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 takes 2-3 days, excluding sample preparation.

15 PFGE types associated with community transmission only p

16 PFGE was significantly more discriminatory (Simpson's in

17 PFGE, AFLP, and MLVA grouped two, one, and two different

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

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

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

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

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

23 Spatial analysis of 13 PFGE types occurring >5 times showed that two PFGE types

24 were USA300 (49%) and USA100 (13%), with 27 PFGE groups overall; 71% of the isolates were staphyloco

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

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

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

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

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

30 %-28.8%) of MRSA-colonized persons carried a PFGE type associated with community transmission.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

39 All isolates were typeable with MLVA and PFGE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

61 30%) represented a single clade identical by PFGE, SCRA, and DL, decreasing specificity.

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

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

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

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

66 ive of 42 isolates were indistinguishable by PFGE.

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

68 % similarity to all case patient isolates by PFGE.

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

70 strains, and VRSA isolates are polyclonal by PFGE.

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

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

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

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

75 High genetic diversity was revealed by PFGE and MLST.

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

77 ndistinguishable from the outbreak strain by PFGE.

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

79 Only one MRSA isolate was USA300 by PFGE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

86 re discrimination between outbreaks than did PFGE.

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

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

89 y prospective surveillance and had different PFGE patterns.

90 appeared genetically diverse (ten different PFGE types).

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

92 ing isolates in the group containing diverse PFGE types.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 lates, the pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) groups detected were USA300 (49%) and USA100 (13%)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

147 describes pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), a method developed for separation of large DNA mo

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

214 ith specific sources, including one and four PFGE types, respectively, associated with human clinical

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

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

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

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

219 Our data indicate that (i) PFGE is highly discriminatory for the subtyping of L. mo

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

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

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

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

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

232 L. monocytogenes, (ii) some L. monocytogenes PFGE types are associated with specific sources, and (ii

233 fic sources, and (iii) some L. monocytogenes PFGE types are widely distributed and appear to be stabl

234 Isolates demonstrated multiple PFGE patterns and uniform susceptibility to ciprofloxaci

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

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

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

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

239 rentiation capabilities that exceed those of PFGE and MLVA.

240 patient, with results comparable to those of PFGE.

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

242 orted relatedness of these isolates based on PFGE.

243 37 case isolates had an identical pattern on PFGE, and all were nalidixic acid resistant.

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

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

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

247 PmeI PFGE patterns for the clinical isolates were indistingui

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

249 200, USA600, and USA900 were the predominant PFGE types among MSSA isolates in both the 2001 to 2002

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

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

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

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

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

255 Seven PFGE types showed significant associations with specific

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

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

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

259 Strains showed very similar PFGE patterns.

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

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

262 fragments up to approximately 50 kb in size, PFGE fractionates DNA molecules up to 10 Mb.

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

264 also trapped within wells under the standard PFGE conditions.

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

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

267 (SCCmec) typing but less discriminatory than PFGE.

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

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

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

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

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

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

274 The PFGE DNA fragment size differences in these isolates cou

275 The PFGE profiles indicated the presence of two clonal group

276 The PFGE profiles of the CEM09 isolates were indistinguishab

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

287 ern diversity between VNTR types compared to PFGE.

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

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

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

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

292 FGE types occurring >5 times showed that two PFGE types were specific to a single processing facility

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