| Literature DB >> 28851288 |
Md Fakruddin1, Md Nur Hossain2, Monzur Morshed Ahmed2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improved methods with better separation and concentration ability for detection of foodborne pathogens are in constant need. The aim of this study was to evaluate microplate immunocapture (IC) method for detection of Salmonella Typhi, Shigella flexneri and Vibrio cholerae from food samples to provide a better alternative to conventional culture based methods.Entities:
Keywords: Detection; Enrichment; Food; Immunocapture; Microplate; Pathogen
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28851288 PMCID: PMC5576308 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-017-1099-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Fig. 1Effect of incubation time on capture efficiency of microplate immunocapture
Fig. 2Effect of cell density on capture efficiency of microplate immunocapture
Fig. 3Specificity of microplate immunocapture
Detection of Vibrio cholerae, Salmonella typhi and Shigella flexneri in artificially contaminated samples
| Samples | Pathogen | Method | No of positives/ total no of replicates (%) | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 101 CFU/25 g | 102 CFU/25 g | 103 CFU/25 g | 104 CFU/25 g | 105 CFU/25 g | ||||
| Minced beef ( |
| IC-culture | 2/15 (13.3) | 5/15 (33.3) | 9/15 (60) | 11/15 (73.3) | 15/15 (100) | 42/75 (56) a |
| Culture | 0/15 (0) | 1/15 (6.7) | 5/15 (33.3) | 10/15 (66.7) | 14/15 (93.3) | 30/75 (40) | ||
| IC-PCR | 3/15 (20) | 6/15 (40) | 10/15 (66.7) | 13/15 (86.7) | 15/15 (100) | 47/75 (62.7) | ||
| PCR | 3/15 (20) | 5/15 (33.3) | 9/15 (60) | 11/15 (73.3) | 14/15 (93.3) | 42/75 (56) | ||
| Minced chicken ( |
| IC-culture | 3/18 (16.7) | 7/18 (38.9) | 11/18 (61.1) | 15/18 (83.3) | 18/18 (100) | 54/90 (60) a |
| Culture | 0/18 (0) | 2/18 (11.1) | 6/18 (33.3) | 11/18 (61.1) | 16/18 (88.8) | 35/90 (38.8) | ||
| IC-PCR | 3/18 (16.7) | 9/18 (50) | 14/18 (77.8) | 17/18 (94.4) | 18/18 (100) | 61/90 (67.8) | ||
| PCR | 2/18 (11.1) | 6/18 (33.3) | 12/18 (66.7) | 15/18 (83.3) | 18/18 (100) | 53/90 (58.8) | ||
| Minced fish ( |
| IC-culture | 3/15 (20) | 6/15 (40) | 9/15 (60) | 12/15 (80) | 15/15 (100) | 45/75 (60) a |
| Culture | 0/15 (0) | 2/15 (13.3) | 5/15 (33.3) | 11/15 (73.3) | 14/15 (93.3) | 32/75 (42.7) | ||
| IC-PCR | 3/15 (20) | 7/15 (46.7) | 11/15 (73.3) | 13/15 (86.7) | 15/15 (100) | 49/75 (65.3) | ||
| PCR | 3/15 (20) | 7/15 (46.7) | 10/15 (66.7) | 11/15 (73.3) | 13/15 (86.7) | 44/75 (58.7) | ||
| Minced shrimpb
|
| IC-culture | 4/15 (26.7) | 7/15 (46.7) | 10/15 (66.7) | 13/15 (86.7) | 15/15 (100) | 49/75 (65.3) a |
| Culture | 0/15 (0) | 2/15 (13.3) | 6/15 (40) | 9/15 (60) | 13/15 (86.7) | 30/75 (40) | ||
| IC-PCR | 5/15 (33.3) | 9/15 (60) | 11/15 (73.3) | 12/15 (80) | 15/15 (100) | 52/75 (69.3) | ||
| PCR | 3/15 (20) | 6/15 (40) | 9/15 (60) | 10/15 (66.7) | 11/15 (73.3) | 39/75 (52) | ||
| MIC = Microplate immunocapture method | ||||||||
Performance evaluation of the microplate immunocapture method as compared to the culture enrichment method
| Parameters | Culture | IC-culture | IC-PCR | PCR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Detection limit (CFU/25 g) | 125 | 50 | 25 | 50 |
| Sensitivity (CI, 95%) | 95.9 | 97.3 | 100 | 98.2 |
| Specificity (CI, 95%) | 97.0 | 96.1 | 96.8 | 95.4 |
| Accuracy (CI, 95%) | 96.2 | 95.3 | 96.7 | 96.1 |
List of strains used in this study
| List of strains | |
|---|---|
| For Broth and as reference strain | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| For specificity test | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| Enteroinvasive | |
| Enteropathogenic | |
| Enterotoxigenic | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Fig. 4Schematic flow diagram of the experimental protocol used
Primer sequences and product size of the genes targeted
| Gene | Primers | Sequences | Target organism | Product Size (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| A058 | 5′-GAT ACT GCT GAA CGTAGAAGG-3’ |
| 470 | [ |
| A01 | 5′-GCG TAA ATC AGC ATC TGC AGT AGC-3’ | ||||
|
| ompWF | 5′-·CAC CAA GAA GGT GAC TTT ATT GTG-3’ |
| 588 | [ |
| OmpWR | 5′-GAA CTT ATA ACC ACC CGC G-3’ | ||||
|
| Ipa F | 5′- GCTGGAAAAACTCAGTGCCT-3’ |
| 423 | [ |
| Ipa R | 5′- CCAGTCCGTAAATTCATTCT-3’ |