Comparison of ribotyping and multilocus enzyme electrophoresis for subtyping of Listeria monocytogenes isolates

核糖体分型和多位点酶电泳在单增李斯特菌分离株亚型鉴定中的比较

阅读:3

Abstract

Ribotyping was compared with multilocus enzyme electrophoresis (MEE) for subtyping 305 Listeria monocytogenes isolates from clinical and nonclinical sources. For ribotyping, EcoRI-restricted genomic DNA fragments of L. monocytogenes strains were separated by agarose gel electrophoresis, and Southern blots were probed with a cloned Escherichia coli rrnB operon (plasmid pKK3535) labeled with digoxigenin. The L. monocytogenes isolates were divided into 28 distinct ribotypes, while MEE analysis divided the same isolates into 78 electrophoretic types (ETs). On the basis of their ribotype profiles, the strains were divided into two subgroups. The ribotype alpha (RT alpha) subgroup contained serotypes 1/2a, 1/2c, and 3a, and the ribotype beta (RT beta) subgroup contained serotypes 1/2b, 3b, 4b, and 4ab. This division is in complete agreement with MEE analysis, which divides the species into two subgroups (ET groups A and B), with the same serotype distribution in each subgroup. Overall, MEE was more discriminating than ribotyping. However, in several instances ribotyping discriminated between isolates within the same ET. Ribotyping was more discriminating for serotypes 1/2a, 1/2c, and 3a (Simpson's Index for Diversity [DI] = 0.81) than for serotypes 1/2b and 4b (DI = 0.76). A substantial proportion (69%) of serotype 1/2b and 4b strains clustered in five ETs and five ribotypes. These data suggest that ribotyping and MEE do not provide adequate discrimination between strains of serotypes 1/2b and 4b. Methods such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis should be explored for further discrimination of strains of these serotypes.

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。