2000
DOI: 10.1007/s002849910006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of 16S rDNA Sequences as Signature Characters to Identify Xylella fastidiosa

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0
2

Year Published

2003
2003
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
24
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Results obtained by Chen et al (2000) showed that the strains of X. fastidiosa could be divided into two groups, one group for strains of grape and mulbery and the second group for strains of citrus, oak, grape, plum, and mulberry, based on sequencing of the 16S rDNA gene. In this work, it was possible to observe that citrus and coffee strains formed a separate group from the strains from the other hosts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Results obtained by Chen et al (2000) showed that the strains of X. fastidiosa could be divided into two groups, one group for strains of grape and mulbery and the second group for strains of citrus, oak, grape, plum, and mulberry, based on sequencing of the 16S rDNA gene. In this work, it was possible to observe that citrus and coffee strains formed a separate group from the strains from the other hosts.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The detection and characterization of X. fastidiosa strains have been done through classic procedures based on cultivation (Hopkins, 1989) as well as using molecular procedures, such as protein profiling and homology of DNA (Chang and Schaad, 1992), RFLP (Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism -Chen et al 1992), PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction - Minsavage et al 1994), sequencing of the ITS DNA sequence (Ciapina, 2001), 16S rDNA (Chen et al 2000) and SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism -Wickert, 2007). But despite their physiologic, microbiologic, pathogenic and molecular differences, all strains are characterized as single species.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Qin et al (30) proposed the following natural groups of strains: 1, citrus and coffee; 2, grapevine, almond, and ragweed; and 3, elm, oak, and plum. Chen et al (6) proposed three strain groups based on 16S ribosomal DNA sequences: 1, citrus and coffee; 2, grapevine and mulberry; and 3, elm, oak, peach, plum, and periwinkle. Based on our analysis of giCVC1, we propose three groups of strains: 1, citrus, coffee, and possibly other South American strains; 2, grapevine, mulberry, oleander, and some almond strains, all from North America; and 3, elm, oak, plum, periwinkle, and some almond strains, again all from North America.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Molecular analyses at the species level have revealed three distinct groups. The grapevine-infecting variants responsible for PD are found in one group, while the citrus-infecting variants responsible for CVC are found in another (6,7,16). Initial expectations, based on geographical distributions, host diversity, differential disease symptoms, and molecular analyses, were that organisms from the three groups would be sufficiently different to support taxonomic separation at the subspecies or pathovar level (17,19,24).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This has been achieved by isolation, serology (e.g., ELISA) and several PCR methods using primers designed for DNA fragments obtained by incubation of total Xf genomic DNA with restriction enzymes, random amplification (Minsavage et al, 1994;Pooler and Hartung, 1995), and conserved genes like 16S rRNA (Chen et al, 2000) and gyrB (Rodrigues et al, 2003).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%