Detection and quantification of Verticillium dahliae and V. longisporum by droplet digital PCR versus quantitative real-time PCR

被引:8
|
作者
Wang, Di [1 ]
Jiao, Xinya [2 ]
Jia, Haijiang [3 ]
Cheng, Shumei [2 ]
Jin, Xi [4 ]
Wang, Youhua [5 ]
Gao, Yunhua [1 ]
Su, Xiaofeng [5 ]
机构
[1] Natl Inst Metrol, Ctr Adv Measurement Sci, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Hebei Agr Univ, Coll Food Sci & Technol, Baoding, Peoples R China
[3] Raw Mat Technol Ctr Guangxi Tobacco, Nanning, Peoples R China
[4] Baoding Univ, Hebei Technol Innovat Ctr Green Management Soil Bo, Baoding, Hebei, Peoples R China
[5] Chinese Acad Agr Sci, Biotechnol Res Inst, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
droplet digital PCR; quantitative real-time PCR; sensitivity; quantification; tolerance; GUIDELINES MINIMUM INFORMATION; ALBO-ATRUM; ASSAY; PUBLICATION; PLATFORMS; STANDARD; PLANTS; WILT;
D O I
10.3389/fcimb.2022.995705
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Vascular wilt, caused by Verticillium dahliae and V. longisporum, limits the quality and yield of agricultural crops. Although quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) has greatly improved the diagnosis of these two pathogens over traditional, time-consuming isolation methods, the relatively poor detection sensitivity and high measurement bias for traceable matrix-rich samples need to be improved. Here, we thus developed a droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assay for accurate, sensitive detection and quantification of V. dahliae and V. longisporum. We compared the analytical and diagnostic performance in detail of ddPCR and the corresponding qPCR assay against the genomic DNA (gDNA) of the two fungi from cultures and field samples. In our study, the species specificity, quantification linearity, analytical sensitivity, and measurement viability of the two methods were analyzed. The results indicated that ddPCR using field samples enhanced diagnostic sensitivity, decreased quantification bias, and indicated less susceptibility to inhibitors compared with qPCR. Although ddPCR was as sensitive as qPCR when using gDNA from cultures of V. dahliae and V. longisporum, its detection rates using field samples were much higher than those of qPCR, potentially due to the inhibition from residual matrix in the extracts. The results showed that digital PCR is more sensitive and accurate than qPCR for quantifying trace amounts of V. dahliae and V. longisporum and can facilitate management practices to limit or prevent their prevalence.
引用
下载
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Detection and Quantification of Klebsiella pneumoniae in Fecal Samples Using Digital Droplet PCR in Comparison with Real-Time PCR
    Feng, Junxia
    Cui, Xiaohu
    Du, Bing
    Zhao, Hanqing
    Feng, Yanling
    Cui, Jinghua
    Yan, Chao
    Gan, Lin
    Fan, Zheng
    Fu, Tongtong
    Xu, Ziying
    Yu, Zihui
    Zhang, Rui
    Du, Shuheng
    Tian, Ziyan
    Zhang, Qun
    Xue, Guanhua
    Yuan, Jing
    MICROBIOLOGY SPECTRUM, 2023, 11 (04):
  • [22] Comparison of Real-Time Quantitative PCR and Digital Droplet PCR for Detection of NPM1 Type A Transcripts
    Schumacher, J. A.
    Szankasi, P.
    Frizzell, K.
    Sorrells, S.
    Shen, W.
    Kelley, T. W.
    Patel, J. L.
    JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS, 2016, 18 (06): : 956 - 956
  • [23] Quantitative Evaluation of CFTR Gene Expression: A Comparison between Relative Quantification by Real-Time PCR and Absolute Quantification by Droplet Digital PCR
    Bruno, Sabina Maria
    Blacona, Giovanna
    Lo Cicero, Stefania
    Castelli, Germana
    Virgulti, Mariarita
    Testino, Giancarlo
    Pierandrei, Silvia
    Fuso, Andrea
    Cimino, Giuseppe
    Ferraguti, Giampiero
    Eramo, Adriana
    Lucarelli, Marco
    GENES, 2023, 14 (09)
  • [24] Comparison of droplet digital PCR to real-time PCR for quantification of hepatitis B virus DNA
    Tang, Hui
    Cai, Qingchun
    Li, Hu
    Hu, Peng
    BIOSCIENCE BIOTECHNOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY, 2016, 80 (11) : 2159 - 2164
  • [25] Comparison of real-time PCR and droplet digital PCR for the detection of Xylella fastidiosa in plants
    Dupas, Enora
    Legendre, Bruno
    Olivier, Valerie
    Poliakoff, Francoise
    Manceau, Charles
    Cunty, Amandine
    JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS, 2019, 162 : 86 - 95
  • [26] Droplet digital PCR versus real-time PCR for in-house validation of porcine detection and quantification protocol: An artificial recombinant plasmid approach
    Nuraeni, Umi
    Malau, Jekmal
    Astuti, Retno Tri
    Dewantoro, Auraga
    Apriori, Dini
    Lusiana, Evellin Dewi
    Prasetya, Bambang
    PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (07):
  • [27] Comparison of droplet digital PCR and real-time quantitative PCR for quantitative detection of the parasitic ciliate Ichthyophthirius multifiliis in the water environment
    Hu, Guangran
    Huang, Ke
    Zhou, Weitian
    Wang, Runqiu
    Zhao, Weishan
    Zou, Hong
    Li, Wenxiang
    Wu, Shangong
    Li, Ming
    Wang, Guitang
    JOURNAL OF FISH DISEASES, 2023, 46 (04) : 357 - 367
  • [28] Application of droplet digital PCR for quantitative detection of Spiroplasma citri in comparison with real time PCR
    Maheshwari, Yogita
    Selvaraj, Vijayanandraj
    Hajeri, Subhas
    Yokomi, Raymond
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (09):
  • [29] Comparison of droplet digital PCR with quantitative real-time PCR for determination of zygosity in transgenic maize
    Xiaoli Xu
    Cheng Peng
    Xiaofu Wang
    Xiaoyun Chen
    Qiang Wang
    Junfeng Xu
    Transgenic Research, 2016, 25 : 855 - 864
  • [30] Tolerance of Droplet-Digital PCR vs Real-Time Quantitative PCR to Inhibitory Substances
    Dingle, Tanis C.
    Sedlak, Ruth Hall
    Cook, Linda
    Jerome, Keith R.
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY, 2013, 59 (11) : 1670 - 1672