. doi: 10.1017/S0022149X09321173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairweather, I. (2011). Liver fluke isolates: a question of provenance. Veterinary Parasitology 176, 18. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.12.011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairweather, I., McShane, D. D., Shaw, L., Ellison, S. E., O'Hagan, N. T., York, E. A., Trudgett, A. and Brennan, G. P. (2012). Development of an egg hatch assay for the diagnosis of triclabendazole resistance in Fasciola hepatica: Proof of concept. Veterinary Parasitology 183, 249259. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.07.023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flanagan, A., Edgar, H. W. J., Forster, F., Gordon, A., Hanna, R. E. B., McCoy, M., Brennan, G. P. and Fairweather, I. (2011 b). Standardisation of a coproantigen reduction test (CRT) protocol for the diagnosis of resistance to triclabendazole in Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Parasitology 176, 3442. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.10.037.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flanagan, A., Edgar, H. W. J., Gordon, A., Hanna, R. E. B., Brennan, G. P. and Fairweather, I. (2011 a). Comparison of two assays, a faecal egg count reduction test (FECRT) and a coproantigen reduction test (CRT), for the diagnosis of resistance to triclabendazole in Fasciola hepatica in sheep. Veterinary Parasitology 176, 170176. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.10.057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, H. L., Hoey, E. M., Orr, N., Trudgett, A., Fairweather, I. and Robinson, M. W. (2004). The occurrence and significance of triploidy in the liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica. Parasitology 128, 6972. doi: 10.1017/S003118200300427X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, N. J., White, P. C., McClean, C. J., Marion, G., Evans, A. and Hutchings, M. R. (2011). Predicting impacts of climate change on Fasciola hepatica risk. PLoS ONE 6:e16126. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaasenbeek, C. P. H., Moll, L., Cornelissen, J. B. W. J., Vellema, P. and Borgsteede, F. H. M. (2001). An experimental study on triclabendazole resistance of Fasciola hepatica in sheep. Veterinary Parasitology 95, 3743. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4017(00)00413-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galtier, N., Nabholz, B., Glémin, S. and Hurst, G. D. D. (2009). Mitochondrial DNA as a marker of molecular diversity: a reappraisal. Molecular Ecology 18, 45414550. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04380.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilleard, J. (2006). Understanding anthelmintic resistance: the need for genomics and genetics. International Journal for Parasitology 36, 12271239. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2006.06.010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilleard, J. S. and Beech, R. N. (2007). Population genetics of anthelmintic resistance in parasitic nematodes. Parasitology 134, 11331146. doi: 10.1017/S0031182007000066.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
González, L. C., Esteban, J. G., Bargues, M. D., Valero, M. A., Ortiz, P., Náquira, C. and Mas-Coma, S. (2011). Hyperendemic human fascioliasis in Andean valleys: an altitudinal transect analysis in children of Cajamarca province. Peru Acta Tropica 120, 119129. doi: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2011.07.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, D., Zadoks, R. and Skuce, P. (2012). Confirmation of triclabendazole resistance in liver fluke in the UK. Veterinary Record 171, 159160. doi: 10.1136/vr.e5381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halferty, L., Brennan, G. P., Hanna, R. E., Edgar, H. W., Meaney, M. M., McConville, M., Trudgett, A., Hoey, L. and Fairweather, I. (2008). Tegumental surface changes in juvenile Fasciola hepatica in response to treatment in vivo with triclabendazole. Veterinary Parasitology 155, 4958. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.04.011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halferty, L., Brennan, G. P., Trudgett, A., Hoey, L. and Fairweather, I. (2009). Relative activity of triclabendazole metabolites against the liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Parasitology 159, 126138. doi: 10.1016/j,vetpar.2008.10.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanna, R. E. B., Edgar, H., Moffett, D., McConnell, S., Fairweather, I., Brennan, G. P., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. M., Cromie, L., Taylor, S. M. and Daniel, R. (2008). Fasciola hepatica: histology of the testis in egg producing adults of several laboratory-maintained isolates grown to maturity in cattle and sheep and in flukes from naturally infected hosts. Veterinary Parasitology 157, 222234. