4.4 Article

Bacterial diversity of loggerhead and green turtle eggs from two major nesting beaches from the Turkish coast of the Mediterranean

期刊

ARCHIVES OF MICROBIOLOGY
卷 204, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00203-022-03292-z

关键词

Bacteria; Beaches; Caretta caretta; Chelonia mydas; Goksu Delta; MALDI-TOF MS; Microbial contamination; Sugozu

资金

  1. BIL (BOTAS International Limited Co., Turkey)
  2. General Directorate for Protection of Natural Assets (Minister of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study conducted in Turkey collected egg samples from loggerhead and green turtle nests and used different methods to identify and analyze the bacteria. It is the first study in Turkey on bacterial variability in turtle eggs, providing valuable references for assessing bacterial threats and establishing suitable conservation measures and treatment processes.
This study was conducted during the 2018 nesting season at the Sugozu Beaches (Adana-Turkey) and Goksu Delta (Mersin-Turkey). Egg samples (n = 63) from loggerhead and green turtle nests (n = 43) were collected. Isolated bacteria were initially identified by phenotypic methods and then by MALDI-TOF MS. The bacterial mass spectra were analyzed using Principal Component Analysis. Bacterial isolation was performed for 55 isolates belonging to 12 genera from two major nesting sites. In Sugozu Beaches 62.2% of the bacteria species belonged to Enterobacteriaceae and in Goksu Delta 44.4% of the bacteria species belonged to Morganellaceae. Klebsiella oxytoca and Staphylococcus haemolyticus had not previously been detected in any sea turtle nests. This is the first MALDI-TOF MS study conducted for determination of bacterial variability in loggerhead turtle eggs in Turkey and serves as a reference study for the assessment of bacterial threat in sea turtle nests, enabling the establishment of suitable conservation measures and treatment processes for both sea turtles and nesting sites.

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