Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae

M. M. Pettigrew; B. Foxman; Z. Ecevit; C. F. Marrs; J. Gilsdorf

doi:10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002

Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae

M. M. Pettigrew, B. Foxman, Z. Ecevit, C. F. Marrs, J. Gilsdorf

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

27 Scopus citations

Abstract

We compared 75 nontypeable (NT) Haemophilus influenzae isolates by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR, and automated ribotyping. PFGE was the most discriminatory of the techniques. ERIC-PCR provides a useful screen but should not replace other techniques as the sole method to group NT H. influenzae strains.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	660-662
Number of pages	3
Journal	Journal of clinical microbiology
Volume	40
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002
State	Published - 2002
Externally published	Yes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Publisher link

10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

Pettigrew, M. M., Foxman, B., Ecevit, Z., Marrs, C. F., & Gilsdorf, J. (2002). Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae. Journal of clinical microbiology, 40(2), 660-662. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002

Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae. / Pettigrew, M. M.; Foxman, B.; Ecevit, Z. et al.
In: Journal of clinical microbiology, Vol. 40, No. 2, 2002, p. 660-662.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Pettigrew, MM, Foxman, B, Ecevit, Z, Marrs, CF & Gilsdorf, J 2002, 'Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae', Journal of clinical microbiology, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 660-662. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002

@article{378d2283eb2a459eb6406079e2893769,

title = "Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae",

abstract = "We compared 75 nontypeable (NT) Haemophilus influenzae isolates by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR, and automated ribotyping. PFGE was the most discriminatory of the techniques. ERIC-PCR provides a useful screen but should not replace other techniques as the sole method to group NT H. influenzae strains.",

author = "Pettigrew, {M. M.} and B. Foxman and Z. Ecevit and Marrs, {C. F.} and J. Gilsdorf",

year = "2002",

doi = "10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "40",

pages = "660--662",

journal = "Journal of clinical microbiology",

issn = "0095-1137",

publisher = "American Society for Microbiology",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae

AU - Pettigrew, M. M.

AU - Foxman, B.

AU - Ecevit, Z.

AU - Marrs, C. F.

AU - Gilsdorf, J.

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - We compared 75 nontypeable (NT) Haemophilus influenzae isolates by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR, and automated ribotyping. PFGE was the most discriminatory of the techniques. ERIC-PCR provides a useful screen but should not replace other techniques as the sole method to group NT H. influenzae strains.

AB - We compared 75 nontypeable (NT) Haemophilus influenzae isolates by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR, and automated ribotyping. PFGE was the most discriminatory of the techniques. ERIC-PCR provides a useful screen but should not replace other techniques as the sole method to group NT H. influenzae strains.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036159778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036159778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002

DO - 10.1128/JCM.40.2.660-662.2002

M3 - Article

C2 - 11825990

AN - SCOPUS:0036159778

SN - 0095-1137

VL - 40

SP - 660

EP - 662

JO - Journal of clinical microbiology

JF - Journal of clinical microbiology

IS - 2

ER -

Use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus typing, and automated ribotyping to assess genomic variability among strains of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae

Abstract

UN SDGs

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this