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.07.022.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurtrez-Boussès, S., Durand, P., Jabbour-Zahab, R., Guégan, J. F., Meunier, C., Bargues, M. D., Mas-Coma, S. and Renaud, F. (2004). Isolation and characterization of microsatellite markers in the liver fluke (Fasciola hepatica). Molecular Ecology Notes 4, 689690. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00786.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ichikawa, M. and Itagaki, T. (2010). Discrimination of the ITS1 types of Fasciola spp. based on a PCR-RFLP method. Parasitology Research 106, 757761. doi: 10.1007/s00436-010-1724-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Itagaki, T. and Tsutsumi, K. (1998). Triploid form of Fasciola in Japan: genetic relationships between Fasciola hepatica and Fasciola gigantica determined by ITS-2 sequence of nuclear rDNA. International Journal for Parasitology 28, 777781. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7519(98)00037-X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
James, C. E. and Davey, M. W. (2009). Increased expression of ABC transport proteins is associated with ivermectin resistance in the model nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. International Journal for Parasitology 39, 213220. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2008.06.009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jefferies, J. R., Campbell, A. M., van Rossum, A. J., Barrett, J. and Brophy, P. M. (2001). Proteomic analysis of Fasciola hepatica excretory-secretory products. Proteomics 1, 11281132. doi: 10.1002/1615-9861(200109)1:9<1128::AID-PROT1128>3.0.CO;2-0.3.0.CO;2-0>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jex, A. R., Young, N. D., Sripa, J., Hall, R. S., Scheerlinck, J. P., Laha, T., Sripa, B. and Gasser, R. B. (2012). Molecular changes in Opisthorchis viverrini (Southeast Asian liver fluke) during the transition from the juvenile to the adult stage. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 6, e1916. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P. C. D., Webster, L. M. I., Adam, A., Buckland, R., Dawson, D. A. and Keller, L. F. (2006). Abundant variation in microsatellites of the parasitic nematode Trichostrongylus tenuis and linkage to a tandem repeat. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology 148, 210218. doi: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2006.04.011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laoprom, N., Sithithaworn, P., Andrews, R. H., Ando, K., Laha, T., Klinbunga, S., Webster, J. P., Petney, T. N. (2012). Population genetic structuring in Opisthorchis viverrini over various spatial scales in Thailand and Lao PDR. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases 6, e1906. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001906.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le, T. H., Blair, D. and McManus, D. P. (2001). Complete DNA sequence and gene organization of the mitochondrial genome of the liverfluke, Fasciola hepatica L. (Platyhelminthes; Trematoda). Parasitology 123, 609621. doi: 10.1017/S0031182001008733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, G. and Quiros, C. F. (2001). Sequence-releated amplified polymorphism (SRAP), a new marker system based on a simple PCR reaction: its application to mapping and gene tagging in Brassica. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 103, 455461. doi: 10.1007/s001220100570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcilla, A., Bargues, M. D. and Mas-Coma, S. (2002). A PCR-RFLP assay for the distinction between Fasciola hepatica and Fasciola gigantica. Molecular and Cellular Probes 16, 327333. doi: 10.1006/mcpr.2002.0429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCann, C. M., Baylis, M. and Williams, D. J. (2010). Seroprevalence and spatial distribution of Fasciola hepatica-infected dairy herds in England and Wales. Veterinary Record 166, 612617. doi: 10.1136/vr.b4836.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McConville, M., Brennan, G. P., Flanagan, A., Edgar, H. W. J., Hanna, R. E. B., McCoy, M., Gordon, A. W., Castillo, R., Hernandez-Campos, A. and Fairweather, I. (2009). An evaluation of the efficacy of compound alpha and triclabendazole against two isolates of Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Parasitology 162, 7588. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.02.004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCoy, M. A., Fairweather, I., Brennan, G. P., Kenny, J. M., Elison, S. and Forbes, A. B. (2005). The efficacy of nitroxynil and triclabendazole administered synchronously against juvenile triclabendazole-resistant Fasciola hepatica in sheep. Research in Veterinary Science 78, 33. doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2005.02.001.Google Scholar
