Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.

Our aim was to analyze the difference between methods for genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolates. We collected genotyping results from Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) and Mycobacterial Interspersed Repetitive Units-Variable Numbers of Tandem Repeat (MIRU-VNTR) in a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jerker Jonsson, Sven Hoffner, Ingela Berggren, Judith Bruchfeld, Solomon Ghebremichael, Alexandra Pennhag, Ramona Groenheit
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3986374?pdf=render
_version_ 1818321465124061184
author Jerker Jonsson
Sven Hoffner
Ingela Berggren
Judith Bruchfeld
Solomon Ghebremichael
Alexandra Pennhag
Ramona Groenheit
author_facet Jerker Jonsson
Sven Hoffner
Ingela Berggren
Judith Bruchfeld
Solomon Ghebremichael
Alexandra Pennhag
Ramona Groenheit
author_sort Jerker Jonsson
collection DOAJ
description Our aim was to analyze the difference between methods for genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolates. We collected genotyping results from Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) and Mycobacterial Interspersed Repetitive Units-Variable Numbers of Tandem Repeat (MIRU-VNTR) in a geographically limited area (Stockholm) during a period of three years. The number and proportion of isolates belonging to clusters was reduced by 45 and 35% respectively when combining the two methods compared with using RFLP or MIRU-VNTR only. The mean size of the clusters was smaller when combining methods and smaller with RFLP compared to MIRU-VNTR. In clusters with confirmed epidemiological links RFLP coincided slightly better than MIRU-VNTR but where there was a difference, the variation in MIRU-VNTR pattern was only in a single locus. In isolates with few IS6110 bands in RFLP, MIRU-VNTR differentiated the isolates more, dividing the RFLP clusters. Since MIRU-VNTR is faster and less labour-intensive it is the method of choice for routine genotyping. In most cases it will be sufficient for epidemiological purposes but true clustering might still be considered if there are epidemiological links and the MIRU-VNTR results differ in only one of its 24 loci.
first_indexed 2024-12-13T10:41:20Z
format Article
id doaj.art-97a3d04c3428475784fdfd471bbc00d1
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-13T10:41:20Z
publishDate 2014-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-97a3d04c3428475784fdfd471bbc00d12022-12-21T23:50:30ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0194e9515910.1371/journal.pone.0095159Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.Jerker JonssonSven HoffnerIngela BerggrenJudith BruchfeldSolomon GhebremichaelAlexandra PennhagRamona GroenheitOur aim was to analyze the difference between methods for genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolates. We collected genotyping results from Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism (RFLP) and Mycobacterial Interspersed Repetitive Units-Variable Numbers of Tandem Repeat (MIRU-VNTR) in a geographically limited area (Stockholm) during a period of three years. The number and proportion of isolates belonging to clusters was reduced by 45 and 35% respectively when combining the two methods compared with using RFLP or MIRU-VNTR only. The mean size of the clusters was smaller when combining methods and smaller with RFLP compared to MIRU-VNTR. In clusters with confirmed epidemiological links RFLP coincided slightly better than MIRU-VNTR but where there was a difference, the variation in MIRU-VNTR pattern was only in a single locus. In isolates with few IS6110 bands in RFLP, MIRU-VNTR differentiated the isolates more, dividing the RFLP clusters. Since MIRU-VNTR is faster and less labour-intensive it is the method of choice for routine genotyping. In most cases it will be sufficient for epidemiological purposes but true clustering might still be considered if there are epidemiological links and the MIRU-VNTR results differ in only one of its 24 loci.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3986374?pdf=render
spellingShingle Jerker Jonsson
Sven Hoffner
Ingela Berggren
Judith Bruchfeld
Solomon Ghebremichael
Alexandra Pennhag
Ramona Groenheit
Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.
PLoS ONE
title Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.
title_full Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.
title_fullStr Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.
title_short Comparison between RFLP and MIRU-VNTR genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in Stockholm 2009 to 2011.
title_sort comparison between rflp and miru vntr genotyping of mycobacterium tuberculosis strains isolated in stockholm 2009 to 2011
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3986374?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT jerkerjonsson comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011
AT svenhoffner comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011
AT ingelaberggren comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011
AT judithbruchfeld comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011
AT solomonghebremichael comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011
AT alexandrapennhag comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011
AT ramonagroenheit comparisonbetweenrflpandmiruvntrgenotypingofmycobacteriumtuberculosisstrainsisolatedinstockholm2009to2011