Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Bacteriology

Tandem Tetramer-Based Microsatellite Fingerprinting for Typing of Proteus mirabilis Strains

Tomasz Cieślikowski, Dobrosława Gradecka, Magdalena Mielczarek, Wiesław Kaca
Tomasz Cieślikowski
1Centre of Microbiology and Virology, Polish Academy of Sciences
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: tcieslik@cmiwpan.lodz.pl
Dobrosława Gradecka
2Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Magdalena Mielczarek
2Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Wiesław Kaca
1Centre of Microbiology and Virology, Polish Academy of Sciences
2Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.4.1673-1680.2003
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Two microsatellite tandem repeated tetramers, (GACA)4 and (CAAT)4, were used for Proteus mirabilis strain differentiation. The microsatellite-based PCR tests were applied for the examination of interstrain diversity for 87 P. mirabilis strains. Forty-six of the investigated strains were clinical isolates (5 were hospital isolates and 39 were outpatient clinic isolates); 42 strains were derived from the Kauffmann-Perch collection of laboratory strains. Fingerprinting done with the tetramers had a high discrimination ability [0.992 and 0.940 for (GACA)4 and (CAAT)4, respectively]. The distributions of clinical isolates among well-defined laboratory strains, determined by numerical analysis (unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic averages; Dice similarity coefficient), proved their genetic similarity to reference strains in the Kauffmann-Perch collection. This analysis also indicated that it is possible to estimate some phenotypic properties of P. mirabilis clinical isolates solely on the basis of microsatellite fingerprinting.

Proteus spp. are mobile gram-negative bacteria common in both the natural environment and animal or human intestinal tracts. Proteus spp. are also known etiologic agents for meningitis and numerous bacteremias (8, 20-23, 43). Urinary tract infections are among the most frequent bacterial infections (19), and Proteus mirabilis strains are one of the most common causes of urinary tract infections (7%), third after Escherichia coli (52%) and Enterococcus spp.(12%) (11). Such infections occur commonly among patients with structural defects of the urinary tract (6, 38, 39). The presence of P. mirabilis rods within a urease-induced bladder stone matrix was visualized recently (24). Moreover, some results suggest a possible etiopathogenic role of P. mirabilis in rheumatoid arthritis (9, 31), and some nosocomial transmission events have been reported (31). Because of the increasing spread and clinical significance of P. mirabilis rods (13, 15, 30, 31, 32), studies of effective methods for epidemiological investigations are of great importance.

Out of the numerous types of simple sequence repeats proposed as tools for very sensitive bacterial fingerprinting (25, 27, 48, 50, 51, 54), many microsatellites have been described as being useful for microbial differentiation, especially below the level of species (1, 10, 26, 28, 33, 34, 47, 48, 49, 53).

Most of the molecular fingerprinting methods applied for the differentiation of Proteus (35, 36, 44), however, are not sensitive enough for more detailed interstrain differentiation. In particular, no specific method allowing for P. mirabilis differentiation, especially below the serotype level, has been described so far.

In this study, we have focused on microsatellite-based methods supplying patterns specific for particular P. mirabilis strains. The aim of the study was to verify how effective microsatellites are for P. mirabilis fingerprinting; in particular, we examined whether tandem tetramer-based PCR is applicable to Proteus strain differentiation or typing as well as the sensitivities of PCR methods based on tandem repeated tetramers. In addition, we compared the efficiencies of these methods and other important Proteus typing methods. Finally, we examined how informative these patterns are in relation to other properties of P. mirabilis strains.

Two microsatellite sequences were used for P. mirabilis laboratory strain differentiation: (GACA)4 and (CAAT)4. The studies were performed with 40 P. mirabilis strains from the serologically defined Kauffmann-Perch (23) collection and with 42 P. mirabilis clinical isolates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bacterial strains. P. mirabilis laboratory strains were from the Czech Collection of Type Cultures, Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology, Prague, Czech Republic. P. mirabilis strain S1959 was obtained from the Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Łódź, Łódź, Poland. Thirty-six clinical isolates of P. mirabilis from urine were obtained from outpatient clinics in Łódź and given the prefix “ZOZ”; they were kindly supplied by Halina Skulimowska (Table 1). An additional six clinical isolates were derived from the Military Medical Academy Hospital, Łódź, Poland, and given the prefix “WAM”; they were kindly supplied by Maria Kowalska (Table 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Proteus strains examined in these studies

