Comparison of the Bruker MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry system and conventional phenotypic methods for identification of Gram-positive rods
In recent years, MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry (MS) method has emerged as a promising and a reliable tool for bacteria identification. In this study we compared Bruker MALDI-TOF MS and conventional phenotypic methods to identify a collection of 333 Gram-positive clinical isolates comprising 22 genera...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2014-09, Vol.9 (9), p.e106303-e106303 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e106303 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | e106303 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 9 |
| creator | Barberis, Claudia Almuzara, Marisa Join-Lambert, Olivier Ramírez, María Soledad Famiglietti, Angela Vay, Carlos |
| description | In recent years, MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry (MS) method has emerged as a promising and a reliable tool for bacteria identification. In this study we compared Bruker MALDI-TOF MS and conventional phenotypic methods to identify a collection of 333 Gram-positive clinical isolates comprising 22 genera and 60 species. 16S rRNA sequencing was the reference molecular technique, and rpoB gene sequecing was used as a secondary gene target when 16Sr RNA did not allow species identification of Corynebacterium spp. We also investigate if score cut-offs values of ≥ 1,5 and ≥ 1,7 were accurate for genus and species-level identification using the Bruker system. Identification at species level was obtained for 92,49% of Gram-positive rods by MALDI-TOF MS compared to 85,89% by phenotypic method. Our data validates the score ≥ 1,5 for genus level and ≥ 1,7 for species-level identification in a large and diverse collection of Gram-positive rods. The present study has proved the accuracy of MALDI-TOF MS as an identification method in Gram-positive rods compared to currently used methods in routine laboratories. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0106303 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1559779781</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_2800717940bd4bd8914826aea68a6ca7</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>1560582931</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a656b09c6f97ec725cae5a77bb7a201a106c1772232036da8436924483496c863</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptks1u1DAUhSMEoj_wBggssekmg__tbJDagZaRBnVT1taN43Q8JHGwk5HmDXhsEmZatYiVLfu75557dbLsHcELwhT5tA1j7KBZ9KFzC0ywZJi9yE5JwWguKWYvn9xPsrOUthgLpqV8nZ1QQTSngp9mv5eh7SH6FDoUajRsHLqK408X0ffL9ZdVfnd7jVpICaXe2SGG1g1xj9I-Da5F0FXIhm7nusGHyQvqN64Lw773Fk3gJlQJ1SEiX81E7S3M3NznJkKb9yH5we8cihP4JntVQ5Pc2-N5nv24_nq3_Javb29Wy8t1bgWVQw5SyBIXVtaFclZRYcEJUKosFVBMYNqDJUpRyqaxZQWaM1lQzjXjhbRasvPsw0G3b0IyxyUmQ4QolCqUJhOxOhBVgK3po28h7k0Ab_4-hHhvIA7eNs5QjbEiquC4rHhZ6YJwTSU4kBqkBTVpfT52G8vWVXbaQ4Tmmejzn85vzH3YGU4Ek2y2e3EUiOHX6NJgWp-saxroXBhn3xILTQs2-_74D_r_6fiBsjGkFF39aIZgMwfrocrMwTLHYE1l758O8lj0kCT2B90GzQw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1559779781</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the Bruker MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry system and conventional phenotypic methods for identification of Gram-positive rods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>Barberis, Claudia ; Almuzara, Marisa ; Join-Lambert, Olivier ; Ramírez, María Soledad ; Famiglietti, Angela ; Vay, Carlos</creator><creatorcontrib>Barberis, Claudia ; Almuzara, Marisa ; Join-Lambert, Olivier ; Ramírez, María Soledad ; Famiglietti, Angela ; Vay, Carlos</creatorcontrib><description>In recent years, MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry (MS) method has emerged as a promising and a reliable tool for bacteria identification. In this study we compared Bruker MALDI-TOF MS and conventional phenotypic methods to identify a collection of 333 Gram-positive clinical isolates comprising 22 genera and 60 species. 16S rRNA sequencing was the reference molecular technique, and rpoB gene sequecing was used as a secondary gene target when 16Sr RNA did not allow species identification of Corynebacterium spp. We also investigate if score cut-offs values of ≥ 1,5 and ≥ 1,7 were accurate for genus and species-level identification using the Bruker system. Identification at species level was obtained for 92,49% of Gram-positive rods by MALDI-TOF MS compared to 85,89% by phenotypic method. Our data validates the score ≥ 1,5 for genus level and ≥ 1,7 for species-level identification in a large and diverse collection of Gram-positive rods. The present study has proved the accuracy of MALDI-TOF MS as an identification method in Gram-positive rods compared to currently used methods in routine laboratories.