Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Methodology
  • Open Access

A set of microsatellite markers to differentiate Plasmodium falciparum progeny of four genetic crosses

  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1Email author
Malaria Journal201817:60

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-018-2210-z

  • Received: 26 November 2017
  • Accepted: 27 January 2018
  • Published:

Abstract

Background

Four Plasmodium falciparum genetic crosses (HB3×3D7, HB3×Dd2, 7G8×GB4, and 803×GB4) have produced sets of recombinant progeny that are widely used for malaria research, including investigations of anti-malarial drug resistance. It is critical to maintain the progeny free from cross-contamination. Microsatellite polymorphisms can be used to validate parasite identity.

Results

A set of 12 markers was developed that differentiates the parents of the four P. falciparum crosses. This typing set identified distinguishing patterns of inheritance (fingerprints) in segregant collections of 15 progeny clones from HB3×3D7, 32 from HB3×Dd2, 33 from 7G8×GB4, and 81 from 803×GB4. Stronger amplification was observed with shorter relative to longer alleles of individual microsatellites. In experiments with mixed parental DNAs, electropherograms showed that signals of cross-contamination can be missed when minor peaks less than 1/4 or 1/3 the height of the major peak are disregarded by threshold settings commonly used for population studies.

Conclusions

Microsatellite typing is an effective method to check the identity of P. falciparum lines and detect parasite cross-contamination in cultures; however, care must be taken not to ignore minor peaks that can be overlooked. The 12 microsatellite markers presented here provide a rapid and efficient means to distinguish the segregants of laboratory crosses. Fingerprint patterns from these markers are useful to maintain the integrity of diverse parasite lines in and between research laboratories.

Keywords

  • Plasmodium falciparum
  • Genotyping
  • Molecular fingerprint
  • Parasite clones
  • Cross-contamination

Background

Genetic crosses between Plasmodium falciparum lines with distinct phenotypes have supported the identification of genes involved in malaria drug resistance, immune evasion, host infection, and disease pathogenesis. However, reproducing the malaria parasite life cycle in the laboratory is complex and expensive [1]. The process requires: production of infectious gametocytes from parasite cultures; infection of Anopheles mosquitoes with these gametocytes for cross-fertilization and generation of recombinant sporozoites (Plasmodium are haploid except for a brief diploid phase from zygote to oocyst); inoculation of the sporozoites into a vertebrate host for production of liver stage parasites; and recovery of blood-stage recombinant progeny (segregants) that emerge from the liver and propagate in erythrocytes. Five P. falciparum genetic crosses have been completed over the past 40 years. Four of these crosses were performed through chimpanzees (Table 1) [24] (and unpublished work). More recently, a fifth cross was produced through immune-deficient mice engrafted with liver and erythrocytes from humans [5].
Table 1

Four Plasmodium falciparum genetic crosses in nonhuman primates

 

3D7×HB3

HB3×Dd2

7G8×GB4

GB4×803

Year published

1987 (Walliker et al.)

1990 (Wellems et al.)

2008 (Hayton et al.)

Unpublished

Parental origins

3D7: Netherlands

HB3: Honduras

HB3: Honduras

Dd2: Indochina

7G8: Brazil

GB4: Ghana

GB4: Ghana

803: Cambodia

Typing method

Restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP)

RFLP and microsatellite analysis

Microsatellite analysis and DNA microarray

Microsatellite analysis and DNA microarray

Potential segregants

15

32

33

81

Recombinant progeny from the four non-human primate (NHP) crosses have led to fundamental research advances in diverse studies of malaria phenotypes (Additional file 1). Protecting the integrity of the P. falciparum parent and progeny lines has been critical to their value as a research resource in support of these and other advances. In a laboratory setting where multiple culture flasks are handled, investigators must continually guard against the risks of cross-contamination or mislabeling [6, 7]. Vigilance is imperative, and it is necessary to perform regular checks of parasites recovered from cryopreserved vials, in long-term cultures, and before cryopreservation for legacy stocks.

