4.4 Article

Clonal structure of Streptococcus sanguinis strains isolated from endocarditis cases and the oral cavity

期刊

MOLECULAR ORAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 26, 期 5, 页码 291-302

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.2041-1014.2011.00618.x

关键词

CLONALFRAME; endocarditis; multi-locus sequence typing; Streptococcus sanguinis

资金

  1. Dental Institute, King's College London
  2. Department of Health via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre
  3. King's College London
  4. King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A collection of Streptococcus sanguinis strains from patients with endocarditis (n = 21) and from the oral cavity (n = 34) was subjected to a multilocus sequence typing analysis using seven housekeeping genes, carbamoyl-phosphate synthetase (carB), Co/Zn/Cd efflux system component (czcD), D-alanyl-D-alanine ligase (ddl), DNA polymerase III (dnaX), glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (gdh), DNA-directed RNA polymerase, beta subunit (rpoB) and superoxide dismutase (sodA). The scheme was expanded by the inclusion of two the putative virulence genes, bacitracin-resistance protein (bacA) and saliva-binding protein (ssaB), to increase strain discrimination. Extensive intra-species recombination was apparent in all genes but inter-species recombination was also apparent with strains apparently harbouring gdh and ddl from unidentified sources and one isolate harboured a sodA allele apparently derived from Streptococcus oralis. The recombination/mutation ratio for the concatenated housekeeping gene sequences was 1.67 (95% confidence limits 1.25-2.72) and for the two virulence genes the r/m ratio was 3.99 (95% confidence limits 1.61-8.72); recombination was the major driver for genetic variation. All isolates were distinct and the endocarditis strains did not form distinct sub-clusters when the data were analysed using CLONALFRAME. These data support the widely held opinion that infecting S. sanguinis strains are opportunistic human pathogens.

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

4.4
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