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106303</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25184254</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Bacteria ; Bacterial Typing Techniques ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Clinical isolates ; Collection ; Corynebacterium ; Desorption ; DNA, Bacterial - genetics ; Gene sequencing ; Gram-Positive Bacteria - classification ; Gram-Positive Bacteria - genetics ; Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification ; Humans ; Identification methods ; Ions ; Laboratories ; Lasers ; Mass spectrometry ; Mass spectroscopy ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Ribonucleic acid ; RNA ; RNA, Ribosomal, 16S - genetics ; Rods ; RpoB protein ; rRNA 16S ; Species ; Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization - methods ; Spectroscopy</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2014-09, Vol.9 (9), p.e106303-e106303</ispartof><rights>2014 Barberis et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2014 Barberis et al 2014 Barberis et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a656b09c6f97ec725cae5a77bb7a201a106c1772232036da8436924483496c863</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a656b09c6f97ec725cae5a77bb7a201a106c1772232036da8436924483496c863</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153636/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4153636/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79343,79344</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25184254$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Barberis, Claudia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almuzara, Marisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Join-Lambert, Olivier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramírez, María Soledad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Famiglietti, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vay, Carlos</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the Bruker MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry system and conventional phenotypic methods for identification of Gram-positive rods</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>In recent years, MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry (MS) method has emerged as a promising and a reliable tool for bacteria identification. In this study we compared Bruker MALDI-TOF MS and conventional phenotypic methods to identify a collection of 333 Gram-positive clinical isolates comprising 22 genera and 60 species. 16S rRNA sequencing was the reference molecular technique, and rpoB gene sequecing was used as a secondary gene target when 16Sr RNA did not allow species identification of Corynebacterium spp. We also investigate if score cut-offs values of ≥ 1,5 and ≥ 1,7 were accurate for genus and species-level identification using the Bruker system. Identification at species level was obtained for 92,49% of Gram-positive rods by MALDI-TOF MS compared to 85,89% by phenotypic method. Our data validates the score ≥ 1,5 for genus level and ≥ 1,7 for species-level identification in a large and diverse collection of Gram-positive rods. The present study has proved the accuracy of MALDI-TOF MS as an identification method in Gram-positive rods compared to currently used methods in routine laboratories.</description><subject>Bacteria</subject><subject>Bacterial Typing Techniques</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Clinical isolates</subject><subject>Collection</subject><subject>Corynebacterium</subject><subject>Desorption</subject><subject>DNA, Bacterial - genetics</subject><subject>Gene sequencing</subject><subject>Gram-Positive Bacteria - classification</subject><subject>Gram-Positive Bacteria - genetics</subject><subject>Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Identification methods</subject><subject>Ions</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Lasers</subject><subject>Mass spectrometry</subject><subject>Mass spectroscopy</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Ribonucleic acid</subject><subject>RNA</subject><subject>RNA, Ribosomal, 16S - genetics</subject><subject>Rods</subject><subject>RpoB protein</subject><subject>rRNA 16S</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization - methods</subject><subject>Spectroscopy</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptks1u1DAUhSMEoj_wBggssekmg__tbJDagZaRBnVT1taN43Q8JHGwk5HmDXhsEmZatYiVLfu75557dbLsHcELwhT5tA1j7KBZ9KFzC0ywZJi9yE5JwWguKWYvn9xPsrOUthgLpqV8nZ1QQTSngp9mv5eh7SH6FDoUajRsHLqK408X0ffL9ZdVfnd7jVpICaXe2SGG1g1xj9I-Da5F0FXIhm7nusGHyQvqN64Lw773Fk3gJlQJ1SEiX81E7S3M3NznJkKb9yH5we8cihP4JntVQ5Pc2-N5nv24_nq3_Javb29Wy8t1bgWVQw5SyBIXVtaFclZRYcEJUKosFVBMYNqDJUpRyqaxZQWaM1lQzjXjhbRasvPsw0G3b0IyxyUmQ4QolCqUJhOxOhBVgK3po28h7k0Ab_4-hHhvIA7eNs5QjbEiquC4rHhZ6YJwTSU4kBqkBTVpfT52G8vWVXbaQ4Tmmejzn85vzH3YGU4Ek2y2e3EUiOHX6NJgWp-saxroXBhn3xILTQs2-_74D_r_6fiBsjGkFF39aIZgMwfrocrMwTLHYE1l758O8lj0kCT2B90GzQw</recordid><startdate>20140903</startdate><enddate>20140903</enddate><creator>Barberis, Claudia</creator><creator>Almuzara, Marisa</creator><creator>Join-Lambert, Olivier</creator><creator>Ramírez, María