The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Use of Ethidium Monoazide and PCR in Combination for Quantification of Viable and Dead Cells in Complex Samples
Open accessAbstract
The distinction between viable and dead cells is a major issue in many aspects of biological research. The current technologies for determining viable versus dead cells cannot readily be used for quantitative differentiation of specific cells in mixed populations. This is a serious limitation. We have solved this problem by developing a new concept with the viable/dead stain ethidium monoazide (EMA) in combination with real-time PCR (EMA-PCR). A dynamic range of approximately 4 log 10 was obtained for the EMA-PCR viable/dead assay. Viable/dead differentiation is obtained by covalent binding of EMA to DNA in dead cells by photoactivation. EMA penetrates only dead cells with compromised membrane/cell wall systems. DNA covalently bound to EMA cannot be PCR amplified. Thus, only DNA from viable cells can be detected. We evaluated EMA-PCR with the major food-borne bacterium Campylobacter jejuni as an example. Traditional diagnosis of this bacterium is very difficult due to its specific growth requirements and because it may enter a state where it is viable but not cultivable. The conditions analyzed included detection in mixed and natural samples, survival in food, and survival after disinfection or antibiotic treatment. We obtained reliable viable/dead quantifications for all conditions tested. Comparison with standard fluorescence-based viable/dead techniques showed that the EMA-PCR has a broader dynamic range and enables quantification in mixed and complex samples. In conclusion, EMA-PCR offers a novel real-time PCR method for quantitative distinction between viable and dead cells with potentially very wide application.
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
Molecular approaches to analysing the microbial composition of raw milk and raw milk cheese
Quigley, L., O'Sullivan, O., Beresford, T. P., Ross, R. P., Fitzgerald, G. F., & Cotter, P. D. (2011) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.08.001 · Cited by 261
Ongeng, D., Geeraerd, A. H., Springael, D., Ryckeboer, J., Muyanja, C., & Mauriello, G. (2015) · Critical Reviews in Microbiology · doi:10.3109/1040841x.2013.829415 · Cited by 73
Metadata
- Authors
- Rudi, K., Moen, B., Drømtorp, S. M., & Holck, A. L.
- Venue
- Applied and Environmental Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2005-02
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1018-1024
- ISSN
- 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5336
- OpenAlex
- W2010172501
- Cited by
- 390
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.19
- 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: Use of Ethidium Monoazide and PCR in Combination for Quantification of Viable and Dead Cells in Complex Samples. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.71.2.1018-1024.2005
- The paper
- Rudi, K., Moen, B., Drømtorp, S. M., & Holck, A. L. (2005). Use of Ethidium Monoazide and PCR in Combination for Quantification of Viable and Dead Cells in Complex Samples. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.71.2.1018-1024.2005
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.