The present study compared two culture-independent methods, polymerase chain reaction denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) and length-heterogeneity polymerase chain.reaction (LH-PCR), for their ability to reveal food bacterial microbiota. Total microbial DNA and RNA were extracted directly from fourteen fermented and unfermented foods, and domain A of the variable regions V1 and V2 of the 16S rRNA gene was analyzed through LH-PCR and PCR-DGGE. Finally, the outline of these analyses was compared with bacterial viable counts obtained after bacterial growth on suitable selective media. For the majority of the samples, RNA-based PCR-DGGE revealed species that the DNA-based PCR-DGGE was not able to highlight. When analyzing either DNA or RNA, LH-PCR identified several lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and coagulase negative cocci (CCN) species that were not identified by PCR-DGGE. This phenomenon was particularly evident in food samples with viable loads < 5.0 Log cfu g(-1). Furthermore, LH-PCR was able to detect a higher number of peaks in the analyzed food matrices relative to species identified by PCR-DGGE. In light of these findings, it may be suggested that LH-PCR shows greater sensitivity than PCR-DGGE. However, PCR-DGGE detected some other species (LAB included) that were not detected by LH-PCR. Therefore, certain LH-PCR peaks not attributed to known species within the LH-PCR database could be solved by comparing them with species identified by PCR-DGGE. Overall, this study also showed that LH-PCR is a promising method for use in the food microbiology field, indicating the necessity to expand the LH-PCR database, which is based, up to now, mainly on LAB isolates from dairy products. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Study of the bacterial diversity of foods: PCR-DGGE versus LH-PCR

Savo Sardaro ML;
2017-01-01

Abstract

The present study compared two culture-independent methods, polymerase chain reaction denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) and length-heterogeneity polymerase chain.reaction (LH-PCR), for their ability to reveal food bacterial microbiota. Total microbial DNA and RNA were extracted directly from fourteen fermented and unfermented foods, and domain A of the variable regions V1 and V2 of the 16S rRNA gene was analyzed through LH-PCR and PCR-DGGE. Finally, the outline of these analyses was compared with bacterial viable counts obtained after bacterial growth on suitable selective media. For the majority of the samples, RNA-based PCR-DGGE revealed species that the DNA-based PCR-DGGE was not able to highlight. When analyzing either DNA or RNA, LH-PCR identified several lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and coagulase negative cocci (CCN) species that were not identified by PCR-DGGE. This phenomenon was particularly evident in food samples with viable loads < 5.0 Log cfu g(-1). Furthermore, LH-PCR was able to detect a higher number of peaks in the analyzed food matrices relative to species identified by PCR-DGGE. In light of these findings, it may be suggested that LH-PCR shows greater sensitivity than PCR-DGGE. However, PCR-DGGE detected some other species (LAB included) that were not detected by LH-PCR. Therefore, certain LH-PCR peaks not attributed to known species within the LH-PCR database could be solved by comparing them with species identified by PCR-DGGE. Overall, this study also showed that LH-PCR is a promising method for use in the food microbiology field, indicating the necessity to expand the LH-PCR database, which is based, up to now, mainly on LAB isolates from dairy products. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12078/3036
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 42
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 37
social impact