PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Jin-Ho Park
, Yun-Ji Kim, Jong-Pill Kim
, Yun-Ji Kim, Jong-Pill Kim
Abstract
Background
Mycobacterium leprae (M. leprae) is pathogenic bacterium with polymorphic, acid-fast properties and causes leprosy that it is called Hansen's disease. Leprosy can be completely cured using multidrug therapy (MDT), but it is not easy to eradicate leprosy and M. leprae on the planet.
Object
We still do not understand the exact pathogenesis mechanism of leprosy. The main reason is that we cannot grow bacteria in vitro. Therefore, quantitative measurement and damage-free storage of live M. leprae are very important.
Methods
Here, we generated bacteria stocks of M. leprae using HBSS with 0.05% tween 80 or freezing solution 11 months ago and evaluated conditional survival of bacteria by Propidium monoazide (PMA) staining, real-time PCR.
Results
There were assessed for bacteria viability under the conditions of each temperature or medium by delta-Ct level of real-time PCR. We also observed that frozen-stored M. leprae (2.14) compare to refrigerated-stored M. leprae (1.03) was significant decreased delta-Ct in HBSS (P<0.05). However, frozen-stored M. leprae (1.14) was not difference refrigerated-stored M. leprae (0.84) in freezing solution (P=NS). Real-time PCR with SYBR green method was reliable for results and statistical significance, but data for real-time PCR with probe method were unreliable.
Figures and Tables
 | Fig. 1Real-time PCR for differences in stored mediaPMA-stained M. leprae was confirmed by real-time PCR of SYBR green method. A) ΔCt of Freezing solution group (Freezing sol., n=7) was significantly decreased at 4℃ compare to HBSS group (HBSS, n=7)(HBSS 2.14 vs Freezing sol. 1.03, *p<0.05). B) ΔCt of Freezing solution group (Freezing sol., n=7) was decreased at −20℃ compare to HBSS group (HBSS, n=7)(HBSS 1.14 vs Freezing sol. 0.84, NS). Samples were stored for 11 months in HBSS or freezing solution (Mean ± S.E.M; *p<0.05; NS, Not significant; each data point is represented on graphs).
|
 | Fig. 2Real-time PCR for differences in stored temperaturePMA-stained M. leprae was confirmed by real-time PCR of SYBR green method. A) ΔCt of refrigerated group (4℃, n=7) was significantly decreased in HBSS compare to frozen group (−20℃, n=7)(4℃ 2.14 vs −20℃ 1.14, *p<0.05). B) ΔCt of refrigerated group (4℃, n=7) was decreased in freezing solution compare to frozen group (−20℃, n=7)(4℃ 1.03 vs −20℃ 0.84, NS). Samples were stored for 11 months in HBSS or freezing solution. (Mean ± S.E.M; *p<0.05; NS, Not significant; each data point is represented on graphs).
|
 | Fig. 3Real-time PCR for differences in stored mediaPMA-stained M. leprae was confirmed by real-time PCR of probe method. A) ΔCt of freezing solution group (Freezing sol., n=7) was increased at 4℃ compare to HBSS group (HBSS, n=7)(HBSS −0.03 vs Freezing sol. 0.31, NS). B) ΔCt of freezing solution group (Freezing sol., n=7) was increased at −20℃ compare to HBSS group (HBSS, n=7)(HBSS 0.41 vs Freezing sol. 0.6, NS). Samples were stored for 11 months in HBSS or freezing solution (Mean ± S.E.M; NS, Not significant; each data point is represented on graphs).
|
 | Fig. 4Real-time PCR for differences in stored temperaturePMA-stained M. leprae was confirmed by real-time PCR of probe method. A) ΔCt of refrigerated group (4℃, n=7) was increased in HBSS compare to frozen group (−20℃, n=7)(4℃ −0.03 vs −20℃ 0.41, NS). B) ΔCt of refrigerated group (4℃, n=7) was increased in freezing solution compare to frozen group (−20℃, n=7)(4℃ 0.31 vs −20℃ 0.6, NS). Samples were stored for 11 months in HBSS or freezing solution. (Mean ± S.E.M; *p<0.05; NS, Not significant; each data point is represented on graphs).
|
 | Fig. 5Summary in this experimentPMA-stained M. leprae was confirmed by real-time PCR. The results of experiments using real-time PCR of SYBR green showed increase ΔCt deviation compare to real-time PCR of probe method. However, Contrary to SYBR green method, probe method results are unreliable because group of each observed ΔCt.
|
References
1. McMurray DN. Mycobacteria and nocardia. Medical Microbiology 4th edition: University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston. 1996.
