Cai Hugh, Archambault Marie, Prescott John F
Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada.
J Vet Diagn Invest. 2003 Sep;15(5):465-9. doi: 10.1177/104063870301500511.
This study evaluated 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis methods as tools for identification of 22 phenotypically difficult to identify veterinary clinical bacterial isolates in a veterinary diagnostic laboratory. The study compared 16S rRNA gene sequencing and conventional phenotypic identification methods. Using 16S rRNA full-gene sequencing, 95% (21/22) of the isolates were identified to the genus level and 86% (19/22) to the species level. The conventional or commercially available manual identification phenotypic characterization methods presumptively identified 91% (20/22) of the isolates to the genus level and 1 isolate to the species level. However, only 55% (12/22) or 4.5% (1/22) of the phenotypic identifications were correct at the genus or species level when they were compared with the 16S rRNA full-gene sequencing. This study also compared 16S rRNA full-gene and partial-gene sequencing. The results demonstrated that the best 16S rRNA gene-sequencing approach is full-gene sequencing because it gives the most precise species identification. Sequencing of the variable regions 1, 2, and 3 of the 16S rRNA gene could be used for tentative identification because the ability of this sequencing to identify bacteria to the genus level is similar to that of the 16S rRNA full-gene sequencing. This method identified only 14% (3/22) isolates differently to the species level compared with the 16S rRNA full gene sequence. Sequencing of the variable regions 7, 8, and 9 is not recommended because it gives more ambiguous identifications. The cost of a 16S RNA full-gene-sequencing analysis was Can 160 dollars and Can 60 dollars for a partial 16S rRNA gene sequence, i.e., sequencing of variable regions 1, 2, and 3 or variable regions 7, 8 and 9.
本研究评估了16S rRNA基因序列分析方法,作为兽医诊断实验室中鉴定22株表型难以鉴定的兽医临床细菌分离株的工具。该研究比较了16S rRNA基因测序和传统表型鉴定方法。使用16S rRNA全基因测序,95%(21/22)的分离株被鉴定到属水平,86%(19/22)被鉴定到种水平。传统的或市售的手动鉴定表型特征方法推测将91%(20/22)的分离株鉴定到属水平,1株鉴定到种水平。然而,与16S rRNA全基因测序相比,在属或种水平上,表型鉴定只有55%(12/22)或4.5%(1/22)是正确的。本研究还比较了16S rRNA全基因和部分基因测序。结果表明,最佳的16S rRNA基因测序方法是全基因测序,因为它能给出最精确的物种鉴定。16S rRNA基因可变区1、2和3的测序可用于初步鉴定,因为该测序将细菌鉴定到属水平的能力与16S rRNA全基因测序相似。与16S rRNA全基因序列相比,该方法在种水平上仅鉴定出14%(3/22)的分离株不同。不建议对可变区7、8和9进行测序,因为其鉴定结果更模糊。16S RNA全基因测序分析的成本为160加元,部分16S rRNA基因序列(即可变区1、2和3或可变区7、8和9的测序)的成本为60加元。