McGarry, J. W., Ortiz, P. L., Hodgkinson, J. E., Goreish, I. and Williams, D. J. L. (2007). PCR-based differentiation of Fasciola species (Trematoda: Fasciolidae), using primers based on RAPD-derived sequences. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 101, 415421. doi: 10.1179/136485907X176508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGonigle, L., Mousley, A., Marks, N. J., Brennan, G. P., Dalton, J. P., Spithill, T. W., Day, T. A. and Maule, A. G. (2008). The silencing of cysteine proteases in Fasciola hepatica newly excysted juveniles using RNA interference reduces gut penetration. International Journal for Parasitology 38, 149155. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2007.10.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McVeigh, P., Maule, A. G., Dalton, J. P. and Robinson, M. W. (2012). Fasciola hepatica virulence-associated cysteine peptidases: a systems biology perspective. Microbes and Infection 14, 301310. doi: 10.1016/j.micinf.2011.11.012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meaney, M., Allister, J., McKinstry, B., McLaughlin, K., Brennan, G. P., Forbes, A. B. and Fairweather, I. (2007). Fasciola hepatica: ultrastructural effects of a combination of triclabendazole and clorsulon against mature fluke. Parasitology Research 100, 10911104. doi: 10.1007/s00436-006-0378-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morphew, R. M., Eccleston, N., Wilkinson, T. J., McGarry, J., Perally, S., Prescott, M., Ward, D., Williams, D., Paterson, S., Raman, M., Ravikumar, G., Khalid Saifullah, M., Abbas Abidi, S. M., McVeigh, P., Maule, A. G., Brophy, P. M. and LaCourse, E. J. (2012). Proteomics and in silico approaches to extend understanding of the glutathione transferase superfamily of the tropical fluke Fasciola gigantica. Journal of Proteome Research 11, 58765889. doi: 10.1021/pr300654w.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morphew, R. M., Wright, H. A., LaCourse, E. J., Porter, J., Barrett, J., Woods, D. J. and Brophy, P. M. (2011). Towards delineating functions within the Fasciola secreted cathepsin I protease family by integrating in vivo based sub-proteomics and phylogenetics. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 5, e937. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000937.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morphew, R. M., Wright, H. A., LaCourse, E. J., Woods, D. J. and Brophy, P. M. (2007). Comparative proteomics of excretory-secretory proteins released by the liver fluke Fasciola hepatica in sheep host bile and during in vitro culture ex host. Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 6, 963972. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M600375-MCP200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mottier, L., Alvarez, L., Fairweather, I. and Lanusse, C. (2006). Resistance-induced changes in triclabendazole transport in Fasciola hepatica: ivermectin reversal effect. Journal of Parasitology 92, 13551360. doi: 10.1645/GE-922R.1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prichard, R. K. and Roulet, A. (2007). ABC transporters and beta-tubulin in macrocyclic lactone resistance: prospects for marker development. Parasitology 134, 11231132. doi: 10.1017/S0031182007000091.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramadan, N. I. and Saber, L. M. (2004). Detection of genetic variability in nonhuman isolates of Fasciola hepatica and Fasciola gigantica by the RAPD-PCR technique. Journal of the Egyptian Society of Parasitology 34, 679689.Google Scholar
Reblánová, M., Špakulová, M., Orosová, M., Králová-Hromadová, I., Bazsalovicsová, E., Rajský, D. (2011). A comparative study of karyotypes and chromosomal location of rDNA genes in important liver flukes Fasciola hepatica and Fascioloides magna (Trematoda: Fasciolidae). Parasitology Research 109, 10211028. doi: 10.1007/s00436-011-2339-y.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Redman, E., Sargison, N., Whitelaw, F., Jackson, F., Morrison, A., Bartley, D. J. and Gilleard, J. S. (2012). Introgression of ivermectin resistance genes into a susceptible Haemonchus contortus strain by multiple backcrossing. PLoS Pathogens 8, 110. doi: e1002534.