↓ Skip to main content

Multi-Locus Next-Generation Sequence Typing of DNA Extracted From Pooled Colonies Detects Multiple Unrelated Candida albicans Strains in a Significant Proportion of Patient Samples

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Multi-Locus Next-Generation Sequence Typing of DNA Extracted From Pooled Colonies Detects Multiple Unrelated Candida albicans Strains in a Significant Proportion of Patient Samples
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01179
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ningxin Zhang, David Wheeler, Mauro Truglio, Cristina Lazzarini, Jenine Upritchard, Wendy McKinney, Karen Rogers, Anna Prigitano, Anna M. Tortorano, Richard D. Cannon, Roland S. Broadbent, Sally Roberts, Jan Schmid

Abstract

The yeast Candida albicans is an important opportunistic human pathogen. For C. albicans strain typing or drug susceptibility testing, a single colony recovered from a patient sample is normally used. This is insufficient when multiple strains are present at the site sampled. How often this is the case is unclear. Previous studies, confined to oral, vaginal and vulvar samples, have yielded conflicting results and have assessed too small a number of colonies per sample to reliably detect the presence of multiple strains. We developed a next-generation sequencing (NGS) modification of the highly discriminatory C. albicans MLST (multilocus sequence typing) method, 100+1 NGS-MLST, for detection and typing of multiple strains in clinical samples. In 100+1 NGS-MLST, DNA is extracted from a pool of colonies from a patient sample and also from one of the colonies. MLST amplicons from both DNA preparations are analyzed by high-throughput sequencing. Using base call frequencies, our bespoke DALMATIONS software determines the MLST type of the single colony. If base call frequency differences between pool and single colony indicate the presence of an additional strain, the differences are used to computationally infer the second MLST type without the need for MLST of additional individual colonies. In mixes of previously typed pairs of strains, 100+1 NGS-MLST reliably detected a second strain. Inferred MLST types of second strains were always more similar to their real MLST types than to those of any of 59 other isolates (22 of 31 inferred types were identical to the real type). Using 100+1 NGS-MLST we found that 7/60 human samples, including three superficial candidiasis samples, contained two unrelated strains. In addition, at least one sample contained two highly similar variants of the same strain. The probability of samples containing unrelated strains appears to differ considerably between body sites. Our findings indicate the need for wider surveys to determine if, for some types of samples, routine testing for the presence of multiple strains is warranted. 100+1 NGS-MLST is effective for this purpose.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 13 45%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 June 2018.
All research outputs
#20,522,137
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,842
of 25,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,345
of 329,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#587
of 688 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,257 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 329,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 688 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.