Bacterial culture and DNA isolation.Bacteria were cultivated in 3 ml of Luria-Bertani (LB) medium for 12 h at 37°C. Then, 1 ml of the culture was centrifuged for 3 min. The pellet was resuspended in 100 μl of Tris-EDTA buffer. After 30 min of incubation with 10 μl of proteinase K solution (20 mg/ml) at 37°C, chromosomal DNA was isolated with a genomic DNA isolation kit (A&A Biotechnology, Gdansk, Poland) and then dissolved in 200 μl of Tris (pH 8.2). DNA samples were kept at −20°C until PCR was performed.

The amount of isolated DNA was verified with a UV spectrophotometer (Ultraspec 2000; Pharmacia LKB) at 260 nm and by electrophoresis in 2% agarose (Serva; analytical grade) in 0.04 M Tris-acetate-1 mM EDTA buffer (pH 7.8).

Primers.Sequences of oligonucleotides (synthesized by Ransom Hill Bioscience Inc., Ramona Calif.) for genomic DNA analysis were as follows: (GACA)4, 5′-GACAGACAGACAGACA-3′ (16 nucleotides) (26), and (CAAT)4, 5′-CAATCAATCAATCAAT-3′ (16 nucleotides) (33).

Primer target site computer analysis.The presence of the doubled tetramer repeats (GACA)4 and (CAAT)4 in the known part of the Proteus genome was confirmed. The National Center for Biotechnology Information GenBank database was explored for the presence of P. mirabilis DNA sequences. This search was followed by a search for tandem repeated tetramers among the 84 P. mirabilis sequences found. For this analysis, two programs, Quicksearch and Nesearch, from the PC/Gene packet, were used.

PCR conditions.A master mixture, the same for each reaction type, contained all reagents except for genomic DNA. Each thin-walled vial (MJ Research) contained 25 μl of reaction solution, which consisted of 2.5 mM deoxynucleotide triphosphate mixture (dATP, dTTP, dCTP, and dGTP; TaKaRa), 2.5 μl of 10× reaction buffer, 100 pM primer, 1 U of thermostable polymerase (Dynazyme; Finnzyme), 18MΩ ultrapure water (Millipore), and 20 ng of template DNA. Amplification was carried out with a UNO II thermocycler (Biometra). An initial 7 min of denaturation at 95°C was followed by 32 cycles of annealing (40°C for 1 min), extension (65°C for 1 min), and denaturation (92°C for 30 s). The reaction was completed by 16 min of extension at 65°C. During gel electrophoresis in an MGU 602T unit (CBS Scientific), aliquots of amplification products (5 μl) were resolved against molecular weight markers (Ideal, Poland, Gdansk) in 2% agarose (Serva; analytical grade). The gels were stained with ethidium bromide solution and photographed with the aid of a BioDoc system (Biometra) and the computer program SM Camera (FAST Multimedia AG 1993, version1.1).

Electrophoretic pattern analysis.For investigation of PCR product diversity, computer-assisted pattern analysis was carried out (GelCompar, version 4.0; Applied Maths, Kortijk, Belgium). The bands chosen for the analysis were selected manually from the hard-copy photograph and the densitometric curves of the appropriate electrophoretic paths. For all electropherograms, the same background subtraction procedure (the rolling-disk procedure, as suggested by the program authors) was used. Normalization procedures included the internal and external reference band sets as shown in Fig. 1. Electrophoretic patterns were normalized to common internal sets of amplicons next to the external molecular weight markers placed on the peripheral paths of both sides of the gels. The correlations among the investigated species were based on the electrophoretic band distribution and the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. For comparison of the electrophoretic patterns and determination of their similarities (construction of dendrograms), the UPGMA (unweighted pair-group method with arithmetic averages) clustering algorithm was used (45). For the band pattern analysis, the Dice similarity coefficient was used.

FIG. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 1.

Electrophoretic resolution by (GACA)4 PCR of six representative P. mirabilis strains derived from the Kauffmann-Perch collection. The fingerprinting procedure accuracy was tested three times for each strain. Lanes: 1 to 3, PrK 75/57; 4 to 6, PrK 66/57; 7 to 9, PrK 62/57; 10 to 12, PrK 34/57; 13 to 15, PrK 18/57; and 16 to 18, PrK 15/57. The repeated procedures included culturing, DNA extraction, and amplification. Experiments were done with 3 ml of inoculum (lanes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18), 1 liter of secondary inoculum (lanes 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, and 17), and 8 liters of culture (lanes 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16). Lanes M, molecular weight markers. The white arrows on the left indicate bands applied as internal references for normalization procedure in the UPGMA analysis.