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reed, M. B., Spithill, T. W., Strugnell, R. A. and Panaccio, M. (1998). Fasciola hepatica: stage-specific expression of novel gene sequences as identified by differential display. Experimental Parasitology 89, 169179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rinaldi, G., Morales, M. E., Cancela, M., Castillo, E., Brindley, P. J. and Tort, J. F. (2008). Development of functional genomic tools in trematodes: RNA interference and luciferase reporter gene activity in Fasciola hepatica. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 9, e260. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0000260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M. W., Lawson, J., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. M. and Fairweather, I. (2004). The comparative metabolism of triclabendazole sulphoxide by triclabendazole-susceptible and triclabendazole-resistant Fasciola hepatica. Parasitology Research 92, 205210. doi: 10.1007/s00436-003-1003-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, M. W., Menon, R., Donnelly, S. M., Dalton, J. P. and Ranganathan, S. (2009). An integrated transcriptomics and proteomics analysis of the secretome of the helminth pathogen Fasciola hepatica. Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 8, 18911907. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M900045-MCP200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryan, L. A., Hoey, E., Trudgett, A., Fairweather, I., Fuchs, M., Robinson, M. W., Chambers, E., Timson, D., Ryan, E., Fetwell, T., Ivens, A., Bentley, G. and Johnston, D. (2008). Fasciola hepatica expresses multiple α- and β-tubulin isotypes. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology 159, 7378. doi: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2008.02.001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sargison, N. D. and Scott, P. R. (2011). Diagnosis and economic consequences of triclabendazole resistance in Fasciola hepatica in a sheep flock in south-east Scotland. Veterinary Record 168, 159. doi: 10.1136/vr.c5332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargison, N. D., Wilson, D. J., Penny, C. D. and Bartley, D. J. (2010). Unexpected production loss caused by helminth parasites in weaned beef calves. Veterinary Record 167, 752754. doi: 10.1136/vr.c5428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Semyenova, S. K., Morozova, E. V., Chrisanfova, G. G., Gorokhov, V. V., Arkhipov, I. A., Moskvin, A. S., Movsessyan, S. O. and Ryskov, A. P. (2006). Genetic differentiation in Eastern European and Western Asian populations of the liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica, as revealed by mitochondrial NAD1 and COX1 genes. Journal of Parasitology 92, 525530. doi: 10.1645/GE-673R.1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teofanova, D., Kantzoura, V., Walker, S., Radoslavov, G., Hristov, P., Theodoropoulos, G., Bankov, I. and Trudgett, A. (2011). Genetic diversity of liver flukes (Fasciola hepatica) from Eastern Europe. Infection, Genetics and Evolution 11, 109115. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2010.10.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Dijk, J., Sargison, N. D., Kenyon, F. and Skuce, P. J. (2010). Climate change and infectious disease: helminthological challenges to farmed ruminants in temperate regions. Animal 4, 377392. doi: 10.1017/S1751731109990991.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vara-Del Río, M. P., Villa, H., Martinez-Valladares, M. and Rojo-Vázquez, F. A. (2007). Genetic heterogeneity of Fasciola hepatica isolates in the northwest of Spain. Parasitology Research 101, 10031006. doi: 10.1007/s00436-007-0574-z.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vargas, D., Vega, M. and González, C. G. (2003). Aproximación a una caracterización molecular de Fasciola hepatica por la técnica RAPDs – PCR. Parasitología Latinoamericana 58, 1116. doi: 10.4067/S0717-77122003000100002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vázquez-Prieto, S., Vilas, R., Mezo, M., González-Warleta, M., Ubeira, F. M. and Paniagua, E. (2011). Allozyme markers suitable for population genetic analysis of Fasciola hepatica. Veterinary Parasitology 176, 8488. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.10.042.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vilas, R., Paniagua, E., Outeiral, S. and Sanmartín, M. L. (2002). Electrophoretic and morphological differentiation of three sympatric species of the genus Lecithochirium (Trematoda: Hemiuridae), parasites of marine fishes. Parasitology Research 88, 10551060. doi: 10.1007/s00436-002-0708-2.Google ScholarPubMed
