Linton C J, Smart A D, Leeming J P, Jalal H, Telenti A, Bodmer T, Millar M R
Department of Pathology and Microbiology, University of Bristol, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Marlborough Street, Bristol BS2 8HW, UK.
Clin Mol Pathol. 1995 Jun;48(3):M133-5. doi: 10.1136/mp.48.3.m133.
Aim-To compare restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) methods for the epidemiological typing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis.Methods-Thirty one M tuberculosis cultures originating from patients in the Canton of Berne in Switzerland, which had previously been typed by RFLP, were subjected to RAPD analysis. Cultures were coded so that the investigators were blind to the RFLP results until RAPD analysis was complete.Results-The 31 cultures of M tuberculosis were divided into nine groups by RFLP and eight groups by RAPD. Generally there was good correlation between the groups identified by the two techniques, with the exception of strains that had only one copy of IS6110. Both methods subdivided isolates that were placed in a single group by the other method.Conclusions-RAPD analysis is quick, simple, and useful for the comparison of small numbers of isolates. RFLP is more reproducible and therefore better suited for the accumulation of RFLP fingerprints for long term local surveillance and large epidemiological studies.
目的——比较限制性片段长度多态性（RFLP）和随机扩增多态性DNA（RAPD）方法用于结核分枝杆菌的流行病学分型。方法——对31株来自瑞士伯尔尼州患者的结核分枝杆菌培养物进行RAPD分析，这些培养物之前已用RFLP分型。培养物进行编码，以便研究人员在RAPD分析完成之前对RFLP结果不知情。结果——31株结核分枝杆菌培养物通过RFLP分为9组，通过RAPD分为8组。总体而言，两种技术鉴定出 的组之间有良好的相关性，但只有一个IS6110拷贝的菌株除外。两种方法都对被另一种方法归为单一组的分离株进行了细分。结论——RAPD分析快速、简单，对于少量分离株的比较很有用。RFLP更具可重复性，因此更适合长期局部监测和大型流行病学研究中RFLP指纹图谱的积累。
