HOOF prints: Brucella strain typing by PCR amplification of multilocus tandem-repeat polymorphisms.

A critical component of limiting bacterial disease outbreaks is the tracing of the infection to the index source, which can be facilitated by using a highly discriminating bacterial identification system that will reliably identify genetically related bacterial populations. For pathogenic bacteria with highly conserved genomes, such as the zoonotic pathogen Brucella, finding distinguishing markers or traits for strain identification is challenging. This chapter describes a relatively new procedure for identifying Brucella strains. The procedure, which is called "HOOF prints" (hypervariable octameic oligonucleotide fingerprints), is based on high levels of polymorphism observed at several genomic loci in the Brucella genomes that contain small tandemly repeated deoxyribonucleic sequences. The technique described is designed for medium- to high-throughput analyses. However, the method described can be modified to characterize fewer samples.

Evaluation of the HOOF-Print assay for typing Brucella abortus strains isolated from cattle in the United States: results with four performance criteria.

BACKGROUND: A fundamental question that arises during epidemiological investigations of bacterial disease outbreaks is whether the outbreak strain is genetically related to a proposed index strain. Highly discriminating genetic markers for characterizing bacterial strains can help in clarifying the genetic relationships among strains. Under the auspices of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, the European Study Group for Epidemiological Markers (ESGEM) established guidelines for evaluating the performance of typing systems based of a number of criteria. Recently, HOOF-Print genotype analysis, a new method for typing Brucella abortus strains based on hypervariability at eight tandem repeat loci, was described. This paper evaluates the HOOF-Print assay by four of the criteria set out by the ESGEM: typeability, reproducibility, power of discrimination, and concordance with other typing methods. RESULTS: The HOOF-Print Assay was evaluated with a test population composed of 97 unrelated field isolates and 6 common laboratory strains of B. abortus. Both typeability and reproducibility of the assay were excellent. Allele diversity and frequency varied widely among the eight loci, ranging from 1 to 13 alleles. The power of discrimination, measured by the Hunter-Gaston discrimination index (HGDI), varied by locus ranging from 0 to 0.89, where a maximal value of 1.0 indicates discrimination of all strains. The HGDI values calculated for subgroups sorted by biovar were similar to the values determined for the whole population. None of the individual loci achieved the recommended HGDI threshold of 0.95, but the HGDI of the composite profiles was 0.99 (93 unique genotypes from 97 field strains evaluated), well above the recommended threshold. By comparison, the HGDI value for biovar typing was 0.61 in a test population biased with disproportionate numbers of the less common biovars. Cluster analysis based on HOOF-Print genotypes assembled the strains into hierarchical groups with no apparent association with the time or location of strain isolation. Likewise, these hierarchical groups were not homogeneous with regard to biotype. In one extreme case, two field isolates with identical fingerprints were identified as different biovars by conventional methods. CONCLUSION: The main purpose of this study was to assess the ability of HOOF-Print genotyping to discriminate unrelated field strains of B. abortus, and whether the assay met established requirements for bacterial strain typing methods. The discriminatory power of the assay was remarkable, considering the genetic homogeneity found among species within the genus. The assay met or exceeded all of the recommended levels for the performance criteria of typeability, reproducibility, and power of discrimination, however some inconsistencies with conventional biovar typing were observed. Nevertheless, the results indicate that with cautious interpretation, multilocus genotyping of polymorphic tandem repeats by HOOF-Print analysis could be a valuable complement to routine epidemiological investigations into localized B. abortus outbreaks.

Brucella 'HOOF-Prints': strain typing by multi-locus analysis of variable number tandem repeats (VNTRs).