Progeny of the P. falciparum genetic crosses have been typed by various methods. HB3×3D7 progeny were originally typed by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) methods in which parasite DNA cut by restriction enzymes is separated on agarose gels, blotted to a membrane, and probed for DNA fragment size differences [8, 9]. HB3×Dd2 progeny were typed by RFLP [10] and microsatellite analysis [11, 12], a method that utilizes polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to amplify stretches of short polymorphic repeats that can be highly variable between parasite lines. Microsatellite and tandem repeat regions that differ by many base pairs can be visualized on agarose gels, whereas microsatellite regions that differ slightly in size are more appropriately analyzed by polyacrylamide sequencing gel or capillary electrophoresis. 7G8×GB4 progeny were typed using microsatellites and high-density oligonucleotide tiling arrays, which differentially hybridize with fragments of DNA containing single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) [13, 14]. 803×GB4 progeny have been typed using microsatellites and a DNA microarray containing 17,000 potential SNPs (unpublished). More recently, progeny from the HB3×3D7, HB3×Dd2, and 7G8×GB4 crosses were analyzed by full genome sequencing [15].

A typing method must be fast, reliable, and inexpensive for regular checks of parasite cultures in the laboratory. RFLP methods require large amounts of DNA, and probe preparation and blotting after gel electrophoresis is time consuming. DNA microarrays also require large amounts of DNA and depend on skilled processing and analysis with specialized equipment. Modern genome sequencing can give snapshots of total variation, but cost, turnaround time, and analysis remain prohibitive for routine typing checks. In contrast to these methods, microsatellite analysis has a production time of less than 1 day, requires only small amounts of DNA, and is relatively inexpensive [12].

A set of 12 microsatellite markers that distinguishes progeny of the four NHP P. falciparum crosses is presented here. Use of these markers can be extended to diverse parasite lines and help to maintain their integrity and identity among different laboratories.

Methods

Parasite cultivation and genomic DNA

Erythrocytes obtained weekly from Interstate Blood Bank (Memphis, TN) or Virginia Blood Services (Richmond, VA) were washed with filtered RPMI 1640 media (KD Medical, Columbia, MD) and stored at 50% hematocrit in a 4 °C refrigerator until use. Complete culture media (cRPMI) was comprised of 1% Albumax II (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA), 0.21% sodium bicarbonate (KD Medical, Columbia, MD), and 20 µg/mL gentamicin (KD Medical, Columbia, MD) in RPMI-1640, which contains 25 mM HEPES and 50 µg/mL hypoxanthine. Parasites were cultivated at 5% haematocrit between 0.5–3.0% parasitaemia at 37 °C under an atmosphere of 90% N2, 5% CO2, and 5% O2. When cultures reached approximately 4% parasitaemia with mostly mature stages, 10 mL volumes were pelleted at 2500 rpm, and the parasitized cells were treated with 0.15% saponin (Amresco, Solon, Ohio) in 1× phosphate buffer solution (PBS) (90 g/L sodium chloride, 1.44 g KH2PO4/L, 7.95 g NA2HPO4/L) (KD Medical, Columbia, MD) for 3 min at room temperature. Parasites were recovered from the resulting host cell lysate by centrifugation at 4000 rpm, washed three times with 1× PBS, and stored at − 20 °C. Some samples of genomic DNA from the 803×GB4 progeny were obtained from smaller culture volumes (~ 2 mL). Genomic DNA was extracted from thawed samples by the phenol:chloroform method [16] or by the DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). DNA concentration was determined using a NanoDrop ND-100 Spectrophotometer.