Vilas, R., Vásquez-Prieto, S. and Paniagua, E. (2012). Contrasting patterns of population genetic structure of Fasciola hepatica from cattle and sheep: Implications for the evolution of anthelmintic resistance. Infection, Genetics and Evolution 12, 4552. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2011.10.010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, S. M., McKinstry, B., Boray, J. C., Brennan, G. P., Trudgett, A., Hoey, E. M., Fletcher, H. and Fairweather, I. (2004). Response of two isolates of Fasciola hepatica to treatment with triclabendazole in vivo and in vitro. Parasitology Research 94, 427438. doi: 10.1007/s00436-004-1222-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, S. M., Johnston, C., Hoey, E. M., Fairweather, I., Borgsteede, F., Gaasenbeek, C., Prodöhl, P. A. and Trudgett, A. (2011). Population dynamics of the liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica: the effect of time and spatial separation on the genetic diversity of fluke populations in the Netherlands. Parasitology 138, 215223. doi: 10.1017/S0031182010001149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, S. M., Prodöhl, P. A., Fletcher, H. L., Hanna, R. E. B., Kantzoura, V., Hoey, E. M. and Trudgett, A. (2007). Evidence for multiple mitochondrial lineages of Fasciola hepatica (liver fluke) within infrapopulations from cattle and sheep. Parasitology Research 101, 117125. doi: 10.1007/s00436-006-0440-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, R., Law, C. J., Hoey, E. M., Fairweather, I., Brennan, G. P. and Trudgett, A. (2012). An amino acid substitution in Fasciola hepatica P-glycoprotein from triclabendazole-resistant and triclabendazole-susceptible populations. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology 186, 6972. doi: 10.1016/j.molbiopara.2012.08.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winkelhagen, A. J., Mank, T., de Vries, P. J. and Soetekouw, R. (2012). Apparent triclabendazole-resistant human Fasciola hepatica infection, the Netherlands. Emerging Infectious Diseases 18, 10281029. doi: 10.3201/eid1806.120302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, M. J., Ai, L., Fu, J. H., Nisbet, A. J., Liu, Q. Y., Chen, M. X., Zhou, D. H. and Zhu, X. Q. (2012). Comparative characterisation of microRNAs from the liver flukes Fasciola gigantica and F. hepatica. PLoS ONE 7, e53387. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, N. D., Halls, R. S., Jex, A. R., Cantacessi, C. and Gasser, R. B. (2010). Elucidating the transcriptome of Fasciola hepatica – a key to fundamental and biotechnological discoveries for a neglected parasite. Biotechnology Advances 28, 222231. doi: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2009.12.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, N. D., Jex, A. R., Cantacessi, C., Halls, R. S., Campbell, B. E., Spithill, T. W., Tangkawattana, S., Tangkawattana, P., Laha, T. and Gasser, R. B. (2011). A portrait of the transcriptome of the neglected trematode, Fasciola gigantica – biological and biotechnological implications. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 5, e1004. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig.1. (A) Schematic showing the life cycle of F. hepatica. Eggs are produced by adults in the bile ducts of the definitive host (e.g. sheep) and are passed in the faeces. A key aspect of the life cycle that lends it to genetic manipulation is the ability of a single miracidium to hatch from an egg, infect the snail intermediate host and give rise to several hundred clonal cercariae that are subsequently released from the snail. These metacercariae encyst on pasture and are ingested by the definitive host; (B) Selected images from experimental infections: 1. Embryonated egg containing miracidium, 2. Free miracidum, 3. Redia from an infected snail, 4. Cercaria released from an infected snail.

Figure 1

Table 1. Currently available nucleotide sequence for F. hepatica

Figure 2

Table 2. A summary of the provenance of F. hepatica isolates available for TCBZ resistance studies

Figure 3

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the experimental approach used to map TCBZ resistance in F. hepatica. The experiment is divided into three phases: (1) the production of clonal infections; (2) the production of F1 recombinants and (3) the production and phenotyping of F2 recombinants. Concurrent production of a genomic scaffold of F. hepatica supports discovery of SNPs in parental clones to allow association of SNPs in the pooled genotyping of phenotyped F2 recombinants either exposed or unexposed to TCBZ. The identification of F1 recombinants is performed using genome-derived microsatellites as neutral markers of parental clones. Metacercariae from self-fertilization or parthenogenesis, which display parental markers only, are shown for completeness but are not used for subsequent production of F2 recombinants. TCBZ, triclabendazole; TCBZ-S, triclabendazole susceptible; TCBZ-R, triclabendazole resistant.