The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
1999
DOI: 10.1016/s0732-8893(99)00033-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative evaluation of an automated ribotyping instrument versus pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for epidemiological investigation of clinical isolates of bacteria

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

4
38
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
4
38
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Each lane of sample data was normalized to a standard marker set and band intensity, and then compared with reference patterns. Similarity coefficients were calculated based on both position and relative band weight (17,22).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each lane of sample data was normalized to a standard marker set and band intensity, and then compared with reference patterns. Similarity coefficients were calculated based on both position and relative band weight (17,22).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Herein, we describe the use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), ribotyping, serotyping, and virulence gene detection by PCR to study in detail the molecular epidemiology of V. parahaemolyticus strains isolated from Canadian patients (3,(9)(10)(11). A retrospective descriptive laboratory analysis of clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates from across Canada (primarily British Columbia), which is available from the inventory of the National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, was conducted.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), as described previously (5,16). Briefly, isolates were inoculated into tubes containing lysis buffer, placed in a heating block at 80°C for 30 min, and then transferred to the RiboPrinter instrument.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Genomic DNA in agarose was digested with the restriction enzyme PvuII, and the resulting fragments were separated by electrophoresis in 1% agarose on a CHEF-DRII apparatus (Bio-Rad, Richmond, Calif.) with the following conditions: 200 V for 23 h at switch times ramped from 5 to 40 s. Strains were considered different by PFGE if more than three bands were different (5,21). Strains with one to three different bands were considered subtypes.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%