ライフサイエンスコーパス: PFGE

1 PFGE analysis showed indistinguishable patterns in 11 cl

2 PFGE and AFLP were less discriminatory than ribotyping a

3 PFGE and CGH analyses of representative strains further

4 PFGE and MLVA patterns identified several possible clust

5 PFGE and rep-PCR provide comparable genotyping results f

6 PFGE and whole-genome mapping were concordant with 22 of

7 PFGE demonstrated a predominant clone of S. epidermidis

8 PFGE did not delineate a homogeneous group of MRSA genet

9 PFGE displayed similar DNA patterns between isolates fro

10 PFGE profiles were generated by use of six restriction e

11 PFGE provided the highest discriminatory power (D = 0.87

12 PFGE revealed most isolates with the same VNTR type to b

13 PFGE revealed that clinical isolates from pigs were more

14 PFGE types associated with community transmission only p

15 PFGE was performed on 38 human and 10 puppy isolates; PF

16 PFGE was significantly more discriminatory (Simpson's in

17 PFGE, MLVF, and MLVA resolved 66 (Simpson's index of div

18 PFGE-ready samples of DNA restriction digests can be pro

19 n (PFGE NAP7 and REA type BK), and type 106 (PFGE NAP11 and REA type DH).

20 Molecular analyses identified 11 PFGE profiles (Centers for Disease Control and Preventio

21 Molecular analyses identified 11 PFGE profiles (Centers for Disease Control and Preventio

22 Nine toxinotypes (TOX) and 31 PFGE patterns were identified.

23 ad a composite genotype profile of MLST ST 5-PFGE USA100-unknown spa type, which has been reported am

24 e pvl gene, and USA types 100, 300, and 700 (PFGE strain types commonly found in the United States) w

25 ile the second isolate carried the MLST ST 8-PFGE USA300-spa type t121 genotype, commonly identified

26 and was then applied to a database of 45,923 PFGE patterns, randomly selected from all submissions to

27 %-28.8%) of MRSA-colonized persons carried a PFGE type associated with community transmission.

28 e patients who acquired IRPA, 46 (31%) had a PFGE pattern similar to that for another isolate, and 38

29 ne additional retail beef MRSA isolate had a PFGE pattern similar to that of a human MRSA isolate, wh

30 i, which can provide discrimination within a PFGE cluster.

31 s denied exposure to either source, although PFGE and multiple-locus variable-number tandem-repeat an

32 ns, including the J strain (ribotype 001 and PFGE NAP2), the toxin A-negative 017 strain (PFGE NAP9 a

33 AFLP and PFGE showed that the isolates from humans and chicken me

34 MLST and PFGE demonstrated a capsular switching from CPS type III

35 n outbreak strain as those found by MLST and PFGE.

36 clustered as a distinct group by rep-PCR and PFGE together with the M. massiliense type strain.

37 nt with those for repetitive-element PCR and PFGE.

38 ulture, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and PFGE.

39 RAPD and PFGE showed that the 24 strains were a genetically diver

40 PCR-ribotyping, REA, and PFGE provide different but overlapping patterns of strai

41 e same antimicrobial susceptibility, ST, and PFGE pattern but could be discriminated based on CRISPR

42 sier and faster than PFGE, is as accurate as PFGE, and does not require sequencing.

43 In addition, the correspondence between PFGE, multilocus sequence types (MLSTs), and rtxA gene s

44 ing analysis, and it bridges the gap between PFGE ( approximately 20 bands sorted by size) and whole-

45 e potential predictive relationships between PFGE banding patterns and particular serotypes.

46 combines the information obtained from both PFGE and MLVA assays to assess epidemiological relations

47 otential outbreaks of MRSA in hospitals, but PFGE provides better discrimination of potential outbrea

48 ty improvements and declining incidence, but PFGE provides limited genetic resolution.

49 By PFGE typing, there were 24 different strain types, and 4

50 ited States; 37 (84%) were strain USA 300 by PFGE.

51 randomly chosen and subjected to analysis by PFGE, RAPD, and AFLP.

52 as then randomly chosen and characterized by PFGE, RAPD, and AFLP.

