Page 143 - GPD-4-1
P. 143

Gene & Protein in Disease                                               Rotavirus diversity in Uttar Pradesh



            the 80 samples from piglets were detected by RT-PCR, as   protection.  Another study indicated that the genomic
                                                                        39
            opposed to 65.63% and 63.75% detected by RNA-PAGE,   segments of G9P[13] RVAs were closely linked to porcine
            respectively. This finding aligns with Kylla, who also noted   or porcine-like human RVAs, demonstrating the existence
            a lower detection rate of RVA using RNA-PAGE (4.81%)   of porcine-human reassortant strains. 40
            compared to RT- PCR (7.43%).  Moreover, RV was found
                                     30
            only in diarrheal samples, corroborating previous studies   5. Conclusion
            that reported similar results. For instance, Kylla found that   This study identified the predominant RVA strain G3P[8],
            9.14% of samples from diarrheal pigs tested positive for   followed by G1P[8], G1P[6], and G2P[4], circulating
            RVA, compared to just 2.54% from non-diarrheal piglets.    among children in Bareilly and surrounding regions. This
                                                         28
            All diarrhea cases of RVA in piglets were reported during   highlights a shifting landscape in the epidemiology and
            the winter season, which corresponds to the name “winter   genotypic distribution of RV related to childhood diarrhea.
            diarrhea.”                                         In addition, the emerging G9P[13]-I5-E1  RVA strain in
              Studies conducted from 1983 to 1997 on human     pigs may pose a risk for potential outbreaks among piglets
            rotaviruses showed that G1 and G2 strains were more   on farms near Rupapur, as well as for children living
            prevalent than G3 strains, a trend that shifted from 1996 to   in close proximity to these farms. Thus, it is crucial to
            1998 when G2 became predominant, followed by G1 and   regularly assess the effectiveness of current RV vaccines
            G9.  A similar pattern continued from 1998 to 2000, with   and to maintain ongoing surveillance of RV genotypes in
               15
            G1 strains predominating over G2, G3, and G4 strains.    diarrheal cases affecting both children and animals.
                                                         31
            Overall, G1P[8] strains (31.4 – 46.1%) and G2P[4] strains   Acknowledgments
            (20.2%) were consistently reported as dominant throughout
            the years studied, except in 2009 when G9P[8] strains   The authors are thankful to the Director and Joint
            peaked at 15.3%, particularly from Pune in Western India.    Director (Research), Indian Veterinary Research Institute,
                                                         32
            Consequently, G1P[8] was identified as the dominant strain   Izatnagar, India, for providing the necessary facilities for
            in Pune during 1992 – 1993 and again from 2006 to 2008.   conducting the study. The authors are also thankful to the
            Similar trends were seen in other parts of India, including   SERB (DST) for providing funds to carry out the research
            northern regions, where G1 was predominant, followed by   work. The authors are thankful to all the hospital and farm
            G2, G-untypeable, and G9 strains. 33-36  Interestingly, between   in-charges/owners and parents of children for providing
            2016 and 2019, the dominance shifted to G3P[8] (44.09%),   samples.
            followed by G1P[8] (32.65%), G2[P4] (5.10%), G1[P6]
            (3.06%), and G9[P4] (1.02%).  In our research, we similarly   Funding
                                   37
            found that the G3P[8] RVA strain was predominant at   The work was supported by grants (Project ID 10058006,
            46.42%, followed by G1[P8] (14.28%), G2P[4] (10.71%), and   File No. SERB/F/459/2016-17 dated 18.05.2016) from the
            G1P[6] (14.28%) among children. In addition, I1 (78.57%)   Science and Engineering Research Board, DST, India, to
            and E1 (75.0%) genotypes were more common than I2 and   Z.B.D.
            E2 (21.42% each) in this investigation. Notably, I2 and E2
            genotypes were consistently associated with the G2P[4]   Conflict of interest
            strain, but not with G1P[6] or G3P[8], suggesting specific   The authors declare that they have no competing or conflict
            linkages among these strains. Similar relationships among   of interests.
            these genes have shown both concordance (G2-P[4]-I2-E2)
            and discordance (G9P[4]-I2-E6). 38                 Author contributions
              The single circulating piglet rotaviral genotype G9P[13]-  Conceptualization: Kiran Bhilegaonkar, Kaushal K. Rajak,
            I5-E1 identified in this study was highly virulent and   Yashpal Singh Malik, Zunjar Baburao Dubal
            associated with severe diarrheal outbreaks. Research into   Data curation: Gazanfar Abass, Shriya Rawat, Nitin Dudhe
            the  pathogenesis  and  genome  analysis  of  the  G9P[13]   Formal analysis:  Vinodh  Kumar  Obli  Rajendran,  Nitin
            RV  strain  from  Ohio revealed  a  human-like  G9  VP7   Dudhe, Zunjar Baburao Dubal
            genotype that shared a higher overall nucleotide identity   Investigation: Gazanfar Abass, Vibha Singh, Nitin Dudhe
            with historical porcine RV (PRV) strains. This strain led   Methodology: Gazanfar Abass, Vibha Singh, Nitin Dudhe
            to longer rectal virus shedding and RV RNAemia in pigs   Writing – original draft: Nitin Dudhe, Vinodh Kumar Obli
            compared to HRV Wa G1P[8] and provided complete       Rajendran
            short-term cross-protection against HRV or PRV     Writing – review & editing: Yashpal Singh Malik, Zunjar
            challenges, whereas HRV Wa G1P[8] offered only partial   Baburao Dubal, Kiran Bhilegaonkar


            Volume 4 Issue 1 (2025)                         7                               doi: 10.36922/gpd.6237
   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148