4.7 Article

Enhancement of Campylobacter hepaticus culturing to facilitate downstream applications

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-00277-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. Vietnam International Education Development
  2. RMIT Scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Campylobacter hepaticus causes Spotty Liver Disease in chickens, and this study developed an enhanced liquid culture method for the efficient production of bacterial biomass. The addition of l-cysteine, l-glutamine, and sodium pyruvate significantly increased C. hepaticus growth, leading to nearly a tenfold increase in culture density.
Campylobacter hepaticus causes Spotty Liver Disease (SLD) in chickens. C. hepaticus is fastidious and slow-growing, presenting difficulties when growing this bacterium for the preparation of bacterin vaccines and experimental disease challenge trials. This study applied genomic analysis and in vitro experiments to develop an enhanced C. hepaticus liquid culture method. In silico analysis of the anabolic pathways encoded by C. hepaticus revealed that the bacterium is unable to biosynthesise l-cysteine, l-lysine and l-arginine. It was found that l-cysteine added to Brucella broth, significantly enhanced the growth of C. hepaticus, but l-lysine or l-arginine addition did not enhance growth. Brucella broth supplemented with l-cysteine (0.4 mM), l-glutamine (4 mM), and sodium pyruvate (10 mM) gave high-density growth of C. hepaticus and resulted in an almost tenfold increase in culture density compared to the growth in Brucella broth alone (log10 = 9.3 vs 8.4 CFU/mL). The type of culture flask used also significantly affected C. hepaticus culture density. An SLD challenge trial demonstrated that C. hepaticus grown in the enhanced culture conditions retained full virulence. The enhanced liquid culture method developed in this study enables the efficient production of bacterial biomass and therefore facilitates further studies of SLD biology and vaccine development.

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