4.3 Review

Detection of biological threats. A challenge for directed molecular evolution

期刊

JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS
卷 58, 期 2, 页码 147-168

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.mimet.2004.04.004

关键词

phage display; detection; monitoring; threat agents; landscape library; phage antibodies; Salmonella typhimurium; fluorescence-activated cell sorting; electron microscopy; food safety; food security

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [NIH-1 R21 AI05564501] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The probe technique originated from early attempts of Anton van Leeuwenhoek to contrast microorganisms under the microscope using plant juices, successful staining of tubercle bacilli with synthetic dyes by Paul Ehrlich and discovery of a stain for differentiation of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria by Hans Christian Gram. The technique relies on the principle that pathogens have unique structural features, which can be recognized by specifically labeled organic molecules. A hundred years of extensive screening efforts led to discovery of a limited assortment of organic probes that are used for identification and differentiation of bacteria. A new challenge-continuous monitoring of biological threats-requires long lasting molecular probes capable of tight specific binding of pathogens in unfavorable conditions. To respond to the challenge, probe technology is being revolutionized by utilizing methods of combinatorial chemistry, phage display and directed molecular evolution. This review describes how molecular evolution methods are applied for development of peptide, antibody and phage probes, and summarizes the author's own data on development of landscape phage probes against Salmonella typhimurium. The performance of the probes in detection of Salmonella is illustrated by a precipitation test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) and fluorescent, optical and electron microscopy. (C) 2004 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

4.3
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