Polymerase Chain Reaction on In-cage Filter Paper at Different Time Points to Detect Helicobacter spp.

Abby C Bernardini, Wendy R Williams
{"title":"Polymerase Chain Reaction on In-cage Filter Paper at Different Time Points to Detect Helicobacter spp.","authors":"Abby C Bernardini, Wendy R Williams","doi":"10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-24-000001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Helicobacter spp. infections in mice can have broad-ranging effects on gastrointestinal, reproductive, and immune systems. This can introduce significant confounding variables for research and may reduce scientific rigor. Screening mouse colonies for Helicobacter species can be accomplished via noninvasive PCR testing on filter paper placed in animal-free dirty bedding sentinel cages. In our facility, one tablespoon of dirty bedding from each cage on a rack is added to a designated sentinel cage every 3 wk at cage change, and PCR testing is performed on in-cage filter paper quarterly. We hypothesized that cages that received Helicobacter spp.-positive bedding at later time points would have a lower detection rate of Helicobacter spp. with PCR testing compared with cages that received positive bedding at earlier time points due to the filter paper becoming saturated. To determine if screening would be able to detect one positive row of cages on a rack, 9 tablespoons of Helicobacter-positive bedding and 71 tablespoons of negative bedding were added at the 3-, 6-, or 9-wk time points to 14 empty sentinel cages per time point. Negative bedding was added every 3 wk to cages not scheduled to receive positive bedding. Negative controls received 80 tablespoons of negative bedding and positive controls received 80 tablespoons of positive bedding at each time point. Filter paper was tested via PCR for Helicobacter spp. at 12 wk. All positive controls tested positive, and all negative controls tested negative. Two 3-wk cages, two 6-wk cages, and three 9-wk cages were positive, indicating no difference between time points. This resulted in a 16.7% Helicobacter spp. detection rate. These results indicate that PCR on in-cage filter paper may not be reliable in detecting low levels of Helicobacter spp. nucleic acid in dirty bedding.","PeriodicalId":94111,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS","volume":"31 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-24-000001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Helicobacter spp. infections in mice can have broad-ranging effects on gastrointestinal, reproductive, and immune systems. This can introduce significant confounding variables for research and may reduce scientific rigor. Screening mouse colonies for Helicobacter species can be accomplished via noninvasive PCR testing on filter paper placed in animal-free dirty bedding sentinel cages. In our facility, one tablespoon of dirty bedding from each cage on a rack is added to a designated sentinel cage every 3 wk at cage change, and PCR testing is performed on in-cage filter paper quarterly. We hypothesized that cages that received Helicobacter spp.-positive bedding at later time points would have a lower detection rate of Helicobacter spp. with PCR testing compared with cages that received positive bedding at earlier time points due to the filter paper becoming saturated. To determine if screening would be able to detect one positive row of cages on a rack, 9 tablespoons of Helicobacter-positive bedding and 71 tablespoons of negative bedding were added at the 3-, 6-, or 9-wk time points to 14 empty sentinel cages per time point. Negative bedding was added every 3 wk to cages not scheduled to receive positive bedding. Negative controls received 80 tablespoons of negative bedding and positive controls received 80 tablespoons of positive bedding at each time point. Filter paper was tested via PCR for Helicobacter spp. at 12 wk. All positive controls tested positive, and all negative controls tested negative. Two 3-wk cages, two 6-wk cages, and three 9-wk cages were positive, indicating no difference between time points. This resulted in a 16.7% Helicobacter spp. detection rate. These results indicate that PCR on in-cage filter paper may not be reliable in detecting low levels of Helicobacter spp. nucleic acid in dirty bedding.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同时间点的笼内滤纸聚合酶链式反应检测螺旋杆菌属
小鼠感染螺旋杆菌会对肠胃、生殖和免疫系统产生广泛的影响。这可能会给研究带来重大的混杂变量,降低科学的严谨性。筛选小鼠群落中的螺旋杆菌物种可通过在无动物的脏垫料哨兵笼中放置的滤纸上进行非侵入性 PCR 测试来实现。在我们的设施中,每 3 周换笼时都会从架子上的每个笼子中取一汤匙脏垫料放入指定的哨兵笼中,每季度在笼内滤纸上进行一次 PCR 检测。我们假设,与在较早时间点收到阳性垫料的笼子相比,在较晚时间点收到螺旋杆菌阳性垫料的笼子,由于滤纸已经饱和,PCR 检测的螺旋杆菌检出率会更低。为了确定筛查是否能够检测到笼架上的一排阳性笼子,在 3、6 或 9 周的时间点,在每个时间点的 14 个空哨兵笼中添加了 9 汤匙的螺旋杆菌阳性垫料和 71 汤匙的阴性垫料。阴性垫料每 3 周添加一次到未安排添加阳性垫料的笼子中。在每个时间点,阴性对照组添加 80 汤匙阴性垫料,阳性对照组添加 80 汤匙阳性垫料。12 周时,通过 PCR 对滤纸进行螺旋杆菌检测。所有阳性对照组检测结果均为阳性,所有阴性对照组检测结果均为阴性。两个 3 周的笼子、两个 6 周的笼子和三个 9 周的笼子都呈阳性,表明时间点之间没有差异。这导致 16.7% 的螺旋杆菌检出率。这些结果表明,用笼内滤纸进行 PCR 检测脏垫料中的低水平螺旋杆菌核酸可能并不可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
American Society of Laboratory Animal Practitioners Position Statement: Handling and Physical Restraint of Research Animals. American Society of Laboratory Animal Practitioners Position Statement: Definition of Animal Welfare. Effect of Novel High-fat Diet Feeding Methods on Food Wastage, Weight Gain, Hair Coat Grease Accumulation, and Scratching Behavior in C57BL/6NCrl Mice. Identification and Treatment of Fur Mites (Radfordia lemnina) in California Deer Mice (Peromyscus californicus) Using Selamectin. American Society of Laboratory Animal Practitioners Position Statement: Animal Care Principles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1