首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Four Genotyping Schemes for Phylogenetic Analysis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Comparison of Their Congruence with Multi-Locus Sequence Typing
【2h】

Four Genotyping Schemes for Phylogenetic Analysis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Comparison of Their Congruence with Multi-Locus Sequence Typing

机译:铜绿假单胞菌系统发育分析的四种基因分型方案:与多基因座序列分型的一致性研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Several molecular typing schemes have been proposed to differentiate among isolates and clonal groups, and hence establish epidemiological or phylogenetic links. It has been widely accepted that multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) is the gold standard for phylogenetic typing/long-term epidemiological surveillance, but other recently described methods may be easier to carry out, especially in settings with limited access to DNA sequencing. Comparing the performance of such techniques to MLST is therefore of relevance. A study was therefore carried out with a collection of P. aeruginosa strains (n = 133) typed by four typing schemes: MLST, multiple-locus variable number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA), pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and the commercial DiversiLab microbial typing system (DL). The aim of this study was to compare the results of each typing method with MLST. The Simpson's indices of diversity were 0.989, 0.980, 0.961 and 0.906 respectively for PFGE, MLVA, DL and MLST. The congruence between techniques was measured by the adjusted Wallace index (W): this coefficient indicates the probability that a pair of isolates which is assigned to the same type by one typing method is also typed as identical by the other. In this context, the congruence between techniques was recorded as follow: MLVA-type to predict MLST-type (93%), PFGE to MLST (92%), DL to MLST (64.2%), PFGE to MLVA (63.5%) and PFGE to DL (61.7%). Conversely, for all above combinations, prediction was very poor. The congruence was increased at the clonal complex (CC) level. MLST is regarded the gold standard for phylogenetic classification of bacteria, but is rather laborious to carry out in many settings. Our data suggest that MLVA can predict the MLST-type with high accuracy, and even higher when studying the clonal complex level. Of the studied three techniques MLVA was therefore the best surrogate method to predict MLST.
机译:已经提出了几种分子分型方案来区分分离物和克隆群,并因此建立流行病学或系统发育联系。多基因座序列分型(MLST)是系统发育分型/长期流行病学监测的金标准,这一点已被广泛接受,但是最近描述的其他方法可能更易于实施,尤其是在DNA测序访问受限的情况下。因此,将此类技术的性能与MLST进行比较是有意义的。因此,对通过四种分型方案分型的铜绿假单胞菌菌株(n = 133)进行了研究:MLST,多位点可变数目串联重复重复分析(MLVA),脉冲场凝胶电泳(PFGE)和商用DiversiLab微生物分型系统(DL)。这项研究的目的是比较每种打字方法与MLST的结果。 PFGE,MLVA,DL和MLST的辛普森多样性指数分别为0.989、0.980、0.961和0.906。通过调整后的华莱士指数(W)衡量技术之间的一致性:该系数表示通过一种分型方法分配给同一类型的一对菌株也被另一种分型的可能性。在这种情况下,技术之间的一致性记录如下:MLVA类型以预测MLST类型(93%),PFGE到MLST(92%),DL到MLST(64.2%),PFGE到MLVA(63.5%)和PFGE为DL(61.7%)。相反,对于所有上述组合,预测都非常差。在克隆复合体(CC)水平上,一致性提高了。 MLST被认为是细菌系统发育分类的金标准,但要在许多环境中进行操作相当费力。我们的数据表明,MLVA可以高度准确地预测MLST类型,在研究克隆复杂水平时甚至更高。因此,在所研究的三种技术中,MLVA是预测MLST的最佳替代方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号