User Settings
Open AccessArticle10.1016/j.mex.2015.06.004

Study of a two species microbial community by an inferential comparative genomic analysis tool: Spatial Analytical Microbial Imaging

Pei Zhang,Paloma Valverde,Douglas Daniel,Peter Fox-2015-01-01-MethodsX
1PDF

TL;DRAbstract

Most molecular fingerprinting techniques, including denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) [1], comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) [2], real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) [3], destroy community structure and/or cellular integrity, therefore lost the info. of the spatial locus and the in situ genomic copy number of the cells. An alternative technique, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) doesn't require sample disintegration but needs to develop specific markers and doesn't provide info. related to genomic copy number. Here, a microbial analysis tool, Spatial Analytical Microbial Imaging (SAMI), is described. An application was performed with a mixture of Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 and E. coli K-12 MG1655. The intrinsic property of their genome, reflected by the average fluorescence intensity (AFI), distinguished them in 3D. And their growth rates were inferred by comparing the total genomic fluorescence binding area (GFA) with that of the pure culture standa

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

Most molecular fingerprinting techniques, including denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) [1], comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) [2], real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) [3], destroy community structure and/or cellular integrity, therefore lost the info. of the spatial locus and the in situ genomic copy number of the cells. An alternative technique, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) doesn't require sample disintegration but needs to develop specific markers and doesn't provide info. related to genomic copy number. Here, a microbial analysis tool, Spatial Analytical Microbial Imaging (SAMI), is described. An application was performed with a mixture of Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 and E. coli K-12 MG1655. The intrinsic property of their genome, reflected by the average fluorescence intensity (AFI), distinguished them in 3D. And their growth rates were inferred by comparing the total genomic fluorescence binding area (GFA) with that of the pure culture standa

Keywords

BiologyFluorescence in situ hybridizationLocus (genetics)Computational biologyGenomeTemperature gradient gel electrophoresisPolymerase chain reactionComparative genomic hybridization

Chat

Click to start Chat