4.7 Article

Genetic profiling of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli strains in relation to clonality and clinical signs of infection

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 40, Issue 3, Pages 959-964

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.40.3.959-954.2002

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sixty-seven human strains of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) (from patients with more or less severe symptoms) were serogrouped and arranged according to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) patterns. We used PCR to investigate the strains according to known or putative virulence factors, and associations with disease were studied. All EHEC strains with the same PFGE pattern belonged to the same serogroup. On the contrary, two serogroups (O157 and O8) included strains with different PFGE patterns. We found several different combinations of chromosomal and plasmid-borne determinants, encoding the putative virulence factors, among the strains. As judged from clinical symptoms, there was no marked difference in pathogenicity among the strains and their combinations of virulence traits. All strains of O157 had the genes coding for verocytotoxin (VT) 2, intimin (eaeA), E. coli hemolysin (E-hly),, and secreted serine protease (espP). Among EHEC non-O157 strains, the genes coding for VT1 and VT2 were equally dispersed. EaeA positivity was just as common among VT1- as VT2-positive strains. Among the plasmid-borne determinants, E-hly and espP were the most common and E-hly might be a pathogenicity marker among EHEC non-O157 strains. The conclusion is that PFGE is a very useful tool in epidemiological studies. The EHEC plasmids are heterogeneous in their gene composition, with the four plasmid-borne determinants found in many combinations. There was no reliable correlation between chromosomal and plasmid-borne virulence factors and human disease.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available