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 Devallois, A.
Right arrow Articles by Rastogi, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Devallois, A.
Right arrow Articles by Rastogi, N.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 11 1997, 2767-2772, Vol 35, No. 11
Copyright © 1997 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Molecular characterization of Mycobacterium avium complex isolates giving discordant results in AccuProbe tests by PCR-restriction enzyme analysis, 16S rRNA gene sequencing, and DT1-DT6 PCR [In Process Citation]

A Devallois, M Picardeau, CN Paramasivan, V Vincent and N Rastogi
Unite de la Tuberculose et des Mycobacteries, Institut Pasteur, Pointe- a-Pitre, Guadeloupe, French West Indies.

Based on cultural and biochemical tests, a total of 84 strains (72 clinical and 12 environmental isolates from the Caribbean Isles, Europe, and the Indian subcontinent) were identified as members of the Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC). They were further characterized with MAC, M. avium, and M. intracellulare probes of the AccuProbe system, and this was followed by selective amplification of DT6 and DT1 sequences. Seventy isolates gave concordant results; 63 were identified as M. avium, 5 were identified as M. intracellulare, and 24 remained untypeable by both methods. Fourteen isolates gave discrepant results, as they were DT1 positive but gave negative results by the M. intracellulare AccuProbe test. Consequently, a detailed molecular analysis of all DT1-positive isolates (14 discrepant strains plus 5 M. intracellulare strains) was performed by PCR-restriction analysis (PRA) of the hsp65 gene and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. The results confirmed the reported heterogeneity of M. intracellulare, as only 6 of 19 isolates (32%) gave PRA results compatible with published M. intracellulare profiles while the rest of the isolates were grouped in four previously unpublished profiles. 16S rRNA gene sequencing showed that only 8 of 19 isolates (42%) were related to M. intracellulare IWGMT 90247 (EMBL accession no. X88917), the rest being related to MCRO19 (EMBL accession no. X93030) and MIWGTMR10 (EMBL accession no. X88915). In conclusion, we have characterized a significant number of MAC isolates which were not identified by the AccuProbe test, PRA, or 16S rRNA sequencing. However, all of them were identifiable by DT1-DT6 PCR (they were DT6 negative and DT1 positive) and could be tentatively identified as M. intracellulare based on previously published observations. It is noteworthy that the majority of such isolates (14 of 19) were from the Indian subcontinent, with 12 of 14 being environmental isolates. Our study confirms the marked heterogeneity of M. intracellulare isolates and shows the utility of in-house DT1 PCR to detect this group of isolates, which would otherwise have been missed by the AccuProbe system in a routine clinical microbiology laboratory.


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 © 1997 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.