The levels of effectiveness of the applied fingerprinting methods were compared by using the formula described by Hunter (14):$$mathtex$$\[D{=}1{-}\left[\frac{1}{N\ (N{-}1)}\right]{{\sum}_{j\ {=}\ 1}^{N}}\ a_{j}\]$$mathtex$$where N is the total number of investigated strains, aj is the number of indistinguishable strains in the experiment, and D is the discrimination power.

RESULTS

Several strains were arbitrarily chosen to examine the reproducibility of the typing method and to test the stability of the bacterial strains. The reproducibility of PCR patterns was confirmed in two series of reactions performed on a DNA matrix isolated from six P. mirabilis laboratory strains, PrK 15/57 (O7), PrK 18/57 (O9), PrK 34/57 (O38), PrK 62/57 (O36), PrK 66/57 (O40), PrK 75/57 (O49), with the (GACA)4 primer and on a DNA matrix isolated from nine P. mirabilis strains, PrK 15/57 (O7), PrK 18/57 (O9), PrK 34/57 (O38), PrK 38/57 (O20), PrK 62/57 (O36), PrK 66/57 (O40), PrK 75/57 (O49), PrO 10/52 (O3), and S1959 (O3), with the (CAAT)4 primer. Each of the strains was isolated three times to check genetic stability. Electrophoresis performed on one gel only with 18 probes (six triplets) resulted in 100% reproducibility (i.e., identical strains produced identical outputs) (Fig. 1 and 2). For the (GACA)4 PCR, a lack of full homology was observed within the repeats of the same-strain analysis (Fig. 3, series designed A, B, and C). The inclusion of several paths from another gel resulted in a total 6.7% difference in the same-strain analysis (Fig. 3, paths not described). Hence, the cutoff was set at an arbitrary value of 90% interpattern homology. The weaker reproducibility in the last test resulted from the larger number of similar amplicons in particular paths as well as from the higher background smear intensity.

FIG. 2.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 2.

Accuracy of (CAAT)4 PCR fingerprinting for six representative P. mirabilis strains derived from the Kauffmann-Perch collection. Lanes: 1 to 3, PrK 66/57; 4 to 6, PrK 62/57; 7 to 9, PrK 38/57; 10 to 12, PrK 34/57; 13 to 15, PrK 18/57; and 16 to 18, PrK 15/57. The testing procedures included culturing, DNA extraction, and amplification. See the legend to Fig. 1 for a further description of lanes. Lanes M, molecular weight markers. The white arrows on the left indicate bands used as internal reference standards for normalization in the UPGMA analysis.

FIG. 3.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 3.

Reproducibility of (GACA)4 PCR (left) and (CAAT)4 PCR (right) in UPGMA band pattern analysis (the Dice similarity coefficient was used). An 0.8% position tolerance value was used. The calculation program GelCompar, version 4.0, was used. Three probes of each strain (A, B, and C) resolved on the same gel and one probe of some of the same strains from another gel (not labeled) are compared. The scales represent the level of homology between the investigated probes.

For the set of six P. mirabilis laboratory strains, the differentiation indices were very high and equal (0.966) with both primers. When more electropherograms were investigated simultaneously (38 and 89), the appropriate differentiation indices were 0.992 with the (GACA)4 primer and 0.940 with the (CAAT)4 primer when a cutoff value of 90% was used and 0.954 with the (CAAT)4 primer when a cutoff value of 93% was used, respectively (Table 2; see also Fig. 5). For further analysis of P. mirabilis clinical isolates, only the (GACA)4 primer was used.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2.

