4.7 Article

Development of RT-qPCR and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays for the rapid detection of Rahnella aquatilis in fish

期刊

AQUACULTURE
卷 578, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2023.740117

关键词

Rahnella aquatilis; RT-qPCR; LAMP; Diagnosis; Fish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents the first report of RT-qPCR and LAMP methods for the detection of R. aquatilis, providing a reliable means for its rapid detection and diagnosis in fish.
Rahnella aquatilis is widely recognized as an opportunistic pathogen of fish, but molecular detection and diagnostic techniques for it remain to be developed. In a previous study, we isolated the pathogenic R. aquatilis strain KCL-5 from diseased crucian carp Carassius auratus and identified it as a new fish pathogen causing enteritis and septicemia. Here, we describe novel real-time quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays for the rapid and sensitive detection of R. aquatilis. Specific RT-qPCR and LAMP primers were developed for the outer membrane protein (OmpA) gene. Their reaction systems were optimized using the recombinant plasmid pMD18-T containing the OmpA gene and their specificities were confirmed using various bacterial fish pathogens including Aeromonas hydrophila, A. veronii, A. allosaccharophila, Yersinia ruckeri, Vibrio vulnificus, V. alfacsensis, Providencia rettgeri, and R. aquatilis. The sensitivities of the RT-qPCR and LAMP assays were further evaluated using serial dilutions of the positive recombinant plasmid pMD18-T/OmpA. Both the RT-qPCR and LAMP assays were able to reliably detect the presence of R. aquatilis with high accuracy and a specificity of 100%. The lowest detection limits of the RT-qPCR and LAMP assays were 2.3 copies/mu L and 2.3 x 101 copies/mu L, respectively. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of RT-qPCR and LAMP methods for R. aquatilis detection, and provides a means for its rapid detection and diagnosis in fish.

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