4.3 Article

Evaluation of a Multiplex Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction for the Quantification of Escherichia coli O157 in Cattle Feces

期刊

FOODBORNE PATHOGENS AND DISEASE
卷 9, 期 1, 页码 79-85

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC
DOI: 10.1089/fpd.2011.0947

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Agriculture [2008-35201-04679]
  2. NIFA [2008-35201-04679, 582937] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cattle are asymptomatic reservoirs for Escherichia coli O157, a major foodborne pathogen. The organism generally colonizes the hindgut of cattle and is shed in the feces at low concentrations. The objective of this research was to evaluate a multiplex, real-time polymerase chain reaction (mqPCR) assay for quantification of E. coli O157 in cattle feces using stx1, stx2, and rfbE gene targets. Primer efficiency and analytical sensitivity of the assay were evaluated with a single or pooled (five strain) culture of E. coli O157. In pure culture, the minimum detection limit of the assay was 1.4 x 10(3) CFU/mL and 3.6 x 10(3) CFU/mL for the single and five-strain mixture of E. coli O157, respectively. Diagnostic sensitivity was analyzed using DNA extracted from cattle feces spiked with E. coli O157. In feces spiked with the pooled mixture of five E. coli O157 strains, the minimum detection limit was 3.6 x 10(4) CFU/g. We also evaluated the assay with feces from cattle experimentally inoculated with E. coli O157 by comparing the results to a culture-based method. For the majority of samples tested, the concentration of E. coli O157 detected by the real-time and culture methods was within one log difference. However, the assay could only be evaluated for cattle shedding high concentrations of E. coli O157. In conclusion, the mqPCR quantifying E. coli O157 in cattle feces using stx1, stx2, and rfbE gene targets may have use in detecting and quantifying super shedders, but is not applicable for quantification in animals shedding low concentrations (10(2) to 10(3) CFU/g feces).

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