Differentiation indices (DI) for two investigated fingerprinting methods based on tandem repeated tetramersa

The patterns obtained for the clinical isolates with the (GACA)4 primer were very similar to those obtained for the laboratory strains. Five bands common to most of the patterns were located at about 2,555, 1,241 (two bands), and 700 bp. Three shorter bands (two pairs separated by a single band) were located at about 500 to 100 bp (Fig. 6). These patterns were similar to the patterns obtained with the (CAAT)4 primer, where five bands positioned between 1,827 and 900 bp (Fig. 4) were common to most of the investigated strains. Most of the strain-specific bands were shorter than 900 bp. Numerical analysis of laboratory strains resulted in no evident clusters, and the dendrogram had the “stair-shape” structure (Fig. 5). The observed interstrain homologies were mostly in the range of about 60 to 95%, similar to those obtained with the dendrogram produced by (GACA)4-based fingerprinting. The patterns resulting from the (CAAT)4 test were more distinct, although some of the strains were still indistinguishable from others, making the interpretation of results difficult (Fig. 5).

FIG. 4.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 4.

Electrophoretic resolution by (CAAT)4 PCR of representative P. mirabilis strains derived from the Kauffmann-Perch collection. Lanes: 1, PrK 74/57 (O48); 2, PrK 69/57 (O43); 3, PrK 64/57 (O38); 4, PrK 61/57 (O35); 5, PrK 58/57 (O32); 6, PrK 56/57 (O31) (P. vulgaris); 7, PrK 53/57 (O30); 8, PrK 52/57 (O29); 9, PrK 51/57 (O28); 10, PrK 50/57 (O27); 11, PrK 49/57 (O26); 12, PrK 47/57 (O24); 13, PrK 46/57 (O24); 14, PrK 45/57 (O24); 15, PrK 43/57 (O23); 16, PrK 41/57 (O23); 17, PrK 38/57 (O20); and 18, PrK 34/57 (O18). Lanes M, molecular weight markers.

FIG. 5.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 5.

UPGMA (Dice) cluster analysis of 35 P. mirabilis laboratory strains by (CAAT)4 PCR. The calculated values for clustering errors are boxed. The scale at the left represents the homology level. The broken line indicates the accuracy of the method. The arrows indicate the main groups of indistinguishable strains for the cutoff value established at 90% similarity.

FIG. 6.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 6.

Representative electrophoretic patterns of (GACA)4 PCR for out-of-clinic isolates of P. mirabilis. Lanes: 1, ZOZ 63b; 2, ZOZ 42; 3, ZOZ 203; 4, ZOZ 216; 5, ZOZ 256; 6, ZOZ 58; 7, ZOZ 352; 8, ZOZ 304; 9, ZOZ 303; 10, ZOZ 302; 11, ZOZ 87; 12, ZOZ 253; 13, ZOZ 191; 14, ZOZ 72; 15, ZOZ 14; 16, ZOZ 13; 17, ZOZ 19; 18, ZOZ 630; 19, ZOZ 670; 20, ZOZ 168; 21, ZOZ 173; 22, ZOZ 367; and 23, ZOZ 105. Lanes M, molecular weight markers.

DISCUSSION

The studies reported here showed that tandem repeated tetramers might be used as effective tools for PCR-based P. mirabilis typing. The results of the cluster analysis partially corresponded to the distributions of important bacterial surface properties.

The levels of effectiveness of the most important Proteus typing methods were compared recently by Senior (42, 43) using phage typing, bacteriocin typing, and Dienes phenomenon-based incompatibility grouping. It was demonstrated that, when a combination of different typing methods is applied, highly sensitive differentiation may be obtained. Pignato et al. (36) found that with two ribotyping methods, 10 examined P. mirabilis strains were clustered together in one ribogroup. The effectiveness of ribotyping for P. mirabilis was compared with those of other genetic differentiation methods by Pfaller et al. (35). The discriminatory indices established were relatively high: 0.92 for ribotyping, 0.979 for PFGE, and 0.980 for the Dienes test. The sensitivity of molecular typing methods used to determine electrophoretic profiles of outer membrane or total cell proteins of Proteus strains (17) is much more limited.

PCR-based differentiation methods that have been evaluated include randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis and repetitive sequence-based PCR. For some Proteus species, repetitive sequences can be use as an effective tool for fingerprinting (18, 44). For P. mirabilis, however, the repetitive sequence-based PCR fingerprinting methods described so far (ERIC-PCR, BOXA1R-PCR, BOXA2R-PCR) have a lower sensitivity and only REP-PCR supports greater efficiency (44). Microsatellite-based PCR methods usually have a higher sensitivity. Nevertheless, for P. mirabilis, the discrimination ability of (GTG)5 microsatellite-based PCR analysis is much lower (data not shown).

