2020
DOI: 10.1007/s00253-020-10880-w
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New multiplex conventional PCR and quadruplex real-time PCR assays for one-tube detection of Phyllosticta citricarpa, Elsinoë fawcettii, Elsinoë australis, and Pseudocercospora angolensis in Citrus: development and validation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

2
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This clearly shows how the Real-Time PCR systems that enabled inference of curves with lower intercept values guaranteed the detection of the same target DNA quantity—thus also of the LoD—at a lower C t than the other systems. The capacity of the Rotor-Gene TM 6000 for detection at a lower C t than other platforms was also previously observed in a comparison with Lightcycler 480 [ 31 , 32 ]. This would also imply that Rotor-Gene TM 6000 has the potential to lower the LoD of our method, which had been established using the CFX96 TM [ 18 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…This clearly shows how the Real-Time PCR systems that enabled inference of curves with lower intercept values guaranteed the detection of the same target DNA quantity—thus also of the LoD—at a lower C t than the other systems. The capacity of the Rotor-Gene TM 6000 for detection at a lower C t than other platforms was also previously observed in a comparison with Lightcycler 480 [ 31 , 32 ]. This would also imply that Rotor-Gene TM 6000 has the potential to lower the LoD of our method, which had been established using the CFX96 TM [ 18 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…False positive results can therefore be obtained when testing DNA of the non-target species P. paracitricarpa ( EPPO, 2020 ). Such cross-reactions with P. paracitricarpa DNA were also observed with the assay developed by Ahmed et al (2020) targeting phylogenetic marker MCM7. The method of Zajc et al (2022) is based on the tef1 gene, which should differ between P. citricarpa and P. paracitricarpa by five nucleotide changes ( Guarnaccia et al, 2017 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…The current diagnostic protocols for detecting and identifying P. citricarpa include several real-time PCR (qPCR) methods ( Ahmed et al, 2020 ; Schirmacher et al, 2019 ; van Gent-Pelzer et al, 2007 ; Zajc et al, 2022 ) and conventional PCR (cPCR) methods ( Baayen et al, 2002 ; Peres et al, 2007 ). Most of these assays are based on the amplification of a specific region of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of rDNA ( Bonants et al, 2003 ; Peres et al, 2007 ; Schirmacher et al, 2019 ; van Gent-Pelzer et al, 2007 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, both P. citricarpa and P. paracitricarpa can cause CBS symptoms on citrus fruits and the two species differ from each other just for some nucleotides related to tef1 and LSU genes (Guarnaccia et al 2017). A range of molecular tests, including multiplex methods for the detection of different citrus pathogens simultaneously, have been developed to detect P. citricarpa (Ahmed et al 2020;EPPO 2020). Nevertheless, these tests cannot distinguish P. citricarpa from the closely related species P. paracitricarpa and P. citriasiana.…”
Section: Septoria Spot Of Citrusmentioning
confidence: 99%