Department of Infectious Diseases, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Viale Regina Elena 299, 00161, Rome, Italy.
Vet Parasitol. 2021 Sep;297:109042. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2020.109042. Epub 2020 Jan 30.
The scientific basis that led to the development of a multispecies concept within the Trichinella genus originated in the 1950s, when scientists began reporting an increasing number of host-specific peculiarities among different geographic isolates. This led to speculation that important geographic variability existed within Trichinella spiralis, the only species in the genus at that time. Comparative infection results sparked great interest among investigators and led to similar studies using various geographic isolates of the parasite. In 1972, the Russian scientists V.A. Britov, S.N. Boev and B.L. Garkavi, described three new species: Trichinella nativa, Trichinella nelsoni and Trichinella pseudospiralis. This shattered the concept that the genus Trichinella was monospecific and widened the host range to include birds. The description of these new species generated an intense debate over their taxonomic validity because there were no clear morphological differences among them and because the concept of sibling species had not yet been accepted by parasitologists. The resolution of the taxonomic issues was facilitated by the adoption of new biochemical and molecular techniques for systematics research. In 1992, the first study comparing 152 isolates from various host species and geographical regions identified eight distinct taxa, coded T1 through T8; four of these represented the previously proposed species and included one new species, Trichinella britovi (T3). During the past 27 years, an increasing number of investigations in different geographical regions and hosts coupled with the availability of new and highly sensitive molecular techniques have allowed the description of four new species; Trichinella murrelli (T5), Trichinella papuae (T10), Trichinella zimbabwensis (T11) and Trichinella patagoniensis (T12), and two new genotypes Trichinella T9 and T13. Thus, the taxonomic status of Trichinella T6, T8, T9 and T13 remain unresolved. These new technologies have also advanced a more complete phylogenetic, zoogeographical and epidemiological knowledge base for future work.
导致旋毛虫属内出现多物种概念的科学依据起源于 20 世纪 50 年代，当时科学家开始报告在不同地理分离株之间宿主特异性的数量不断增加。这导致人们推测，当时唯一的物种旋毛虫旋毛虫中存在重要的地理变异性。比较感染结果引起了研究人员的极大兴趣，并导致使用寄生虫的各种地理分离株进行类似的研究。1972 年，俄罗斯科学家 V.A. Britov、S.N. Boev 和 B.L. Garkavi 描述了三个新物种：原生旋毛虫、尼尔森旋毛虫和假旋毛虫。这打破了旋毛虫属单种的概念，并将宿主范围扩大到鸟类。这些新物种的描述引发了关于其分类学有效性的激烈争论，因为它们之间没有明显的形态差异，而且寄生虫学家尚未接受种系发生学上的姊妹种概念。分类问题的解决得益于采用了新的生化和分子技术进行系统发育研究。1992 年，第一项比较来自不同宿主物种和地理区域的 152 个分离株的研究确定了 8 个不同的分类群，代码为 T1 到 T8；其中 4 个代表了先前提出的物种，包括一个新物种，即旋毛虫 britovi（T3）。在过去的 27 年中，在不同地理区域和宿主中进行的越来越多的研究，加上新的和高度敏感的分子技术的可用性，允许描述了四个新物种；旋毛虫 murrelli（T5）、旋毛虫 papuae（T10）、旋毛虫 zimbabwensis（T11）和旋毛虫 patagoniensis（T12）以及两个新基因型旋毛虫 T9 和 T13。因此，旋毛虫 T6、T8、T9 和 T13 的分类地位仍未解决。这些新技术也推进了更完整的系统发育、动物地理学和流行病学知识库，以用于未来的工作。
