BOX ve (GTG)5 Parmak izi Metotlarının İran’da Tavuklardan İzole Edilen Escherichia coli’nin Moleküler Tiplendirilmesinde Klonal Heterojenite ve Yeterliliği

Abstract

Citation of This ArticleKheiri R, Akhtari L: Clonal heterogeneity and efficacy of BOX and (GTG)5 fingerprinting methods for molecular typing of Escherichia coli isolated from chickens in IRI. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg, 23 (2): 219-225, 2017. DOI: 10.9775/kvfd.2016 AbstractThis study evaluates the clonal heterogeneity and efficacy of BOX-PCR and (GTG)5-PCR for DNA-based typing of Escherichia coli strains isolated from feces of chickens in IRI. Fecal samples were collected from chicken husbandry followed by E. coli isolation through biochemical tests. Isolates were finger printed by BOX-A1 and (GTG)5 primers. Dendrograms were generated based on 80% similarity and Shannon-Weaver index was calculated. One hundred and six E. coli isolates were obtained from chicken's fecal sample. By (GTG)5 primer, of 106 isolates, two isolates were untypeable, while 104 isolates generated 100 unique, and 2 duplicate profiles. The dendrogram generated six clusters (G1-G6). With BOX-PCR, 106 E. coli isolates revealed 50 unique BOX profiles, in addition to 22 repetitive profiles, while 12 isolates were untypeable. Based on the bands and dendrogram, the 106 strains were grouped into six clusters (B1-B6). Shannon-Weaver index was 4.665 for (GTG)5-PCR and 0.281 for BOX-PCR. (GTG)5-PCR revealed complex clonal heterogeneity, more discriminatory power, less untypeable isolates, higher Shannon-Weaver index, and less isolates with the same profile in comparison to BOX-PCR. Although (GTG)5-PCR proved to be a powerful typing method, it is recommended to combine two or more different typing methods for higher discriminatory power. (GTG)5-PCR; BOX-PCR ile karşılaştırıldığında kompleks klonal heterojenite, daha fazla ayırt edici güç, daha az tiplendirilemeyen izolat, daha yüksek Shannon-Weaver endeksi ve daha az aynı profilli izolat elde edilmesini sağladı. (GTG)5-PCR daha güçlü tiplendirme metodu olmasına rağmen iki veya daha fazla tiplendirme metodunun birlikte kullanılması daha yüksek ayırıcı güç için önerilmektedir. Keywords: BOX-PCR, Chicken, Clonal heterogeneity, Escherichia coli, (GTG)5-PCR, Molecular typing BOX ve (GTG) 5 Parmak izi Metotlarının İran'da Tavuklardan İzole Edilen

Determinación de la diversidad genética y caracterización de genes de patogenicidad en aislados de Escherichia coli en pollos de engorde (Gallus gallus domesticus), Azuay, Ecuador

“…Se reportó que el índice de discriminación de Simpson para E. coli [14] fue más alto (93,68 %) con (GTG)5-PCR, seguido de BOX-PCR (91,23 %), REP-PCR (89,33 %), ERIC-PCR (84,69 %) y ERIC2-PCR (79,38 %) y que, la (GTG)5-PCR produjo números de banda de 10 a 25 [20]. Se confirma la mayor precisión de (GTG)5-PCR, en comparación con BOX-PCR [15]. También hay que resaltar el método de diagnóstico como es el uso de sondas para la hibridación en fase sólidas, estas sondas son fragmentos pequeños de ADN que contienen parte de los genes que codifican para algún factor de virulencia [29].…”