International journal of mycobacteriology · 2022
Spoligotyping and polymerase chain reaction based mycobacterium bovis strains typing with methods (enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-polymerase chain reaction, randomly amplified polymorphic dnas-polymerase chain reaction and out polymerase chain reaction).
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sahin Funda, Tarhan G Lnur, Cinoglu Halil, Kayar Mediha Beg M, Yakici G Lfer
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In this study, it was aimed to investigate Mycobacterium bovis strains isolated from lungs and lymph nodes of slaughtered animals on clonal level by using different methods such as spoligotyping, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-polymerase chain reaction (ERIC-PCR), randomly amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPD-PCR) and OUT-PCR. Comparative evaluation of these methods was further conducted.
METHODS: A total of 38 M. bovis isolates were evaluated in the study. DNA isolation of all M. bovis strains isolated from pruvat free Löwenstein Jensen medium was done by boiling method for ERIC-PCR, RAPD-PCR, and OUT PCR. Mickle device was used for DNA isolation for spoligotyping method.
RESULTS: In 38 M. bovis isolates examined in our study, 4 different groups were determined by spoligotyping and RAPD-PCR test methods, and 5 different groups were detected in ERIC-PCR tests. In the OUT-PCR tests, the band which provides sufficient type separation was not observed.
CONCLUSION: ERIC-PCR, RAPD-PCR, and OUT-PCR methods are easily applicable, simple, and relatively inexpensive methods for evaluating the differences between origins in the typing of M. bovis. The tests need to be evaluated in more detail with extensive studies.
METHODS: A total of 38 M. bovis isolates were evaluated in the study. DNA isolation of all M. bovis strains isolated from pruvat free Löwenstein Jensen medium was done by boiling method for ERIC-PCR, RAPD-PCR, and OUT PCR. Mickle device was used for DNA isolation for spoligotyping method.
RESULTS: In 38 M. bovis isolates examined in our study, 4 different groups were determined by spoligotyping and RAPD-PCR test methods, and 5 different groups were detected in ERIC-PCR tests. In the OUT-PCR tests, the band which provides sufficient type separation was not observed.
CONCLUSION: ERIC-PCR, RAPD-PCR, and OUT-PCR methods are easily applicable, simple, and relatively inexpensive methods for evaluating the differences between origins in the typing of M. bovis. The tests need to be evaluated in more detail with extensive studies.