| Literature DB >> 20016810 |
Lara R P Amorim1, Joana G L Silva, Paul A Gibbs, Paula C Teixeira.
Abstract
This study was performed to evaluate the adaption of the impedimetric method to detect the lytic infection by Salmonella-specific bacteriophages and to provide a higher selectivity to this rapid method in detecting Salmonella spp. by using specific agents. Three bacteriophages and twelve strains of Salmonella spp. were tested. Each of the twelve strains was used separately to inoculate TSB together with each one of the phages. The inoculum concentration was between 10(6) and 10(7) cfu/mL, at a cell: phage ratio of 1 : 100. From the sample analysis, based on conductance (G) measurements (37 degrees C), the infection could be detected, by observation of both detection-time delay and distinct curve trends. The main conclusions were that kinetic detection by impedance microbiology with phage typing constitutes a method of determining whether a test microorganism is sensitive to the bacteriophage and a method to evaluate whether a lytic bacteriophage is present in a sample, by affecting bacterial growth rate/metabolic change.Entities:
Year: 2009 PMID: 20016810 PMCID: PMC2789333 DOI: 10.1155/2009/259456
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Microbiol
Susceptibility of tested bacteria to phages according to spot test method.
| Isolate |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| S1400/94' | + (6.33)* | + (7.21) | + (7.08) |
| 869' | + (11.8) | + (13.5) | + (12.1) |
| 128' | + (12.9) | + (12.6) | + (12.4) |
| 172 | + (10.8) | + (8.50) | + (8.00) |
| 205 | + (6.83) | − | − |
| 002 | − | − | − |
| 161 | + (7.33) | − | − |
| 195 | + (9.45) | − | − |
| 036 | − | − | − |
| 152 | + (12.5) | + (10.0) | + (9.10) |
| 039 | + (3.38) | − | − |
| 023 | + (3.42) | − | − |
*The values presented between parentheses correspond to average regarding the plaque size.
A positive indication (+) means that the isolate is susceptible to the phage and produces plaques, while a negative (−) indicates that no plaques were observed.
Effect of cell concentration on the detection times.
| Detection time (hours) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cell concentration | S1400/94 | 869' | 128' |
| 104 (a) | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 2.6 ± 0.2 | 2.5 ± 0.2 |
| 105 (b) | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.2 |
| 106 (c) | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 1.3 ± 0.2 |
| 107 (d) | 0.8 ± 0.1 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 0.9 ± 0.1 |
| 108 (e) | 3.8 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.2 | 3.7 ± 0.2 |
| 109 (f) | — | — | — |
Note: Means and standard deviations are based on three experiments in duplicate.
Figure 1Detectable change in electrical characteristics checked at several bacteria densities. There were considered the mean values of duplicates from three experiments made for a representative phage (2/2) and its bacterial host (S1400/94): (a) 104 cfu/mL; (b) 105 cfu/mL; (c) 106 cfu/mL; (d) 107 cfu/mL; (e) 108 cfu/mL; (f) 109 cfu/mL.
Figure 2Effect of cell : phage ratio on the detection times and percentage change of conductance of 2/2 bacteriophage host S1400/94. These values were obtained from three experiments, in duplicate. Cell : phage ratio—(a) 1 : 0; (b) 1 : 0.1; (c) 1 : 1; (d) 1 : 10; (e) 1 : 100.
Effect of cell to phage ratio on detection times.
| Detection time (hours) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cell : phage ratio | S1400/94 | 869' | 128' |
| 1 : 0 (a) | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.2 |
| 1 : 0.1 (b) | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.3 |
| 1 : 1 (c) | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.3 |
| 1 : 10 (d) | 4.8 ± 0.2 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 4.9 ± 0.2 |
| 1 : 100 (e) | 8.0 ± 0.3 | 8.1 ± 0.3 | 8.3 ± 0.3 |
Note: Means and standard deviations are based on three experiments in duplicate.
Results obtained from conductimetric tests.
| Detection time (hours) | Differential between curves (area) (mm2)* | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacteria | No phage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| S1400/94 | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 4.5 ± 0.1 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | 2.5 ± 0.5 | 5.6 ± 1.3 | 2.7 ± 0.2 | 3.0 ± 0.2 |
| 869' | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 6.5 ± 0.4 | 2.1 ± 0.2 | 3.1 ± 0.5 | 7.7 ± 0.4 | 4.3 ± 0.5 | 5.7 ± 0.4 |
| 128' | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 6.6 ± 0.7 | 4.0 ± 0.5 | 2.6 ± 0.4 | 6.9 ± 0.5 | 6.2 ± 0.4 | 4.5 ± 0.3 |
| 172 | 1.1 ± 0.4 | 6.6 ± 0.9 | 7.4 ± 0.3 | 8.5 ± 0.5 | 9.0 ± 0.9 | 7.6 ± 1.6 | 8.4 ± 0.1 |
| 205 | 1.5 ± 0.1 | 7.0 ± 0.2 | 6.7 ± 0.3 | 6.8 ± 0.1 | 8.3 ± 0.8 | 4.2 ± 0.6 | 6.7 ± 0.3 |
| 002 | 1.3 ± 0.2 | 7.2 ± 0.7 | 7.2 ± 0.2 | 5.0 ± 0.2 | 8.7 ± 0.7 | 4.4 ± 0.3 | 4.7 ± 0.2 |
| 161 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 8.0 ± 0.4 | 3.1 ± 0.3 | 2.5 ± 0.3 | 7.8 ± 0.6 | 4.7 ± 0.3 | 3.4 ± 0.5 |
| 195 | 1.7 ± 0.4 | 6.9 ± 0.3 | 6.1 ± 0.3 | 7.5 ± 0.2 | 6.4 ± 0.6 | 6.5 ± 0.1 | 13.4 ± 0.3 |
| 036 | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 7.5 ± 0.3 | 6.1 ± 0.5 | 7.2 ± 0.3 | 9.2 ± 0.6 | 4.1 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.2 |
| 152 | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 6.8 ± 0.7 | 6.7 ± 0.4 | 7.0 ± 0.4 | 8.6 ± 0.7 | 8.1 ± 0.5 | 6.6 ± 0.6 |
| 039 | 2.0 ± 0.3 | 6.5 ± 0.8 | 6.5 ± 0.2 | 6.5 ± 0.6 | 8.8 ± 0.5 | 7.1 ± 1.1 | 8.4 ± 0.2 |
| 023 | 1.4 ± 0.4 | 4.0 ± 0.6 | 4.5 ± 0.2 | 4.1 ± 0.3 | 4.1 ± 0.3 | 3.1 ± 0.6 | 5.9 ± 0.3 |
Note: Means and standard deviations are based on three experiments in duplicate.
*The differential between curves is obtained by calculating the area between the control curve (sample with no phage) and that of the sample (with a phage).