Cited by 39Oral microbiology and periodontitis researchMicrobial infections and disease researchOral and gingival health research

Comparison of three molecular typing methods in studies of transmission of Porphyromonas gingivalis

van Steenbergen, T. J. M., Menard, C., Tijhof, C. J., Mouton, C., de Graaff, J.·1993·Journal of Medical Microbiology

Abstract

Porphyromonas gingivalis is associated strongly with severe periodontitis, but little information is available on possible transmission routes of this species. This study evaluated three DNA-based molecular typing methods for use in epidemiological surveys of P. gingivalis. In total, 32 isolates from eight married couples were investigated by: (i) restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) of whole chromosomal DNA; (ii) hybridisation of DNA fragments with ribosomal DNA (ribotyping); and (iii) amplification of DNA by the polymerase chain reaction with arbitrary primers (AP-PCR). The data obtained with the three methods were in broad agreement: in six of the eight couples, the isolates from husband and wife were indistinguishable, but isolates from unrelated individuals showed distinct types with all three methods. For some isolates, minor differences in REA pattern were obtained which could not be correlated with differences in ribotype or AP-PCR type. Ribotyping showed differences between isolates from one individual, which were indistinguishable with the other two methods. The patterns obtained with ribotyping or AP-PCR were simple in comparison to the relatively complex REA patterns. Although all three methods were concordant, AP-PCR was found to be the least time-consuming method. The data support the suggestion that P. gingivalis can be transmitted between spouses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1099/00222615-39-6-416

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 18 · Cited by 39

Authors
van Steenbergen, T. J. M., Menard, C., Tijhof, C. J., Mouton, C., & de Graaff, J.
Affiliations
Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Mouton, C.
Venue
Journal of Medical Microbiology
Published
1993-12-01
Volume
39
Issue
6
Pages
416-421
ISSN
  • 0022-2615 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-5644
OpenAlex
W2168674064
Cited by
39
References
18
Citations by year
2018: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Microbial infections and disease research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Oral and gingival health research
Keywords
Porphyromonas gingivalis, bacterial transmission, periodontitis, restriction endonuclease analysis, ribotyping, method comparison, epidemiological typing
MeSH terms
Prohibitins, Adult, Base Sequence, DNA, Bacterial, DNA, Ribosomal, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Molecular Sequence Data, Nucleic Acid Hybridization, Periodontitis, Restriction Mapping, Reproducibility of Results, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Bacteroidaceae Infections, Porphyromonas gingivalis, DNA Primers

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review