![]() |
CiteULike | ![]() |
lewista's CiteULike | ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
Register | ![]() |
Log in | ![]() |
Comparison of amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis, random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis, and amplified fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting for identification of Acinetobacter genomic species and typing of Acinetobacter baumannii. |
Reviews
[Write a review of this article]
Notes for this articleRAPD looks best, but variability due to differences in primer conctn, DNA quality etc.
Find related articles from these CiteULike users
Find related articles with these CiteULike tags
Posting History
AbstractThirty-one strains of Acinetobacter species, including type strains of the 18 genomic species and 13 clinical isolates, were compared by amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA), random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis (RAPD), and amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) fingerprinting. ARDRA, performed with five different enzymes, showed low discriminatory power for differentiating Acinetobacter at the species and strain level. The standardized commercially available RAPD kit clearly enabled the discrimination of all Acinetobacter genomic species but showed great polymorphism between isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii. AFLP fingerprinting with radioactively as well as fluorescently labelled primers showed high discriminatory power for the identification of 18 Acinetobacter genomic species and typing of 13 clinical Acinetobacter isolates. Compared to radioactive AFLP, fluorescent AFLP was technically fast and simple to perform, and it permitted analysis with an automated DNA sequencer. Fluorescent AFLP seems particularly well suited for studying the epidemiology of nosocomial infections and outbreaks caused by Acinetobacter species.
BibTeX record
RIS record