用于检测家禽中多杀性巴氏杆菌的 PCR 和环介导等温扩增(LAMP)测定法的比较评估。

IF 1.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES New Zealand veterinary journal Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI:10.1080/00480169.2024.2417921
M Poussard, S D Pant, J Huang, P Scott, S A Ghorashi
{"title":"用于检测家禽中多杀性巴氏杆菌的 PCR 和环介导等温扩增(LAMP)测定法的比较评估。","authors":"M Poussard, S D Pant, J Huang, P Scott, S A Ghorashi","doi":"10.1080/00480169.2024.2417921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To develop a colourimetric loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay for the detection of <i>Pasteurella multocida</i> in clinical poultry samples and compare the performance of this assay with PCR. A secondary aim was to evaluate a simple DNA extraction method that could enable LAMP-based testing in the field without the need for specialised laboratory equipment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Primer sets for both LAMP and PCR were designed to amplify the <i>KMT1</i> gene of <i>P. multocida.</i> DNA was extracted from 12 <i>P. multocida</i> isolates using a commercial extraction kit, and subjected to analysis using both LAMP and PCR. The analytical specificity of the LAMP assay was evaluated by testing it against a panel of 12 unrelated bacterial species, and the analytical sensitivity (limit of detection) was determined through testing of serial dilutions of the target DNA and compared to that of PCR. Subsequently, cloacal swabs (n = 40) from a commercial turkey flock were subjected to analysis using both LAMP and PCR assays, using a rapid DNA extraction method and a commercial extraction kit. Clinical sensitivity and specificity of the LAMP assay were calculated in comparison to PCR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A single DNA fragment of the expected size (∼ 200 base pairs), was amplified by PCR from 12 <i>P. multocida</i> isolates, which were also all positive by the LAMP assay. The identity of all PCR amplicons was confirmed by sequencing. Both PCR and LAMP showed similar analytical sensitivity, with a LOD of 20 pg of target DNA. As neither PCR nor LAMP assays produced positive results with 12 non-related bacterial species, the analytical specificity was assessed as 100%. However, LAMP demonstrated lower clinical specificity (94.74%) compared to PCR (100%) when 40 clinical samples were tested. None of the DNA samples extracted using the simplified DNA extraction method were amplified by either LAMP or PCR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The LAMP assay developed in this study exhibits comparable performance to PCR in detecting <i>P. multocida</i>.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The use of a rapid and portable DNA extraction method, in conjunction with LAMP assays, could create opportunities for point-of-care testing for fowl cholera in field settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19322,"journal":{"name":"New Zealand veterinary journal","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of PCR and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays for detecting <i>Pasteurella multocida</i> in poultry.\",\"authors\":\"M Poussard, S D Pant, J Huang, P Scott, S A Ghorashi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00480169.2024.2417921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To develop a colourimetric loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay for the detection of <i>Pasteurella multocida</i> in clinical poultry samples and compare the performance of this assay with PCR. A secondary aim was to evaluate a simple DNA extraction method that could enable LAMP-based testing in the field without the need for specialised laboratory equipment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Primer sets for both LAMP and PCR were designed to amplify the <i>KMT1</i> gene of <i>P. multocida.</i> DNA was extracted from 12 <i>P. multocida</i> isolates using a commercial extraction kit, and subjected to analysis using both LAMP and PCR. The analytical specificity of the LAMP assay was evaluated by testing it against a panel of 12 unrelated bacterial species, and the analytical sensitivity (limit of detection) was determined through testing of serial dilutions of the target DNA and compared to that of PCR. Subsequently, cloacal swabs (n = 40) from a commercial turkey flock were subjected to analysis using both LAMP and PCR assays, using a rapid DNA extraction method and a commercial extraction kit. Clinical sensitivity and specificity of the LAMP assay were calculated in comparison to PCR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A single DNA fragment of the expected size (∼ 200 base pairs), was amplified by PCR from 12 <i>P. multocida</i> isolates, which were also all positive by the LAMP assay. The identity of all PCR amplicons was confirmed by sequencing. Both PCR and LAMP showed similar analytical sensitivity, with a LOD of 20 pg of target DNA. As neither PCR nor LAMP assays produced positive results with 12 non-related bacterial species, the analytical specificity was assessed as 100%. However, LAMP demonstrated lower clinical specificity (94.74%) compared to PCR (100%) when 40 clinical samples were tested. None of the DNA samples extracted using the simplified DNA extraction method were amplified by either LAMP or PCR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The LAMP assay developed in this study exhibits comparable performance to PCR in detecting <i>P. multocida</i>.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>The use of a rapid and portable DNA extraction method, in conjunction with LAMP assays, could create opportunities for point-of-care testing for fowl cholera in field settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Zealand veterinary journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Zealand veterinary journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2024.2417921\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Zealand veterinary journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2024.2417921","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:开发一种比色环介导等温扩增(LAMP)检测方法,用于检测临床家禽样本中的多杀性巴氏杆菌,并比较该检测方法与 PCR 的性能。另一个目的是评估一种简单的 DNA 提取方法,这种方法可以在现场进行基于 LAMP 的检测,而无需专门的实验室设备:方法:设计了用于 LAMP 和 PCR 的引物组,以扩增多杀性疟原虫的 KMT1 基因。使用商业提取试剂盒从 12 个多杀菌素分离物中提取 DNA,并使用 LAMP 和 PCR 进行分析。通过对 12 个不相关的细菌种类进行测试,评估了 LAMP 分析法的分析特异性;通过测试目标 DNA 的系列稀释液,确定了分析灵敏度(检测限),并与 PCR 的灵敏度进行了比较。随后,使用快速 DNA 提取方法和商业提取试剂盒对来自商业火鸡群的泄殖腔拭子(n = 40)进行了 LAMP 和 PCR 检测分析。计算了 LAMP 检测法与 PCR 检测法的临床灵敏度和特异性:结果:通过 PCR 从 12 个多杀菌素分离物中扩增出一个预期大小(200 碱基对)的 DNA 片段,这些分离物在 LAMP 检测中也全部呈阳性。所有 PCR 扩增子的身份都通过测序得到了确认。PCR 和 LAMP 的分析灵敏度相似,目标 DNA 的检测限均为 20 pg。由于 PCR 和 LAMP 检测法均未对 12 种非相关细菌产生阳性结果,因此分析特异性被评估为 100%。不过,在检测 40 份临床样本时,LAMP 的临床特异性(94.74%)低于 PCR(100%)。使用简化 DNA 提取方法提取的 DNA 样本均未被 LAMP 或 PCR 扩增:结论:本研究开发的 LAMP 检测方法在检测多杀性疟原虫方面的性能与 PCR 相当:临床意义:使用快速、便携的 DNA 提取方法与 LAMP 检测相结合,可为野外环境中的禽霍乱护理点检测创造机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparative evaluation of PCR and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays for detecting Pasteurella multocida in poultry.

