The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Application of 5′-Nuclease PCR for Quantitative Detection of Listeria monocytogenes in Pure Cultures, Water, Skim Milk, and Unpasteurized Whole Milk
Open accessAbstract
PCR techniques have significantly improved the detection and identification of bacterial pathogens. Countless adaptations and applications have been described, including quantitative PCR and the latest innovation, real-time PCR. In real-time PCR, e.g., the 5′-nuclease chemistry renders the automated and direct detection and quantification of PCR products possible (P. M. Holland et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88:7276–7280, 1991). We present an assay for the quantitative detection of Listeria monocytogenes based on the 5′-nuclease PCR using a 113-bp amplicon from the listeriolysin O gene ( hlyA ) as the target. The assay was positive for all isolates of L. monocytogenes tested (65 isolates including the type strain) and negative for all other Listeria strains (16 isolates from five species tested) and several other bacteria (18 species tested). The application of 5′-nuclease PCR in diagnostics requires a quantitative sample preparation step. Several magnetic bead-based strategies were evaluated, since these systems are simple and relatively easy to automate. The combination of nonspecific binding of bacteria to paramagnetic beads, with subsequent DNA purification by use of the same beads, gave the most satisfactory result. The detection limit was approximately 6 to 60 CFU, quantification was linear over at least 7 log units, and the method could be completed within 3 h. In conclusion, a complete quantitative method for L. monocytogenes in water and in skimmed and raw milk was developed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Improved tools for biological sequence comparison.
Pearson, W. R., & Lipman, D. J. (1988) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.85.8.2444 · Cited by 11,227
Cited by
Pan, Y., & Breidt, F. (2007) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.01198-07 · Cited by 269
Goberna, M., Podmirseg, S. M., Waldhuber, S., Knapp, B. A., García, C., & Insam, H. (2011) · Applied Soil Ecology · doi:10.1016/j.apsoil.2011.07.007 · Cited by 138
Metadata
- Authors
- Nogva, H. K., Rudi, K., Naterstad, K., Holck, A., & Lillehaug, D.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2000-10
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 4266-4271
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W1976357307
- Cited by
- 256
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 11.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Application of 5′-Nuclease PCR for Quantitative Detection of Listeria monocytogenes in Pure Cultures, Water, Skim Milk, and Unpasteurized Whole Milk. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.66.10.4266-4271.2000
- The paper
- Nogva, H. K., Rudi, K., Naterstad, K., Holck, A., & Lillehaug, D. (2000). Application of 5′-Nuclease PCR for Quantitative Detection of Listeria monocytogenes in Pure Cultures, Water, Skim Milk, and Unpasteurized Whole Milk. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.66.10.4266-4271.2000
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.