首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Parasitlolgy >A COMPARISON OF FOUR FLUORESCENT ANTIBODY-BASED METHODS FOR PURIFYING, DETECTING, AND CONFIRMING CRYPTOSPORIDIUM PARVUM IN SURFACE WATERS
【24h】

A COMPARISON OF FOUR FLUORESCENT ANTIBODY-BASED METHODS FOR PURIFYING, DETECTING, AND CONFIRMING CRYPTOSPORIDIUM PARVUM IN SURFACE WATERS

机译:四种基于荧光抗体的纯化,检测和确认水体中隐孢子虫的方法的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Cryptosporidiosis has been traced to drinking contaminated surface water, which was either not treated or was ineffectively treated. Testing to detect Cryptosporidium parvum in surface water has been suggested to help prevent future outbreaks. In the present study, the same sample collection and filtration methods were used to compared sample processing and detection steps from 4 testing methods: a modified information collection rule (ICR) method and method 1623 (both developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), a flow cytometric method, and a solid-phase cytometric method. All of these methods use fluorescent antibody staining, which is only a presumptive indication of the presence of this parasite. Confirmation requires another assay. Methods were evaluated for both presumptive and confirmed detection. Solid-phase cytometry had the highest presumptive and confirmed detection rates. Flow cytometry had the next highest presumptive detection rate in reagent water but was third in spiked surface and tap waters, with no confirmation procedure. The ICR method had the third highest presumptive detection rate in reagent water and the second highest in spiked surface and tap waters but failed to confirm any oocysts. Method 1623 had significantly lower presumptive detection than any other method and a significantly lower confirmation rate than the solid-phase cytometry method.
机译:隐孢子虫病已被归因于饮用受污染的地表水,该水未经处理或未经有效处理。有人建议对地表水中的小隐孢子虫进行检测,以帮助防止将来爆发。在本研究中,使用相同的样品收集和过滤方法比较了以下4种测试方法的样品处理和检测步骤:修改后的信息收集规则(ICR)方法和方法1623(均由美国环境保护署开发),流式细胞术和固相细胞术。所有这些方法都使用荧光抗体染色,这只是该寄生虫存在的推定指标。确认需要另一种测定。对方法进行了推定和确认检测的评估。固相流式细胞术具有最高的推定性和确诊率。流式细胞术在试剂水中的推定检出率次高,在加标地表水和自来水中则排在第三位,没有确定程序。 ICR方法在试剂水中的推定检出率第三高,在加标地表水和自来水中的检出率第二高,但未能确认任何卵囊。方法1623的推定检测率比其他任何方法都低,确认率也比固相细胞计数法低得多。

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