Simons K R, Morton R J, Mosier D A, Fulton R W, Confer A W
Department of Veterinary Parasitology, Microbiology and Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater 74078.
J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Apr;27(4):664-7. doi: 10.1128/jcm.27.4.664-667.1989.
The French pressure cell and sonication methods of bacterial cell disruption were compared for the evaluation of surface proteins from Pasteurella haemolytica A1. Several protein bands were quantitatively different when compared by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, immunoblotting, and densitometry. With densitometry, sonicated preparations had higher concentrations of the 102-, 83-, 50-, 38-, and 30-kilodalton (kDa) proteins; French pressure cell preparations had higher concentrations of the 96-, 65-, and 42-kDa proteins. Qualitative differences between these two disruption methods were evident at the 102-, 96-, 91-, 50-, 38-, and 30-kDa protein bands. However, significant differences (P less than 0.05) were detected between the two methods at only the 102-, 96-, 91-, and 50-kDa bands.
为评估溶血巴斯德菌A1的表面蛋白,对法国压力破碎法和超声破碎法这两种细菌细胞破碎方法进行了比较。通过十二烷基硫酸钠-聚丙烯酰胺凝胶电泳、免疫印迹和光密度测定法进行比较时,几条蛋白条带在数量上存在差异。用光密度测定法检测发现,超声破碎制备物中102、83、50、38和30千道尔顿(kDa)的蛋白浓度较高;法国压力破碎制备物中96、65和42 kDa的蛋白浓度较高。这两种破碎方法在102、96、91、50、38和30 kDa蛋白条带处存在明显的质量差异。然而,仅在102、96、91和50 kDa条带处检测到两种方法之间存在显著差异(P小于0.05)。