Both tandem repeated tetramers are short enough for the presented fingerprints to resemble RAPD types (2, 29). The resolution of the RAPD method was found to be identical to that of ribotyping, since both generated the same numbers of different electrophoretic profiles for the investigated P. mirabilis strains (36). Therefore, the microsatellite-based fingerprinting method described here, with high discriminatory abilities [0.992 with the (GACA)4 primer and 0.940 with the (CAAT)4 primer], seems to be promising. Numerical analysis of the total number of investigated strains showed that most clinical isolates were interspersed among laboratory reference strains.

For some species, the correspondence between strain phenotypes and fingerprinting patterns based on sequences not directly related to surface antigens has already been reported. The application of ribotyping techniques to Listeria monocytogenes has demonstrated a significant relationship between serotypes and genetic lineages (C. Nadon, D. Woodward, C. Young, F. Rodgers, and M. Wiedmann, Abstr. 100th Gen. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol., abstr. P-96, 2000). The efficacy of phenotypic feature differentiation for some Abiotrophia strains on the basis of several genotyping methods has also been established (16). Also, for uropathogenic Escherichia coli strains, ribotype or RAPD-generated profiles consistent with their common clonal origins have been detected. However, interstrain serological similarities may originate from convergent evolution or recombination events (37) and therefore do not reflect common clonal origins.

The small series of P. mirabilis strains were genetically stable in the genome loci including both types of applied sequences: (GACA)4 and (CAAT)4. Moreover, our preliminary results indicate that there is some correspondence between microsatellite and repetitive sequence genomic distributions and phenotypic properties of Proteus laboratory strains (4, 5). These results correspond to some other findings indicating that a large number of P. mirabilis properties are correlated with, e.g., serological identity and proticine production and sensitivity type (7). Therefore, as one may expect, a considerable portion of genome sequences should be ordered steadily (i.e., the general order of genes and/or operons should be to be conserved). If this notion is true, then estimation of one set of bacterial properties based on a statistical distribution of others is well grounded. In particular, microsatellite-based PCR fingerprinting may then serve for the estimation of probable serological properties of clinical isolates or the selection of clinical isolates which are more strongly associated with uropathogenicity. It has been shown that some serological types of P. mirabilis are more frequent (8, 20-23, 41). The question of whether this association really results from general P. mirabilis genome stability or from local linkage disequilibria might be answered only by investigations based on a larger number of subtracted sequence types, i.e., additional types.

In conclusion, tetramer-based PCR fingerprinting results are independent of strain storage and culturing, and the method used here shows efficient discrimination ability. The presented findings suggest that at least some microsatellite-based fingerprints are specific enough for the rapid differentiation of P. mirabilis strains at the level of serogroup and for the effective differentiating of particular clones. Moreover, dendrogram structures determined independently of the applied calculation algorithm (40, 42, 52) include additional information which may be interpreted in relation to important surface properties. Our results are in agreement with reports of correlations between known surface antigens (of different bacteria) and fingerprinting results based on numerous, distinct sequence types (ribotyping, restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis, RAPD analysis, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis) and, along with previous findings, suggest similar correlations with several PCR-based fingerprinting methods.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The work was partially supported by grant 4 P05A 092-19 from the State Committee for Scientific Research.

