The Cataracterization of Protein Profiles of the Aeromonas hydrophila and A.caviae Strains Isolated from Gull and Rainbow Trout Feces by SDS-PAGE

Bu çalışmada biri Aeromonas hydrophila ATCC 7512 olmak üzere toplam 10 hareketli aeromonas susu kullanıldı. Bu suşların beşi martılardan (bir A. hydrophila ve dört A. caviae susu), dördü alabalıklardan (üç A. hydrophila susu ve bir A. caviae susu) izole edildi. Bu suşlara ait tüm hücre protein profilleri SDS-PAGE yöntemi ile analiz edildi. Her bir susa ait protein profillerinin karşılaştırılması sonucu 45 çift oluşturuldu. Bu çiftlerin 17si (% 37,8) farklı, 18'i (% 40) şüpheli ilişkili, 10'u (% 22,2) identik bulundu. Aynı türe ait suşlar kendi içerisinde karşılaştırıldığında dört A. hydrophila susunun tamamı farklı veya şüpheli ilişkili bulunurken, beş A. caviae susunun biri dışında dördü identik bulundu. Martılardan izole edilen bir A. hydrophila susu, yine martılardan izole edilen dört A. caviae susu ile identik bulundu. Ülkemizde, A. hydrophila ve A. caviae suşlarının martı dışkılarından izolasyonunun ve SDS-PAGE yöntemiyle protein profillerinin ilk defa ortaya konulduğu bu araştırma, konuyla ilgili bundan sonra yapılacak çalışmalara katkıda bulunacaktır.

Martı ve Alabalık dışkılarından izole edilen aeromonas hydrophila and A. caviae suşlarının protein profillerinin SDS-PAGE yöntemi ile karakterizasyonu

Ten motile Aeromonads, including one Aeromonas hydrophila ATCC 7512, were used. Of the strains, five were isolated from gulls (one A. hydrophila strain and four A. caviae strains) and four from rainbow trout (three A. hydrophila strains and one A. caviae strain). Whole cell protein profiles of these strains were analyzed by SDS-PAGE. Forty-five pairs were formed in comparing the protein profiles of each strain. Of the pairs, 17 (37.8%) were different, 18 (40%) were unclear and 10 (22.2%) were identical. When the strains belonging to the same species were compared within themselves, four A. caviae strains were found to be identical, while all four A. hydrophila strains were different or of uncertain relationship to the group. One A. hydrophila strain isolated from gulls was found to be identical to four A. caviae strains again isolated from gulls. In this study, A. hydrophila and A. caviae strains were isolated from gull feces and their protein profiles were shown by SDS-PAGE for the first time in Turkey. These findings are expected to contribute to future studies in this field.

PDF

___

janda, J.M.: Recent Advances in the Study of the Taxonomy, Pathogenicity, and Infectious Syndromes Associated with the Genus Aeromonas. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 1991; 4: 397-410.
Boynukara, B., Gülhan, T., Boynukara, Z.: Isolation of Motile Aeromonads from Turkish Van Cat. Indian Vet. J. 2002; 79:429- 431.
Janda, J.M., Brenden, R.: Importance of Aeromonas sobria in Aeromonas Bacteremia. J. Infect. Dis. 1987; 155: 589-591.
Jindal, N., Garg, S.R., Kumar, A.: Comparison of Aeromonas spp. Isolated from Human, Livestock and Poultry Faeces. Isr. J. Vet. Med. 1993; 48: 80-83.
Stephenson, J.R., Tabaqchali, S.: New Method for Typing Coagulase Negative Staphylococci. J. Clin. Pathol. 1986; 39: 1271-1275.
Stephenson, J.R., Millership, S.E., Tabaqchali, S.: Typing of Aeromonas Species by Polyacrylamide-Gel Electrophoresis of Radiolabelied Cell Proteins. J. Med. Microbiol. 1987; 24: 113- 118.
Tabaqchali, S., Holland, D., O'Farrell, S., Silman, R.: Typing Scheme for Clostridium difficile: Its Application in Clinical and Epidemiological Studies. Lancet. 1984; 1 : 935-938.
Popoff, M.: Aeromonds. In: Krieg, M.R., Holt, J.G. (Eds.).: Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology. 4th. ed. 1984; Williams and Wilkins. Baltimore/London, pp. 545-546.
Maclnnes, J.I., Trust, T.J., Crosa, J.H.: Deoxyribonucleic Acid Relationship Among Members of the Genus Aeromonas. Can. J. Microbiol. 1979; 25: 579-586
Fanning, G.R., Hickman-Brenner, F.W., Farmer, J.J., Brenner, 10.
D.J.: DNA Reiatedness and Phenotypic Analysis of the Genus Aeromonas. Abstract C 116.1985; p. 319. In: Abstracts of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology. ASM, Washington. D.C.
Whittington, R.J., Gudkovs, N., Carrigan, M.J., Ashburner, L.D., 11.
Thurstan, S.J.: Clinical, Microbiological and Epidemiological Findings in Recent Outbreaks of Goldfish Ulcer Diseases due to Atypical Aeromonas salmonicida in South-Eastern Australia. J. Fish Dis. 1987; 10: 353-362.
Lowry, O.H., Rosebough, N.J., Farr, A.L., Randall R.J.: Protein measurement with the folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem.. 1951; 193: 265-275.
Laemmli, U.K.: Cleavage of Structural Proteins during the Assembly of the Head of Bacteriophage T4. Nature. 1970; 227: 680-685.
Hoefer Scientific Instruments: SDS Gels. 1992-1993; San Francisco, USA.
Dasi, M., Nogueira, J.M., Camarena, J.J., Gill, C, Garcia-Verdu, R., Barbera, J.: Use of Genomic Fingerprinting in the Characterization of Neisseria gonorrhoeae Isolated in Valencia, Spain. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 1992; 11: 804-809.
Millership, S.E., Want, S.V.: Typing of Aeromonas Species by Protein Fingerprinting: Comparison of Radiolabelling Silver Staining for Visualizing Proteins. J. Med. Microbiol. 1989; 29: 29-32.
Vouterin, L., Swings, J., Kersters, K.: Protein Electrophoresis and Classification in Handbook of New Bacterial Systematics, Edited by M. Goodfellow and A.G. O'Donnel. 1993; pp: 251-258. Academic Press, London.
Esteban, J., Gadea, I., Fernandez-Roblas, R., Molleja, A., Calvo, R., Acebron, V., Soriano, F.: Pseudo-Outbreak of Aeromonas hydrophila Isolates Related to Endoscopy. J. Hosp. Infect. 1999; 41:313-316.
Millership, S.E., Want, S.V.: Characterization of Strains of Aeromonas spp. by Phenotype and Whole-Cell Protein Fingerprint. J. Med. Microbiol. 1993; 39: 107-113.
Popoff, M., Coynault, C, Kiredjian, M., Lemelin, M.: Polynucieotide Sequence Reiatedness among Motile Aeromonas Species. Curr. Microbiol. 1981; 5: 109-114.