用于定量燕麦中产生毛霉烯的镰刀菌种类的数字PCR分析,包括长叶镰刀菌,F. poae和孢子毛霉。

IF 3.8 2区 化学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Subramani Natarajan, Diana Bucur, Steven Kildea, Fiona Doohan
{"title":"用于定量燕麦中产生毛霉烯的镰刀菌种类的数字PCR分析,包括长叶镰刀菌,F. poae和孢子毛霉。","authors":"Subramani Natarajan,&nbsp;Diana Bucur,&nbsp;Steven Kildea,&nbsp;Fiona Doohan","doi":"10.1007/s00216-025-05840-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><i>Fusarium</i> fungi cause Fusarium head blight (FHB) in oats, reducing yield and contaminating grains with harmful trichothecene mycotoxins. FHB symptoms in oats are often not visually distinct, necessitating alternative detection methods. We developed digital PCR (dPCR) assays as the most accurate DNA-based method to detect trichothecene-producing <i>Fusarium</i> species commonly found in oats. Building on existing quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays, we developed dPCR assays targeting all trichothecene producers (the <i>Tri5</i> gene), or specific to <i>F. langsethiae</i> (<i>Fl</i>), <i>F. poae</i> (<i>Fp</i>), and <i>F. sporotrichioides</i> (<i>Fs</i>). All targeted single copy genes, except <i>F. poae</i> which targeted rDNA which is a variable and multi-copy target (and hence not as reliable as the other assays for quantification). Optimized dPCR assays showed excellent linearity (<i>R</i><sup><i>2</i></sup> = 0.99) and greater resilience than qPCR to varying oat DNA concentrations. Overall, when comparing assay sensitivity using both fungal and field oat DNA extracts, dPCR assays were superior to qPCR for <i>Tri5</i>, <i>Fl</i>, and <i>Fs</i>, but the converse was true for <i>Fp</i>. Performance comparisons using field samples showed moderate to perfect agreement between qPCR and dPCR for <i>Tri5</i> and <i>Fl</i> (<i>κ</i> = 0.5 and 0.86) and poor agreement for <i>Fp</i> (<i>κ</i> = 0.00). Strong correlations were observed between the methods for <i>Tri5</i>, <i>Fl</i>, and <i>Fp</i> (<i>r</i> = 0.88–0.97), but unlike dPCR, qPCR did not detect <i>Fs</i> in any of the field samples. We conclude that the dPCR assays for <i>Tri5</i>, <i>Fl</i>, and <i>Fs</i> offer a reliable method for quantification while that for <i>Fp</i> is reliable for fungal detection but less reliable for quantification of the pathogen in field samples.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":462,"journal":{"name":"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry","volume":"417 13","pages":"2957 - 2969"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00216-025-05840-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital PCR assays for quantifying trichothecene-producing Fusarium species, including Fusarium langsethiae, F. poae, and F. sporotrichioides, in oats\",\"authors\":\"Subramani Natarajan,&nbsp;Diana Bucur,&nbsp;Steven Kildea,&nbsp;Fiona Doohan\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00216-025-05840-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><i>Fusarium</i> fungi cause Fusarium head blight (FHB) in oats, reducing yield and contaminating grains with harmful trichothecene mycotoxins. FHB symptoms in oats are often not visually distinct, necessitating alternative detection methods. We developed digital PCR (dPCR) assays as the most accurate DNA-based method to detect trichothecene-producing <i>Fusarium</i> species commonly found in oats. Building on existing quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays, we developed dPCR assays targeting all trichothecene producers (the <i>Tri5</i> gene), or specific to <i>F. langsethiae</i> (<i>Fl</i>), <i>F. poae</i> (<i>Fp</i>), and <i>F. sporotrichioides</i> (<i>Fs</i>). All targeted single copy genes, except <i>F. poae</i> which targeted rDNA which is a variable and multi-copy target (and hence not as reliable as the other assays for quantification). Optimized dPCR assays showed excellent linearity (<i>R</i><sup><i>2</i></sup> = 0.99) and greater resilience than qPCR to varying oat DNA concentrations. Overall, when comparing assay sensitivity using both fungal and field oat DNA extracts, dPCR assays were superior to qPCR for <i>Tri5</i>, <i>Fl</i>, and <i>Fs</i>, but the converse was true for <i>Fp</i>. Performance comparisons using field samples showed moderate to perfect agreement between qPCR and dPCR for <i>Tri5</i> and <i>Fl</i> (<i>κ</i> = 0.5 and 0.86) and poor agreement for <i>Fp</i> (<i>κ</i> = 0.00). Strong correlations were observed between the methods for <i>Tri5</i>, <i>Fl</i>, and <i>Fp</i> (<i>r</i> = 0.88–0.97), but unlike dPCR, qPCR did not detect <i>Fs</i> in any of the field samples. We conclude that the dPCR assays for <i>Tri5</i>, <i>Fl</i>, and <i>Fs</i> offer a reliable method for quantification while that for <i>Fp</i> is reliable for fungal detection but less reliable for quantification of the pathogen in field samples.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"417 13\",\"pages\":\"2957 - 2969\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00216-025-05840-0.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-025-05840-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-025-05840-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

