4.6 Article

Classification and Identification of Bacteria by Mass Spectrometry and Computational Analysis

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 3, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002843

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Ministry of Education and Research
  2. European Union
  3. Max-Planck Society

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In general, the definite determination of bacterial species is a tedious process and requires extensive manual labour. Novel technologies for bacterial detection and analysis can therefore help microbiologists in minimising their efforts in developing a number of microbiological applications. Methodology: We present a robust, standardized procedure for automated bacterial analysis that is based on the detection of patterns of protein masses by MALDI mass spectrometry. We particularly applied the approach for classifying and identifying strains in species of the genus Erwinia. Many species of this genus are associated with disastrous plant diseases such as fire blight. Using our experimental procedure, we created a general bacterial mass spectra database that currently contains 2800 entries of bacteria of different genera. This database will be steadily expanded. To support users with a feasible analytical method, we developed and tested comprehensive software tools that are demonstrated herein. Furthermore, to gain additional analytical accuracy and reliability in the analysis we used genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms by mass spectrometry to unambiguously determine closely related strains that are difficult to distinguish by only relying on protein mass pattern detection. Conclusions: With the method for bacterial analysis, we could identify fire blight pathogens from a variety of biological sources. The method can be used for a number of additional bacterial genera. Moreover, the mass spectrometry approach presented allows the integration of data from different biological levels such as the genome and the proteome.

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

4.6
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