戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 cile by anaerobic culture, and performed PCR ribotyping.
2 hat afforded by plasmid profile analysis and ribotyping.
3 cile by anaerobic culture, and performed PCR ribotyping.
4 typed using high-throughput, fluorescent PCR ribotyping.
5 the potential to be an alternative to CE-PCR ribotyping.
6 analysis (MLVA) compared to typing using PCR ribotyping.
7 test using MLVA and in the control using PCR ribotyping.
8 y rate was 90%, yielding 11,294 isolates for ribotyping.
9 ormed by sequencing of the tcdC gene and PCR ribotyping.
10   All C. difficile strains were typed by PCR-ribotyping.
11 iginating from 26 countries were analyzed by ribotyping.
12 consistent with those of both emm typing and ribotyping.
13 staphylococcal (CoNS) isolates identified by ribotyping.
14 g pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) or ribotyping.
15 ce typing (using six housekeeping genes) and ribotyping.
16 tergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR, and automated ribotyping.
17 nal strain, all 90 isolates were analyzed by ribotyping.
18  the results of the Dienes test and those of ribotyping.
19 racterized by serotyping and automated EcoRI ribotyping.
20 ates were typed by polymerase chain reaction ribotyping.
21 pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and ribotyping.
22 olates was further differentiated with PvuII ribotyping.
23 nth period were typed by the Dienes test and ribotyping.
24 ans strains was evaluated by both AP-PCR and ribotyping.
25 que strains as judged by the Dienes test and ribotyping.
26 cible and could be used as an alternative to ribotyping.
27 t to least, plasmid profiling [40 types], PS ribotyping [34 types], and PFGE [23 types]).
28 ds were as follows: PFGE, 99.7%; MEE, 99.4%; ribotyping, 98.8%; MAb serotyping, 75.8%; MAb serotyping
29                   REA, slpAST, MLST, and PCR-ribotyping all included AP-B (toxinotype III, binary tox
30      Strains were also subjected to PFGE and ribotyping analysis.
31 typing, with 85 outbreaks being confirmed by ribotyping and 62 by MLVA.
32 monocytogenes isolates were characterized by ribotyping and allelic analysis of the virulence genes h
33 ates were typed by polymerase chain reaction-ribotyping and analyzed for the presence of toxin genes.
34 m a transtracheal swab was compared by using ribotyping and antibiotic susceptibility analyses.
35                                              Ribotyping and AP-PCR analysis confirmed a previous repo
36 etermined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ribotyping and endonuclease subtyping.
37     It was recently reported that both PvuII ribotyping and HinfI/DdeI restriction endonuclease analy
38 rsity within the C. diphtheriae species, and ribotyping and MEE data generally correlated well with e
39 ence in the mean turnaround time between the ribotyping and MLVA typing (13.6 and 5.3 days, respectiv
40 al and geographic diversity, were assayed by ribotyping and multilocus enzyme electrophoresis (MEE).
41      Routine polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ribotyping and multiple-locus variable-number tandem-rep
42             Fingerprinting of genomic DNA by ribotyping and PFGE produced a significant variation in
43 e finding that differences in the results of ribotyping and plasmid analysis change over time suggest
44  was more discriminatory than EcoRI or PvuII ribotyping and provided subtype data with better epidemi
45 stant isolates was investigated by automated ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE).
46                The isolates were subtyped by ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis.
47                                              Ribotyping and RAPD clearly demonstrated the household t
48  PFGE and AFLP were less discriminatory than ribotyping and RAPD.
49 kota isolates were indistinguishable by both ribotyping and RAPD.
50                                              Ribotyping and REA identified numerous, previously unrec
51                             A combination of ribotyping and serotyping showed that two bovine isolate
52 ed patients and characterized them using PCR-ribotyping and virulence factor analysis.
53                               Both PstI/SphI ribotyping and XbaI-PFGE provided a similar degree of st
54 ion was 0.980 for the Dienes test, 0.979 for ribotyping, and 0.992 for PFGE.
55 shable on multilocus enzyme electrophoresis, ribotyping, and DNA macrorestriction analysis.
56 AT probes was less discriminating than MLST, ribotyping, and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic co
57 group B isolates were typeable by PFGE, MEE, ribotyping, and ITS PCR-RFLP.
58  restriction fragment length polymorphism or ribotyping, and multilocus enzyme electrophoresis.
59     Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), ribotyping, and multilocus sequence typing are commonly
60 E), multilocus enzyme electrophoresis (MEE), ribotyping, and PCR-restriction fragment length polymorp
61           The methodologies for RAPD typing, ribotyping, and PFGE typing of C. diphtheriae strains we
62 d gel electrophoresis [PFGE], PstI/SphI [PS] ribotyping, and plasmid profiling).
63 g methods, such as serotyping, phage typing, ribotyping, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, can yi
64 olates by multilocus enzyme electrophoresis, ribotyping, and random amplified polymorphic DNA showed
65     Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), ribotyping, and repetitive extragenic palindromic sequen
66 rotyping, pulsed-field restriction analysis, ribotyping, and repetitive-sequence (BOX element) PCR.
67  dilution vancomycin susceptibility testing, ribotyping, and Sanger sequencing of the vancomycin resi
68 Restriction endonuclease analysis (REA), PCR ribotyping, and serogrouping differentiated 11, 4, and 3
69 popular C. difficile-typing technique is PCR ribotyping, and we previously developed methods using fl
70 avium and B. hinzii, although the results of ribotyping are more easily interpreted.
