首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Microbiology >Molecular Characterisation Of Leptospiral Isolates Identified In Agricultural Labours Of Salem District Of Tamilnadu
【24h】

Molecular Characterisation Of Leptospiral Isolates Identified In Agricultural Labours Of Salem District Of Tamilnadu

机译:泰米尔纳德邦塞勒姆区农业劳动中鉴定的钩端螺旋体分离株的分子表征

获取原文
       

摘要

In the present study, RAPD analysis of the two Leptospire isolates identified (K1 and K2) were subjected to random amplified polymorphic DNA fingerprinting analysis and compared with 5 genomospecies. Genotype characters of isolated K1 and K2 have poor resemblance with reference strain Panama CZ 14M, LSU 1945 and Sarmin CZ 390. The genomic profile of K1 and K2 were very similar and resemble the genomic profile of Rachmat belongs to the genomospecies Leptospira interrogans. The present study reports the prevalence of the leptospire belongs to Rachmat strain of the genomospecies Leptospira interrogans. Introduction Traditionally leptospires are classified and identified in serological techniques such as the cross-absorption tests (Gerritsen et al., 1995). However, these techniques are laborious and show poor inter-laboratory reproducibility (Kobayashi et al., 1985), but still cannot distinguish all serovars. The DNA based methods for the identification of Leptospira holds good results and these method include restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis (Terpstra et al., 1978; Hookey et al., 1987; Ellis et al., 1991); DNA-DNA hybridisation (Perolat et al., 1993); Pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) (Herrmann et al., 1992); Polymerase chain reaction followed by RFLP analysis (Ralph et al., 1993) and random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) fingerprinting (Corney et al., 1993; Natarajaseenivasan et al., 2004). RFLP analysis is generally more sensitive and discriminatory than serotyping, but some serovars are not readily distinguished. (Thiermann et al., 1986), and the complex banding patterns are difficult to interpret. Hybridization of labelled DNA probes to RFLP blots greatly simplifies the visualised banding patterns facilitating interpretation. (Van Eys et al., 1991) and allows serovars with similar RFLP banding pattern to be differentiated (Zuerner et al., 1993). RFLP analysis, DNA-DNA hybridization and PFGE are slow and require large amounts of purified DNA. In contrast, PCR - based methods are rapid and require only small amounts of DNA. (Van Eys et al., 1989; Gerritsen et al., 1991; Merien et al., 1992; Gravekamp et al., 1993). PCR-based fingerprinting systems have been well developed for a range of bacteria. (Corney et al., 1993; Giesendorf et al., 1993; Ralph et al., 1993; Van Belkum et al., 1993; Woodward et al., 1993). Because of some disadvantage in the application of cross-absorption agglutination (CAA) technique and in restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) alternative methods were searched. Corney et al. (1993) stressed the need to develop a rapid and simple typing method which can distinguish different genotype without the disadvantages of CAA and REA. Rapid identification of the isolates would allow farmers to start appropriate vaccination regimens with minimal delays. Welsh and McClelland (1990) and Williams et al. (1990) developed a DNA fingerprinting technique based on the random amplification of genomic sequences by using a single primer at low stringency in a polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Gerritsen et al. (1995) investigated the use of leptospiral and non leptospiral primers in RAPD fingerprinting of leptospirosis. Perolat et al. (1998), Brenner et al. (1999) and Levett (2001) reported more than 16 genomospecies of leptospires based on genotypic characters. The molecular analysis of new isolates from different regions may increase genomospecies number of leptospires. With this background the leptospires isolates collected in the present study were subjected to random amplification of polymorphic DNA finger printing analysis to find out whether they are new genomospecies or related to the already existing genomospecies. Material and Methods Isolation of genomic DNA from Leptospiral isolates Blood samples from Leptospiral infected patients were inoculated into sterile EMJH medium and the isolated leptospiral strains (K1 and K2) were grown at 300C in EMJH medium for 7 days to a density of 108
机译:在本研究中,对鉴定出的两个钩端螺旋体分离株(K1和K2)的RAPD分析进行了随机扩增多态性DNA指纹分析,并与5个基因组种进行了比较。分离的K1和K2的基因型特征与参考菌株Panama CZ 14M,LSU 1945和Sarmin CZ 390的相似性较差。K1和K2的基因组特征非常相似,并且类似于Rachmat的基因组特征属于问号钩端螺旋体。本研究报告了钩端螺旋体的流行属于问号钩端螺旋体基因型的Rachmat菌株。简介传统上,钩端螺旋体是通过诸如交叉吸收试验等血清学技术进行分类和鉴定的(Gerritsen等,1995)。但是,这些技术费力且实验室间的可重复性较差(Kobayashi等,1985),但仍不能区分所有血清型。基于DNA的钩端螺旋体鉴定方法取得了良好的结果,这些方法包括限制性片段长度多态性(RFLP)分析(Terpstra等,1978; Hookey等,1987; Ellis等,1991);以及DNA片段鉴定。 DNA-DNA杂交(Perolat等,1993);脉冲场凝胶电泳(PFGE)(Herrmann et al。,1992);聚合酶链反应,然后进行RFLP分析(Ralph等,1993)和随机扩增多态性DNA(RAPD)指纹图谱(Corney等,1993; Natatarajaseenivasan等,2004)。 RFLP分析通常比血清分型更敏感和更具歧视性,但某些血清型不易区分。 (Thiermann et al。,1986),复杂的条带模式难以解释。标记的DNA探针与RFLP印迹的杂交大大简化了可视化的条带模式,有助于解释。 (Van Eys et al。,1991),并允许区分具有相似RFLP条带模式的血清型(Zuerner et al。,1993)。 RFLP分析,DNA-DNA杂交和PFGE反应缓慢,需要大量纯化的DNA。相反,基于PCR的方法是快速的,只需要少量的DNA。 (Van Eys等,1989; Gerritsen等,1991; Merien等,1992; Gravekamp等,1993)。基于PCR的指纹系统已经针对多种细菌进行了完善的开发。 (Corney等,1993; Giesendorf等,1993; Ralph等,1993; Van Belkum等,1993; Woodward等,1993)。由于在交叉吸收凝集(CAA)技术的应用和限制性核酸内切酶分析(REA)中存在一些缺点,因此寻找了替代方法。 Corney等。 (1993)强调需要开发一种快速而简单的分型方法,该方法可以区分不同的基因型而又没有CAA和REA的缺点。快速鉴定出分离株将使农民能够以最小的延迟开始适当的疫苗接种方案。威尔士和麦克莱兰(1990)和威廉姆斯(Williams)等人。 (1990年)开发了一种DNA指纹技术,该技术基于基因组序列的随机扩增,方法是在聚合酶链反应(PCR)中使用低严格性的单个引物。 Gerritsen等。 (1995)研究了钩端螺旋体和非钩端螺旋体引物在钩端螺旋体病的RAPD指纹图谱中的应用。 Perolat等。 (1998),Brenner等人。 (1999)和Levett(2001)报告了超过16种基于基因型特征的钩端螺旋体基因型。来自不同地区的新分离株的分子分析可能会增加钩端螺旋体的基因组数目。在这种背景下,对本研究中收集到的钩端螺旋体分离株进行多态性DNA指纹分析的随机扩增,以发现它们是新的基因型还是与已经存在的基因型有关。材料和方法从钩端螺旋体分离株中分离基因组DNA将感染了钩端螺旋体的患者的血样接种到无菌EMJH培养基中,分离出的钩端螺旋体菌株(K1和K2)在EMJH培养基中于300°C生长7天,密度为108

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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