Limits...
Genomic evidence reveals numerous Salmonella enterica serovar Newport reintroduction events in Suwannee watershed irrigation ponds.

Li B, Jackson SA, Gangiredla J, Wang W, Liu H, Tall BD, Beaubrun JJ, Jay-Russell M, Vellidis G, Elkins CA - Appl. Environ. Microbiol. (2015)

Bottom Line: Newport III).Based on this comparative genomic evidence and the spatial and temporal factors, we speculated that the presence of Salmonella in the ponds was likely due to numerous punctuated reintroduction events associated with several different but common hosts in the environment.These findings may have implications for the development of strategies for efficient and safe irrigation to minimize the risk of Salmonella outbreaks associated with fresh produce.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Molecular Biology, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. FDA, Laurel, Maryland, USA baoguang.li@fda.hhs.gov.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Microarray scatter plots of pairwise comparisons demonstrating gene-level differences between strains analyzed in this study. Four S. Newport II isolates C84, C124, C126, and C234, were recovered from different ponds at different sample dates. (A to C) The genotype of C84 was compared with those of C124 (A), C126 (B), and C234 (C). (D to F) The genotype of C84 was also compared with those of two S. Newport II isolates, C110 (D) and C83 (E), and S. Newport II strain C75 (F).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4644655&req=5

Figure 4: Microarray scatter plots of pairwise comparisons demonstrating gene-level differences between strains analyzed in this study. Four S. Newport II isolates C84, C124, C126, and C234, were recovered from different ponds at different sample dates. (A to C) The genotype of C84 was compared with those of C124 (A), C126 (B), and C234 (C). (D to F) The genotype of C84 was also compared with those of two S. Newport II isolates, C110 (D) and C83 (E), and S. Newport II strain C75 (F).

Mentions: With the high discriminatory power of microarray analysis, not only could we subtype S. Newport to two different lineages, but we also were able to detect subtle gene differences within each lineage and further differentiate the two lineages into four subgroups, A, B, C, and D. For instance, in lineage II, strains in subgroups A (C84, C124, C126, and C234) and B (C122, C123, C124, C125, and C126) showed an identical genotype within their subgroup as measured by gene differences (n = 0), suggesting that these strains in this subgroup may share a host; in lineage III, strains in subgroups C (C142, C147, C148, C150, C151, C152, C153, and C154) and D (C75, C162, and C163) had an identical genotype within the subgroup, suggesting that these strains may also share a host (Table 3; Fig. 4). Although no gene differences were found within these subgroups, a small number of gene differences were detected outside these subgroups (Table 3; Fig. 4). These microarray data can be used to understand the relationship among these closely related S. Newport isolates from each irrigation pond.


Genomic evidence reveals numerous Salmonella enterica serovar Newport reintroduction events in Suwannee watershed irrigation ponds.

Li B, Jackson SA, Gangiredla J, Wang W, Liu H, Tall BD, Beaubrun JJ, Jay-Russell M, Vellidis G, Elkins CA - Appl. Environ. Microbiol. (2015)

Microarray scatter plots of pairwise comparisons demonstrating gene-level differences between strains analyzed in this study. Four S. Newport II isolates C84, C124, C126, and C234, were recovered from different ponds at different sample dates. (A to C) The genotype of C84 was compared with those of C124 (A), C126 (B), and C234 (C). (D to F) The genotype of C84 was also compared with those of two S. Newport II isolates, C110 (D) and C83 (E), and S. Newport II strain C75 (F).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4644655&req=5

Figure 4: Microarray scatter plots of pairwise comparisons demonstrating gene-level differences between strains analyzed in this study. Four S. Newport II isolates C84, C124, C126, and C234, were recovered from different ponds at different sample dates. (A to C) The genotype of C84 was compared with those of C124 (A), C126 (B), and C234 (C). (D to F) The genotype of C84 was also compared with those of two S. Newport II isolates, C110 (D) and C83 (E), and S. Newport II strain C75 (F).
Mentions: With the high discriminatory power of microarray analysis, not only could we subtype S. Newport to two different lineages, but we also were able to detect subtle gene differences within each lineage and further differentiate the two lineages into four subgroups, A, B, C, and D. For instance, in lineage II, strains in subgroups A (C84, C124, C126, and C234) and B (C122, C123, C124, C125, and C126) showed an identical genotype within their subgroup as measured by gene differences (n = 0), suggesting that these strains in this subgroup may share a host; in lineage III, strains in subgroups C (C142, C147, C148, C150, C151, C152, C153, and C154) and D (C75, C162, and C163) had an identical genotype within the subgroup, suggesting that these strains may also share a host (Table 3; Fig. 4). Although no gene differences were found within these subgroups, a small number of gene differences were detected outside these subgroups (Table 3; Fig. 4). These microarray data can be used to understand the relationship among these closely related S. Newport isolates from each irrigation pond.

Bottom Line: Newport III).Based on this comparative genomic evidence and the spatial and temporal factors, we speculated that the presence of Salmonella in the ponds was likely due to numerous punctuated reintroduction events associated with several different but common hosts in the environment.These findings may have implications for the development of strategies for efficient and safe irrigation to minimize the risk of Salmonella outbreaks associated with fresh produce.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Molecular Biology, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, U.S. FDA, Laurel, Maryland, USA baoguang.li@fda.hhs.gov.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus