| Literature DB >> 30728816 |
Steven C Ricke1, Kristina M Feye1, W Evan Chaney2, Zhaohao Shi1, Hilary Pavlidis2, Yichao Yang3.
Abstract
The accurate and rapid detection of Campylobacter spp. is critical for optimal surveillance throughout poultry processing in the United States. The further development of highly specific and sensitive assays to detect Campylobacter in poultry matrices has tremendous utility and potential for aiding the reduction of foodborne illness. The introduction and development of molecular methods such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) have enhanced the diagnostic capabilities of the food industry to identify the presence of foodborne pathogens throughout poultry production. Further innovations in various methodologies, such as immune-based typing and detection as well as high throughput analyses, will provide important epidemiological data such as the identification of unique or region-specific Campylobacter. Comparable to traditional microbiology and enrichment techniques, molecular techniques/methods have the potential to have improved sensitivity and specificity, as well as speed of data acquisition. This review will focus on the development and application of rapid molecular methods for identifying and quantifying Campylobacter in U.S. poultry and the emergence of novel methods that are faster and more precise than traditional microbiological techniques.Entities:
Keywords: Campylobacter; characterization; molecular technology; poultry; rapid detection
Year: 2019 PMID: 30728816 PMCID: PMC6351486 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.03280
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Detection of Campylobacter spp. using various immunological techniques.
| Target epitope | Organism | Type | Author; Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flagellin |
| Monoclonal antibodies |
|
| Outer membrane protein |
| Monoclonal antibodies |
|
| 15-kDa cell surface protein |
| Monoclonal antibodies |
|
| Two |
| Monoclonal antibody 33D2 |
|
| Lipopolysaccharide antigens |
| Monoclonal antibodies |
|
| Hippurate hydrolase |
| Monoclonal antibodies |
|
| Outer membrane protein |
| Monoclonal antibodies |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Enzyme-linked fluorescent assay |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Microplate EIA assay |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Microplate EIA assay |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Lateral-flow EIA assay |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Cotton swab colorimetric assay |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Biosensor |
|
| Surface antigen |
| Single-chain variable fragment antibodies |
|
Advantages and disadvantages of selected detection methods.
| Advantages | Disadvantages | |
|---|---|---|
| Selective plating | Inexpensive | Cannot culture VBNC state cells |
| Well-established | Variable specificity | |
| Can customize antibiotic makeup | Can be affected by culturing methods | |
| ELISA | Can perform many samples at once | Loss of sensitivity and specificity in mixed cultures |
| Several different possible techniques (direct, indirect, sandwich) | Cross-reactivity between closely related species | |
| Can change selectivity based on targeted epitopes | False positives from complex matrices | |
| Flow cytometry | Multiple parameters analyzed | Expensive, specialized equipment |
| Single cell analysis | Requires highly trained personnel to prepare, run, and analyze data | |
| High specificity | Relatively slow | |
| Conventional PCR | Better specificity than plating | Non-specific binding of similar DNA |
| Can be combined with other assays such as ELISA | Must be optimized | |
| Relatively simple and quick | Can only be used for presence/absence | |
| Multiplex PCR | Assay multiple species at once | Requires highly specific primers |
| Higher throughput than conventional PCR | Difficult to optimize | |
| Less costly than running multiple assays | False negatives/positives | |
| qPCR | High sensitivity | Complex matrices may include inhibitors |
| Used for rapid detection | Require highly specific primers | |
| May be multiplexed | Cannot differentiate live/dead cells | |
| EMA/PMA may be used to help distinguish dead cells | ||
| dPCR | Cheaper than qPCR | Cannot differentiate live/dead cells |
| Less vulnerable to inhibitors than qPCR | Greater chance of false positives than qPCR | |
| No calibration or internal controls required | ||
| 16S rRNA | Highly conserved region found in all bacteria | High cost of equipment |
| Able to distinguish species using variable regions | Relative abundance may be skewed by copy number | |
| Can be used on non-culturable bacteria | Possible species level resolution issues | |
| Whole genome sequencing | Open access of many databases | High cost of equipment |
| High discrimination | Specialized training required | |
| Can detect antimicrobial resistances and virulence genes | Varied interpretation of data | |
Recent studies in whole genome sequencing (WGS) of Campylobacter spp.