Special appreciation is extended to Maria Olszewska (Institute of Cytology and Plant Physiology, University of Łódź), Leon Sedlaczek (Centre of Microbiology and Virology, Polish Academy of Sciences), and Antoni Różalski (Institute of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Łódź) for encouragement of our research as well as for comments, advice, and critical discussions. We also thank Tomasz Sakowicz (Institute of Cytology and Plant Physiology, University of Łódź) for kindly reading the manuscript.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 25 July 2002.
    • Returned for modification 15 October 2002.
    • Accepted 7 January 2003.
  • Copyright © 2003 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Adair, D. M., P. L. Worsham, K. K. Hill, A. M. Klevytska, P. J. Jackson, A. M. Friedlander, and P. Keim. 2000. Diversity in a variable-number tandem repeat from Yersinia pestis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38:1516-1519.
  2. 2.↵
    Arribas, R., S. Tortola, J. Welsh, M. McClelland, and M. Peinado. 1996. Arbitrarily primed PCR and RAPDs, p. 47-53. In M. R. Micheli and R. Bova (ed.), Fingerprinting methods based on arbitrarily primed PCR. Springer-Verlag KG, Berlin, Germany.
  3. 3.
    Bingen, E., C. Boissiont, P. Desjardins, H. Cave, N. Lambert-Zechovsky, E. Denamur, P. Blot, and J. Elion. 1993. Arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction provides rapid differentiation of Proteus mirabilis isolates from a pediatric hospital. J. Clin. Microbiol.31:1055-1059.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    Cieślikowski, T., D. Gradecka, M. Mielczarek, and W. Kaca. 2000. Different PCR-based fingerprints exhibit significantly higher intra-serotype genetic similarity for P. mirabilis strains. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Suppl.1:44.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Cieślikowski, T., M. Rzeżnik, and W. Kaca. 2001. Diverse PCR-based fingerprints of several reference P. vulgaris strains correlate with the chemical structure of their O-specific antigens. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Suppl.1:3.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Coker, C., C. A. Poore, X. Li, and H. L. T. Mobley. 2000. Pathogenesis of Proteus mirabilis urinary tract infections. Microbiol. Infect.2:1497-1505.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    Csiszar, K., and B. Lanyi. 1981. Proticine typing of serologically defined Proteus strains. Acta Microbiol. Acad. Sci. Hung.28:111-118.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    De Louvois, J. 1969. Serotyping and the Dienes reaction on Proteus mirabilis from hospital infections. J. Clin. Pathol.22:263-268.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    Ebringer, A., and C. Wilson. HLA molecules bacteria and autoimmunity. J. Med. Microbiol.49:305-311.
  10. 10.↵
    Field, D., and C. Wills. 1996. Long polymorphic microsatellites in simple organisms. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B263:209-215.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. 11.↵
    Fluit, A. C., M. E. Jones, F. J. Schmitz, J. Acar, R. Gupta, and J. Verhoef. 2000. Antimicrobial resistance among urinary tract infection (UTI) isolates in Europe: results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program 1997. Antonie Leeuwenhoek77:147-152.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. 12.
    Hoffmann, G., G. Gajdos, M. Czako, M. Kerenyi, V. Toht, L. Emody, and T. Tomocsanyi. 1998. Diversity among clinical isolates of Proteus penneri detected by random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis. Zentbl. Bakteriol.288:351-360.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    Hryniewicz, K., K. Szczypa, A. Sulikowska, K. Jankowski, K. Betlejewska, and W. Hryniewicz. 2001. Antibiotic susceptibility of bacterial strains isolated from urinary tract infections in Poland. J. Antimicrob. Chemother.47:773-780.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    Hunter, P. R. 1990. Reproducibility band indices of discriminatory power of microbial typing methods. J. Clin. Microbiol.28:1903-1905.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    Janicka, G., I. Kania, M. Bialek, E. Kruszynska, E. Wiktorowicz-Belzyt, A. Mikucka, and H. Czajkowski. 1999. Beta-lactam-resistance patterns of some gram-negative rods. Pol. Merkuriusz Lek. 6:12-14. (In Polish.)
  16. 16.↵
    Kanamoto, T., S. Sato, and M. Inoue. 2000. Genetic heterogeneities and phenotypic characteristics of strains of the genus Abiotrophia and proposal of Abiotrophia para-adiacens sp. nov. J. Clin. Microbiol.38:492-498.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    Kappos, T., M. A. John, Z. Hussain, and M. A. Valvano. 1992. Outer membrane protein profiles and multilocus enzyme electrophoresis analysis for differentiation of clinical isolates of Proteus mirabilis and Proteus vulgaris. J. Clin. Microbiol.30:2632-2637.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    Kowalczyk, M., and Z. Sidorczyk. 2000. Determination of genetic diversity of Proteus penneri strains using rep-PCR, p. 315-320. In L. Emoidy et al. (ed.), Genes and proteins underlying microbial urinary tract virulence. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, N.Y.
