JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nakata, S
Right arrow Articles by Estes, M K
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nakata, S
Right arrow Articles by Estes, M K

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1987 October; 25(10): 1902-1906

Electron microscopy procedure influences detection of rotaviruses.

S Nakata, B L Petrie, E P Calomeni and M K Estes

Department of Virology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030.

ABSTRACT

Technical parameters of electron microscope staining procedures (type of stain, pH of stain, and time of staining) influence particle integrity for three groups of rotaviruses. Simian rotavirus SA11 (group A), Chinese adult diarrhea rotavirus and porcine rotavirus-like agent (group B), and porcine pararotavirus (group C) were tested. All rotavirus strains were quite stable in uranyl acetate and phosphotungstic acid at pH 4.5 and relatively stable in ammonium molybdate. However, staining with phosphotungstic acid at higher pH values with increased staining time yielded a reduction in the number of particles and particles that were broken or degraded to single-shelled particles or core particles. The different staining procedures were also tested in immunoelectron microscopy experiments. Antibody molecules bound to rotavirus particles were observed clearly only with phosphotungstic acid staining and not with uranyl acetate. We therefore recommend that uranyl acetate and phosphotungstic acid at pH 4.5 be used for negative staining of rotaviruses; phosphotungstic acid at pH 4.5 is optimal for immunoelectron microscopy. These technical points may be critical for rotavirus detection and are important for studies pertaining to the epidemiology and clinical importance of the non-group A rotaviruses.

J Clin Microbiol. 1987 October; 25(10): 1902-1906






Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1987 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.