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are very few tools available for subtyping Brucella isolates for epidemiological trace-back. Subtyping is difficult because of the genetic homogeneity within the genus. Sequencing of the genomes from three Brucella species has facilitated the search for DNA sequence variability. Recently, hypervariability among short tandem repeat sequences has been exploited for strain-typing of several bacterial pathogens. RESULTS: An eight-base pair tandem repeat sequence was discovered in nine genomic loci of the B. abortus genome. Eight loci were hypervariable among the three Brucella species. A PCR-based method was developed to identify the number of repeat units (alleles) at each locus, generating strain-specific fingerprints. None of the loci exhibited species- or biovar-specific alleles. Sometimes, a species or biovar contained a specific allele at one or more loci, but the allele also occurred in other species or biovars. The technique successfully differentiated the type strains for all Brucella species and biovars, among unrelated B. abortus biovar 1 field isolates in cattle, and among B. abortus strains isolated from bison and elk. Isolates from the same herd or from short-term in vitro passage exhibited little or no variability in fingerprint pattern. Sometimes, isolates from an animal would have multiple alleles at a locus, possibly from mixed infections in enzootic areas, residual disease from incomplete depopulation of an infected herd or molecular evolution within the strain. Therefore, a mixed population or a pool of colonies from each animal and/or tissue was tested. CONCLUSION: This paper describes a new method for fingerprinting Brucella isolates based on multi-locus characterization of a variable number, eight-base pair, tandem repeat. We have named this technique "HOOF-Prints" for Hypervariable Octameric Oligonucleotide Finger-Prints. The technique is highly discriminatory among Brucella species, among previously characterized Brucella strains, and among unrelated field isolates that could not be differentiated by classical methods. The method is rapid and the results are reproducible. HOOF-Printing will be most useful as a follow-up test after identification by established methods since we did not find species-specific or biovar-specific alleles. Nonetheless, this technology provides a significant advancement in brucellosis epidemiology, and consequently, will help to eliminate this disease worldwide.

Evaluation of the Brucella abortus species-specific polymerase chain reaction assay, an improved version of the Brucella AMOS polymerase chain reaction assay for cattle.

In a blind test, 344 samples representing 80 bacterial isolates were analyzed by the Brucella abortus species-specific polymerase chain reaction (BaSS PCR) assay for the identification and discrimination of B. abortus field strains (wild-type biovars 1, 2, and 4) from 1) B. abortus vaccine strains, 2) other Brucella species, and 3) non-Brucella bacteria. Identical samples were tested in 2 laboratories. Half the samples were fully viable, and half were bacteria that had been killed by methanol fixation. The results in 1 laboratory correctly identified 100% of the samples, resulting in a predictive value of 100% for all categories and 100% sensitivity and specificity under the prescribed conditions. The second laboratory misidentified 31 samples, resulting in a range of 66.7-100% sensitivity, 93.2-99.7% specificity, and 77.3-98.2% predictive values depending on the category. There was no significant difference in viable versus fixed bacteria for either laboratory. Subsequent review of the protocol indicated that contamination was the likely cause of 26 of the 31 erroneous identifications. The results show that the BaSS PCR assay has the potential to be a very reliable screening tool for B. abortus identification. However, the data also provide a cautionary reminder of the importance of preventing contamination in diagnostic PCR.

Evidence of Brucella sp. infection in marine mammals stranded along the coast of southern New England.

After recent isolations of Brucella sp. from pinnipeds and cetaceans, a survey was initiated to investigate the prevalence of Brucella sp. infections and serologic evidence of exposure in marine mammals stranded along the coasts of Connecticut and Rhode Island. One hundred and nineteen serum samples from four species of cetaceans and four species of pinnipeds were collected from 1985 to 2000 and tested for antibodies to Brucella sp. using the brucellosis card test, buffered acidified plate antigen test, and rivanol test. In addition, 20 of these were necropsied between 1998 and 2000, with lymphoid and visceral tissues cultured for Brucella sp. Three of 21 (14%) harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) and four of 53 (8%) harp seals (Phoca groenlandica) were seropositive. Brucella sp. was isolated from two of four (50%) harbor seals and three of nine (33%) harp seals. Of the five animals with positive cultures, two were seropositive and three seronegative. Brucella sp. was most frequently cultured from the lung and axillary, inguinal, and prescapular lymph nodes. Tissues from which Brucella sp. was isolated showed no gross or histopathologic changes. These results indicate that marine mammals stranded along the coast of southern New England can be exposed to and infected with Brucella sp.