镰刀菌在燕麦中引起镰刀菌头枯萎病(FHB),降低产量并使有害的毛霉毒素污染谷物。燕麦中的FHB症状通常不明显,需要其他检测方法。我们开发了数字PCR (dPCR)作为最准确的基于dna的方法来检测燕麦中常见的产生毛霉烯的镰刀菌。在现有的定量PCR (qPCR)分析的基础上,我们开发了针对所有毛霉菌生产者(Tri5基因)或针对F. langsethiae (Fl), F. poae (Fp)和F. sporotrichioides (Fs)的dPCR分析。所有的目标都是单拷贝基因,除了F. poae,它的目标是rDNA,这是一个可变的多拷贝目标(因此不像其他定量分析那样可靠)。优化后的dPCR检测结果与qPCR相比具有良好的线性关系(R2 = 0.99),且对不同浓度燕麦DNA的响应能力更强。总的来说,当比较使用真菌和田间燕麦DNA提取物的检测灵敏度时,dPCR检测对Tri5、Fl和Fs优于qPCR,而对Fp则相反。田间样品的性能比较显示,qPCR和dPCR对Tri5和Fl的表达具有中等到完全的一致性(κ = 0.5和0.86),而对Fp的表达一致性较差(κ = 0.00)。在Tri5、Fl和Fp的检测方法之间存在很强的相关性(r = 0.88-0.97),但与dPCR不同的是,qPCR在任何田间样品中均未检测到Fs。我们得出结论,对Tri5、Fl和Fs的dPCR检测提供了一种可靠的定量方法,而对Fp的dPCR检测对真菌检测是可靠的,但对田间样品中的病原体的定量不太可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Digital PCR assays for quantifying trichothecene-producing Fusarium species, including Fusarium langsethiae, F. poae, and F. sporotrichioides, in oats

Fusarium fungi cause Fusarium head blight (FHB) in oats, reducing yield and contaminating grains with harmful trichothecene mycotoxins. FHB symptoms in oats are often not visually distinct, necessitating alternative detection methods. We developed digital PCR (dPCR) assays as the most accurate DNA-based method to detect trichothecene-producing Fusarium species commonly found in oats. Building on existing quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays, we developed dPCR assays targeting all trichothecene producers (the Tri5 gene), or specific to F. langsethiae (Fl), F. poae (Fp), and F. sporotrichioides (Fs). All targeted single copy genes, except F. poae which targeted rDNA which is a variable and multi-copy target (and hence not as reliable as the other assays for quantification). Optimized dPCR assays showed excellent linearity (R2 = 0.99) and greater resilience than qPCR to varying oat DNA concentrations. Overall, when comparing assay sensitivity using both fungal and field oat DNA extracts, dPCR assays were superior to qPCR for Tri5, Fl, and Fs, but the converse was true for Fp. Performance comparisons using field samples showed moderate to perfect agreement between qPCR and dPCR for Tri5 and Fl (κ = 0.5 and 0.86) and poor agreement for Fp (κ = 0.00). Strong correlations were observed between the methods for Tri5, Fl, and Fp (r = 0.88–0.97), but unlike dPCR, qPCR did not detect Fs in any of the field samples. We conclude that the dPCR assays for Tri5, Fl, and Fs offer a reliable method for quantification while that for Fp is reliable for fungal detection but less reliable for quantification of the pathogen in field samples.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
638
审稿时长
2.1 months
期刊介绍: Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry’s mission is the rapid publication of excellent and high-impact research articles on fundamental and applied topics of analytical and bioanalytical measurement science. Its scope is broad, and ranges from novel measurement platforms and their characterization to multidisciplinary approaches that effectively address important scientific problems. The Editors encourage submissions presenting innovative analytical research in concept, instrumentation, methods, and/or applications, including: mass spectrometry, spectroscopy, and electroanalysis; advanced separations; analytical strategies in “-omics” and imaging, bioanalysis, and sampling; miniaturized devices, medical diagnostics, sensors; analytical characterization of nano- and biomaterials; chemometrics and advanced data analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信