Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, March 2003, p. 1504-1510, Vol. 69, No. 3
0099-2240/03/$08.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/AEM.69.3.1504-1510.2003
Copyright © 2003, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Department of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Szent István University, H-1143 Budapest, Hungary,1 Institute for Apiculture, Agricultural Inspection Service and Research Centre Vienna, Austrian Agency for Health and Food Safety and Federal Office for Food Safety, A-1226 Vienna,2 Clinical Virology Group, Institute of Virology,4 Clinic for Poultry and Pet Birds,3 Institute of Hydrobiology, Ichthyology and Apidology,5 University of Veterinary Medicine, A-1210 Vienna, Austria; and Department of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates6
Received 27 August 2002/ Accepted 25 November 2002
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
P. larvae (White) subsp. larvae is a slender rod about 2.5 to 5 µm long and about 0.5 µm wide. The bacterium forms large numbers of oval spores in infected larvae within a few days. The spores are highly resistant to heat and chemical agents and can survive in the environment for several years (12). Only the spores are capable of inducing disease.
This bacterium, formerly named Bacillus larvae, was reclassified into the new genus Paenibacillus (5) on the basis of the 16S rRNA sequence diversity. The P. larvae strains are divided into two distinct subspecies, P. larvae subsp. larvae and P. larvae subsp. pulvifaciens (14). Although P. larvae subsp. larvae is considered to be the cause of American foulbrood, P. larvae subsp. pulvifaciens is capable of causing similar but usually milder clinical symptoms.
The spread of the agent between apiaries or countries is often associated with the import of honeybee colonies or the use of contaminated honey (6, 11, 17, 26) for feeding purposes. In most cases, American foulbrood can be diagnosed in the field by visual inspection; however, the diagnosis must be confirmed by laboratory tests. Microscopic identification of stained bacteria can be complemented by the modified hanging-drop technique (19), the Holst milk test (15), or fluorescent-antibody techniques developed for the detection of P. larvae antigens (20, 25, 27). Besides microscopy, the most frequently applied identification method is the isolation of P. larvae using culture media followed by characterization by biochemical tests. The bacterium requires complex media for growth (24). For biochemical diagnosis of suspected P. larvae colonies, the catalase (13) and nitrate reduction (18) tests are widely used.
Detection of P. larvae in honey samples is a valuable method of control of the spread of the disease within and between countries (17, 26). The major problems associated with the diagnosis of P. larvae in honey specimens are the relatively low concentration of P. larvae spores in the honey and the presence of related Paenibacillus or Bacillus species, which often overgrow the P. larvae colonies. Spores can be purified and concentrated by dialysis (22) and/or centrifugation (16) of the diluted honey samples. Heat treatment is used for the inactivation of non-spore-forming bacteria. Several selective media have been developed for the cultivation of P. larvae, such as sheep blood agar containing nalidixic acid (16) or J agar (10) with nalidixic acid and pipermidic acid (1). A virulent mutant bacteriophage from P. larvae has also been used for the identification of P. larvae in honey samples (23). Biochemical identification and characterization systems (e.g., BioLog) are appropriate methods for the recognition of P. larvae as well.
Molecular techniques have also been developed for the identification of P. larvae (2, 3). Govan et al. (8) have described a PCR assay for the detection of P. larvae-specific DNA in bacterial colonies grown on semiselective medium. This technique was suggested for use in the rapid confirmation of the presence of P. larvae strains isolated from honey samples. Dobbelaere et al. (7) also described a PCR assay for the identification of cultivated bacteria and for the detection of P. larvae in DNA extracts of the remains of American foulbrood-diseased larvae. Very recently, Alippi et al. (4) described a method, based on PCR and restriction fragment analysis, which allows the differentiation of P. larvae subsp. larvae strains from all other bacterial species.
The aim of this study was to develop a sensitive and specific PCR assay for the direct detection of P. larvae in contaminated honey samples. Different techniques for the isolation of DNA from bacterial spores were compared, and different sets of oligonucleotide primers were evaluated for their sensitivity and specificity. The PCR assays were compared to the "gold standard" of P. larvae cultivation and biochemical identification methods (BioLog).
|
|
|---|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 4. Comparison of the efficacy of PCR, isolation, and BioLog identification techniques for the detection of P. larvae in bee products
|
DNA extractions.
