4.7 Article

Development and application of oligonucleotide probes for in situ detection of thermotolerant Campylobacter in chicken faecal and liver samples

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD MICROBIOLOGY
卷 105, 期 2, 页码 245-255

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2005.04.012

关键词

in situ hybridisation; thermotolerant Campylobacter; chicken liver; fluorescent probes; 16S-rRNA; 23S-rRNA; ARB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on Campylobacter 16S- and 23S-rRNA sequence data oligonucleotide probes specific for thermotolerant campylobacters and for members of the genus Campylobacter have been developed. The 16S-rRNA-targeted probe CA-MP653, recommended for a comprehensive detection of members of the genus Campylobacter, specifically detected all Campylobacter strains used in this study. Detection of thermotolerant species has been achieved by the 23S-rRNA-targeted probe CAJECO1427. Optimal hybridisation conditions have been derived for both probes from melting profiles of fluorescence-labelled probe-target hybrids recorded in fluorescence in situ hybridisation experiments (FISH). The FISH assay was evaluated both by spiking poultry faecal samples with Campylobacter jejuni and by detecting Campylobacter in naturally colonized chickens. C. jejuni was reliably detected at levels of 106 cfu/g faeces after a 3- h enrichment step in Blood Preston Selective broth. Low level contaminations (<= 10(2) cfu/g) were reliably identified after 24 h of enrichment. By screening cloacal swab samples obtained from birds from a poultry slaughterhouse, thermotolerant Campylobacter spp. were even detected without pre-enrichment. Moreover, the in situ assay was applied on poultry liver samples. The probes allowed a direct, specific detection of thermotolerant Campylobacter in cryosectioned liver samples. Campylobacter spp. detection by FISH using highly specific probes looks promising to become a future monitoring system in a logistic poultry slaughter concept. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V All rights reserved.

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