Multiplex PCR to detect four different tomato-infecting pathogens
Language English Country United States Media print-electronic
Document type Evaluation Study, Journal Article
- MeSH
- Actinomycetales genetics isolation & purification MeSH
- Ascomycota genetics isolation & purification MeSH
- Begomovirus genetics isolation & purification MeSH
- DNA Primers genetics MeSH
- Electrophoresis, Polyacrylamide Gel MeSH
- Fusarium genetics isolation & purification MeSH
- Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction methods MeSH
- Plant Diseases microbiology virology MeSH
- Solanum lycopersicum microbiology virology MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Evaluation Study MeSH
- Names of Substances
- DNA Primers MeSH
This work was aimed to develop a multiplex PCR assay to detect infectious agents such as Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis, Fusarium sp, Leveillula taurica, and begomoviruses in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) plants. Specific primer sets of each pathogen were designed based on intergenic ribosomal RNA sequences for the first three, whereas for begomoviruses, primers were designed based on conserved regions. The design also considered that the length (200-800 bp) of the PCR products was resolvable by electrophoresis; thus 296, 380, 457, and 731 bp fragments for Clavibacter, Fusarium, Leveillula, and begomoviruses, respectively, were considered. PCR conditions were optimized to amplify all the products in a single tube from genomic DNA and circumvent PCR inhibitors from infected plants. Finally, when the multiplex PCR assay was tested with tomato plants infected with any of the four pathogens, specific PCR products confirmed the presence of the pathogens. Optimized PCR multiplex allowed for the accurate and simultaneous detection of Clavibacter, Fusarium, Leveillula, and begomoviruses in infected plants or seeds from tomato.
See more in PubMed
J Virol Methods. 2008 Jan;147(1):93-8 PubMed
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1984 Dec;81(24):8014-8 PubMed
Phytopathology. 2005 Feb;95(2):166-71 PubMed
Nucleic Acids Res. 1999 Feb 1;27(3):915-6 PubMed
Biotechnol J. 2007 Mar;2(3):386-92 PubMed
J Mol Biol. 1983 Jun 5;166(4):557-80 PubMed
Prep Biochem. 1983;13(4):347-59 PubMed
J Clin Lab Anal. 2003;17(4):108-12 PubMed
Phytopathology. 2003 Sep;93(9):1153-7 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2010 May;55(3):239-44 PubMed
Biotechniques. 1997 Sep;23(3):504-11 PubMed
Phytopathology. 2003 Mar;93(3):286-92 PubMed
Biotechniques. 1993 Apr;14(4):524, 528 PubMed
J Virol Methods. 2007 Sep;144(1-2):165-8 PubMed
Phytopathology. 1997 Jul;87(7):712-9 PubMed
J Microbiol Methods. 2003 Jan;52(1):85-91 PubMed
Mol Ecol. 1993 Apr;2(2):113-8 PubMed
Mol Plant Pathol. 2009 May;10(3):311-24 PubMed
Arch Virol. 2008;153(4):783-821 PubMed
Mol Plant Pathol. 2010 Mar;11(2):309-14 PubMed
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000 Oct;13(4):559-70 PubMed
J Biotechnol. 2003 Dec 19;106(2-3):179-91 PubMed
Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2011;49:219-48 PubMed
Nucleic Acids Res. 1980 Oct 10;8(19):4321-5 PubMed