53 Transmission confirmed by PFGE occurred in 2 (1.5%) of 133 contact patients, after

54 uish the 10 outbreak isolates, as defined by PFGE and epidemiological data, from a collection of 20 S

55 different plasmid profiles, as determined by PFGE and PCR, were isolated from the same tick and vary

56 Strain relatedness data determined by PFGE and WGS roughly correlated, but the resolution of W

57 30%) represented a single clade identical by PFGE, SCRA, and DL, decreasing specificity.

58 Different genotypes identified by PFGE underwent species identification using a 16S rRNA g

59 ifferent K. kingae clones were identified by PFGE, of which 5 (B, H, K, N, and P) caused 72.9% of all

60 Four genotypic clusters were identified by PFGE; of the four clusters, clonal type B was predominan

61 of isolates which were indistinguishable by PFGE were nonclonal by WGS.

62 ive of 42 isolates were indistinguishable by PFGE.

63 f typhoid fever and subtyping of isolates by PFGE resulted in rapid detection of an outbreak associat

64 % similarity to all case patient isolates by PFGE.

65 of isolate pairs considered nonidentical by PFGE were clonal by WGS.

66 strains, and VRSA isolates are polyclonal by PFGE.

67 Analysis of the 15q11-q13 region by PFGE also revealed a polymorphic region between BP1 and

68 l isolates classified as clonally related by PFGE with the same type.

69 rom the same patients were highly related by PFGE, but isolates from different patients were not, sug

70 aline flush syringes were closely related by PFGE, identifying contaminated flushes as the outbreak s

71 ike) allele demonstrated <50% relatedness by PFGE.

72 High genetic diversity was revealed by PFGE and MLST.

73 m closely related NSTs were often similar by PFGE profile as well, further corroborating the applicab

74 ndistinguishable from the outbreak strain by PFGE.

75 one was an unrelated DL type) were typed by PFGE.

76 Only one MRSA isolate was USA300 by PFGE.

77 es appear predominantly to be highly clonal, PFGE had a relatively higher discriminatory power (discr

78 Among the hospital outbreak clusters, PFGE and DL identified the same "unrelated" organism in

79 ->PFGE) = 0.06; adjusted Wallace coefficient(PFGE --> repPCR) = 0.52) between the two methods was low

80 E up to 99% and 96% for five-enzyme combined PFGE for S. enterica serovar Enteritidis and S. enterica

81 te means of identifying the next most common PFGE-based backgrounds, USA100 and USA500.

82 We compared PFGE with a number of other methods of genotyping in a s

83 re discrimination between outbreaks than did PFGE.

84 They belonged to 3 different PFGE types: USA100 (n = 1), USA400 (n = 5), and USA500 (

85 d to our previous analyses, and 62 different PFGE patterns.

86 y prospective surveillance and had different PFGE patterns.

87 appeared genetically diverse (ten different PFGE types).

88 ported previously on a highly discriminatory PFGE-based subtyping scheme for S. enterica serovar Ente

89 nd swine identified isolates with a distinct PFGE profile that were significantly under-represented i

90 ing isolates in the group containing diverse PFGE types.

91 EMRSA-16, and 24 MRSA isolates with diverse PFGE patterns) was investigated.

92 e-induced nicks are prone to breakage during PFGE.

93 applied to representative isolates (of each PFGE subtype and isolation year) of a collection of 48 h

94 nalyzed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) after digestion of genomic DNA with restriction en

95 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis revealed a diverse population of MSSA str

96 ylotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis, sequence typing, and virulence gene prof

97 ated using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis.

98 s, such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and 7-gene multilocus sequence typing (MLST), prov

99 ntified by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and confirmed by multiple-locus variable-number ta

100 terized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and emm typing.

101 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) were perfor

102 respect to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multilocus sequence typing (MLST) revealed a h

103 ared using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multilocus sequence typing.

104 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multilocus variable number tandem repeat analy

105 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multiple-locus variable-number tandem-repeat a

106 than with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and other methodologies.

107 h included pulsed-filed gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and PCR for Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL), the

108 notyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and PCR for pvl and 31 other putative virulence de

109 e combined pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and Southern hybridization for detection of genes

110 ion of GES, pulse-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and WGS for the second cluster.

111 s, such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and whole-genome sequencing.

