Journal of the science of food and agriculture · 2011
Discrimination of probiotic Lactobacillus strains for poultry by repetitive sequenced-based PCR fingerprinting.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Lee Chin Mei, Sieo Chin Chin, Cheah Yoke-Kqueen, Abdullah Norhani, Ho Yin Wan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Four repetitive element sequence-based polymerase chain reaction (rep-PCR) methods, namely repetitive extragenic palindromic PCR (REP-PCR), enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus PCR (ERIC-PCR), polytrinucleotide (GTG)₅ -PCR and BOX-PCR, were evaluated for the molecular differentiation of 12 probiotic Lactobacillus strains previously isolated from the gastrointestinal tract of chickens and used as a multistrain probiotic. This study represents the first analysis of the comparative efficacy of these four rep-PCR methods and their combination (composite rep-PCR) in the molecular typing of Lactobacillus strains based on a discriminatory index (D).
RESULTS: Species-specific and strain-specific profiles were observed from rep-PCR. From the numerical analysis of composite rep-PCR, BOX-PCR, (GTG)₅ -PCR, REP-PCR and ERIC-PCR, D values of 0.9118, 0.9044, 0.8897, 0.8750 and 0.8529 respectively were obtained. Composite rep-PCR analysis was the most discriminative method, with eight Lactobacillus strains, namely L. brevis ATCC 14869(T) , L. reuteri C 10, L. reuteri ATCC 23272(T) , L. gallinarum ATCC 33199(T) , L. salivarius ATCC 11741(T) , L. salivarius I 24, L. panis JCM 11053(T) and L. panis C 17, being differentiated at the strain level.
CONCLUSION: Composite rep-PCR analysis is potentially a useful fingerprinting method to discriminate probiotic Lactobacillus strains isolated from the gastrointestinal tract of chickens.
RESULTS: Species-specific and strain-specific profiles were observed from rep-PCR. From the numerical analysis of composite rep-PCR, BOX-PCR, (GTG)₅ -PCR, REP-PCR and ERIC-PCR, D values of 0.9118, 0.9044, 0.8897, 0.8750 and 0.8529 respectively were obtained. Composite rep-PCR analysis was the most discriminative method, with eight Lactobacillus strains, namely L. brevis ATCC 14869(T) , L. reuteri C 10, L. reuteri ATCC 23272(T) , L. gallinarum ATCC 33199(T) , L. salivarius ATCC 11741(T) , L. salivarius I 24, L. panis JCM 11053(T) and L. panis C 17, being differentiated at the strain level.
CONCLUSION: Composite rep-PCR analysis is potentially a useful fingerprinting method to discriminate probiotic Lactobacillus strains isolated from the gastrointestinal tract of chickens.