Evaluation of PCR inhibitory effect of enrichment broths and comparison of DNA extraction methods for detection of Salmonella Enteritidis using real-time PCR assay.
The best enrichment broth and DNA extraction scheme was determined for rapid and sensitive detection of Salmonella Enteritidis in steamed pork using real-time PCR. The inhibitory effect of commonly used Salmonella enrichment broths, Rappaport-Vassiliadis (RV) and Muller-Kauffmann tetrathionate with novobiocin (MKTTn), on real-time PCR was confirmed. The inhibition of PCR was statistically significant (p < 0.05) in RV and MKTTn, as compared with buffered peptone water (BPW) or phosphate-buffered saline. The inhibitory effect of the selective enrichment media was successfully removed by using a modified DNA extraction, PrepMan Ultra Reagent with an additional washing step or the DNeasy Tissue Kit. In three experiments, when applied to detection of Salmonella Enteritidis in steamed pork, the real-time PCR coupled with single 24 h enrichment with BPW performed better than double 48 h enrichment with BPW plus RV or MKTTn. The simple real-time PCR assay using BPW proved to be a rapid and sensitive test for detection of low concentrations of Salmonella Enteritidis in steamed pork samples as compared with the conventional culture method.
Hyeon
Ji Yeon
JY
Department of Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Korea.
Hwang
In Gyun
IG
Kwak
Hyo Sun
HS
Park
Chankyu
C
Choi
In Soo
IS
Seo
Kun Ho
KH
D000818:Animals; D003470:Culture Media; D004269:DNA, Bacterial / Q000737:chemistry / Q000235:genetics; D005516:Food Microbiology; D006801:Humans; D008460:Meat / Q000382:microbiology*; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction / Q000379:methods; D012480:Salmonella Infections / Q000517:prevention & control*; D012477:Salmonella enteritidis / Q000235:genetics / Q000302:isolation & purification*; D013048:Specimen Handling / Q000379:methods; D013552:Swine
D003470:Culture Media; D004269:DNA, Bacterial
Mutat Res. 2002 Sep 30;506-507:55-63
12351145
Lett Appl Microbiol. 2003;37(5):386-91
14633109
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001 Jan;67(1):449-52
11133478
J Clin Microbiol. 2004 Dec;42(12):5832-6
15583319
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003 Mar;69(3):1844-6
12620880
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1997 Oct;63(10):3741-51
9327537
Lett Appl Microbiol. 2003;36(4):217-21
12641714
Food Microbiol. 2006 Sep;23(6):599-604
16943057
J Clin Microbiol. 1997 Apr;35(4):995-8
9157172
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004 Dec;70(12):7046-52
15574899
J Clin Microbiol. 1995 Oct;33(10):2643-6
8567898
J Clin Microbiol. 2005 Jul;43(7):3033-7
16000411
Int J Food Microbiol. 1992 Sep;17(1):37-45
1476866
FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2005 May 1;44(2):177-82
15866213
J Food Prot. 2006 Feb;69(2):282-7
16496566
J AOAC Int. 2003 Jul-Aug;86(4):775-90
14509439
J Clin Microbiol. 1990 Jun;28(6):1300-7
1696283
Int J Food Microbiol. 1998 Mar 3;40(1-2):1-8
9600604