| Literature DB >> 29870530 |
Michela Sali1, Flavio De Maio1, Michela Tarantino2, Giuliano Garofolo3, Manuela Tittarelli3, Lorena Sacchini3, Katiuscia Zilli3, Paolo Pasquali2, Paola Petrucci2, Cinzia Marianelli2, Massimiliano Francia2, Maurizio Sanguinetti1, Rosanna Adone2.
Abstract
Brucellosis is essentially a disease of domesticated livestock; however, humans can also be infected via the consumption of contaminated meat or dairy products, underlying the need for rapid and accurate identification methods. Procedures for microbiological identification and typing of Brucella spp. are expensive, time-consuming, and must be conducted in biohazard containment facilities to minimize operator risk. The development of a matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS)-based assay has reduced the processing time while maintaining performance standards. In this study, to improve the identification accuracy and suitability of the MALDI-TOF-based assay for routine diagnosis, we developed a new protein extraction protocol and generated a custom reference database containing Brucella strains representative of the most widespread species. The reference library was then challenged with blind-coded field samples isolated from infected animals. The results indicated that the database could be used to correctly identify 99.5% and 97% of Brucella strains at the genus and species level, respectively, indicating that the performance of the assay was not affected by the different culture conditions used for microbial isolation. Moreover, the inactivated samples were stored and shipped to reference laboratories with no ill effect on protein stability, thus confirming the reliability of our method for routine diagnosis. Finally, we evaluated the epidemiological value of the protocol by comparing the clustering analysis results of Brucella melitensis strains obtained via multiple locus variable-number tandem repeat analysis or MALDI-TOF MS. The results showed that the MALDI-TOF assay could not decipher the true phylogenetic tree, suggesting that the protein profile did not correspond with the genetic evolution of Brucella.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29870530 PMCID: PMC5988274 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197864
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
MALDI-TOF database composition.
Brucella strains used to construct the MALDI-TOF database. Further details regarding the Brucella reference strains are provided in S1 Table.
| Species | Number | Biovar (N°) | Source (N°) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference strains | Human | Cattle | Buffalo | Sheep | Goat | Suine | Wild Boar | |||
| 27 | 1 (8) | 4 | − | 2 | 2 | − | − | − | − | |
| 3 (14) | − | − | 11 | 1 | 2 | − | − | − | ||
| 6 (2) | 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 7 (1) | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 9 (2) | 2 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 27 | 1 (3) | 3 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 2 (1) | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 3 (23) | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 14 | 4 | − | − | ||
| 18 | 1 (3) | 3 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 2 (9) | 5 | − | − | − | − | − | 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 (2) | 2 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 4 (2) | 2 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 5 (2) | 2 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | ||
| 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
| 1 | − | 1 | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | |
Fig 1Representative MALDI-TOF protein profiles.
Distinctive protein profiles of the representative Brucella spp. strains (A) and outgroup bacterial strains (B) included in the database. MALDI-TOF dendrogram of strains included in the database (C).
MALDI-TOF identification results.
Identification of 98 Brucella strains tested by MALDI-TOF analysis using the “non-stop” and “long-term” protocols.
| Non-stop procedure | Long-term procedure | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correct identification | Incorrect identification | Correct identification | Incorrect identification | |
| 46 (100) | - | 46 (100) | - | |
| 35 (100) | - | 32 (91.4) | ||
| 17 (100) | - | 17 (100) | - | |
| 98 (100) | - | 95 (97) | 3 (3) | |
* Non-stop procedure: Brucella isolates were tested by MALDI-TOF immediately after the inactivation;
** Long-term procedure: Brucella isolates were inactivated and then stored at 4°C for 48–72 h before testing with MALDI-TOF.
Genus and species identification by using “long-term protocol”.
Exhaustive genus and single species identification using the MALDI-TOF assay with the “long-term” protocol.
| Genus identification N° (%) | No protein profile N° (%) | Species identification | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correct identification | Incorrect identification | ||||
| N° (%) | Average Score | Mis-identification N° (%) | |||
| 132 (99.2) | 1 (1.1) | 130 (97.7) | 2.496 | 2 (2.3) | |
| 47 (100) | − | 44 (93.6) | 2.468 | 3 (7.4) | |
| 17 (100) | − | 17 (100) | 2.710 | - | |
| 196 (99.5) | 1 (0.5) | 191 (97.0) | - | 5 (2.1) | |
aMis-identified like B. abortus;
bMis-identified like B. suis
Fig 2Representative dendrograms of the MALDI-TOF, MLVA-8 and MLVA-11 assays.
MALDI-TOF dendrogram of 51 selected B. melitensis field strains from Italy (A). Unweighted pair group method with arithmetic mean assessments of the relationships between the 51 B. melitensis isolates using MLVA-8 (B) and MLVA-11 (C) data. Each strain is individuated by an identification number and genotype. Genotype designations followed the nomenclature used in the international MLVA database (http://mlva.u-psud.fr/mlvav4/genotyping/).
Simpson’s diversity indices.
Simpson’s diversity index and respective 95% confidence intervals with partitions for MALDI-TOF-MS clusters and MLVA-8 and MLVA-11 panels.
| Method | Partitions (n°) | Simpson’s ID | CI (95%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MALDI-TOF | 10 | 0.707 | (0.589–0.826) |
| MLVA-11 | 10 | 0.810 | (0.750–0.870) |
| MLVA-8 | 5 | 0.649 | (0.553–0.744) |
Wallace values.
Wallace under independence, Wallace, and adjusted Wallace index values and respective 95% confidence intervals for MALDI-TOF-MS clusters and MLVA-8 and MLVA-11 panels.
| Method A | Method B | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MLVA-11 | MLVA-8 | 0.351 | 1.000 (1.000–1.000) | 1.000 (1.000–1.000) |
| MLVA-8 | MLVA-11 | 0.190 | 0.540 (0.441–0.639) | 0.432 (0.310–0.555) |
| MALDI-TOF | MLVA-8 | 0.351 | 0.357 (0.225–0.488) | 0.008 (0.000–0.211) |
| MLVA-8 | MALDI-TOF | 0.293 | 0.297 (0.155–0.438) | 0.006 (0.000–0.206) |
| MALDI-TOF | MLVA-11 | 0.190 | 0.196 (0.125–0.267) | 0.007 (0.000–0.095) |
| MLVA-11 | MALDI-TOF | 0.293 | 0.302 (0.176–0.427) | 0.013 (0.000–0.190) |
Bold values: the confidence interval of W includes the Wallace in case of independence (Wi).