Comparison of various molecular methods for rapid differentiation of intestinal bifidobacteria at the species, subspecies and strain level
- PMID: 27449060
- PMCID: PMC4957357
- DOI: 10.1186/s12866-016-0779-3
Comparison of various molecular methods for rapid differentiation of intestinal bifidobacteria at the species, subspecies and strain level
Abstract
Background: Members of the genus Bifidobacterium are anaerobic Gram-positive Actinobacteria, which are natural inhabitants of human and animal gastrointestinal tract. Certain bifidobacteria are frequently used as food additives and probiotic pharmaceuticals, because of their various health-promoting properties. Due to the enormous demand on probiotic bacteria, manufacture of high-quality products containing living microorganisms requires rapid and accurate identification of specific bacteria. Additionally, isolation of new industrial bacteria from various environments may lead to multiple isolations of the same strain, therefore, it is important to apply rapid, low-cost and effective procedures differentiating bifidobacteria at the intra-species level. The identification of new isolates using microbiological and biochemical methods is difficult, but the accurate characterization of isolated strains may be achieved using a polyphasic approach that includes classical phenotypic methods and molecular procedures. However, some of these procedures are time-consuming and cumbersome, particularly when a large group of new isolates is typed, while some other approaches may have too low discriminatory power to distinguish closely related isolates obtained from similar sources.
Results: This work presents the evaluation of the discriminatory power of four molecular methods (ARDRA, RAPD-PCR, rep-PCR and SDS-PAGE fingerprinting) that are extensively used for fast differentiation of bifidobacteria up to the strain level. Our experiments included 17 reference strains and showed that in comparison to ARDRA, genotypic fingerprinting procedures (RAPD and rep-PCR) seemed to be less reproducible, however, they allowed to differentiate the tested microorganisms even at the intra-species level. In general, RAPD and rep-PCR have similar discriminatory power, though, in some instances more than one oligonucleotide needs to be used in random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis. Moreover, the results also demonstrated a high discriminatory power of SDS-PAGE fingerprinting of whole-cell proteins. On the other hand, the protein profiles obtained were rather complex, and therefore, difficult to analyze.
Conclusions: Among the tested procedures, rep-PCR proved to be the most effective and reliable method allowing rapid differentiation of Bifidobacterium strains. Additionally, the use of the BOXA1R primer in the differentiation of 21 Bifidobacterium strains, newly isolated from infant feces, demonstrated slightly better discriminatory power in comparison to PCR reactions with the (GTG)5 oligonucleotide. Thus, BOX-PCR turned out to be the most appropriate and convenient molecular technique in differentiating Bifidobacterium strains at all taxonomic levels.
Keywords: ARDRA; Bifidobacterium; Differentiation; RAPD; SDS-PAGE fingerprinting; rep-PCR.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Identification of Bifidobacterium species using rep-PCR fingerprinting.Syst Appl Microbiol. 2003 Nov;26(4):557-63. doi: 10.1078/072320203770865864. Syst Appl Microbiol. 2003. PMID: 14666984
-
Efficiency of PCR-based methods in discriminating Bifidobacterium longum ssp. longum and Bifidobacterium longum ssp. infantis strains of human origin.J Microbiol Methods. 2011 Oct;87(1):10-6. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2011.06.014. Epub 2011 Jul 2. J Microbiol Methods. 2011. PMID: 21756944
-
[Application of the methods of molecular systematics to classification and identification of bacteria of the genus Bifidobacterium].Mikrobiologiia. 2008 May-Jun;77(3):293-302. Mikrobiologiia. 2008. PMID: 18683644 Review. Russian.
-
RAPD and rep-PCR fingerprinting for characterization of Bifidobacterium species.Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2008;53(2):99-104. doi: 10.1007/s12223-008-0014-1. Epub 2008 May 25. Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2008. PMID: 18500627
-
Molecular approaches for the detection and identification of bifidobacteria and lactobacilli in the human gastrointestinal tract.Syst Appl Microbiol. 2003 Nov;26(4):572-84. doi: 10.1078/072320203770865882. Syst Appl Microbiol. 2003. PMID: 14666986 Review.
Cited by
-
Efficacy of BOX-PCR fingerprinting for taxonomic discrimination of bifidobacterial species isolated from diverse sources.3 Biotech. 2021 Jun;11(6):270. doi: 10.1007/s13205-021-02765-0. Epub 2021 May 16. 3 Biotech. 2021. PMID: 34055563 Free PMC article.
-
Molecular typing tools for identifying and characterizing lactic acid bacteria: a review.Food Sci Biotechnol. 2020 Aug 16;29(10):1301-1318. doi: 10.1007/s10068-020-00802-x. eCollection 2020 Oct. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2020. PMID: 32995049 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Molecular Routes to Specific Identification of the Lactobacillus Casei Group at the Species, Subspecies and Strain Level.Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Apr 13;21(8):2694. doi: 10.3390/ijms21082694. Int J Mol Sci. 2020. PMID: 32294944 Free PMC article.
-
Genetic specialization of key bifidobacterial phylotypes in multiple mother-infant dyad cohorts from geographically isolated populations.Front Microbiol. 2024 Jul 3;15:1399743. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1399743. eCollection 2024. Front Microbiol. 2024. PMID: 39021621 Free PMC article.
-
In Vitro Comparative Analysis of Probiotic and Functional Attributes of Indigenous Isolates of Bifidobacteria.Curr Microbiol. 2019 Mar;76(3):304-311. doi: 10.1007/s00284-018-1615-9. Epub 2019 Jan 2. Curr Microbiol. 2019. PMID: 30600360
References
-
- He T, Priebe MG, Zhong Y, Huang C, Harmsen HJM, Raangs GC, et al. Effects of yogurt and bifidobacteria supplementation on the colonic microbiota in lactose-intolerant subjects. J Appl Microbiol. 2008;104(2):595–604. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources