51株临床铜绿假单胞菌ERIC-PCR分型与噬菌体分型比较研究
|
摘要
目的探讨噬菌体分型技术和ERIC-PCR技术对51株临床铜绿假单胞菌的相关性。方法临床铜绿假单胞菌51株使用PL39、PL15、PL16、PL18、PL49和PL62(滴斑法)进行噬菌体分型,采用肠杆菌基因间重复一致序列为引物进行ERIC-PCR分型,比较两种分型方法的差异。结果 51株铜绿假单胞菌的ERIC-PCR指纹图谱使用UPGMA法进行聚类分析,分为1型、2型和3型,使用噬菌体分型可分为Ⅰ、Ⅱ、Ⅲ、Ⅳ、Ⅴ和Ⅵ群6个群。经Spearman等级相关分析,铜绿假单胞菌ERIC-PCR分型与6种噬菌体分型无显著相关性(r=-0.055,P>0.05)。结论细菌ERIC-PCR分型较噬菌体分型分辨率低,因此在细菌同源性分析时应结合多种分型技术分析菌株的遗传进化关系。
Objective To compare the ability of phage typing and ERIC-PCR fingerprint typing to distinguish strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Methods Fifty-one strains of P.aeruginosafrom patients were typed using 6 P.aeruginosa phages(PL39,PL15,PL16,PL18,PL49,and PL62)and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus(ERIC)PCR.Differences between ERIC-PCR genotyping and phage typing of the 51 strains were compared. Results The 51 strains of P.aeruginosa were divided into 3 types(type 1,type 2,and type 3)by ERIC-PCR fingerprint using UPGMA clustering.Based on phage typing,the 51 strains were classified into 6 types(type I,type II,type III,type IV,type V,and type VI).The ERIC-PCR type and phage type were not correlated according to Spearman rank correlation analysis(r=-0.055,P=0.7010). Conclusion Phage typing has greater ability to distinguish the homology of P.aeruginosa than ERIC-PCR typing.Bacteria should be phylogenetically analyzed using a variety of typing techniques.
Objective To compare the ability of phage typing and ERIC-PCR fingerprint typing to distinguish strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Methods Fifty-one strains of P.aeruginosafrom patients were typed using 6 P.aeruginosa phages(PL39,PL15,PL16,PL18,PL49,and PL62)and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus(ERIC)PCR.Differences between ERIC-PCR genotyping and phage typing of the 51 strains were compared. Results The 51 strains of P.aeruginosa were divided into 3 types(type 1,type 2,and type 3)by ERIC-PCR fingerprint using UPGMA clustering.Based on phage typing,the 51 strains were classified into 6 types(type I,type II,type III,type IV,type V,and type VI).The ERIC-PCR type and phage type were not correlated according to Spearman rank correlation analysis(r=-0.055,P=0.7010). Conclusion Phage typing has greater ability to distinguish the homology of P.aeruginosa than ERIC-PCR typing.Bacteria should be phylogenetically analyzed using a variety of typing techniques.
引文
[1]周海健,阚飙.细菌基因组分型方法的应用研究进展[J].疾病监测,2016,31(8):668-75.
[2]靳静,陈松建,张改,等.克雷伯菌属噬菌体LH-01的生物学特性及其对败血症小鼠疗效的初步研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2015,10(1):25-8.
[3] Dalla-Costa LM,Irino K,Rodrigues J,et al.Characterisation of diarrhoeagenic Escherichia coli clones by ribotyping and ERICPCR[J].J Med Microbiol,1998,47(3):227-34.
[4]张改,黄德海,靳静,等.肺炎克雷伯菌噬菌体LH-02的生物学特性及基因组初步研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2016,11(1):9-12.
[5]陈松建,张改,靳静,等.肺炎克雷伯菌短尾噬菌体LH-01药代动力学研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2016,11(7):615-9.
[6]李亚辉,李振江,靳静,等.血清不耐热物质对噬菌体PL39杀灭铜绿假单胞菌的影响[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2017,12(7):639-42.
[7]李亚辉,王小亭,靳静,等.铜绿假单胞菌宽谱噬菌体PL39生物学特性研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2016,11(2):144-6,150.
[8]李庆雷,柴同杰,刘巍.ERIC-PCR和PFGE对大肠埃希菌由舍内向舍外传播的鉴定及两种方法的比较[J].动物医学进展,2010,31(S1):112-7.
[9]靳静,黄德海,王小亭,等.19株新分离噬菌体可裂解肺炎克雷伯菌临床株的ERIC-PCR指纹图谱分析[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2015,10(9):782-5.
[10]林一曼,兰全学,石晓路,等.噬菌体分型技术和脉冲场凝胶电泳技术对肠炎沙门菌分型的比较[J].中国卫生检验杂志,2009,19(5):998-9.
[11] Bannerman TL,Hancock GA,Tenover FC,et al.Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis as a replacement for bacteriophage typing of Staphylococcus aureus[J].J Clini Microbiol,1995,33(3):551-5.
[2]靳静,陈松建,张改,等.克雷伯菌属噬菌体LH-01的生物学特性及其对败血症小鼠疗效的初步研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2015,10(1):25-8.
[3] Dalla-Costa LM,Irino K,Rodrigues J,et al.Characterisation of diarrhoeagenic Escherichia coli clones by ribotyping and ERICPCR[J].J Med Microbiol,1998,47(3):227-34.
[4]张改,黄德海,靳静,等.肺炎克雷伯菌噬菌体LH-02的生物学特性及基因组初步研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2016,11(1):9-12.
[5]陈松建,张改,靳静,等.肺炎克雷伯菌短尾噬菌体LH-01药代动力学研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2016,11(7):615-9.
[6]李亚辉,李振江,靳静,等.血清不耐热物质对噬菌体PL39杀灭铜绿假单胞菌的影响[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2017,12(7):639-42.
[7]李亚辉,王小亭,靳静,等.铜绿假单胞菌宽谱噬菌体PL39生物学特性研究[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2016,11(2):144-6,150.
[8]李庆雷,柴同杰,刘巍.ERIC-PCR和PFGE对大肠埃希菌由舍内向舍外传播的鉴定及两种方法的比较[J].动物医学进展,2010,31(S1):112-7.
[9]靳静,黄德海,王小亭,等.19株新分离噬菌体可裂解肺炎克雷伯菌临床株的ERIC-PCR指纹图谱分析[J].中国病原生物学杂志,2015,10(9):782-5.
[10]林一曼,兰全学,石晓路,等.噬菌体分型技术和脉冲场凝胶电泳技术对肠炎沙门菌分型的比较[J].中国卫生检验杂志,2009,19(5):998-9.
[11] Bannerman TL,Hancock GA,Tenover FC,et al.Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis as a replacement for bacteriophage typing of Staphylococcus aureus[J].J Clini Microbiol,1995,33(3):551-5.