These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of biochemical and molecular methods for the identification of bacterial isolates associated with failed loggerhead sea turtle eggs.
    Author: Awong-Taylor J, Craven KS, Griffiths L, Bass C, Muscarella M.
    Journal: J Appl Microbiol; 2008 May; 104(5):1244-51. PubMed ID: 18028359.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: Comparison of biochemical vs molecular methods for identification of microbial populations associated with failed loggerhead turtle eggs. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two biochemical (API and Microgen) and one molecular methods (16s rRNA analysis) were compared in the areas of cost, identification, corroboration of data with other methods, ease of use, resources and software. The molecular method was costly and identified only 66% of the isolates tested compared with 74% for API. A 74% discrepancy in identifications occurred between API and 16s rRNA analysis. The two biochemical methods were comparable in cost, but Microgen was easier to use and yielded the lowest discrepancy among identifications (29%) when compared with both API 20 enteric (API 20E) and API 20 nonenteric (API 20NE) combined. A comparison of API 20E and API 20NE indicated an 83% discrepancy between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: The Microgen identification system appears to be better suited than API or 16s rRNA analysis for identification of environmental isolates associated with failed loggerhead eggs. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Most identification methods are not intended for use with environmental isolates. A comparison of identification systems would provide better options for identifying environmental bacteria for ecological studies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]