Author: Takhampunya, Ratree; Korkusol, Achareeya; Pongpichit, Chalermpol; Yodin, Komsan; Rungrojn, Artharee; Chanarat, Nitima; Promsathaporn, Sommai; Monkanna, Taweesak; Thaloengsok, Sasikanya; Tippayachai, Bousaraporn; Kumfao, Naruemon; Richards, Allen L.; Davidson, Silas A.
Title: Metagenomic Approach to Characterizing Disease Epidemiology in a Disease-Endemic Environment in Northern Thailand Document date: 2019_2_26
ID: 0gi6qzw0_66
Snippet: In this study, a high prevalence from NGS results was observed for few bacterial genera; however, some genera could not be verified with conventional assays such as real-time PCR, PCR, or DNA sequencing. The main reason was likely that the number of reads was too low and below the limit of detection for the conventional test, or they could have been non-pathogenic strains or species and were not picked up by confirmatory assays. For example, Lept.....
Document: In this study, a high prevalence from NGS results was observed for few bacterial genera; however, some genera could not be verified with conventional assays such as real-time PCR, PCR, or DNA sequencing. The main reason was likely that the number of reads was too low and below the limit of detection for the conventional test, or they could have been non-pathogenic strains or species and were not picked up by confirmatory assays. For example, Leptospira spp. comprise both pathogenic, intermediate, and saprophytic (non-pathogenic) species that can be introduced as contaminants from the environment into samples. Here Leptospira spp. were only detected in the rodent population, although NGS analysis showed reads were also detected in UFI patients, chiggers, and ticks at lower levels. However, testing with confirmatory assay resulted in no signal or PCR product using a genus-based assay (Ahmed et al., 2009) with primer sets targeting house-keeping genes such as gyrB or SecY (Slack et al., 2006; Victoria et al., 2008) . In some cases, PCR assays targeting Leptospira 16S rRNA genes showed some positive bands for UFI patients but the product size was shorter than expected and DNA sequences from these products matched only human DNA (100%). Rickettsia spp. and Francisella spp. could not be verified in some sample types such as ticks, chiggers, and rodents. These could be endosymbiont bacteria which our assays could not detect (Wright et al., 2011; Takhampunya et al., 2017) .
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- bacterial genera and dna sequencing: 1, 2
- bacterial genera and human dna: 1
- confirmatory assay and detection limit: 1, 2
- confirmatory assay and dna sequencing: 1
- confirmatory assay and endosymbiont bacteria: 1
- confirmatory assay and high prevalence: 1
- confirmatory assay test and detection limit: 1
- conventional assay and detection limit: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
- conventional assay and dna sequence: 1
- conventional assay and dna sequencing: 1, 2
- conventional assay and high prevalence: 1, 2
- conventional assay and human dna: 1, 2, 3
- conventional test and detection limit: 1, 2
- detection limit and dna sequence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22
- detection limit and dna sequencing: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
- detection limit and high prevalence: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
- detection limit and human dna: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- dna sequence and high prevalence: 1, 2, 3
- dna sequence and human dna: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date