|
|
|
monitoring methods [View Printable]
|
Che wizard
Group: Member Posts: 6 Joined: Dec 30, 2004
|
three part question:
1. Looking for a quick (<1 hr.), easy, and cheap method to detect bacteria, 2. ability to differentiate (viable and non-), and 3. Is there a way to convert colonies into # of bacteria?
Current method is the modified SM 9215 D membrane filter method, used to monitor of heterotrophic bacteria in ultra-pure water. Average count: < 1 colony per litre.
|
.........................
|
Posted Dec 30, 2004, 22:11 PM |
|
|
|
Scot E. DOwd Ph.D.
Group: Member Posts: 120 Joined: Dec 28, 2004
|
chromotography? labeling with molecular probes viability dye? <1hr would be the tough criteria. I would like to see some responses.
|
|
|
|
trook
Group: Member Posts: 337 Joined: Jan 17, 2005
|
Are you interested in isolating single or multi-species bacteria? With single species bacteria you should be able to come up with a PCR detection assay (if it doesn't already exsist for your species). If you are talking multi-species detection from environmental samples than this probably won't work as well...
|
.........................
|
| Posted Jan 17, 2005, 22:54 PM |
|
|
|
dennsi
Group: Member Posts: 10 Joined: Dec 04, 2004
|
| Che wizard said: | three part question:
1. Looking for a quick (<1 hr.), easy, and cheap method to detect bacteria, 2. ability to differentiate (viable and non-), and 3. Is there a way to convert colonies into # of bacteria?
Current method is the modified SM 9215 D membrane filter method, used to monitor of heterotrophic bacteria in ultra-pure water. Average count: < 1 colony per litre.
|
|
.........................
|
| Posted Jan 18, 2005, 4:11 AM |
|
|
|
trook
Group: Member Posts: 337 Joined: Jan 17, 2005
|
As a follow up to my previous comment ... There are pitfalls to PCR detection methods (i.e. detection of nucleic acid does not imply viability, therefore confirmitory outgrowth will be required for each positive result using this method). Here is a recent paper talking about this issue: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, Nov. 2004, p. 54035405 Vol. 42, No. 11 An Unexpected Experimental Pitfall in the Molecular Diagnosis of Bacterial Endophthalmitis Luana Ugahary,1 Wendy van de Sande,2 Jan C. van Meurs,1 and Alex van Belkum2*
|
.........................
|
| Posted Jan 18, 2005, 19:52 PM |
|
|
|
trook
Group: Member Posts: 337 Joined: Jan 17, 2005
|
Here is a recent paper comparing two methodologies for identification of mycobacteria. Please note that these methods can be applied to other organisms...
Comparative evaluation of polymerase chain reaction and restriction enzyme analysis: Two amplified targets, hsp65 and rpoB, for identification of cultured mycobacteria Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 19 January 2005, Wattana Cheunoy, Therdsak Prammananan, Angkana Chaiprasert and Suporn Foongladda
|
.........................
|
| Posted Jan 27, 2005, 15:57 PM |
|
|
|
|
top of page
|
 
|
Forum Jump
|
|