Martin F N, Coffey M D, Zeller K, Hamelin R C, Tooley P, Garbelotto M, Hughes K J D, Kubisiak T, Bilodeau G J, Levy L, Blomquist C, Berger P H
United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), Salinas, CA, USA.
Phytopathology. 2009 Apr;99(4):390-403. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-99-4-0390.
Given the importance of Phytophthora ramorum from a regulatory standpoint, it is imperative that molecular markers for pathogen detection are fully tested to evaluate their specificity in detection of the pathogen. In an effort to evaluate 11 reported diagnostic techniques, we assembled a standardized DNA library using accessions from the World Phytophthora Genetic Resource Collection for 315 isolates representing 60 described Phytophthora spp. as well as 11 taxonomically unclassified isolates. These were sent blind to collaborators in seven laboratories to evaluate published diagnostic procedures using conventional (based on internal transcribed spacer [ITS] and cytochrome oxidase gene [cox]1 and 2 spacer regions) and real-time polymerase chain reaction (based on ITS and cox1 and 2 spacer regions as well as beta-tubulin and elicitin genes). Single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis using an automated sequencer for data collection was also evaluated for identification of all species tested. In general, the procedures worked well, with varying levels of specificity observed among the different techniques. With few exceptions, all assays correctly identified all isolates of P. ramorum and low levels of false positives were observed for the mitochondrial cox spacer markers and most of the real-time assays based on nuclear markers (diagnostic specificity between 96.9 and 100%). The highest level of false positives was obtained with the conventional nested ITS procedure; however, this technique is not stand-alone and is used in conjunction with two other assays for diagnostic purposes. The results indicated that using multiple assays improved the accuracy of the results compared with looking at a single assay alone, in particular when the markers represented different genetic loci. The SSCP procedure accurately identified P. ramorum and was helpful in classification of a number of isolates to a species level. With one exception, all procedures accurately identified P. ramorum in blind evaluations of 60 field samples that included examples of plant infection by 11 other Phytophthora spp. The SSCP analysis identified eight of these species, with three identified to a species group.
鉴于从监管角度来看,栎树猝死病菌十分重要,因此必须对用于病原体检测的分子标记进行全面测试,以评估其在检测该病原体时的特异性。为了评估11种已报道的诊断技术,我们利用世界疫霉遗传资源库中的材料,构建了一个标准化DNA文库,其中包含代表60种已描述疫霉属物种的315个分离株以及11个分类学上未分类的分离株。这些样本被匿名发送给七个实验室的合作人员,以评估已发表的诊断程序,这些程序包括传统方法(基于内转录间隔区[ITS]和细胞色素氧化酶基因[cox]1和2间隔区)和实时聚合酶链反应(基于ITS、cox1和2间隔区以及β-微管蛋白和激发素基因)。还评估了使用自动测序仪收集数据的单链构象多态性(SSCP)分析,以鉴定所有测试物种。总体而言,这些程序运行良好,不同技术之间观察到的特异性水平各不相同。除了少数例外情况,所有检测方法都能正确鉴定出所有栎树猝死病菌分离株,线粒体cox间隔区标记和大多数基于核标记的实时检测方法的假阳性水平较低(诊断特异性在96.9%至100%之间)。传统的巢式ITS程序产生的假阳性水平最高;然而,该技术并非独立使用,而是与其他两种检测方法结合用于诊断目的。结果表明,与单独查看单一检测方法相比,使用多种检测方法可提高结果的准确性,特别是当标记代表不同基因座时。SSCP程序准确鉴定出栎树猝死病菌,并有助于将许多分离株分类到物种水平。在对60个田间样本的盲测中,除了一个例外情况,所有程序都准确鉴定出了栎树猝死病菌,这些样本包括11种其他疫霉属物种引起植物感染的实例。SSCP分析鉴定出了其中的8个物种,3个被鉴定到物种组。