112 diversity, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and/or enterobacterial repetitive intergenic conse

113 USA300 by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) are the predominant strain type in these infection

114 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) clonal type USA200 is the most widely disseminated

115 ncing, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) DNA fingerprinting.

116 s based on pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) fingerprints.

117 digestion pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) for typing S. aureus Forty-two S. aureus isolates

118 gene, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) genotyping were done.

119 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) has been the gold standard approach but is impract

120 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) is a common method used to type methicillin-resist

121 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) is a standard typing method for isolates from Salm

122 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) is considered the "gold standard" for molecular ep

123 andard" of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) is time-consuming and complex.

124 Pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) offers a high-resolution approach to quantify chro

125 paring its pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) or multilocus sequence typing profiles to that of

126 nalyzed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) or used in applications requiring submegabase DNA

127 d the same pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pattern, suggesting clonal spread.

128 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) patterns of the six VREF isolates were >/=80% simi

129 ly similar pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) patterns.

130 different pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) profiles were analyzed by using multilocus sequenc

131 of raccoon pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pulse type data with the Pennsylvania Department o

132 e outbreak pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pulsotype.

133 typing by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) revealed clonal relatedness with the strain from t

134 ble, novel pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) subtyping pattern.

135 typing and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) subtyping.

136 to compare pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) to the combination of ribosomal spacer PCR (RS-PCR

137 The pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) type was determined for all MRSA isolates.

138 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was applied as a first-line approach, followed by

139 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was performed on isolates from cases and suspect p

140 ping using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was performed on VRSA isolates.

141 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was performed to test genetic relatedness.

142 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) was used to type 128 Streptococcus infantarius sub

143 g SmaI and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) were both used to analyze 33 C. jejuni isolates ob

144 esting and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) were performed on Salmonella Typhi isolates.

145 ening, and pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) were performed to further characterize the strains

146 apping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) with isolates from an outbreak of Salmonella enter

147 By pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), 8 of 10 environmental M. porcinum were determined

148 equencing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and a mouse infection model were used to study ge

149 ical lab), pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and an antibiotic susceptibility profile (AB).

150 ng (MLST), pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and array-based comparative genomic hybridization

151 ification, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and multilocus sequence typing (MLST) to characte

152 y testing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and multilocus sequence typing (MLST) were perfor

153 (rep-PCR), pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and multilocus sequence typing (MLST).

154 C) clones, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and public array comparative genomic hybridizatio

155 ibotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) of wh

156 nd SCCmec, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and spa typing.

157 on of GES, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and WGS for the second cluster.

158 ST typing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and whole genome sequencing.

159 equencing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), cultures of the ink and ingredients used in the p

160 technique, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), is laborious and insufficient for discriminating

161 d by using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and clustered

162 FDA using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and serotyping

163 ermined by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and staphyloco

164 s included pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus variable number tandem repeat analysis

165 analysis, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), polymerase chain reaction, and pertactin gene seq

166 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), ribotyping, and repetitive extragenic palindromic

167 e typed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), screened for multiple toxin genes, and tested for

168 c) typing, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), spa typing, and Panton-Valentine leukocidin PCR.

169 terized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) t

170 ined using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), Staphylococcus protein A (spa) typing, multilocus

171 Using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), the number of patients who acquired IRPA as a res

172 cation and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), we sought to identify possible clonal isolates of

173 s, such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), were critical in detecting outbreaks that led to

174 another by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), were obtained from eight hamsters from a Minnesot

175 p-PCR) and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), which showed the characteristic clonal groups for

176 ermined by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), with onset during 2010.

177 number of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE)-defined types.

178 AFLP), and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

179 yping, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

180 e typed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

181 (MLST) and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

182 btyping by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

183 tigated by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

184 bjected to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

185 ngible for pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

186 ompared to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

187 notyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

188 nerated by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

189 ined using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

190 y MLST and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

191 ) and (ii) pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

192 strains is pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

193 ermined by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

194 MLST), and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

195 , and (iv) pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

196 erns after pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

197 data from pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

198 ng method, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

199 ermined by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

200 e typed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

201 bility and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

202 uated with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

203 -MVLST and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).

204 s, such as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE); however, conventional multilocus sequence typing

205 terized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE); SCCmec typing; susceptibility to 15 antimicrobial

206 linked (by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis [PFGE]) isolates.

207 latedness (pulsed-field gel electrophoresis [PFGE]) remains essentially unchanged 20 years after its

208 echnology (pulsed-field gel electrophoresis [PFGE]) to shotgun sequencing of the entire genome (whole

209 onal MLST, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis [PFGE], and single-nucleotide variant [SNV] analysis).

210 ibotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis [PFGE], random amplification of polymorphic DNA [RAPD], a

211 increased from 81% and 41% for single-enzyme PFGE up to 99% and 96% for five-enzyme combined PFGE for

212 Thirteen established PFGE types were recognized among these isolates, althoug

213 iminatory power values were 1.0 and 0.46 for PFGE and RS-PCR, respectively.

214 sults suggest how to optimize conditions for PFGE when quantifying chromosomal fragmentation induced

215 is involves generating distance matrices for PFGE data (Dice coefficients) and MLVA data (single-step

216 uence (adjusted Wallace coefficient(repPCR-->PFGE) = 0.06; adjusted Wallace coefficient(PFGE --> repP

217 as none of the retail pork MRSA isolates had PFGE patterns similar to those of human MRSA isolates.

218 a with the Pennsylvania Department of Health PFGE database revealed that the patterns of seven Salmon

219 However, PFGE showed more pattern diversity than did DL, suggesti

220 he 38-patient subset, 28 (74%) had identical PFGE patterns.

221 ition, a further 29 EMRSA-15s with identical PFGE patterns from two geographically linked but epidemi

222 MLVA resolved the 29 isolates with identical PFGE patterns into seven and six subtypes, respectively.

223 MRSA isolates were found to be identical in PFGE pattern, ST, and spa type to two human clonal MRSA

224 All clone SA isolates examined, including PFGE-matched human isolates, belong to sequence type 8 (

225 n with paired isolates had indistinguishable PFGE patterns and identical antimicrobial susceptibility

226 GAS colonies with indistinguishable PFGE patterns corresponding to emm subtype 1.0 were isol

227 performed on 38 human and 10 puppy isolates; PFGE patterns did not reliably predict clustering by cgM

228 f a nonserotyped Salmonella isolate from its PFGE pattern, random forest classification provided bett

229 common REA groups, and 187 (54%) were known PFGE types.

230 The combined SmaI and KpnI PFGE pattern designations of clone SA from sheep were in

231 The profiles obtained by macrorestriction PFGE were largely in concordance with the MLST results,

232 All three classification methods (PFGE only, MLVA only, and fusion) produced a similar pat

233 Isolates demonstrated multiple PFGE patterns and uniform susceptibility to ciprofloxaci

234 temporal scale and showed that the fusion of PFGE and MLVA data produced the best discrimination of i

235 Our analysis shows that the fusion of PFGE and MLVA data provides an improved ability to discr

236 One hundred five MRSA isolates of PFGE types USA100 to USA1100 and the Brazilian clone, fr

237 ntine leukocidin, while common among MRSA of PFGE type USA300, was rare among MSSA USA300 in both tim

238 rentiation capabilities that exceed those of PFGE and MLVA.

239 patient, with results comparable to those of PFGE.

240 otocol includes descriptions of two types of PFGE instrumentation (not commercially available), along

241 orted relatedness of these isolates based on PFGE.

242 37 case isolates had an identical pattern on PFGE, and all were nalidixic acid resistant.

243 Thirty-one PFGE types were found, with the most common types, CDC01

244 from whom E. coli O157:H7 with the outbreak PFGE pattern was cultured during July-August 2011, and p

245 had >/= 1 sample positive with the outbreak PFGE pattern.

246 PmeI PFGE patterns for the clinical isolates were indistingui

247 d for organisms belonging to the predominant PFGE clones isolated from asymptomatic carriers and pati

248 200, USA600, and USA900 were the predominant PFGE types among MSSA isolates in both the 2001 to 2002

249 Molecular analyses demonstrated remarkable PFGE strain diversity, with multiple mechanisms and mole

250 sequencing of 4 CC138 isolates representing PFGE clones with different invasive-disease potentials r

251 ble to discriminate isolates within the same PFGE clonal group.