Three different nucleic acid isolation methods were tested comparatively: guanidium thiocyanate treatment (method A), cetyltrimethylammonium bromide treatment (method B), and lysozyme treatment (method C).
(i) DNA extraction method A.
The bacterial pellets were resuspended in denaturing buffer containing guanidinium thiocyanate, N-lauroylsarcosine, sodium citrate, and 2-mercaptoethanol. After mixing, sodium acetate was added, and then nucleic acid was extracted with phenol-chloroform-isoamyl alcohol. The nucleic acids were precipitated with isopropanol, and the precipitates were resolved in elution buffer (Qiagen).
(ii) DNA extraction method B.
The bacterial pellets were resuspended in lysis buffer containing cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, Tris-HCl, NaCl, EDTA, and 2-mercaptoethanol. After vortexing, the mixtures were frozen in liquid nitrogen and thawed by shaking at room temperature; this procedure was repeated twice. Thereafter, nucleic acid was extracted with phenol-chloroform-isoamyl alcohol and precipitated with isopropanol. The precipitates were resolved in elution buffer (Qiagen).
(iii) DNA extraction method C.
The bacterial pellets were resuspended in 200 µl of enzyme solution containing 20 mg of lysozyme per ml, 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0), 2 mM EDTA, and 1.2% Triton and incubated for 1 h at 37°C. Then 25 µl of proteinase K and 200 µl of buffer AL (Qiagen) were added, and the lysates were incubated at 56°C for 30 min and at 96°C for 5 min. Bacterial DNA was isolated using the QIAamp DNA minikit (Qiagen) as specified by the manufacturer. DNA was eluted with 200 µl of elution buffer and stored at -20°C.
PCR.
Specified DNA fragments of P. larvae and other Paenibacillus and Bacillus species were amplified using PCR.
(i) Primer design.
Oligonucleotide primers were designed on the basis of the published nucleotide sequences of P. larvae. The primers were constructed with the help of the Primer Designer program (Scientific and Educational Software, version 3.0). A previously described P. larvae-specific primer pair (PL 1-PL 2) (8) was also included in our investigations. The primer sequences, orientations, origins, locations, and resulting product sizes are shown in Table 1. Nucleotide positions refer to the P. larvae sequences with accession no. X60619 and AF111421. The primers were synthesized by GibcoBRL Life Technologies, Ltd. (Paisley, Scotland).
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Oligonucleotide primers selected for P. larvae PCR
|
Gel electrophoresis.
Samples (5 µl) of the amplicons were electrophoresed in a 1.2% Tris acetate-EDTA-agarose gel at 6 V/cm for 80 min. The gel was stained with ethidium bromide, and the bands were visualized under UV light at 312 nm using a TFX 35M UV transilluminator (Life Technologies) and photographed with a Kodak DS electrophoresis documentation and analysis system using the Kodak Digital Science 1D software program. Product sizes were determined by reference to a 100-bp molecular size ladder (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Nucleotide sequencing and computer analysis.
To confirm the specificity of the PCR assays, PCR amplification products of five selected honey samples positive for P. larvae subsp. larvae and one sample of cultivated P. alvei were sequenced, and the sequences were aligned with the published sequences available in the GenBank database. The method of fluorescence-based sequencing has been described previously by our group (9).
Culture of bacteria.
The bacteria from the aforementioned samples were isolated, identified, and characterized on the basis of their biochemical properties. For the honey samples, 5 g of honey was diluted in 5 ml of sterile distilled water and the solutions were incubated at 90°C for 6 min to inactivate non-spore-forming bacteria. From each sample, 400 µl of diluted honey was inoculated onto each of six Columbia sheep blood agar plates. The plates were incubated at 37°C and were checked for P. larvae growth on days 3 and 6. The bacterial colonies were isolated, and the bacteria were characterized by light microscopy following Gram stain, catalase test (13) (P. larvae is catalase negative), and formation of great whips in the fluid part of Columbia blood slant agar (21).
Metabolic fingerprint technique.
Further identification and characterization of the bacterial isolates were performed using the BioLog GP MicroPlate test panel. The tests were carried out as specified by the manufacturer. The plates were read visually after 4 and 24 h. The results were evaluated using the MicroLog2 system (Biolog, Inc.).
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (95K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Gel electrophoresis of PCR products of P. larvae subsp. larvae amplified with different primer pairs. Lanes: 1, AF 1 plus AF 2; 2, AF 1 plus AF 3; 3, AF 4 plus AF 5; 4, AF 6 plus AF 7; 5, AF 8 plus AF 9; 6, AF 10 plus AF 11; 7, Paeni 30 plus Paeni 253; 8, PBL 8 plus PBL 350; 9, PL 1 plus PL 2; M, molecular size marker (100-bp ladder).
|
The AF 1 plus AF 2 primers detected P. larvae (subspp. larvae and pulvifaciens) DNA up to a dilution of 10-8, which contained approximately 0.9 to 1.1 CFU of bacteria. The other bacterial species were positive only up to dilutions containing 8 x 106 CFU (B. subtilis), 7 x 105 CFU (B. cereus and B. megaterium), and 9 x 104 CFU (P. alvei), respectively (Fig. 2). The AF 6 plus AF 7 primers detected P. larvae DNA even at a sensitivity level of 0.05 CFU (P. larvae subsp. larvae) and 0.1 CFU (P. larvae subsp. pulvifaciens), respectively; the other tested bacterial species, however, also gave a positive reaction with the AF 6 plus AF 7 primer pair, up to a sensitivity of 2.6 to 7 CFU of bacteria in one case (P. alvei). The other primers detected P. larvae only when large amounts (105 to 107 CFU) were present, and in some cases nonspecific bands of different sizes were produced when other bacterial species were tested (data not shown).
![]() View larger version (111K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Gel electrophoresis of PCR products from serial dilutions of DNA extracts from different bacteria using the AF 1 plus AF 2 primer pair. (a) P. larvae subsp. larvae; (b) P. larvae subsp. pulvifaciens; (c) P. alvei; (d) B. cereus; (e) B. megaterium; (f) B. subtilis. Lanes (from left to right): molecular size marker (100-bp ladder), undiluted DNA, 10-fold dilution steps 10-1 to 10-10, negative control.
|
Because of the resistance of Paenibacillus spores to proteolytic enzymes, three different DNA isolation methods were tested in parallel on seven randomly selected honey samples and on one pollen specimen. The results of the comparison of the DNA isolation techniques are presented in Table 2. All three methods were effective in seven of eight samples; however, following PCR, the sharpness of the bands and the amount of amplified PCR products differed significantly: the largest amount of amplified DNA was obtained when method C was used for DNA extraction. Consequently, extraction method C was applied to all other samples.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 2. Comparison of different DNA extraction methods prior to PCR
|
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 3. Comparison of different primer pairs used in the PCR assays on randomly selected honey samples
|
Five PCR products were sequenced, and the sequences were subjected to BLAST search to identify related sequences deposited in the GenBank database. The sequences uniformly exhibited the highest (100%) identity to the P. larvae subsp. larvae 16S rRNA gene partial sequence (accession no. AY030079). The sequence of the cultivated P. alvei nucleic acid showed only 93.13% identity to the P. larvae subsp. larvae sequence, and the highest (99.34%) identity was observed to the P. alvei strain DSM 29T partial 16S rRNA gene sequence (accession no. AJ320491). Because of the high identities of the nucleotide sequences of our strains to already available sequences, the sequences were not submitted to the GenBank database.
|
|
|---|
PCR is a quick and reliable method that is widely used in microbiological diagnostics for the detection of specific nucleic acid sequences in biological materials. In this study, we tested different PCR systems for the detection of P. larvae-specific DNA in honey and compared the sensitivity and specificity of the PCR assays with isolation and biochemical characterization methods.
To date, only two relatively short genomic regions of P. larvae have been sequenced and deposited in the GenBank database. Five primer pairs were selected from the 16S rRNA gene region, and three primer pairs were selected from the metalloproteinase precursor gene region (Table 1). All of them functioned properly on DNA extracts from P. larvae colonies.