  19. 19.↵
    Kunin, C. M. 1997. Urinary tract infections: detection, prevention and management, 5th ed. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, Md.
  20. 20.↵
    Larsson, P., and S. Olling. 1977. O-antigen distribution and sensivity to the bactericidal effect of normal human serum of Proteus strains from clinical specimens. Med. Microbiol. Immunol. (Berlin)163:77-82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.
    Larsson, P., H. E. Anderson, and B. Norlen. 1978. Serotyping in epidemiological tracing of nosocomially acquired Proteus mirabilis in geriatric ward. Infection6:105-110.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.
    Larsson, P. 1980. O-antigens of Proteus mirabilis and Proteus vulgaris strains from patients with bacteremia. J. Clin. Microbiol.12:490-492.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    Larsson, P. 1984. Serology of Proteus mirabilis and Proteus vulgaris. Methods Microbiol.11:187-214.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    Li, X., H. Zhao, C. V. Lockatell, C. B. Drachenberg, D. E. Johnson, and H. L. Mobley. 2002. Visualization of Proteus mirabilis within the matrix of urease-induced bladder stones during experimental urinary tract infection. Infect. Immun.70:389-394.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    Lupski, J. R., and G. M. Weinstock. 1992. Short interspersed repetitive DNA sequences in procaryotic genomes. J. Bacteriol.174:4525-4529.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    Marshall, D. G., D. C. Coleman, D. J. Saliman, H. Xia, C. A. O'Morain, and C. J. Smith. 1996. Genomic DNA fingerprinting of clinical isolates of Helicobacter pylori using short oligonucleotide probes containing repetitive sequences. J. Appl. Bacteriol.81:509-517.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    Metherell, L. A., C. Hurst, and I. J. Bruce. 1997. Rapid, sensitive, microbial detection by gene amplification using restriction endonuclease target sequences. Mol. Cell. Probes11:297-308.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    Metzgar, D., E. Thomas, C. Davis, D. Field, and C. Wills. 2001. The microsatellites of Escherichia coli: rapidly evolving repetitive DNAs in a non-pathogenic prokaryote. Mol. Microbiol.39:183-190.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  29. 29.↵
    Micheli, M. R., R. Bova, and E. D'Ambrosio. 1996. Random amplified DNA assay, p. 55-63. In M. R. Micheli and R. Bova (ed.), Fingerprinting methods based on arbitrarily primed PCR. Springer-Verlag KG, Berlin, Germany.
  30. 30.↵
    Mutnick, A. H., P. J. Turner, and R. N. Jones. 2002. Emerging antimicrobial resistances among Proteus mirabilis in Europe: report from the MYSTIC Program (1997-2001). Meropenem Yearly Susceptibility Test Information Collection. J. Chemother.14:253-258.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. 31.↵
    O'Hara, C. M., F. W. Brenner, and J. M. Miller. 2000. Classification, identification, and clinical significance of Proteus, Providencia, and Morganella. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.13:534-546.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    Patzer, J., D. Dzierzanowska, and P. Turner. 2002. Susceptibility patterns of Gram-negative bacteria from a Polish intensive care unit, 1997-2000. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents19:431-434.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  33. 33.↵
    Peak, I. R. A., M. P. Jennings, W. Hood, M. Bisercic, and E. Moxon. 1997. Tetrameric repeat units associated with virulence factor phase variation in Haemophilus also occur in Neisseria spp. and Moraxella catarrhalis. FEMS Microbiol. Lett.137:109-114.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  34. 34.↵
    Peak, I. R. A., M. P. Jennings, D. W. Hood, and E. R. Moxon. 1999. Tetranucleotide repeats identify novel virulence determinant analogues in Neisseria meningitidis. Microb. Pathog.26:13-23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    Pfaller, M. A., I. Mujeeb, R. J. Hollis, R. N. Jones, and G. V. Doern. 2000. Evaluation of the discriminatory powers of the Dienes test and ribotyping as typing methods for Proteus mirabilis. J. Clin. Microbiol.38:1077-1080.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    Pignato, S., G. M. Giammanco, F. Grimont, P. A. Grimont, and G. J. Giammanco. 1999. Molecular characterization of the genera Proteus, Morganella, and Providencia by ribotyping. J. Clin. Microbiol.37:2840-2847.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    Prats, G., F. Navarro, B. Mirelis, D. Dalmau, N. Margall, P. Coll, A. Stell, and J. Johnson. 2000. Escherichia coli serotype O15:K12:H1 as a uropathogenic clone. J. Clin. Microbiol.38:201-209.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    Różalski, A. 2002. Molecular basis of Proteus bacilli. Adv. Clin. Exp. Med.11:3-18.
