4.5 Article

Comparative efficacy of five different rep-PCR methods to discriminate Escherichia coli populations in aquatic environments

期刊

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 58, 期 3, 页码 537-547

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2008.424

关键词

DNA fingerprinting; Escherichia coli; (GTG)(5)-PCR; microbial source tracking; molecular typing; rep-PCR

资金

  1. Canadian Institute of Health Research
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Industrial Research Chair

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Development of efficient techniques to discriminate the sources of E. coli in aquatic environments is essential to improve the surveillance of fecal pollution indicators, to develop strategies to identify the sources of fecal contamination, and to implement appropriate management practices to minimize gastrointestinal disease transmission. In this study the robustness of five different rep-PCR methods, such as REP-PCR, ERIC-PCR, ERIC2-PCR, BOX-PCR and (GTG)(5)-PCR were evaluated to discriminate 271 E. coli strains isolated from two watersheds (Lakelse Lake and Okanagan Lake) located in British Columbia, Canada. Cluster analysis of (GTG)(5)-PCR, BOX-PCR, REP-PCR, ERIC-PCR and ERIC2-PCR profiles of 271 E. coli revealed 43 clusters, 35 clusters, 28 clusters, 23 clusters and 14 clusters, respectively. The discriminant analysis of rep-PCR genomic fingerprints of 271 E. coli isolates yielded an average rate of correct classification (watershed-specific) of 86.8%, 82.3%, 78.4%, 72.6% and 55.8% for (GTG)(5)-PCR, BOX-PCR, REP-PCR, ERIC-PCR and ERIC2-PCR, respectively. Based on the results of cluster analysis and discriminant function analysis, (GTG)(5)-PCR was found to be the most robust molecular tool for differentiation of E. coli populations in aquatic environments.

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

4.5
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