Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
UNLABELLED: Opportunistic infections caused by Non-Candida albicans. have been increasing. Traditional methods that are used to identify clinical isolates of Candida species are time-consuming and not appropriate for rapid, accurate and reliable identification. PURPOSE: To identify Candida spp isolated from cancer patients using PCR-restriction enzyme. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using universal primers, ITS1 and ITS4, in this study, we could amplify ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 rDNA regions at both 80 clinical isolates and 3 standard strains. The PCR products were digested with two restriction enzymes MspI and BlnI separately. RESULT: We successfully identified all isolated species using two restriction enzymes (MspI, BlnI). Candida albicans was the most common species (77.5%), followed by C. glabrata (15%), C. tropicalis (5%), C. krusei (2.5%). Although the primers and enzyme had the ability to identify C. parapsilosis, C. guilliermondii, C. dubliniensis, present isolates did not include these among identified ones. CONCLUSION: RFLP-PCR using ITSI and ITS4 primers and restriction enzyme is a rapid, easy, reliable and also applicable method in clinical laboratory for identification of medically important Candida spp.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shokohi et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: