Online first
Current issue
Archive
Special Issues
About the Journal
Publication Ethics
Anti-Plagiarism system
Instructions for Authors
Instructions for Reviewers
Editorial Board
Editorial Office
Contact
Reviewers
All Reviewers
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
General Data Protection Regulation (RODO)
REVIEW PAPER
Methods of analysis of gut microorganism – actual state of knowledge
1
University of Medical Sciences, Department of Pediatric Gastroenterology & Metabolic Diseases, Poznań, Poland
2
Institute for Microecology Poznań, Poland
3
Departament of Biotechnology and Food Microbiology, Poznan University of Life Sciences, Poland
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2014;21(4):799-803
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Microbiota plays an integral part in maintaining organism homeostasis, through eliminat pathogens, anti-cancer activity, synthesis of digestive enzymes and vitamins, maintaining the continuity of the intestinal epithelium and stimulation of the gastrointestinal immune system, and encourage a quicker and more efficient immune response. Changes in the microbiota composition is often observed in patients with allergy, atopy, irritable bowel syndrome and other diseases, which is the reason for a growing interest in methods of identification of the gut microbial complex.
Objective:
The aim of the study was to compare the state of current knowledge about two methods used in the study of intestinal microorganisms complex: the traditional culture method and genetic analysis.
Description of the state of knowledge:
Both techniques have advantages and disadvantages. The biggest limitation of the culture method is its inability to detect a significant number of the intestinal microbes. Using the microbiological technique we can only detect identifiable bacteria that can be grown on available substrates. For an accurate quantitative and qualitative investigation of the total microbiota, the more expensive genetic method is required. Due to genetic analysis it is possible to identify the vast number of new microorganisms and identify the dominant bacterial groups in different parts of the gastrointestinal tract.
Summary:
Each of the presented techniques plays specific role in medicine and science. The combination of both methods may become a critical element for understanding the ecosystem of intestinal bacteria.
Microbiota plays an integral part in maintaining organism homeostasis, through eliminat pathogens, anti-cancer activity, synthesis of digestive enzymes and vitamins, maintaining the continuity of the intestinal epithelium and stimulation of the gastrointestinal immune system, and encourage a quicker and more efficient immune response. Changes in the microbiota composition is often observed in patients with allergy, atopy, irritable bowel syndrome and other diseases, which is the reason for a growing interest in methods of identification of the gut microbial complex.
Objective:
The aim of the study was to compare the state of current knowledge about two methods used in the study of intestinal microorganisms complex: the traditional culture method and genetic analysis.
Description of the state of knowledge:
Both techniques have advantages and disadvantages. The biggest limitation of the culture method is its inability to detect a significant number of the intestinal microbes. Using the microbiological technique we can only detect identifiable bacteria that can be grown on available substrates. For an accurate quantitative and qualitative investigation of the total microbiota, the more expensive genetic method is required. Due to genetic analysis it is possible to identify the vast number of new microorganisms and identify the dominant bacterial groups in different parts of the gastrointestinal tract.
Summary:
Each of the presented techniques plays specific role in medicine and science. The combination of both methods may become a critical element for understanding the ecosystem of intestinal bacteria.
REFERENCES (24)
1.
Marques TM, Wall R, Ross RP, Fitzgerald GF, Ryan CA, Stanton C. Programming infant gut microbiota: influence of dietary and environmental factors. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2010; 21(2): 149–156.
2.
O’Toole P.W., Claesson M.J. Gut microbiota: Changes throughout the lifespan from infancy to elderly. International Dairy Journal 2010; 20 (4): 281–291.
3.
Simon GL, Gorbach SL. Intestinal flora in health and disease. Gastroenterology 1984; 86(1):174–93.
4.
Boriello SP. The normal flora of the intestinal tract. In: Hart AL, Stagg AJ, Graffner H, Glise H, Falk P, Kamm EA (eds.). Gut Ecology. London; Martin Dunitz Ltd. p. 3–12.
5.
Fonty G. Digestive microbial ecology: structure, diversity and functions of microbial communities and factors affecting their balance and activities. Annual Scientific Exchange 2003 – Nutrition Group.
6.
