4.7 Article

Real-time fluorescence PCR assays for detection and characterization of heat-labile I and heat-stable I enterotoxin genes from enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 42, 期 9, 页码 4092-4100

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.42.9.4092-4100.2004

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To facilitate the diagnosis of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) infections in humans, we developed and evaluated real-time fluorescence PCR assays for the Roche LightCycler (LC) against the enterotoxin genes commonly present in strains associated with human illness. Separate LC-PCR assays with identical cycling conditions were designed for the type I heat-labile enterotoxin (LT I) and the type I heat-stable enterotoxin (ST 1) genes, using the LC hybridization probe format. A duplex assay for ST I with two sets of amplification primers and three hybridization probes was required to detect the major nucleotide sequence variants of ST 1, ST la and ST Ib. LC-PCR findings from the testing of 161 E. coli isolates of human origin (138 ETEC and 23 non-ETEC) were compared with those obtained by block cycler PCR analysis. The sensitivities and specificities of the LC-PCR assays were each 100% for the LT I and ST I genes. The LC-PCR and block cycler PCR assays were also compared for their abilities to detect LT I and ST I genes in spiked stool specimens with different methods of sample preparation. Findings from these experiments revealed that the limits of detection for the LC-PCR assays were the same or substantially lower than those observed for the block cycler PCR assay. Melting curve analysis of the amplified LT I and ST I genes revealed sequence variation within each gene, which for the ST I genes correlated with the presence of ST la and ST 1b. The rapidity, sensitivity, and specificity of the LC-PCR assays make them attractive alternatives to block cycler PCR assays for the detection and characterization of ETEC.

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