Polymerase chain reaction

PCR was performed in 96-well plates in an Applied Biosystems SimpliAmp Thermal Cycler with the following conditions: denaturation for 2 min at 94 °C; 42 cycles through 94 °C for 20 s, 45 °C for 10 s, 42 °C for 10 s, and 60 °C for 30 s; and a final extension at 60 °C for 5 min. Reaction volumes of 25 µL included: 1 µL of template DNA at a concentration of approximately 20 ng/µL, 0.5 µL of each 10 µM forward primer and 10 µM reverse primer with a 5′ 6-FAM fluorescence modification (Eurofins, Louisville, KY), 12.5 µL MyTaq Mix (Bioline, Taunton, MA), and 10.5 µL PCR qualified water (Quality Biological, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD).

Microsatellite analysis

Amplified DNA was diluted 100× in an optical 96-well plate with 10 µL of Hi-Di Formamide (Life Technologies Corporation, Carlsbad, CA) and 0.2 µL GeneScan 500XL ROX Size Standards (Life Technologies Corporation, Carlsbad, CA) per well. Plates were processed in a Hitachi 3730xl DNA Analyzer and evaluated using GeneMapper version 4.1 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Base pair sizes of microsatellite alleles were recorded at the peak heights of their signals presented on electropherograms.

Mixed DNA samples experiment

Stock 803 and GB4 genomic DNA dilutions were combined in 1.5 mL Eppendorf tubes (Denville Scientific Incorporated, Holliston, MA) in 803:GB4 DNA ratios of 5:95, 10:90, 20:80, 50:50, 80:20, 90:10, and 95:5. These mixed DNA samples were typed as described above using markers TAA87, TA127, 1451458, and C3M69.

Results and discussion

Thirty-two candidate microsatellite markers were identified from a large collection originally developed to differentiate HB3×Dd2 and 7G8×GB4 progeny (Table 2 and Additional file 2) [4, 11]. Selection criteria included: (1) physical location in the genome to avoid linkage disequilibrium and cover the most chromosomes; and (2) PCR product size that discriminated between the parents of each cross by more than 3 base pairs. Of these 32 microsatellite markers, 14 distinguished the 3D7, Dd2, HB3, 7G8, GB4, and 803 parental lines from one another. To facilitate efficient PCR in the 12-column format of 96-well plates, a final set of 12 markers was selected for typing. Table 2 lists the primer sequences, genome locations, and expected PCR product sizes of the 12 microsatellites.
Table 2

A set of 12 microsatellite markers that distinguishes parents and recombinant progeny of four Plasmodium falciparum crosses

Marker

Chromosome

Location (kB)

Microsatellite peak size (base pairs)

Forward primer

Reverse primer

Microsatellite repeat sequence-including F/R primers (3D7)

GB4

803

Dd2

HB3

3D7

7G8

C3M64

3

477

109

174

174

184

198

188

AAAGAATAAGAATAGGAATCA

AACAAAACATGCTTATCTAAA

AAAGAATAAGAATAGGAATCATATATATATACATACATATACACACATATATATATATATATACATATATATATACACACATATATATATATACACATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATACATATTAATAAAGATTCATTTTATATTATTTAGATAAGCATGTTTTGTT

C3M54

3

909

215

264

234

241

238

266

AATATAATCATAAAGTCGTAC

CTAAGAGAAAAAATGGGTAT

AATATAATCATAAAGTCGTACTTTTTTTTTTTTATTTTATATAATAAATAAATATAAAATAAATAAAATATTTATATATATATATATATATATAAATGTTATTATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATTTTTATAATATATATAATAACTGGATTCTATTTTTTTTTAGAGTAATATATATATATATATATATAATTATATTTTTATATAATACCCATTTTTTCTCTTAG

C4M30

4

1087

164

189

165

180

193

167

ATTGATGCTTTGTCTAATTAG

ATGACAAAACATGGTATGTA

ATTGATGCTTTGTCTAATTAGAGTATATGATATATATATATATATAAAAAAAAAAAAATAAAAAATAAAATAAATAAAAAATAAAAAAAATAAAAAATAAAAAATAAAATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATTTTTTTTTATATATTCATATACATACCATGTTTTGTCAT

B5M3

5

494

120

114

123

127

121

133

AAGTTATGATGAATTTGATTC

TTATTATCATCATCACCCATC

AAGTTATGATGAATTTGATTCTAAAATATCAAAATATCCAACAAAAGTAGGAAATGAAGGGAAAAAATCAAAAGATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATATGATGGGTGATGATGATAATAA

TAA81

5

1214

121

115

121

127

118

115

TTTCACACAACACAGGATT

TGGACAAATGGGAAAGGATA

TTTCACACAACACAGGATTATTACCATCACCATTAATGTTATCATTCCTTGTATTATTATTATTATTATTATTATTATTATGTTTGATTTGGTTATCATCTTTATCCTTTCCCATTTGTCCA

TAA87

6

374

94

109

107

104

95

110

ACATGTTCATATTACTCAC

AATGGCAACACCATTCAAC

ACATGTTCATATTACTCACCACATTATTATTATTATTATTATTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTAGGTGGTTGAATGGTGTTGCCATT

PE14D

7

413

114

130

115

133

136

121

TGTAATGAATGATTCTAATACCAC

TTGGACCATGCTTCACAG

TGTAATGAATGATTCTAATACCACTACTACTACTACTACTACTACTACTACTACTAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAATAAACCTACTTCCTATTTGGATTTCTGTGAAGCATGGTCCAA

TA127

8

1161

118

132

132

124

120

124

GCTTTATAAAAATAACACACC

TAAAAAACACTCAGTTTGAG

GCTTTATAAAAATAACACACCTATATATAAATATATATATATATATATATATATATATTATATACATTTCTATCTTTATTCTTTCTTTTTATTTTTTTTTTTTATCTCAAACTGAGTGTTTTTTA

C9108

9

1145

96

122

113

116

137

114

AATATCTACACAACTAAAGC

CAAAAGAATCATCCTTTTCC

AATATCTACACAACTAAAGCATATACATATATATATTATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATAATATATATGTATATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAATAAATGGAAAAGGATGATTCTTTTG

401780

10

402

103

80

80

105

90

86

GAAACATAAAGGGATGTGTA

ACTTAGAAGAAATTCAATGC

GAAACATAAAGGGATGTGTATAAGTATATGTATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATATTTCTTATTGATCGCATTGAATTTCTTCTAAGT

1451458

14

1452

215

203

203

194

205

209

GAGCATTATAAAATTGGCTA

AAAAAGAAAAGAGATGAACA

GAGCATTATAAAATTGGCTACTAGTGAATATCTAAAATGTACATAAATAAATAAATAAATAAATAAATAAATATGTACATATATATATATATATATATATATATATCAAAATGTACAAAAATAGAATTTAAAGTATACTTTTATCTATCTGTACCAAATATGTGTTACATATTTATATATAATAATGTTCATCTCTTTTCTTTTT

2549455

14

2550

178

174

179

176

179

175

AAATATATGTTCTACTTTCAATCA

GAGGAAATAATATAATACACCA

AAATATATGTTCTACTTTCAATCATATAATAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTACTTATTAGTTTATAACTAAAAATTTTTCAATATATATATATATATATATATATATTCAGTACTCTATTAATTATAATTATTATATGTATCTATTTTTTATATTATTAATAGATGGTGTATTATATTATTTCCTC

The 12-marker typing set identified distinguishing patterns of inheritance (fingerprints) in segregant collections of 15 progeny clones from HB3×3D7, 32 from HB3×Dd2, 33 from 7G8×GB4, and 81 from the new 803×GB4 (Additional file 3). Since peaks on the DNA analyzer can shift slightly depending on machine running conditions, parental control DNAs were included in all typing determinations along with the size standards.