Aims: To develop a colourimetric loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay for the detection of Pasteurella multocida in clinical poultry samples and compare the performance of this assay with PCR. A secondary aim was to evaluate a simple DNA extraction method that could enable LAMP-based testing in the field without the need for specialised laboratory equipment.

Methods: Primer sets for both LAMP and PCR were designed to amplify the KMT1 gene of P. multocida. DNA was extracted from 12 P. multocida isolates using a commercial extraction kit, and subjected to analysis using both LAMP and PCR. The analytical specificity of the LAMP assay was evaluated by testing it against a panel of 12 unrelated bacterial species, and the analytical sensitivity (limit of detection) was determined through testing of serial dilutions of the target DNA and compared to that of PCR. Subsequently, cloacal swabs (n = 40) from a commercial turkey flock were subjected to analysis using both LAMP and PCR assays, using a rapid DNA extraction method and a commercial extraction kit. Clinical sensitivity and specificity of the LAMP assay were calculated in comparison to PCR.

Results: A single DNA fragment of the expected size (∼ 200 base pairs), was amplified by PCR from 12 P. multocida isolates, which were also all positive by the LAMP assay. The identity of all PCR amplicons was confirmed by sequencing. Both PCR and LAMP showed similar analytical sensitivity, with a LOD of 20 pg of target DNA. As neither PCR nor LAMP assays produced positive results with 12 non-related bacterial species, the analytical specificity was assessed as 100%. However, LAMP demonstrated lower clinical specificity (94.74%) compared to PCR (100%) when 40 clinical samples were tested. None of the DNA samples extracted using the simplified DNA extraction method were amplified by either LAMP or PCR.

Conclusion: The LAMP assay developed in this study exhibits comparable performance to PCR in detecting P. multocida.

Clinical relevance: The use of a rapid and portable DNA extraction method, in conjunction with LAMP assays, could create opportunities for point-of-care testing for fowl cholera in field settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Zealand veterinary journal
New Zealand veterinary journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The New Zealand Veterinary Journal (NZVJ) is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed articles covering all aspects of veterinary science, including clinical practice, animal welfare and animal health. The NZVJ publishes original research findings, clinical communications (including novel case reports and case series), rapid communications, correspondence and review articles, originating from New Zealand and internationally. Topics should be relevant to, but not limited to, New Zealand veterinary and animal science communities, and include the disciplines of infectious disease, medicine, surgery and the health, management and welfare of production and companion animals, horses and New Zealand wildlife. All submissions are expected to meet the highest ethical and welfare standards, as detailed in the Journal’s instructions for authors.
期刊最新文献
The association between fluoride concentrations and spontaneous humeral fracture in first-lactation dairy cows: results from two New Zealand studies. A retrospective analysis of post-mortem findings in New Zealand weka (Gallirallus australis), 1995-2022. Gastrointestinal nematode parasites of grazing ruminants: a comprehensive literature review of diagnostic methods for quantifying parasitism, larval differentiation and measuring anthelmintic resistance. Comparison of bacterial culture results obtained from three different sampling locations in dogs and cats with chronic nasal disease. Folliculectomy for the treatment of pre-ovulatory follicular stasis in three illegally captured West Coast green geckos (Naultinus tuberculatus) to enable wild rehabilitation.
×
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