| Sequencing type | Organism | Topic | Sample; Country; Author; Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Illumina |
| Antimicrobial resistance profiling | Clinical, meats, ceca isolates; USA; |
| Identified antimicrobial resistance genes to predict phenotypic resistance. | |||
| Illumina |
| Antimicrobial resistance profiling | Poultry isolates; USA; |
| Identified antimicrobial resistance genes to predict phenotypic resistance. | |||
| Illumina |
| Antimicrobial resistance profiling | Clinical, poultry isolates; Estonia; |
| Used WGS and MLST to analyze antimicrobial resistance in strain types. | |||
| Illumina |
| Antimicrobial resistance profiling | Poultry isolates; Europe; |
| Examined fluoroquinolone resistance in poultry isolates from 12 European countries. | |||
| Illumina |
| Comparative analysis | Poultry, bird isolates; USA; |
| Compared using MALDI-TOF MS as a rapid method to identify | |||
| Ion torrent |
| Comparative analysis | Clinical, animal, environmental isolates; France; |
| Studied pathogen source attribution of campylobacteriosis in France using WGS and MLST. | |||
| Illumina |
| Epidemiology | Chicken liver pâté; Sweden; |
| Outbreak of campylobacteriosis due to undercooked chicken liver pate. | |||
| Illumina/wgMLST |
| Epidemiology | Clinical, poultry, bovine isolates; Israel; |
| Used WGS and wgMLST to screen for virulence genes in Isreaeli | |||
| Illumina |
| Genome sequence | Poultry isolates; USA; |
| Sequenced three | |||
| Illumina/SMRT |
| Genome sequence | Poultry isolates; USA; |
| Sequenced three phage-propagating strains of | |||
| Illumina/SMRT |
| Genome sequence | Poultry isolate; USA; |
| Discovered type VI secretion system and antimicrobial resistance genes in plasmid of | |||
| Ion Torrent |
| Genome sequence | Chicken sushi; Japan; |
| Sequenced two isolates associated with an outbreak due to consumption of undercooked chicken sushi. | |||
| Illumina |
| Genome wide association study | Clinical, animal, environmental isolates; Canada; |
| Identified gene markers associated with clinically related | |||
| Illumina |
| Stress resistance | Clinical, poultry isolates; UK; |
| Analyzed aerotolerant |
Gene targets for the detection of Campylobacter spp. using various polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques.
| Target gene | Organism | Primers | Sample; Country; Author; Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 16S rRNA |
| 3’-ACCTTGTTACGACTTCACCCCA-5’5’-GAGAGTTTGATCCTGGCTCAG-3’ | Chicken wings; Netherlands; |
| 16S rRNA |
| 5’-AATTCTAATACGACTCACTATAGGGAGAGTGTGACTGATCATCCTCTCA-3’5’-GACAACAGTTGGAAACGACTGCTAATA-3’ | Poultry products, dairy products, red meat, vegetables; Belgium; |
| 16S rRNA |
| 5’-GGATGACACTTTTCGGAGC-3’5’-CATTGTAGCACGTGTGTC-3’ | Fecal samples; Australia; |
| 256bp fragment |
| 5’-AGAACACGCGGACCTATATA-3’5’-CGATGCATCCAGGTAATGTAT-3’ | Poultry, beef, pork samples; USA; |
| Multiplex capable, see text for details | |||
| Flagellin - |
| 5’-ATGGGATTTCGTATTAAC-3’ | Fecal samples; USA; |
|
| 5’-GAACTTGAACCGATTTG-3’ | ||
| Flagellin - |
| 5’-CCAAATCGGTTCAAGTTCAAATCAAAC-3’ | Fecal samples; Denmark; |
|
| 5’-CCACTACCTACTGAAAATCCCGAACC-3’ | ||
| Heat shock protein - |
| 5’-CAAGTTGCTACAATCTCAGCCA-3’ | Water samples; USA; |
|
| 5’-GATAACACCATCTTTGCCCACT-3’ | Multiplex capable, see text for details | |
| Hippuricase - |
| 5’-GACTTCGTGCAGATATGGATGCTT-3’ | Fecal samples; Denmark; |
|
| 5’-GCTATAACTATCCGAAGAAGCCATCA-3’ | Multiplex capable, see text for details | |
| Cytolethal distending toxin - |
| 5’-AGGACTTGAACCTACTTTTC-3’ | Broiler carcasses, vegetable samples; Brazil; |
|
| 5’-AGGTGGAGTAGTTAAAAACC-3’ | Multiplex capable, see text for details | |
| Aspartokinase - |
| 5’-GGTATGATTTCTACAAAGCGAG-3’ | Fecal samples; Denmark; |
|
| 5’-ATAAAAGACTATCGTCGCGTG-3’ | Multiplex capable, see text for details | |
| Lipid A acyltransferase - |
| 5’-CGATGATGTGCAAATTGAAGC-3’ | Biochemical assays; Japan; |
|
| 5’-TTCTAGCCCCTTGCTTGATG-3’ | Multiplex capable, see text for details | |
| 16S rRNA |
| 5’-CTGCTTAACACAAGTTGAGTAGG-3’5’-TTCCTTAGGTACCGTCAGAA3’ | Chicken carcass rinses; Denmark; |
| Fragment of |
| 5’-CTGAATTTGATACCTTAAGTGCAGC-3’5’-AGGCACGCCTAAACCTATAGCT-3’ | Viable/dead cells; Norway; |
| 16s rRNA |
| 5’-GGATGACACTTTTCGGAGC-3’5’-CATTGTAGCACGTGTGTC-3’ | Fecal samples; UK; |
| ATP binding protein - |
| 5’-AGTGCCGATAAAGGCTCATCA-3’ | Poultry, fish, beef, pork, milk, vegetable samples; Spain; |
|
| 5’-ACTCGTCGAGCTTGAAGAATACG-3’ | ||
| VS1 gene |
| 5’‐GAATGAAATTTTAGAATGGGG‐3’5’‐GATATGTATGATTTTATCCTGC‐3’ | Chicken, milk, water; China; |
| Hippuricase - |
| 5’-TCCAAAATCCTCACTTGCCATT-3’ | Poultry processing water; USA; |
|
| 5’-TGCACCAGTGACTATGAATAACGA-3’ | ||
| Cytochrome c oxidase - |
| 5’-TGGTCTAAGTCTTGAAAAAGTGGCA-3’ | Broiler neck-skin; Slovenia; |
|
| 5’-ACTCTTATAGCTTTTCAAATGGCATATCC-3’ | ||