Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

AIMS Press, AIMS Microbiology, 3(7), p. 304-319, 2021

DOI: 10.3934/microbiol.2021019

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

A comparison of different DNA extraction methods and molecular techniques for the detection and identification of foodborne pathogens

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

<abstract> <p>Foodborne infections continue to plague Europe. Food safety monitoring is in crisis as the existing techniques for detecting pathogens do not keep up with the global rising of food production and consumption. Thus, the development of innovative techniques for detecting and identifying pathogenic bacteria has become critical. The aim of the present study was firstly to develop an innovative simple and low cost method of extracting bacterial DNA from contaminated food and water samples with <italic>Salmonella enteric(a)</italic> subsp. <italic>enteric(a)</italic> serovar Typhimurium and <italic>Listeria monocytogenes</italic> and its comparison with two commercial DNA extraction kits (Qiagen, Macherey-Nagel). Finally, pathogens' detection using two molecular techniques (PCR-electrophoresis, LAMP), in order to evaluate the best combination of DNA extraction and identification based on their sensitivity, cost, rapidity and simplicity. Considering the above criteria, among them, best was proved an in-house bacterial DNA extraction method, based on the chloroform-isoamyl alcohol protocol, with certain modifications. This technique showed statistically similar results in terms of sensitivity, compared to the commercial kits, while at the same time maintained high rapidity and much lower cost. Lastly, between the molecular techniques, LAMP was found more promising considering its simplicity, high rapidity and sensitivity. Conclusively, the in-house DNA extraction method along with the LAMP technique, was proven to be the best among the presented combinations.</p> </abstract>