PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 17125669

[New methods for mycobacteria identification].

Abstract

Currently, the genus Mycobacterium comprises more than 100 different species, many of which cause significant clinical infections with high morbidity and mortality. Mycobacteria identification by conventional methods (rate and optimal temperature of growth, pigment production, colony morphology, and biochemical characteristics) has been the standard in most clinical microbiology laboratories. However, this phenotypic approach has considerable limitations, since numerous species cannot be differentiated. Moreover, because of the slow growth of these microorganisms, the results may not be available until 2-4 weeks after the initial isolation. Therefore, one of the most important challenges for clinical mycobacteriology laboratories is rapid and accurate identification of this variety of microorganism. This review aims to briefly describe several alternative procedures for mycobacterial identification. Although analysis of cell wall lipids (mycolic acids) by high-performance liquid chromatography is an interesting and well-known option, the most promising innovation for mycobacteria identification is the use of rapid molecular methods such as nucleic acid probes and, especially, genomic amplification methods.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Fernando Alcaide Fernández de Vega. 2006. [New methods for mycobacteria identification].. https://doi.org/10.1157/13094279

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparison of methods for analysis of selective genotyping survival data.

Survival traits and selective genotyping datasets are typically not normally distributed, thus common models used to identify QTL may not be statistically appropriate for their analysis. The objective of the present study was to compare models for identification of QTL associated with survival traits, in particular when combined with selective genotyping. Data were simulated to model the survival distribution of a population of chickens challenged with Marek disease virus. Cox proportional hazards (CPH), linear regression (LR), and Weibull models were compared for their appropriateness to analyze the data, ability to identify associations of marker alleles with survival, and estimation of effects when all individuals were genotyped (full genotyping) and when selective genotyping was used. Little difference in power was found between the CPH and the LR model for low censoring cases for both full and selective genotyping. The simulated data were not transformed to follow a Weibull distribution and, as a result, the Weibull model generally resulted in less power than the other two models and overestimated effects. Effect estimates from LR and CPH were unbiased when all individuals were genotyped, but overestimated when selective genotyping was used. Thus, LR is preferred for analyzing survival data when the amount of censoring is low because of ease of implementation and interpretation. Including phenotypic data of non-genotyped individuals in selective genotyping analysis increased power, but resulted in LR having an inflated false positive rate, and therefore the CPH model is preferred for this scenario, although transformation of the data may also make the Weibull model appropriate for this case. The results from the research presented herein are directly applicable to interval mapping analyses.

Genotype↗