Leptospirosis: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
PreDec2022>Gpindzola No edit summary |
m (5 revisions imported) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Suwancharoen D., Sittiwicheanwong B., Wiratsudakul A. 2016. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5053931/ Evaluation of loop-mediated isothermal amplification method (LAMP) for pathogenic Leptospira spp. detection with leptospires isolation and real-time PCR.] | Suwancharoen D., Sittiwicheanwong B., Wiratsudakul A. 2016. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5053931/ Evaluation of loop-mediated isothermal amplification method (LAMP) for pathogenic Leptospira spp. detection with leptospires isolation and real-time PCR.] | ||
*LAMP and real time PCR were evaluated as methods for detecting Leptospira DNA in cattle urine. The LAMP assay targeted the 16S rRNA gene which is common to eight pathogenic species of Leptospira. rt-PCR targeted a region of the lipL32 gene which is also present in pathogenic species. LAMP was found to be more specific and more selective than rt-PCR. The authors also suggest that LAMP will be more effective for early detection of Leptospirosis than traditional bacterial culture methods | *LAMP and real time PCR were evaluated as methods for detecting Leptospira DNA in cattle urine. The LAMP assay targeted the 16S rRNA gene which is common to eight pathogenic species of Leptospira. rt-PCR targeted a region of the lipL32 gene which is also present in pathogenic species. LAMP was found to be more specific and more selective than rt-PCR. The authors also suggest that LAMP will be more effective for early detection of Leptospirosis than traditional bacterial culture methods. | ||
Additional Relevant Sources: | |||
Syed Atif Ali, Gurpreet Kaur, Nongthombam Boby, T. Sabarinath, Khushal Solanki, Dheeraj Pal, Pallab Chaudhuri. 2017. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890850817300774?via%3Dihub Rapid and visual detection of Leptospira in urine by LigB-LAMP assay with pre-addition of dye.] | |||
Latest revision as of 12:57, 16 December 2022
Ahmed S.A., Sandai D.A., Musa S., et al. 2012. Rapid diagnosis of leptospirosis by multiplex PCR.
- Multiplex PCR was developed to detect Leptosporosis DNA from bacterial cultures. The gene LipL32 was targeted and PCR conditions were optimized. The assay was found to be highly sensitive and selective against a wide variety of infectious bacterial species. The results were read on an agarose gel.
Suwancharoen D., Sittiwicheanwong B., Wiratsudakul A. 2016. Evaluation of loop-mediated isothermal amplification method (LAMP) for pathogenic Leptospira spp. detection with leptospires isolation and real-time PCR.
- LAMP and real time PCR were evaluated as methods for detecting Leptospira DNA in cattle urine. The LAMP assay targeted the 16S rRNA gene which is common to eight pathogenic species of Leptospira. rt-PCR targeted a region of the lipL32 gene which is also present in pathogenic species. LAMP was found to be more specific and more selective than rt-PCR. The authors also suggest that LAMP will be more effective for early detection of Leptospirosis than traditional bacterial culture methods.
Additional Relevant Sources:
Syed Atif Ali, Gurpreet Kaur, Nongthombam Boby, T. Sabarinath, Khushal Solanki, Dheeraj Pal, Pallab Chaudhuri. 2017. Rapid and visual detection of Leptospira in urine by LigB-LAMP assay with pre-addition of dye.