252 Strains belonging to the same PFGE clone, either carried asymptomatically or causing d

253 Using the scheme PFGE-MLVA-MLST-prn mutations-Prn deficiency, the 240 iso

254 CC138, a common CC, was divided into several PFGE patterns, partly explained by number, location, and

255 analyzed FQ(R) C. coli isolates had similar PFGE (pulsed field gel electrophoresis) patterns and the

256 tical virulence genotypes and highly similar PFGE profiles, consistent with cross-species exchange of

257 Strains showed very similar PFGE patterns.

258 ates belonged to ST1751 and had very similar PFGE patterns.

259 , from South Korea, and belonged to a single PFGE type.

260 Six SmaI PFGE groups were detected, with one predominant group re

261 also trapped within wells under the standard PFGE conditions.

262 PFGE NAP2), the toxin A-negative 017 strain (PFGE NAP9 and REA type CF), the 078 animal strain (PFGE

263 AP9 and REA type CF), the 078 animal strain (PFGE NAP7 and REA type BK), and type 106 (PFGE NAP11 and

264 (SCCmec) typing but less discriminatory than PFGE.

265 strain comparison is easier and faster than PFGE, is as accurate as PFGE, and does not require seque

266 LST yielded higher discriminatory power than PFGE, MLVA outperformed the other methods in delineating

267 the commercial rep-PCR has less utility than PFGE in small-scale epidemiological assessments of MRSA

268 e a limited geographic distribution and that PFGE is more discriminatory than RS-PCR performed with c

269 ngle-nucleotide resolution demonstrates that PFGE is prone to false-positive and false-negative resul

270 Together, these data indicate that PFGE coupled with sufficient enzyme numbers and combinat

271 The PFGE DNA fragment size differences in these isolates cou

272 The PFGE profiles indicated the presence of two clonal group

273 The PFGE profiles of the CEM09 isolates were indistinguishab

274 The PFGE, MLVA, and MLST profiles were consistent with the p

275 encing of hsp65, recA, and rpoB revealed the PFGE outbreak clones to have identical sequences, while

276 ty than was initially assumed, splitting the PFGE-associated outbreak isolates into 4 groups, 2 of wh

277 While the PFGE patterns tended to cluster within each hospital, se

278 e resistance (Mtr), were segregated with the PFGE cluster and not with the VR type.

279 data were not always in concordance with the PFGE data, and some isolates containing the same bla(OXA

280 Here we show that isolates with this PFGE profile form a distinct phylogenetic sub-clade with

281 The isolates spanned three PFGE macrorestriction profile groups, groups 37, 38, and

282 VF would be the most suitable alternative to PFGE for hospital outbreak investigations.

283 R-MVLST could be a complementary approach to PFGE subtyping for S. Newport.

284 TLST was also comparable to PFGE for establishing short-term epidemiological relatio

285 MLVF was comparable to PFGE for resolving the EMRSA-15s but had a lower discrim

286 ern diversity between VNTR types compared to PFGE.

287 In contrast to PFGE, WGS phylogenetic analysis refuted an epidemiologic

288 In contrast to PFGE, WGS phylogenetic analysis refuted an epidemiologic

289 l of 26 of 29 clinical isolates subjected to PFGE (including isolates from all positive patients) wer

290 and Choleraesuis (n = 8), were subjected to PFGE, and their profiles were analyzed by random forest

291 and nucleotide positions were not unique to PFGE type, nor were they clustered in time.

292 We compared WGS to PFGE for investigating presumptive outbreaks involving t

293 olates, 83.2% (432/519) exhibited the USA300 PFGE genotype and 89.1% (465/522) were pvl positive.

294 Using PFGE, MLST, and spa typing, three retail beef MRSA isola

295 to be genetically distinct when typed using PFGE.

296 While PFGE is state-of-the-art, interlaboratory comparisons ar

297 All WGM agreed with PFGE.

298 tegorize isolates from common lineages, with PFGE being reserved for fine-scale typing.

299 le-number tandem-repeat analysis (MLVA) with PFGE for subtyping these highly clonal MRSA lineages.

300 repetitive-element PCR (rep-PCR) system with PFGE in a sample of 86 unique MRSA isolates recovered fr