Literature DB >> 24487529

Comparative analysis and limitations of ethidium monoazide and propidium monoazide treatments for the differentiation of viable and nonviable campylobacter cells.

Diana Seinige1, Carsten Krischek, Günter Klein, Corinna Kehrenberg.   

Abstract

The lack of differentiation between viable and nonviable bacterial cells limits the implementation of PCR-based methods for routine diagnostic approaches. Recently, the combination of a quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and ethidium monoazide (EMA) or propidium monoazide (PMA) pretreatment has been described to circumvent this disadvantage. In regard to the suitability of this approach for Campylobacter spp., conflicting results have been reported. Thus, we compared the suitabilities of EMA and PMA in various concentrations for a Campylobacter viability qPCR method. The presence of either intercalating dye, EMA or PMA, leads to concentration-dependent shifts toward higher threshold cycle (CT) values, especially after EMA treatment. However, regression analysis resulted in high correlation coefficient (R(2)) values of 0.99 (EMA) and 0.98 (PMA) between Campylobacter counts determined by qPCR and culture-based enumeration. EMA (10 μg/ml) and PMA (51.10 μg/ml) removed DNA selectively from nonviable cells in mixed samples at viable/nonviable ratios of up to 1:1,000. The optimized EMA protocol was successfully applied to 16 Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli field isolates from poultry and indicated the applicability for field isolates as well. EMA-qPCR and culture-based enumeration of Campylobacter spiked chicken leg quarters resulted in comparable bacterial cell counts. The correlation coefficient between the two analytical methods was 0.95. Nevertheless, larger amounts of nonviable cells (>10(4)) resulted in an incomplete qPCR signal reduction, representing a serious methodological limitation, but double staining with EMA considerably improved the signal inhibition. Hence, the proposed Campylobacter viability EMA-qPCR provides a promising rapid method for diagnostic applications, but further research is needed to circumvent the limitation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24487529      PMCID: PMC3993131          DOI: 10.1128/AEM.03962-13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol        ISSN: 0099-2240            Impact factor:   4.792


  31 in total

1.  Reverse transcriptase real-time PCR for detection and quantification of viable Campylobacter jejuni directly from poultry faecal samples.

Authors:  Xuan Thanh Bui; Anders Wolff; Mogens Madsen; Dang Duong Bang
Journal:  Res Microbiol       Date:  2011-10-21       Impact factor: 3.992

2.  Comparison of propidium monoazide with ethidium monoazide for differentiation of live vs. dead bacteria by selective removal of DNA from dead cells.

Authors:  Andreas Nocker; Ching-Ying Cheung; Anne K Camper
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2006-06-05       Impact factor: 2.363

3.  [Comparing methods of measurement].

Authors:  U Grouven; R Bender; A Ziegler; S Lange
Journal:  Dtsch Med Wochenschr       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 0.628

4.  Selective removal of DNA from dead cells of mixed bacterial communities by use of ethidium monoazide.

Authors:  Andreas Nocker; Anne K Camper
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Rapid quantification of viable Campylobacter bacteria on chicken carcasses, using real-time PCR and propidium monoazide treatment, as a tool for quantitative risk assessment.

Authors:  M H Josefsen; C Löfström; T B Hansen; L S Christensen; J E Olsen; J Hoorfar
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2010-06-18       Impact factor: 4.792

6.  Most Campylobacter subtypes from sporadic infections can be found in retail poultry products and food animals.

Authors:  E M Nielsen; V Fussing; J Engberg; N L Nielsen; J Neimann
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2005-11-29       Impact factor: 2.451

7.  EMA-real-time PCR as a reliable method for detection of viable Salmonella in chicken and eggs.

Authors:  Luxin Wang; Azlin Mustapha
Journal:  J Food Sci       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.167

8.  Insufficient differentiation of live and dead Campylobacter jejuni and Listeria monocytogenes cells by ethidium monoazide (EMA) compromises EMA/real-time PCR.

