1997
DOI: 10.1099/00222615-46-12-1043
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

PCR Identification of Trichophyton Mentagrophytes Var. Interdigitale And T. Mentagrophytes var. Mentagrophytes Dermatophytes with a Random Primer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, based on ribosomal small subunit rRNA gene sequences, a primer system specific for the detection of dermatophytic DNA has been described, though this system is not designed to distinguish individual dermatophyte species (5). Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (35), PCR fingerprinting (12), arbitrarily primed PCR (29), random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis (30,34), or sequencing of the ITS region (13,14,23) has been stated to be useful for the identification of species in dermatophytes and other fungi. Some of these methods, however, lack reproducibility; in particular, few of the random amplified polymorphic DNA techniques proposed for fungi in the 1990s are in use today.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, based on ribosomal small subunit rRNA gene sequences, a primer system specific for the detection of dermatophytic DNA has been described, though this system is not designed to distinguish individual dermatophyte species (5). Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis (35), PCR fingerprinting (12), arbitrarily primed PCR (29), random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis (30,34), or sequencing of the ITS region (13,14,23) has been stated to be useful for the identification of species in dermatophytes and other fungi. Some of these methods, however, lack reproducibility; in particular, few of the random amplified polymorphic DNA techniques proposed for fungi in the 1990s are in use today.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The species included in this anthropo-zoophilic complex, which were first defined on the basis of morphological features and mating-type studies, have more recently been investigated using molecular methods, revealing an organization more complex than expected. These molecular approaches have been based primarily on the G+C content of chromosomal DNA (Davison et al, 1980), total DNA homology (Davison & Mackenzie, 1984), restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) (Mochizuki et al, 1990(Mochizuki et al, , 1996, arbitrarily primed PCR (AP-PCR) (Liu et al, 2000), random amplification of polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis (Kac et al, 1999;Liu et al, 1997;Mochizuki et al, 1997) and PCR fingerprinting (Faggi et al, 2001;Graser et al, 1999b). More recently, sequence analysis of the rDNA regions (Graser et al, 1999a;Harmsen et al, 1995;Makimura et al, 1998Makimura et al, , 1999Mochizuki et al, 1999Mochizuki et al, , 2003 and, in particular, analysis of internal transcribed spacer (ITS) regions (Graser et al, 1999a;Makimura et al, 1998Makimura et al, , 1999Mochizuki et al, 1999), which appeared more suitable than the gene coding for the small-subunit rRNA (18S rRNA) (Harmsen et al, 1995), were used successfully to evaluate the phylogenetic relationships within the T. mentagrophytes complex.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Molecular methods, such as restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of mitochondrial DNA (1,7,8), sequencing of the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of the ribosomal DNA (3,4), sequencing of protein-encoding genes (5,6), and PCR (random amplification of polymorphic DNA [RAPD] [15], arbitrarily primed PCR [AP-PCR] [10,11], and PCR fingerprinting [2]), have brought important progress in distinguishing between species and strains. However, most of these techniques (e.g., restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis, sequencing) are complex, laborious, time-consuming, and not easily employable for routine identification of dermatophytes; in contrast, PCR technology is simple, rapid, and, in the absence of specific nucleotide sequence information for the many dermatophyte species, able to generate species-specific or strain-specific DNA polymorphisms on the basis of characteristic band patterns detected by agarose gel electrophoresis (2,11).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%