De novo transcriptome sequencing and differential gene expression analysis of two parasitic human Demodex species
Demodex are among the tiniest organisms in Acari and are important mammalian parasites. However, differences in pathogenicity between two human parasites, Demodex folliculorum and Demodex brevis, remain unknown. Related genetic studies are limited by RNA extraction difficulties and molecular data deficiencies. In this study, RNA extraction, de novo sequencing, functional annotation, and differential gene expression analyses were performed to compare D. folliculorum and D. brevis. This yielded 67.09 and 65.10 million clean reads, respectively, with similar annotations. Bioinformatics analyses and manual alignments identified 237 coding sequences comprising 48 genes from 29 families, including five important functional classes. Of these, 30 genes from 20 families related to metabolism, motion, detoxification and stress response, and allergic reaction were differentially expressed between the two species. Cathepsin type 1, serine protease inhibitor, arginine kinase, triosephosphate isomerase, muscle-specific protein 20-2, myosin alkaline light chain, troponin C, tropomyosin, and heat shock protein 90 were highly expressed in D. folliculorum, whereas cathepsin type 2, aspartic protease, serine protease, myosin heavy chain type 2, and alpha tubulin type 1C were highly expressed in D. brevis. Verified coding sequences were nearly consistent with unigene clusters. Further, absolute quantification results demonstrated that differentially expressed genes followed the predicted expression trend. Therefore, the first RNA sequencing and functional annotation analysis of two Demodex species was successful. Differential expression of important functional genes is likely implicated in pathogenicity disparities between these two species. Our study provides molecular data and technical support for further studies on human Demodex pathogenicity and functional genes.
KeywordsHuman Demodex Pathogenicity differences de novo transcriptome sequencing Differentially expressed gene screening Expression quantity verification
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 81471972 and 81271856).
Compliance with ethical standards
The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Medical and Biological Research of Xi’an Jiaotong University Health Science Center (approval no. 2019-002). All subjects were sampled by the authors or associated project staff. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- Ayres SJ (1930) Pityriasis folliculorum (Demodex). Arch Dermatol Syphilol 21:19–24. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.1930.01440070027002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chan TF, Ji KM, Yim AK, Liu XY, Zhou JW, Li RQ, Yang KY, Li J, Li M, Law PT, Wu YL, Cai ZL, Qin H, Bao Y, Leung RK, Ng PK, Zou J, Zhong XJ, Ran PX, Zhong NS, Liu ZG, Tsui SK (2015) The draft genome, transcriptome, and microbiome of Dermatophagoides farinae reveal a broad spectrum of dust mite allergens. J Allergy Clin Immunol 135:539–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2014.09.031 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cheng S, Zhang M, Chen H, Fan W, Huang Y (2019) The correlation between the microstructure of meibomian glands and ocular Demodex infestation: a retrospective case-control study in a Chinese population. Medicine (Baltimore) 98:e15595. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015595 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grbić M, Van Leeuwen T, Clark RM, Rombauts S, Rouzé P, Grbić V, Osborne EJ, Dermauw W, Ngoc PC, Ortego F, Hernández-Crespo P, Diaz I, Martinez M, Navajas M, Sucena É, Magalhães S, Nagy L, Pace RM, Djuranović S, Smagghe G, Iga M, Christiaens O, Veenstra JA, Ewer J, Villalobos RM, Hutter JL, Hudson SD, Velez M, Yi SV, Zeng J, Pires-daSilva A, Roch F, Cazaux M, Navarro M, Zhurov V, Acevedo G, Bjelica A, Fawcett JA, Bonnet E, Martens C, Baele G, Wissler L, Sanchez-Rodriguez A, Tirry L, Blais C, Demeestere K, Henz SR, Gregory TR, Mathieu J, Verdon L, Farinelli L, Schmutz J, Lindquist E, Feyereisen R, Van de Peer Y (2011) The genome of Tetranychus urticae reveals herbivorous pest adaptations. Nature 2479:487–492. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10640 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hoy MA, Yu FH, Meyer JM, Tarazona OA, Jeyaprakash A, Wu K (2013) Transcriptome sequencing and annotation of the predatory mite Metaseiulus occidentalis (Acari: Phytoseiidae): a cautionary tale about possible contamination by prey sequences. Exp Appl Acarol 59:283–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-012-9603-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Liu B, Jiang GF, Zhang YF, Li JL, Li XJ, Yue JS, Chen F, Liu H, Li H, Zhu S, Wang J, Ran C (2011) Analysis of transcriptome differences between resistant and susceptible strains of the citrus red mite Panonychus citri (Acari: Tetranychidae). PLoS One 6:e28516. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0028516 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Olinda RG, Frade MTS, Soares GSL, de Aguiar GMN, Costa VMD, de Lucena RB, Dantes AFM (2013) Bovine demodicosis associated with squamous cell carcinoma of the vulva. Acta Sci Vet 41:29Google Scholar
- Sellars MJ, Vuocolo T, Leeton LA, Coman GJ, Degnan BM, Preston NP (2007) Real-time RT-PCR quantification of Kuruma shrimp transcripts: a comparison of relative and absolute quantification procedures. J Biotechnol 129:391–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2007.01.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhao YE (2016) Human demodicosis: emerging dermatosis caused by Demodex. Chin J Parasitol Parasit Dis 34:456–462,472Google Scholar
- Zhao YE, Guo N, Li C, Lu ZH (2007) The dynamic observation of the morphologic structure and activity of human Demodex in different stages. Chin J Vector Bio Control 18:120–123. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-4692.2007.02.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar