4.6 Article

Identification and measurement of staphylococcal enterotoxin-like protein I (SElI) secretion from Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolate

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 121, 期 2, 页码 539-546

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jam.13181

关键词

enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; SEI; staphylococcal enterotoxin-like protein I; staphylococcal enterotoxins; staphylococcal food poisoning

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31371781, 31400794]
  2. Applied Basic Research Programs of Sichuan Province [2014JY0253]
  3. New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-11-0847]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: Staphylococcus aureus (Staph. aureus) produces a wide variety of staphylococcal enterotoxins (SEs) and staphylococcal enterotoxin-like (SEl) proteins, which are the most causative agents of staphylococcal food poisoning. In contrast to classical SEs (SEA to SEE), the relationship between the novel SEs/SEls (SEG to SElX) and staphylococcal food poisoning is not elucidated. This study is aimed to establish a system to detect staphylococcal enterotoxin-like protein I (SElI) for analysis of staphylococcal food poisoning. Methods and Results: SElI was characterized in a Staph. aureus clinical isolate associated with food poisoning; there was an amino acid substitution Thr145Ala compared to previously identified SEI from Staph. aureus 04-02981. Subsequently, SElI was expressed, purified, and the poly-and monoclonal antibodies against it were prepared. Using these antibodies, a highly sensitive sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) that specifically detected and measured SElI secretion from the Staph. aureus clinical isolate in LB medium, milk and bloodstream was developed. Conclusions: The ELISA system has been successfully applied for analysing SElI secretion in vivo and in vitro. Significance and Impact of the Study: The highly sensitive ELISA should make it attractive for quantifying SElI in food hygiene supervision and clinical diagnosis in near future.

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