| Literature DB >> 26276157 |
Jérémy Desneux1,2, Marianne Chemaly3,4, Anne-Marie Pourcher5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Distinguishing between viable and dead bacteria in animal and urban effluents is a major challenge. Among existing methods, propidium monoazide (PMA)-qPCR is a promising way to quantify viable cells. However, its efficiency depends on the composition of the effluent, particularly on total suspended solids (TSS)) and on methodological parameters. The aim of this study was evaluate the influence of three methodological factors (concentration of PMA, incubation time and photoactivation time) on the efficiency of PMA-qPCR to quantify viable and dead cells of Listeria monocytogenes used as a microorganism model, in two piggery effluents (manure and lagoon effluent containing 20 and 0.4 TSS g.kg(-1), respectively). An experimental design strategy (Doehlert design and desirability function) was used to identify the experimental conditions to achieve optimal PMA-qPCR results.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26276157 PMCID: PMC4537567 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-015-0505-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Design matrix of the Doehlert uniform shell design for 3 factors and corresponding responses
| Run | Factors | Responses (log10 cfu-eq) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PMA concentration (μM) | Incubation time (min.) | Photoactivation time (min.) | Manure | Lagoon | |||
| Δviable | Δdead b | Δviable | Δdead | ||||
| 1a | 160 | 17.5 | 29 | 1.2 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 3.4 |
| 2 | 160 | 17.5 | 29 | 0.9 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 3.4 |
| 3 | 160 | 17.5 | 29 | 1.1 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 3.4 |
| 4 | 160 | 17.5 | 29 | 1.1 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 3.4 |
| 5 | 300 | 17.5 | 29 | 1.6 | 4.1 | 1.2 | 3.4 |
| 6 | 20 | 17.5 | 29 | 0.2 | 2.7 | 0.1 | 3.4 |
| 7 | 230 | 17.5 | 56 | 1.3 | 4.1 | 1.2 | 3.4 |
| 8 | 90 | 17.5 | 2 | 0.6 | 2.4 | 0.4 | 2.5 |
| 9 | 230 | 17.5 | 2 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 0.3 | 2.5 |
| 10 | 90 | 17.5 | 56 | 0.6 | 3.1 | 1.0 | 3.4 |
| 11 | 230 | 30 | 38 | 1.0 | 4.1 | 0.6 | 3.4 |
| 12 | 90 | 5 | 20 | 0.6 | 2.9 | 0.3 | 1.2 |
| 13 | 230 | 5 | 20 | 1.2 | 3.3 | 0.7 | 3.4 |
| 14 | 160 | 5 | 47 | 0.8 | 4.1 | 0.8 | 3.4 |
| 15 | 90 | 30 | 20 | 0.5 | 3.2 | 0.7 | 3.4 |
| 16 | 160 | 30 | 11 | 1.0 | 4.1 | 0.6 | 3.4 |
aThe central run (1 to 4) has been repeated 4 times in order to calculate residual variance
bThe concentrations of the inoculated cells were 8.3 log10 cfu mL−1 in the manure and 7.3 log10 cfu mL−1 in the lagoon resulting in a maximum theoretical Δdead value of 4.1 and 3.4, respectively
Fig. 1Pareto chart of the individual, quadratic and interactive effect of PMA concentration (PMA), incubation time (Inc) and photoactivation time (Phot) on the Δviable (a and b) and Δdead (c and d) values in samples of manure and lagoon effluents
Predicted values of the desirability function at each point conditions set for manure and lagoon
| Run | Predicted value | |
|---|---|---|
| Lagoon | Manure | |
| 1 to 4 | 0.426 | 0.464 |
| 5 | 0.454 | 0.173 |
| 6 | 0.819a | 0.411 |
| 7 | 0.000 | 0.498 |
| 8 | 0.609 | 0.000 |
| 9 | 0.659 | 0.174 |
| 10 | 0.605 | 0.508 |
| 11 | 0.602 | 0.600 |
| 12 | 0.456 | 0.475 |
| 13 | 0.596 | 0.364 |
| 14 | 0.494 | 0.705a |
| 15 | 0.721 | 0.678 |
| 16 | 0.754 | 0.652 |
aThe numbers in bold indicate the run corresponding to the higher overall desirability
Physico-chemical parameters and Δviable and Δdead responses (expressed in log10 cfu-eq) after PMA pretreatment of 5 manures and 4 lagoon effluents
| Matrix | Sample | Δviable mean ± SDb | Δdead a mean ± SD | pH | Turbidity (NTU) | VS (g.kg−1) | TSS (g.kg−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| manure | M1 | 0.15 ± 0.2C | 2.97 ± 0.3A | 7.6 | 2612 | 6.3 | 3.8 |
| M2 | 0.83 ± 0.1A | 3.25 ± 0.0A | 8.2 | 2660 | 7.6 | 5.9 | |
| M3 | 0.49 ± 0.2ABC | 2.51 ± 0.3B | 7.3 | 4624 | 22.8 | 14.8 | |
| M4 | 0.29 ± 0.3BC | 2.40 ± 0.2B | 7.5 | 3323 | 19.8 | 12.9 | |
| M5 | 0.21 ± 0.1C | 2.93 ± 0.2A | 7.6 | 3580 | 12.4 | 10.5 | |
| Mean | 0.39 ± 0.3 | 2.81 ± 0.4 | 7.7 ± 0.3 | 3360 ± 821 | 13.8 ± 7.3 | 9.6 ± 4.7 | |
| Lagoon | L6 | 0.12 ± 0.1C | 3.35 ± 0.0A | 8.5 | 102 | 1.6 | 0.9 |
| L7 | 0.36 ± 0.1BC | 3.35 ± 0.0A | 8.4 | 120 | 1.2 | 0.55 | |
| L8 | 0.46 ± 0.1BC | 3.35 ± 0.0A | 8.4 | 461 | 1.8 | 1.1 | |
| L9 | 0.69 ± 0.1ABC | 3.12 ± 0.3A | 8.4 | 772 | 1.3 | 1.0 | |
| Mean | 0.41 ± 0.2 | 3.29 ± 0.2 | 8.4 ± 0.0 | 364 ± 318 | 1.5 ± 0.3 | 0.9 ± 0.2 |
The values followed by different capital letters are statistically different according to a Student-Newman-Keuls test
aThe concentrations of the inoculated cells were 7.4 log10 cfu mL−1 in the manure and 7.5 log10 cfu mL−1 in the lagoon, resulting in a maximum theoretical Δdead value of 3.2 and 3.5, respectively
bmean of triplicates ± standard deviation
Primers and probe used for L. monocytogenes quantification
| Probe or primer | Sequence (5′–3′) | Denaturation temperature (°C) |
|---|---|---|
| Primers | ||
| Forward | TGC AAG TCC TAA GAC GCC A | 60.3 |
| Reverse | CAC TGC ATC TCC GTG GTA TAC TAA | 60.3 |
| Probe | CGA TTT CAT CCG CGT GTT TCT TTT CG | 70.2 |
Criteria for multivariate optimization of individual responses
| Matrix | Response | Target | Lower limit | Upper limit | Weight | Importance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manure | Δviable a | Target = 0 | 0.2 | 1.6 | 1 | 3 |
| Δdead b | Target =4.1 | 2.4 | 4.1 | 1 | 3 | |
| Lagoon | Δviable | Target = 0 | 0.1 | 1.2 | 1 | 3 |
| Δdead | Target =3.4 | 1.2 | 3.4 | 1 | 3 |
adifference between the number of cultivable cells and the number of cells measured by qPCR after PMA treatment
bdifference between the number of cultivable cells (before heat treatment) and the number of cells measured by qPCR after PMA treatment