    OpenUrl
  39. 39.↵
    Różalski, A., Z. Sidorczyk, and K. Kotełko. 1997. Potential virulence factors of Proteus bacilli. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.61:65-89.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    Saitou, N., and M. Nei. 1986. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol.4:406-425
    OpenUrlWeb of Science
  41. 41.↵
    Sedlak, J., A. Tomasoffa, and M. Hattala. 1959. On occurrence and aetiological importance of Proterus hauseri in infections of man. J. Hyg. Epidemiol. Microbiol. Immunol.3:422-430.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    Senior, B. W. 1998. Proteus, Morganella and Providencia, p. 1035-1050. In L. Collier (ed.), Microbiology and microbial infections. Arnold, London, England.
  43. 43.↵
    Senior, B. W. 1999. Investigation of the types and characteristics of the proteolytic enzymes formed by diverse strains of Proteus species. J. Med. Microbiol.48:623-628.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    Serweciñska, L., T. Cieślikowski, M. Pytlos, A. Jaworski, and W. Kaca. 1998. Genomic fingerprinting of Proteus species using repetitive sequence based PCR (rep-PCR). Acta Microbiol. Pol.47:313-319.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    Sokal, R. R., and P. H. A. Sneath. 1963. Principles of numerical taxonomy, p. 169-215. W. H. Freeman & Company, San Francisco, Calif.
  46. 46.
    Stibitz, S., and M.-S. Yang. 1999. Genomic plasticity in natural populations of Bordetella pertussis. J. Bacteriol.181:5512-5515.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    Urzì, C., F. De Leo, C. Lo Passo, and G. Criseo. 1999. Intra-specific diversity Aureobasidium pullulans strains isolated from rocks and other habitats assessed by physiological methods and by random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD). J. Microbiol. Methods36:95-105.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  48. 48.↵
    Van Belkum, A., S. Scherer, L. van Alphen, and H. Verbrugh. 1998. Short-sequence DNA repeats in procaryotic genomes. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.62:275-293.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. 49.↵
    Van Belkum, A., S. Schrerer, W. van Leeuwen, D. Willemse, L. van Alphen, and H. A. Verburgh. 1997. Variable number of tandem repeats in clinical strains of Haemophilus influenzae. Infect. Immun.65:5017-5027.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.↵
    Versalovic, J., T. Koeuth, and J. R. Lupski. 1991. Distribution of repetitive DNA sequencing in eubacteria and application to fingerprinting of bacterial genomes. Nucleic Acids Res.19:6823-6831.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  51. 51.↵
    Versalovic, J., M. Schneider, F. J. de Bruijn, and J. R. Lupski. 1994. Genomic fingerprinting of bacteria using repetitive sequence-based polymerase chain reaction. Methods Mol. Cell. Biol.5:25-40.
    OpenUrl
  52. 52.↵
    Ward, J. H. 1963. Hierarchical Grouping to optimize an objective function. J. Am. Stat. Assoc.58:236-244.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  53. 53.↵
    Weising, K., R. G. Atkinson, and R. C. Gardner. 1995. Genomic fingerprinting by microsatellite-primed PCR: a critical evaluation. PCR Methods Appl.4:249-255.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  54. 54.↵
    Wood, C. R., J. Versalovic, T. Koeuth, and J. R. Lupski. 1993. Whole-cell repetitive element sequence-based polymerase chain reaction allows rapid assessment of clonal relationships of bacterial isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.31:1927-1931.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Tandem Tetramer-Based Microsatellite Fingerprinting for Typing of Proteus mirabilis Strains
Tomasz Cieślikowski, Dobrosława Gradecka, Magdalena Mielczarek, Wiesław Kaca
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Apr 2003, 41 (4) 1673-1680; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.4.1673-1680.2003

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Tandem Tetramer-Based Microsatellite Fingerprinting for Typing of Proteus mirabilis Strains
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Tandem Tetramer-Based Microsatellite Fingerprinting for Typing of Proteus mirabilis Strains
Tomasz Cieślikowski, Dobrosława Gradecka, Magdalena Mielczarek, Wiesław Kaca
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Apr 2003, 41 (4) 1673-1680; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.41.4.1673-1680.2003
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

DNA Fingerprinting
Microsatellite Repeats
polymerase chain reaction
Proteus Infections
Proteus mirabilis

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X