Authors:  Gabriele Flekna; Polonca Stefanic; Martin Wagner; Frans J M Smulders; Sonja Smole Mozina; Ingeborg Hein
Journal:  Res Microbiol       Date:  2007-03-12       Impact factor: 3.992

9.  Molecular monitoring of disinfection efficacy using propidium monoazide in combination with quantitative PCR.

Authors:  Andreas Nocker; Katherine E Sossa; Anne K Camper
Journal:  J Microbiol Methods       Date:  2007-05-01       Impact factor: 2.363

10.  Rapid identification and quantification of Campylobacter coli and Campylobacter jejuni by real-time PCR in pure cultures and in complex samples.

Authors:  Mily Leblanc-Maridor; François Beaudeau; Henri Seegers; Martine Denis; Catherine Belloc
Journal:  BMC Microbiol       Date:  2011-05-22       Impact factor: 3.605

View more
  13 in total

1.  Direct detection from clinical sputum samples to differentiate live and dead Mycobacterium Tuberculosis.

Authors:  Jie Lu; Huiwen Zheng; Ping Chu; Shujing Han; Hui Yang; Zhongdong Wang; Jin Shi; Zuosen Yang
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 2.352

2.  Evaluation of Assays to Quantify Infectious Human Norovirus for Heat and High-Pressure Inactivation Studies Using Tulane Virus.

Authors:  Xinhui Li; Runze Huang; Haiqiang Chen
Journal:  Food Environ Virol       Date:  2017-02-25       Impact factor: 2.778

3.  Changes in physiological states of Salmonella Typhimurium measured by qPCR with PMA and DyeTox13 Green Azide after pasteurization and UV treatment.

Authors:  Liyan Li; Jing Fu; Sungwoo Bae
Journal:  Appl Microbiol Biotechnol       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Influencing factors and applicability of the viability EMA-qPCR for a detection and quantification of Campylobacter cells from water samples.

Authors:  Diana Seinige; Maren von Köckritz-Blickwede; Carsten Krischek; Günter Klein; Corinna Kehrenberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Evaluation of Various Campylobacter-Specific Quantitative PCR (qPCR) Assays for Detection and Enumeration of Campylobacteraceae in Irrigation Water and Wastewater via a Miniaturized Most-Probable-Number-qPCR Assay.

Authors:  Graham S Banting; Shannon Braithwaite; Candis Scott; Jinyong Kim; Byeonghwa Jeon; Nicholas Ashbolt; Norma Ruecker; Lisa Tymensen; Jollin Charest; Katarina Pintar; Sylvia Checkley; Norman F Neumann
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 4.792

6.  A Dual Filtration-Based Multiplex PCR Method for Simultaneous Detection of Viable Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, and Staphylococcus aureus on Fresh-Cut Cantaloupe.

Authors:  Ke Feng; Wenzhong Hu; Aili Jiang; Yongping Xu; Yu Zou; Liu Yang; Xin Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Detection and Enumeration of Spore-Forming Bacteria in Powdered Dairy Products.

Authors:  Aoife J McHugh; Conor Feehily; Colin Hill; Paul D Cotter
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 5.640

8.  Development of a propidium monoazide-polymerase chain reaction assay for detection of viable Lactobacillus brevis in beer.

Authors:  Yanlin Ma; Yang Deng; Zhenbo Xu; Junyan Liu; Jianjun Dong; Hua Yin; Junhong Yu; Zongming Chang; Dongfeng Wang
Journal:  Braz J Microbiol       Date:  2017-06-03       Impact factor: 2.476

9.  Monitoring Viable Cells of the Biological Control Agent Lactobacillus plantarum PM411 in Aerial Plant Surfaces by Means of a Strain-Specific Viability Quantitative PCR Method.

Authors:  Núria Daranas; Anna Bonaterra; Jesús Francés; Jordi Cabrefiga; Emilio Montesinos; Esther Badosa
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 10.  Developments in Rapid Detection Methods for the Detection of Foodborne Campylobacter in the United States.

Authors:  Steven C Ricke; Kristina M Feye; W Evan Chaney; Zhaohao Shi; Hilary Pavlidis; Yichao Yang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 5.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.