Limmathurotsakul D, et al. Defining the true sensitivity of culture for the diagnosis of melioidosis using Bayesian latent class models. PLoS One. 2010; 30–5(8): e12485. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0012485.
7.
Merlino J, Leroi M, Bradbury R, Veal D, Harbour C. New Chromogenic Identification and Detection of Staphylococcus aureus and Methicillin-Resistant S. aureus. J Clin Microbiol. 2000; 38(6): 2378–2380;.
8.
Kuch A, Stefaniuk E, Ozorowski T, Hryniewicz W. New selective and differential chromogenic agar medium, chromID VRE, for screening vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus species. J Microbiol Methods. 2009; 77(1):124–126.
9.
Stewart E J. Bacteria Growing Unculturable. J Bacteriol. 2012; 194(16): 4151–4160.
10.
Macfarlane GT, Gibson GR, Cummings JH. Comparison of fermentation reactions in different regions of the human colon . Journal of Applied Microbiology 1992; 72(1): 57–64.
11.
Marteau P, Pochart P, Doré J, Béra-Maillet C, Bernalier A, Corthier G. Comparative study of bacterial groups within the human cecal and fecal microbiota. Appl Environ Microbiol 2001; 67: 4939–4942.
12.
Renesto P, Crapoulet N, Ogata H, La Scola B, Vestris G, Claverie JM, Raoult D. Genome-based design of a cell-free culture medium for Tropheryma whipplei. Lancet 2003; 362(9382): 447–449.
13.
Bäckhed F, Ley RE, Sonnenberg JL, Peterson DA, Gordon JI. Host-bacterial mutualism in the human intestine. Science 2005; 307: 1915–1920.
14.
Mullis K, Faloona F, Scharf S, Saiki R, Horn G, Erlich, H. Specific enzymatic amplification of DNA in vitro: the polymerase chain reaction. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium in Quantitative Biology 1986; 51: 263–273.
15.
Carey CM, Kirk JL, Ojha S, Kostrzynska M. Current and future uses of real-time polymerase chain reaction and microarrays in the study of intestinal microbiota, and probiotic use and effectiveness. Can J Microbiol. 2007; 53(5): 537–550.
16.
Kageyama A, Benno Y. Rapid detection of human fecal Eubacterium species and related genera by nested PCR method. Microbiol Immunol. 2001; 45(4): 315–318.
17.
Wang RF, Kim SJ, Robertson LH, Cerniglia CE. Development of a membrane-array method for the detection of human intestinal bacteria in fecal samples. Mol Cell Probes. 2002; 16(5): 341–350.
18.
Sip A, Krasowska M, Więckowicz M, Grajek WŁ. Metoda skriningu bakteriocynogennych bakterii fermentacji mlekowej. Żywność. Nauka. Technologia. Jakość 2009; 1(62), 5–26 (in Polish).
19.
Wagner M, Horn M, Daims H. Fluorescence in situ hybridization for the identification and characterization of prokaryotes. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2003; 6: 302–309.
20.
Handelsman J. Metagenomics: Application of Genomics to Uncultured Microorganisms. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 2004; 68(4): 69–685.
21.
Pareek CS, Smoczynski R, Tretyn A. Sequencing technologies and genome sequencing. J Appl Genet. 2011; 52(4): 413–435.
22.
Dave M, Higgins PD, Middha S, Rioux KP. The human gut microbiome: current knowledge, challenges, and future directions. Transl Res. 2012; 160(4): 246–257.
23.
Grölund MM, Lehtonen OP, Eerola E, Kero P. Fecal Microflora in Healthy Infants Born by Different Methods of Delivery: Permanent Changes in Intestinal Flora After Cesarean Delivery. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology & Nutrition 1999; 28(1): 19–25.
24.
Tazume S, Ozawa A, Yamamoto T, et al. Ecological Study on the Intestinal Bacterial Flora of Patients with Diarrhea. Clinical Infectious Diseases 1993; 16(Suppl 2): 77–82.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1898-2263 |
| ISSN: | 1232-1966 |
Improvement of visual identification of the journal - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher Education allocated to the activities of disseminating science.
Generation of the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
