ArticleTropical medicine and health2026
Intraspecies genetic diversity and host-associated distribution of Endolimax nana in Sumba Island, Indonesia.
Article in Tropical medicine and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndolimax nana is a common intestinal archamoebid within Evosea (Amoebozoa), alongside genera such as Entamoeba, Iodamoeba, and Mastigamoeba. Despite its frequent colonization of humans, it has received limited attention as a presumed non-pathogenic commensal, and its genetic diversity and host-associated distribution remain poorly resolved. Here, we define the molecular diversity, subtype structure, and host-associated distribution of E. nana.
methodsCross-sectional surveys were conducted in Wainyapu Village, Sumba Island, Indonesia. A total of 315 stool samples were collected from humans (n = 144) and animals (n = 171), including rats, pigs, dogs, ducks, chickens, horses, buffaloes, and goats between 2015 and 2016. Samples were screened by PCR targeting the 18S rRNA gene, followed by direct sequencing and sub-cloning. Sub-cloning was performed for 26 samples with ambiguous chromatograms. Phylogenetic relationships were inferred using Bayesian inference, Neighbor-Joining, and Maximum Parsimony methods. In human, the association between E. nana colonization and diarrheal stool form was evaluated using logistic regression analysis.
resultsE. nana was detected in humans (42.4%, 61/144), rats (12.0%, 6/50), pigs (11.1%, 5/45), dogs (7.7%, 2/26), ducks (20.0%, 1/5), and chickens (3.6%, 1/28). Sequencing yielded 127 sequences (1252-1283 bp) comprising 118 unique 18S rRNA haplotypes. Phylogenetic analyses resolved two major subtypes (ST1 and ST2), each consistently recovered monophyletic clusters and further subdivided into distinct subclusters. Subtype distribution revealed clear host-associated structure: ST1-1 and ST2-2 were predominantly human-associated, ST1-2 was shared between humans and pigs, and ST2-1 was distributed across humans, pigs, and rats. Notably, no subtype was restricted to animal hosts, indicating that all subtype lineages include human-associated populations. No association was observed between E. nana colonization and diarrheal stool form.
conclusionsWe provide the first molecular characterization of human-derived E. nana, defining its subtype structure and host-associated distribution. The absence of animal-restricted subtypes suggests that E. nana circulates primarily within human-associated transmission networks. No association was observed between E. nana colonization and diarrheal stool form in the present dataset. However, these findings should not be interpreted as definitive evidence regarding the commensal or pathogenic nature of the organism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.