Suppr超能文献

使用聚合酶链反应和十二烷基硫酸钠-聚丙烯酰胺凝胶电泳技术鉴别中间普氏菌狭义种和变黑普氏菌。

Use of PCR and sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis techniques for differentiation of Prevotella intermedia sensu stricto and Prevotella nigrescens.

作者信息

Premaraj T, Kato N, Fukui K, Kato H, Watanabe K

机构信息

Institute of Anaerobic Bacteriology, Gifu University School of Medicine, 40 Tsukasa-machi, Gifu 500-8705, Japan.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1999 Apr;37(4):1057-61. doi: 10.1128/JCM.37.4.1057-1061.1999.

Abstract

Primers were designed from 16S rRNA sequences of Prevotella intermedia sensu stricto and Prevotella nigrescens and were used to discriminate these two species by PCR. The results were compared with those from the PCR technique using primers designed from arbitrarily primed PCR products by Guillot and Mouton (E. Guillot and C. Mouton, J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:1876-1882, 1997). The specificities of both assays were studied by using P. intermedia ATCC 25611, P. nigrescens ATCC 33563, 174 clinical isolates of P. intermedia sensu lato, and 59 reference strains and 58 clinical isolates of other Prevotella species and/or common oral flora. In addition, the usefulness and reliability of sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) in the differentiation of the two species were examined by comparing the results with those from PCR assays. The controversial lipase test for distinguishing these species was also carried out. Unambiguous differentiation was made by both PCR assays, and the results matched each other. The SDS-PAGE assay was found to misidentify a few strains tested, compared with the results of PCR assays. The lipase test was positive for both species, including the reference strains of P. intermedia and P. nigrescens. We conclude that both PCR assays are simple, rapid, reliable, and specific methods which could be used in clinical studies and that the lipase test is not valuable in the differentiation. The reliable discrimination of the two species by SDS-PAGE is questionable.

摘要

根据中间普氏菌(狭义)和变黑普氏菌的16S rRNA序列设计引物,并通过PCR用于区分这两个菌种。将结果与Guillot和Mouton(E. Guillot和C. Mouton,《临床微生物学杂志》35:1876 - 1882,1997年)使用从任意引物PCR产物设计的引物进行PCR技术的结果进行比较。通过使用中间普氏菌ATCC 25611、变黑普氏菌ATCC 33563、174株中间普氏菌(广义)临床分离株、59株参考菌株以及58株其他普氏菌种和/或常见口腔菌群的临床分离株,研究了两种检测方法的特异性。此外,通过将结果与PCR检测结果进行比较,检验了十二烷基硫酸钠 - 聚丙烯酰胺凝胶电泳(SDS - PAGE)在区分这两个菌种方面的实用性和可靠性。还进行了用于区分这些菌种的有争议的脂肪酶试验。两种PCR检测方法都能明确区分,且结果相互匹配。与PCR检测结果相比,发现SDS - PAGE检测法误鉴定了一些测试菌株。脂肪酶试验对这两个菌种均呈阳性,包括中间普氏菌和变黑普氏菌的参考菌株。我们得出结论,两种PCR检测方法都是简单、快速、可靠且特异的方法,可用于临床研究,并且脂肪酶试验在区分方面没有价值。SDS - PAGE对这两个菌种的可靠区分存在疑问。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验