2. Hess S, Rambukkana AJMs. Cell biology of intracellular adaptation of Mycobacterium leprae in the peripheral nervous system. Microbiol Spectr. 2019; 7(4):
3. Martinez AN, Lahiri R, Pittman TL, Scollard D, Truman R, Moraes MO, et al. Molecular determination of Mycobacterium leprae viability by use of real-time PCR. J Clin Microbiol. 2009; 47(7):2124–2130.
4. Lahiri R, Randhawa B, Krahenbuhl JJJomm. Application of a viability-staining method for Mycobacterium leprae derived from the athymic (nu/nu) mouse foot pad. J Med Microbiol. 2005; 54(Pt 3):235–242.
5. Levy L, Ji BJLr. The mouse foot-pad technique for cultivation of Mycobacterium leprae. Lepr Rev. 2006; 77(1):5.
6. Yan W, Xing Y, Yuan LC, De Yang R, Tan FY, Zhang Y, et al. Application of RLEP real-time PCR for detection of M. leprae DNA in paraffin-embedded skin biopsy specimens for diagnosis of paucibacillary leprosy. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2014; 90(3):524–529.
7. Kim JP, Kim YS, Kim CW. Evaluation of Propidium Monoazide Real-Time PCR for Viablity of Mycobacterium leprae. Korean Lepr Bull. 2016; 49(1):13–22.
8. Kim S, Lee S, Kim E, Seo D, Song Y, Jung I. Selective detection of viable enterococcus faecalis using propidium monoazide in combination with real-time PCR. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2008; 33(6):537–544.
9. Nocker A, Sossa-Fernandez P, Burr MD, Camper AKJAEM. Use of propidium monoazide for live/dead distinction in microbial ecology. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007; 73(16):5111–5117.
10. Fittipaldi M, Nocker A, Codony FJJomm. Progress in understanding preferential detection of live cells using viability dyes in combination with DNA amplification. J Microbiol Methods. 2012; 91(2):276–289.
11. Trombone AP, Pedrini SC, Diorio SM, Belone Ade F, Fachin LR, do Nascimento DC, et al. Optimized protocols for Mycobacterium leprae strain management: frozen stock preservation and maintenance in athymic nude mice. Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE. J Vis Exp. 2014; 03. 23(85):DOI: 10.3791/50620. PubMed PMID: 24686247; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4155980.
12. Nocker A, Sossa KE, Camper AKJJomm. Molecular monitoring of disinfection efficacy using propidium monoazide in combination with quantitative PCR. J Microbiol Methods. 2007; 70(2):252–260.
13. Ditommaso S, Giacomuzzi M, Memoli G, Cavallo R, Curtoni A, Avolio M, et al. Reduction of turnaround time for non-tuberculous mycobacteria detection in heater-cooler units by propidium monoazide-real-time polymerase chain reaction. J Hosp Infect. In press 2019.
14. Batista-Silva L, Rodrigues LS, de Carvalho Vivarini A, Costa FdMR, De Mattos KA, Costa MRSN, et al. Mycobacterium leprae-induced Insulin-like Growth Factor I attenuates antimicrobial mechanisms, promoting bacterial survival in macrophages. Sci Rep. 2016; 6:27632.
15. Silva CA, Danelishvili L, McNamara M, Berredo-Pinho M, Bildfell R, Biet F, et al. Interaction of Mycobacterium leprae with human airway epithelial cells: adherence, entry, survival, and identification of potential adhesins by surface proteome analysis. Infect Immun. 2013; 81(7):2645–2659.
16. Tanigawa K, Suzuki K, Nakamura K, Akama T, Kawashima A, Wu H, et al. Expression of adipose differentiation-related protein (ADRP) and perilipin in macrophages infected with Mycobacterium leprae. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2008; 289(1):72–79.
17. Fukutomi Y, Matsuoka M, Minagawa F, Toratani S, McCormick G, Krahenbuhl JJIjol, et al. IL-10 treatment of macrophages bolsters intracellular survival of Mycobacterium leprae. Int J Lepr Other Mycobact Dis. 2004; 72:16–26.
18. Kim YJ, Lee SM, Park BK, Kim SS, Yi J, Kim HH, et al. Evaluation of propidium monoazide real-time PCR for early detection of viable Mycobacterium tuberculosis in clinical respiratory specimens. Ann Lab Med. 2014; 34(3):203–209.
XML Download