<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD) method became widely applied for sensitive, efficient and fast distinguishing of different isolates of a given species, if pure culture is available. Problems with reproducibility and discriminatory power, frequently cited in the literature, can be overcome by precise optimization procedure allowing to achieve reliable conditions for each species analysed. Basing on two examples of different species, H. pylori and E. faecium, particular parameters of RAPD fingerprinting were evaluated with respect to selection of best working primers generating medium-complex profiles, using only high quality DNA samples and evaluation optimum for every reaction reagent. Stable and informative amplification patterns were obtained with different best working primers which could discriminate between all H. pylori and E. faecium strains tested. For both analysed species different optima were found, suggesting species-specific need of precise RAPD conditions evaluation. This study proved high sensitivity and efficiency of optimized RAPD profiling applicable for searching the epidemiology traces for both species.
DNA, Bacterial, Genotype, Helicobacter pylori, Enterococcus faecium, Reproducibility of Results, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sensitivity and Specificity, Bacterial Typing Techniques, Helicobacter Infections, Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA Technique, Humans, Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections
DNA, Bacterial, Genotype, Helicobacter pylori, Enterococcus faecium, Reproducibility of Results, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Sensitivity and Specificity, Bacterial Typing Techniques, Helicobacter Infections, Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA Technique, Humans, Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |