The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Quantitative Detection of Listeria monocytogenes and Listeria innocua by Real-Time PCR: Assessment of hly , iap , and lin02483 Targets and AmpliFluor Technology
Open accessAbstract
We developed and assessed real-time PCR (RTi-PCR) assays for the detection and quantification of the food-borne pathogen Listeria monocytogenes and the closely related nonpathogenic species L. innocua . The target genes were hly and iap for L. monocytogenes and lin02483 for L. innocua . The assays were 100% specific, as determined with 100 Listeria strains and 45 non- Listeria strains, and highly sensitive, with detection limits of one target molecule in 11 to 56% of the reactions with purified DNA and 3 CFU in 56 to 89% of the reactions with bacterial suspensions. Quantification was possible over a 5-log dynamic range, with a limit of 15 target molecules and R 2 values of >0.996. There was an excellent correspondence between the predicted and the actual numbers of CFU in the samples (deviations of <23%). The hly -based assay accurately quantified L. monocytogenes in all of the samples tested. The iap -based assay, in contrast, was unsuitable for quantification purposes, underestimating the bacterial counts by 3 to 4 log units in a significant proportion of the samples due to serovar-related target sequence variability. The combination of the two assays enabled us to classify L. monocytogenes isolates into one of the two major phylogenetic divisions of the species, I and II. We also assessed the new AmpliFluor technology for the quantitative detection of L. monocytogenes by RTi-PCR. The performance of this system was similar to that of the TaqMan system, although the former system was slightly less sensitive (detection limit of 15 molecules in 45% of the reactions) and had a higher quantification limit (60 molecules).
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
Cited by
Pan, Y., & Breidt, F. (2007) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.01198-07 · Cited by 269
Hurtado, A., Ocejo, M., & Oporto, B. (2017) · Veterinary Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2017.09.003 · Cited by 49
Pérez-Baltar, A., Alía, A., Rodríguez, A., Córdoba, J. J., Medina, M., & Montiel, R. (2020) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods9081092 · Cited by 14
Boers, S. A., van Houdt, R., van Sorge, N. M., Groot, J., van Aarle, Y., van Bussel, M. J. A. W. M., Smit, L. F. E., Wessels, E., & Claas, E. C. J. (2024) · European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1007/s10096-024-04751-9 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Rodríguez-Lázaro, D., Hernández, M., Scortti, M., Esteve, T., Vázquez-Boland, J. A., & Pla, M.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2004-03
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1366-1377
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2160418859
- Cited by
- 246
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.98
- 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: Quantitative Detection of Listeria monocytogenes and Listeria innocua by Real-Time PCR: Assessment of hly , iap , and lin02483 Targets and AmpliFluor Technology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.70.3.1366-1377.2004
- The paper
- Rodríguez-Lázaro, D., Hernández, M., Scortti, M., Esteve, T., Vázquez-Boland, J. A., & Pla, M. (2004). Quantitative Detection of Listeria monocytogenes and Listeria innocua by Real-Time PCR: Assessment of hly , iap , and lin02483 Targets and AmpliFluor Technology. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.70.3.1366-1377.2004
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.