The sensitivity of the PCR assays using different primers was determined by serial dilutions of P. larvae DNA isolated from bacterial colonies. The primer pair AF 6 plus AF 7 showed the highest sensitivity, amplifying P. larvae nucleic acid from as little as 0.05 CFU of cultured bacteria; primer pair AF 1 plus AF 2 exhibited a similarly high sensitivity (0.9 CFU). The primer pairs designed in the metalloproteinase precursor gene region showed significantly lower sensitivity (105 to 107 CFU).
To assess the specificity of the primers used, the PCR assays were performed on other Paenibacillus and Bacillus species as well. Although the primers were selected from nucleotide sequences which are relatively specific for P. larvae, they also amplified, to a certain extent, DNA from other Paenibacillus and Bacillus species. The most sensitive primers for the detection of P. larvae (AF 6 plus AF 7; specific amplification as low as 0.05 CFU) also amplified P. alvei and B. subtilis strains at 2.6 and 11 CFU, respectively. The tested primer pair from the metalloproteinase gene region showed a rather low sensitivity for P. larvae (105 CFU) but a relatively high specificity: the other tested bacteria reacted only at 107 CFU.
To investigate the practical value of the assays, honey samples were tested by PCR with the selected primers. Since bacterial spores are more resistant to proteinase K treatment than are vegetative cells, the routine DNA isolation methods have to be complemented by additional treatments to extract nucleic acid from spores. In this study, we compared the DNA isolation efficacy of three extraction methods. Two classical methods, using chemicals (guanidium thiocyanate and cetyltrimethylammonium bromide) for the lysis of the spores followed by phenol-chloroform extraction of the DNA, and one enzymatic (lysozyme) treatment followed by proteinase K digestion were tested. The methods were equally efficient (seven successful isolations from eight P. larvae-containing honey samples); however, with the different methods, different samples were negative. Since the classical methods are rather time-consuming, need special facilities, and result in dangerous waste material, lysozyme treatment followed by proteinase K digestion was chosen for further applications. Also, this DNA extraction method resulted, following PCR, in clear electrophoretic bands with larger amounts of amplified DNA compared to the other methods.
The PCR assays were applied to honey, pollen, wax, and brood samples. Practically only the AF 1 plus AF 2 and AF 6 plus AF 7 primers could detect Paenibacillus-specific nucleotide sequences in these samples (Table 3). The primers AF 6 plus AF 7 showed the highest sensitivity, detecting P. larvae in 18 of 23 contaminated honey samples (78.3%). This primer pair also detected P. larvae from pollen, wax, and brood samples. With honey samples, this PCR technique was specific for P. larvae, because it did not amplify DNA from honey samples which contained saprophytic Bacillus species but no P. larvae (Table 4). The determined nucleotide sequences of selected PCR products also support the specificity of this assay. Although the isolation and biochemical characterization of P. larvae from honey samples were found to be more sensitive and specific than PCR, PCR should still be considered for large-scale screening of American foulbrood in honey samples because of its rapidity and moderate expense.
Govan et al. also described a PCR detection method for rapid identification of P. larvae (8). Their system was developed for the identification of P. larvae cultivated from honey samples in semiselective medium (and not for direct detection in honey). We included their published primers in our studies (PL 1 plus PL 2 primers) for comparison. These primers detected P. larvae nucleic acid at a level of 104 CFU and failed to detect P. larvae DNA in honey samples.
The sensitivity of the PCR assays could be further improved by carrying out a second, nested amplification step. Certain combinations of our primers would allow a second-round PCR. On the other hand, the risk of cross-contamination, a lower specificity, a longer duration, and enhanced costs reduce the usability of nested PCR in large-scale screenings of honey samples.
To summarize, in this study we investigated quite intensively the applicability of PCR for the detection of P. larvae, the causative agent of American foulbrood, and found certain PCR assays to be appropriate for quick screening of honey samples for the presence of P. larvae; the results, however, should be confirmed by isolation and biochemical characterization of the bacteria. The specificity of the PCR assays could be improved by the use of primer sequences from other genomic regions, which are more specific for P. larvae than are the currently available sequences. For this approach, however, large genome segments of P. larvae and related bacteria have to be sequenced beforehand.
We cordially thank Jolanta Kolodziejek, Helga Lussy, and Claudia Pallan for their excellent technical assistance and Johanna Kindermann for valuable suggestions.
|
|
|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»