71                     Both the Dienes test and ribotyping are useful methods for identifying individual
72 eld gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and automated ribotyping by using HindIII and PvuII.
73 gree of diversity observed by PFGE, MEE, and ribotyping can be explained by the fact that isolates we
74 four other molecular subtyping methods: MEE, ribotyping (ClaI), random amplified polymorphic DNA assa
75 erior discriminatory performance of the PFGE-ribotyping combination was proven in two ways: (i) by de
76                 Our data show that (i) EcoRI ribotyping, combined with hylB and sodA sequencing, prov
77 (intergenic transcribed spacer PCR [ITS-PCR] ribotyping) could distinguish among type strains of the
78 iscrimination [D] = 0.995) than either EcoRI ribotyping (D = 0.950) or AscI or ApaI single-enzyme PFG
79 -style sequencer to generate fluorescent PCR ribotyping data.
80 cost-effective generation of fluorescent PCR ribotyping data.
81 pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), PCR ribotyping, detection of a binary toxin gene, and detect
82                                        EcoRI ribotyping differentiated 17 ribotypes, and DNA sequenci
83 e for identifying polymorphism was PstI-SphI ribotyping, distinguishing a total of 22 patterns, 10 of
84 le serotypes, demonstrating the potential of ribotyping for serotype prediction.
85 ntibiotic susceptibility, biochemical tests, ribotyping, genome restriction mapping, and multilocus s
86                                              Ribotyping identified 18 different strains among the 39
87 fficile typing platform that is based on PCR-ribotyping in conjunction with a semiautomated molecular
88                  Whole-genome sequencing and ribotyping indicated that the NAPCR1 variant belongs to
89                                              Ribotyping is a molecular method for the characterizatio
90           Capillary electrophoresis (CE)-PCR ribotyping is currently the gold standard for C. diffici
91                    The results revealed that ribotyping is highly discriminatory and reproducible and
92 o were examined by biotyping, PvuII and SmaI ribotyping, IS200 fingerprinting, and pulsed-field gel e
93 ction fragment length polymorphism analysis, ribotyping, IS200 typing, and PCR amplification of the f
94 th three well-established molecular methods (ribotyping, macrorestriction analysis of genomic DNA, an
95 ferences among isolates, and unlike PFGE and ribotyping, microarrays can be used to identify specific
96 ollowing order: MLVA, REA, PFGE, slpAST, PCR-ribotyping, MLST, and AFLP.
97             Four molecular subtyping methods-ribotyping, multilocus enzyme electrophoresis (MEE), ran
98                    The Clostridium difficile Ribotyping Network (CDRN) was established in 2007 as par
99                                              Ribotyping of IgA-coated cecal microbiota showed Proteob
100 of discrimination among isolates than either ribotyping or PFGE, although strain clustering was simil
101 accharomyces were shown to share the ITS-PCR ribotyping patterns of both parental species.
102                                              Ribotyping patterns using the restriction enzymes MaeI a
103                                    By use of ribotyping, plasmid content, and antibiotic susceptibili
104                  Typing was performed by PCR-ribotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and
105 comparison of four molecular typing methods (ribotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis [PFGE], ran
106 unction with other molecular techniques (16S ribotyping, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, and detect
107                                          PCR-ribotyping, REA, and PFGE provide different but overlapp
108 sity [D] = 0.98 and 0.94 for PFGE typing and ribotyping, respectively).
109 protein A gene sequence typing (slpAST), PCR-ribotyping, restriction endonuclease analysis (REA), mul
110 ethods, including phage typing (PT) (n = 7), ribotyping (RT) (n = 13), and pulsed-field gel electroph
111 ined by multilocus sequence analysis and PCR ribotyping; sequence type 37 (ST37)/ribotype 017 (RT017)
112                  The correlation between PCR-ribotyping, sequencing, and Xpert PCR for detection of N
113 presented herein, the combination of REA and ribotyping should provide valuable information in unders
114                               PFGE, MEE, and ribotyping showed greater discriminatory abilities than
115 ntly provided more discriminatory power than ribotyping, there were examples where the use of ribotyp
116 and seven cat isolates were characterized by ribotyping to determine whether the ribotypes of the cat
117 the restriction endonuclease XbaI, while for ribotyping, two restriction endonucleases (PstI and SphI
118 c DNA, plasmid profiling, protein profiling, ribotyping using 5S, 16S, and 23S rDNA probes, and polym
119                       Access to C. difficile ribotyping was associated with significant changes in th
120                                              Ribotyping was less sensitive than PFGE when applied to
121 typing, there were examples where the use of ribotyping was more discriminatory than REA.
122                                              Ribotyping was performed using the fully automated RiboP
123                                              Ribotyping was used to identify cultures and indicated d
124                          Capillary-based PCR ribotyping was used to quantify the presence/absence and
125 r biotype differentiation; however, PFGE and ribotyping were better (and equal to each other) at disc
126  indistinguishable by the Dienes test and/or ribotyping were characterized further by pulsed-field ge
127  pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and ribotyping, were used to characterize 207 Escherichia co
128                                          PCR ribotyping, whole-genome sequencing, and phenotypic assa
129                                    Automated ribotyping with HindIII is an accurate method for geneti
130 criminatory ability of MLVA was greater than ribotyping, with 85 outbreaks being confirmed by ribotyp
131 es (88.8%) matched patient stool isolates by ribotyping, without significant difference by treatment.

 
Page Top