4.7 Article

A polyphasic approach to the identification of ochratoxin A-producing black Aspergillus isolates from vineyards in Sicily

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD MICROBIOLOGY
卷 127, 期 1-2, 页码 147-154

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2008.06.021

关键词

Aspergillus; ochratoxin A; PCR identification; ITS analysis; fAFLP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aspergillus strains belonging to section Nigri isolated during a two year survey in eight Sicilian vineyards located on the slopes of Mount Etna (Sicily, Italy) were analysed analyzed in order to characterize species responsible for ochratoxin A (OTA) contamination of grapes. The polyphasic approach permitted analysis of biodiversity of Aspergillus isolates in relation to their morphology, ochratoxigenicity and genetic variability. We assessed OTA production by A. carbonarius, A. niger, A. tubingensis and A. japonicus using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. A. carbonarius isolates were the strongest OTA producers. A subset of 66 representative strains was selected for further DNA-based characterization. PCR assays using species-specific primers discriminated between A. niger, A. carbonarius and A. japonicus on the basis of the target sequences for each species. The PCR-based methods matched morphological characterization in identifying all the black aspergilli (BA) isolates tested, whereas RFLP analysis with Rsal of isolates positive to PCRs with A. niger specific primers identified three A. tubingensis isolates. The identification of thirteen isolates was further confirmed by ITS analysis. By this method, each of the isolates was identified and assigned to an Aspergillus species. The fAFLP analysis of 40 isolates highlighted the power of this technique to discriminate different species and single strains, to verify the presence of mixed populations in the same vineyard, through homogeneous species clusters. No correlation was observed between the clusters and OTA production level or origin. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据