JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 de la Puente-Redondo, V. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ferri, E. F. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by de la Puente-Redondo, V. A.
Right arrow Articles by Ferri, E. F. R.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2000, p. 1016-1022, Vol. 38, No. 3
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Comparison of Different PCR Approaches for Typing of Francisella tularensis Strains

V. A. de la Puente-Redondo,1 N. García del Blanco,1 C. B. Gutiérrez-Martín,1 F. J. García-Peña,2 and E. F. Rodríguez Ferri1,*

Section of Microbiology and Immunology, Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, León,1 and Central Laboratory of Animal Health, Algete, Madrid,2 Spain

Received 26 August 1999/Returned for modification 11 October 1999/Accepted 7 December 1999

In this study, we evaluated three PCR methods for epidemiological typing of Francisella tularensis: repetitive extragenic palindromic element PCR (REP-PCR), enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus sequence PCR (ERIC-PCR), and random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) assay with both M13 and T3-T7 primers. The analysis was performed with 40 strains of F. tularensis isolated from hares, humans, ticks, and a vole. On the basis of the combination of REP, ERIC, and RAPD fingerprints, F. tularensis strains were divided into 17 genetic groups (designated A to Q), and one Francisella novicida strain was classified in group R. The F. novicida strain is of special concern, since previous genetic methods have been unable to clearly distinguish between F. tularensis and F. novicida. The F. tularensis isolates recovered from hares were included in groups A to J, M, and P; those recovered from humans were included in groups A, D, G, J, L, O, and N; those isolated from ticks were included in groups B and Q; and that recovered from a vole was in group K. The diversities calculated for the 40 F. tularensis isolates, according to Simpson's index, were 0.14 for REP-PCR, 0.52 for ERIC-PCR, 0.39 for RAPD assay with the M13 primer (RAPD/M13-PCR), and 0.65 for RAPD/T3-T7-PCR, and the diversity increased up to 0.90 when ERIC-PCR, RAPD/M13-PCR, and RAPD/T3-T7-PCR were combined. Our results suggest that although limited genetic heterogeneity among F. tularensis strains was observed, this small variation is enough to validate the PCR methods used in this study and their combinations, because they can provide safe, useful, and rapid tools for the typing of F. tularensis.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Facultad de Veterinaria, Departamento de Sanidad Animal, Universidad de León, 24007-León, Spain. Phone: 34-987 291 297. Fax: 34-987 291 304. E-mail: dsaerf{at}unileon.es.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2000, p. 1016-1022, Vol. 38, No. 3
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


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 © 2000 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.