Comparative evaluation of lateral flow immunoassays, LAMP, and quantitative PCR for diagnosis of fire blight in apple orchards

侧向流动免疫测定法、LAMP法和定量PCR法在苹果园火疫病诊断中的比较评价

阅读:2

Abstract

Fire blight remains a serious threat to commercial apple production in the USA and worldwide. Other diseases and spray damage can result in fire blight-like symptoms that can lead to misdiagnosis and affect disease management strategies. Accurate and timely detection of the fire blight pathogen, Erwinia amylovora, is extremely important to deploy appropriate and timely measures to reduce fire blight epidemics in commercial apple orchards. We tested two commercial lateral flow immunoassays (AgriStrip®, and Pocket Diagnostics kit), Loop mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and quantitative PCR (qPCR) to diagnose E. amylovora infected samples in lab and field settings. The AgriStrip® and Pocket Diagnostics kits were able to detect actively growing bacteria up to ×10(6) cfu/ml bacterial concentration. Pocket Diagnostics kit had less specificity and showed positive tests for E. pyrifolia in addition to E. amylovora. The LAMP assay showed high specificity for E. amylovora and was able to detect up to ×10(3) cfu/ml bacterial concentrations. The qPCR assay was also able to detect bacterial cells up to ×10(-3) cfu/ml bacterial concentration with highly specific E. amylovora detection. Grower surveys and comparative cost-benefit analysis indicated that immunoassay kits are less expensive, easier to use, and require less technical expertise for on-site fire blight diagnosis than LAMP and qPCR. However, the choice of a specific diagnostic assay depends on the time, sensitivity, and specificity required for the detection of fire blight and its management.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。