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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Graves, L M
Right arrow Articles by Schuchat, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Graves, L M
Right arrow Articles by Schuchat, A

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1994 December; 32(12): 2936-2943

Comparison of ribotyping and multilocus enzyme electrophoresis for subtyping of Listeria monocytogenes isolates.

L M Graves, B Swaminathan, M W Reeves, S B Hunter, R E Weaver, B D Plikaytis and A Schuchat

Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30333.

ABSTRACT

Ribotyping was compared with multilocus enzyme electrophoresis (MEE) for subtyping 305 Listeria monocytogenes isolates from clinical and nonclinical sources. For ribotyping, EcoRI-restricted genomic DNA fragments of L. monocytogenes strains were separated by agarose gel electrophoresis, and Southern blots were probed with a cloned Escherichia coli rrnB operon (plasmid pKK3535) labeled with digoxigenin. The L. monocytogenes isolates were divided into 28 distinct ribotypes, while MEE analysis divided the same isolates into 78 electrophoretic types (ETs). On the basis of their ribotype profiles, the strains were divided into two subgroups. The ribotype alpha (RT alpha) subgroup contained serotypes 1/2a, 1/2c, and 3a, and the ribotype beta (RT beta) subgroup contained serotypes 1/2b, 3b, 4b, and 4ab. This division is in complete agreement with MEE analysis, which divides the species into two subgroups (ET groups A and B), with the same serotype distribution in each subgroup. Overall, MEE was more discriminating than ribotyping. However, in several instances ribotyping discriminated between isolates within the same ET. Ribotyping was more discriminating for serotypes 1/2a, 1/2c, and 3a (Simpson's Index for Diversity [DI] = 0.81) than for serotypes 1/2b and 4b (DI = 0.76). A substantial proportion (69%) of serotype 1/2b and 4b strains clustered in five ETs and five ribotypes. These data suggest that ribotyping and MEE do not provide adequate discrimination between strains of serotypes 1/2b and 4b. Methods such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis should be explored for further discrimination of strains of these serotypes.


J Clin Microbiol. 1994 December; 32(12): 2936-2943




This article has been cited by other articles:




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

Copyright © 1994 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.