Minor mixed or contaminated parasite subpopulations can be missed by microsatellite typing when they represent < 20% of the overall parasite population [17, 18]. In further experiments with microsatellite markers to detect cross-contamination, known amounts of 803 and GB4 genomic DNA were mixed and tested with markers TAA87, TA127, 1451458, and C3M69, all of which have alleles that differ by 10 base pairs or more. The microsatellite signals from minor quantities of DNA differed greatly in level and, in some cases, were difficult to detect in the individual scans (Fig. 1). Peak height ratios were consistent with greater amplification of smaller alleles of the four individual markers, in agreement with previous findings of a general bias to smaller amplicons [18] (see representative TAA87 and TA127 data in Additional file 4).
Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Typing results from mixtures of 803 and GB4 DNA tested with microsatellites TAA87, TA127, 1451458, and C3M69. The 803 DNA has a longer repeat sequence than GB4 in microsatellites TAA87 and TA127, whereas GB4 has a longer microsatellite sequences than 803 in microsatellites 1451458 and C3M69. Solid and dashed lines represent the 1/3 and 1/4 cut off levels, respectively

While microsatellite analysis is an efficient method to check parasite line integrity, our results show that minor populations may still be missed. Filters that disregard minor peaks less than 1/4 or 1/3 the size of the major peak are sometimes used in population genetic studies, so the use of these filters in microsatellite analysis may give false impression of clonality with mixed parasite populations [1922]. Unfiltered searches for minor peaks with multiple markers are therefore recommended for detection of allelic variations indicative of mixed or contaminated parasite subpopulations.

The polymorphism of these microsatellite markers can be useful for genetic population studies [19, 20, 23, 24] as well as future typing applications in genetic crosses. Although the microsatellite markers were stable in this study, infrequent de novo size variations are possible; an example has been reported in a clonal parasite population after long-term culture [11].

Comparison of sample typing patterns to published fingerprints presently relies on human ability to recognize visual patterns and find differences, and potential for error remains in assessment of clonality or disparity between lines. Automated searches may help to improve these comparisons in the future, perhaps with algorithms of pattern matching against microsatellite databases.

Conclusions

A set of 12 microsatellite markers is presented to distinguish genetically related P. falciparum progeny of laboratory crosses, with useful fingerprints to maintain the integrity of diverse parasite lines in and between research laboratories.

Abbreviations

PCR: 

polymerase chain reaction

NHP: 

nonhuman primate

RFLP: 

restriction fragment length polymorphism

SNP: 

single nucleotide polymorphism

cRPMI: 

complete RPMI 1640 media

PBS: 

phosphate buffer solution

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

CEF, JMS, and TEW designed the study and wrote the manuscript. CEF, JMS, JM, VMM, and CHL performed experiments. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We thank Jennifer S. Armistead, Roberto Moraes Barros, and Ramon L. Caleon for providing feedback on the manuscript. We thank Michael Krause and Xinzhuan Su for providing genomic DNA samples from some of the genetic crosses.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed in this study are provided in the main text of this published article or as additional files.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Funding

This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID).

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Laboratory of Malaria and Vector Research (LMVR), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD 20892, USA

