MALDI-TOF MS与16S rDNA方法对 弧菌科微生物的鉴定与系统分类学分析

目的比较基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF MS)与16S rDNA方法对弧菌科微生物的鉴定及系统分类学分析能力。方法对19株弧菌科微生物,采用MALDI-TOF MS进行蛋白质图谱采集,通过对特征峰的分析,实现对微生物的鉴定和系统分类学分析;同时对19株微生物进行16S rDNA测序,用邻接法对16S rDNA序列进行鉴定和系统分类学分析,比较两种方法在弧菌科微生物鉴定和系统分类学分析中的异同。结果两种方法对19株弧菌科微生物的种属鉴定结果一致。系统分类学分析中,多株同种属的弧菌的两种方法分析结果一致,但对拟态弧菌和霍乱弧菌在树状图中的位置和亲缘关系,两种方法差异较大。结论 MALDI-TOF MS与16S rDNA均能够快速准确地鉴定弧菌科微生物,但利用MALDI-TOF MS进行系统分类学分析还有待数据库的扩大及算法的优化。

Comparison of MALDI-TOF MS vs 16S rDNA for identification and systematic taxonomic analysis of Vibrio microorganisms

Abstract: Objective To compare the performances of matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) vs 16S rDNA for the identification and systematic taxonomic analysis of Vibrio microorganisms. Methods 19 strains of Vibrio microorganisms were detected using MALDI-TOF MS to collect protein profiles. Microbial identification and systematic taxonomic analysis were carried out to compare and analyze the characteristic peaks. Meanwhile, the 19 Vibrio microorganisms were sequenced by using 16S rDNA for identification on the level of molecular biology, and phylogenetic tree analysis of the 16S rDNA sequences was realized with Neighbor-joining method. The similarities and differences between the two methods in the identification and systematic taxonomic analysis of Vibrio microorganisms were compared . Results The results of species identification by the two methods were consistent. Systematic taxonomic analysis showed that for the Vibrio strains of the same species, the results of the two methods were consistent, however, for the locations of and relationship between Vibrio mimius and Vibrio cholerae in the dendrograms, there were differences between the two methods. Conclusion Both MALDI-TOF MS and 16S rDNA can identify Vibrio microorganisms quickly and accurately, however, the system taxonomic analysis using MALDI-TOF MS has yet to expand the database and optimize the algorithm.