| Title |
Detection of microcystin-producing cyanobacteria in water samples using loop-mediated isothermal amplification targeting mcyB gene
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
3 Biotech, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13205-018-1402-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohandass Ramya, Muthukrishnan Kayalvizhi, Gopalakrishnan Haripriya, Pasupathi Rathinasabapathi |
| Abstract |
Microcystin toxin-producing cyanobacteria are known to have harmful effects on humans and animals. We have developed a loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP)-based detection method by targeting the microcystin synthetase B gene (mcyB), the gene responsible for the production of microcystin. The sensitivity of the method was found to be 1 fg per reaction, and it was 1000-fold higher than the conventional PCR. The LAMP method was able to amplify the target gene with a minimum amount of dNTP (0.4 mM), which further reduces the cost of reaction. The improved LAMP assay could detect the presence of the toxin-producing cyanobacteria in water samples within 2 h of time, which demonstrates the rapidness of the method. Freshwater samples were screened using the developed LAMP, and seven water samples collected from lakes and a bird sanctuary tested positive for mcyB gene harboring cyanobacteria, and negative in all other drinking waters. Hence, the developed LAMP could be a possible alternative to the existing molecular methods for screening for microcystin in environmental samples with greater sensitivity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 22% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,544,609
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from 3 Biotech
#407
of 1,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,152
of 333,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age from 3 Biotech
#16
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,252 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,264 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.