4.4 Article

Isolation of Escherichia coli bacteriophages from the stool of pediatric diarrhea patients in Bangladesh

Journal

JOURNAL OF BACTERIOLOGY
Volume 186, Issue 24, Pages 8287-8294

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JB.186.24.8287-8294.2004

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A 3-week coliphage survey was conducted in stool samples from 140 Bangladeshi children hospitalized with severe diarrhea. On the Escherichia coli indicator strain K803, all but one phage isolate had 170-kb genomes and the morphology of T4 phage. In spot tests, the individual T4-like phages infected up to 27 out of 40 diarrhea-associated E. coli, representing 22 O serotypes and various virulence factors; only five of them were not infected by any of these new phages. A combination of diagnostic PCR based on g32 (DNA binding) and g23 (major capsid protein) and Southern hybridization revealed that half were T-even phages sensu strictu, while the other half were pseudo-T-even or even more distantly related T4-like phages that failed to cross-hybridize with T4 or between each other. Nineteen percent of the acute stool samples yielded T4-like phages, and the prevalence was lower in convalescent stool samples. T4-like phages were also isolated from environmental and sewage water, but with low frequency and low titers. On the enteropathogenic E. coli strain O127:K63, 14% of the patients yielded phage, all of which were members of the phage family Siphoviridae with 50-kb genomes, showing the morphology of Jersey- and beta-4 like phages and narrow lytic patterns on E. coli O serotypes. Three siphovirus types could be differentiated by lack of cross-hybridization. Only a few stool samples were positive on both indicator strains. Phages with closely related restriction patterns and, in the case of T4-like phages, identical g23 gene sequences were isolated from different patients, suggesting epidemiological links between the patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available