References

  1. Su X-z, Hayton K, Wellems TE. Genetic linkage and association analyses for trait mapping in Plasmodium falciparum. Nat Rev Genet. 2007;8:497–506.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Walliker D, Quakyi IA, Wellems TE, McCutchan TF, Szarfman A, London WT, et al. Genetic analysis of the human malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum. Science. 1987;236:1661–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Wellems TE, Panton LJ, Gluzman IY, do Rosario VE, Gwadz RW, Walker-Jonah A, et al. Chloroquine resistance not linked to mdr-like genes in a Plasmodium falciparum cross. Nature. 1990;345:253–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hayton K, Gaur D, Liu A, Takahashi J, Henschen B, Singh S, et al. Erythrocyte binding protein PfRH5 polymorphisms determine species-specific pathways of Plasmodium falciparum invasion. Cell Host Microbe. 2008;4:40–51.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Vaughan AM, Pinapati RS, Cheeseman IH, Camargo N, Fishbaugher M, Checkley LA, et al. Plasmodium falciparum genetic crosses in a humanized mouse model. Nat Methods. 2015;12:631–3.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Robson KJH, Walliker D, Creasey A, Mcbride J, Beale G, Wilson RJM. Cross-contamination of Plasmodium cultures. Parasitol Today. 1992;8:38–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Dolan SA, Herrfeldt JA, Wellems TE. Restriction polymorphisms and fingerprint patterns from an interspersed repetitive element of Plasmodium falciparum DNA. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 1993;61:137–42.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Wellems TE, Walliker D, Smith CL, do Rosario VE, Maloy WL, Howard RJ, et al. A histidine-rich protein gene marks a linkage group favored strongly in a genetic cross of Plasmodium falciparum. Cell. 1987;49:633–42.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Peterson DS, Walliker D, Wellems TE. Evidence that a point mutation in dihydrofolate-reductase thymidylate synthase confers resistance to pyrimethamine in falciparum malaria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1988;85:9114–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Walker-Jonah A, Dolan SA, Gwadz RW, Panton LJ, Wellems TE. An RFLP map of the Plasmodium falciparum genome, recombination rates and favored linkage groups in a genetic cross. Mol Biochem Parasitol. 1992;51:313–20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Su X-z, Ferdig MT, Huang Y, Huynh CQ, Liu A, You J, et al. A genetic map and recombination parameters of the human malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum. Science. 1999;286:1351–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ferdig MT, Su X-z. Microsatellite markers and genetic mapping in Plasmodium falciparum. Parasitol Today. 2000;16:307–12.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kidgell C, Winzeler EA. Elucidating genetic diversity with oligonucleotide arrays. Chromosome Res. 2005;13:225–35.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang H, Li N, Gopalan V, Zilversmit MM, Varma S, Nagarajan V, et al. High recombination rates and hotspots in a Plasmodium falciparum genetic cross. Genome Biol. 2011;12:R33.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Miles A, Iqbal Z, Vauterin P, Pearson R, Campino S, Theron M, et al. Indels, structural variation, and recombination drive genomic diversity in Plasmodium falciparum. Genome Res. 2016;26:1288–99.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Sambrook J, Russell DW. Commonly used techniques in molecular cloning. In: Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. Volume 3. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2001: pp. A8.1-54.Google Scholar
  17. Juliano JJ, Kwiek JJ, Cappell K, Mwapasa V, Meshnick SR. Minority-variant Pfcrt K76T mutations and chloroquine resistance, Malawi. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:872–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu S, Mu J, Jiang H, Su X-z. Effects of Plasmodium falciparum mixed infections on in vitro antimalarial drug tests and genotyping. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2008;79:178–84.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Anderson TJ, Su X-z, Bockarie M, Lagog M, Day KP. Twelve microsatellite markers for characterization of Plasmodium falciparum from finger-prick blood samples. Parasitology. 1999;119(Pt 2):113–25.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Anderson TJ, Haubold B, Williams JT, Estrada-Franco JG, Richardson L, Mollinedo R, et al. Microsatellite markers reveal a spectrum of population structures in the malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum. Mol Biol Evol. 2000;17:1467–82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Imwong M, Nair S, Pukrittayakamee S, Sudimack D, Williams JT, Mayxay M, et al. Contrasting genetic structure in Plasmodium vivax populations from Asia and South America. Int J Parasitol. 2007;37:1013–22.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Noviyanti R, Coutrier F, Utami RA, Trimarsanto H, Tirta YK, Trianty L, et al. Contrasting transmission dynamics of co-endemic Plasmodium vivax and P. falciparum: implications for malaria control and elimination. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015;9:e0003739.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Su X-z, Wellems TE. Toward a high-resolution Plasmodium falciparum linkage map: polymorphic markers from hundreds of simple sequence repeats. Genomics. 1996;33:430–44.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Su X-z, Wootton JC. Genetic mapping in the human malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum. Mol Microbiol. 2004;53:1573–82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate. Please note that comments may be removed without notice if they are flagged by another user or do not comply with our community guidelines.

Advertisement