Soledad</creator><creator>Famiglietti, Angela</creator><creator>Vay, Carlos</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140903</creationdate><title>Comparison of the Bruker MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry system and conventional phenotypic methods for identification of Gram-positive rods</title><author>Barberis, Claudia ; Almuzara, Marisa ; Join-Lambert, Olivier ; Ramírez, María Soledad ; Famiglietti, Angela ; Vay, Carlos</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c526t-a656b09c6f97ec725cae5a77bb7a201a106c1772232036da8436924483496c863</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Bacteria</topic><topic>Bacterial Typing Techniques</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Clinical isolates</topic><topic>Collection</topic><topic>Corynebacterium</topic><topic>Desorption</topic><topic>DNA, Bacterial - genetics</topic><topic>Gene sequencing</topic><topic>Gram-Positive Bacteria - classification</topic><topic>Gram-Positive Bacteria - genetics</topic><topic>Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Identification methods</topic><topic>Ions</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Lasers</topic><topic>Mass spectrometry</topic><topic>Mass spectroscopy</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Ribonucleic acid</topic><topic>RNA</topic><topic>RNA, Ribosomal, 16S - genetics</topic><topic>Rods</topic><topic>RpoB protein</topic><topic>rRNA 16S</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization - methods</topic><topic>Spectroscopy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Barberis, Claudia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almuzara, Marisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Join-Lambert, Olivier</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramírez, María Soledad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Famiglietti, Angela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vay, Carlos</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Journals</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Barberis, Claudia</au><au>Almuzara, Marisa</au><au>Join-Lambert, Olivier</au><au>Ramírez, María Soledad</au><au>Famiglietti, Angela</au><au>Vay, Carlos</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the Bruker MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry system and conventional phenotypic methods for identification of Gram-positive rods</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2014-09-03</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>e106303</spage><epage>e106303</epage><pages>e106303-e106303</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>In recent years, MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry (MS) method has emerged as a promising and a reliable tool for bacteria identification. In this study we compared Bruker MALDI-TOF MS and conventional phenotypic methods to identify a collection of 333 Gram-positive clinical isolates comprising 22 genera and 60 species. 16S rRNA sequencing was the reference molecular technique, and rpoB gene sequecing was used as a secondary gene target when 16Sr RNA did not allow species identification of Corynebacterium spp. We also investigate if score cut-offs values of ≥ 1,5 and ≥ 1,7 were accurate for genus and species-level identification using the Bruker system. Identification at species level was obtained for 92,49% of Gram-positive rods by MALDI-TOF MS compared to 85,89% by phenotypic method. Our data validates the score ≥ 1,5 for genus level and ≥ 1,7 for species-level identification in a large and diverse collection of Gram-positive rods. The present study has proved the accuracy of MALDI-TOF MS as an identification method in Gram-positive rods compared to currently used methods in routine laboratories.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>25184254</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0106303</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2014-09, Vol.9 (9), p.e106303-e106303 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1559779781 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| subjects | Bacteria Bacterial Typing Techniques Biology and Life Sciences Clinical isolates Collection Corynebacterium Desorption DNA, Bacterial - genetics Gene sequencing Gram-Positive Bacteria - classification Gram-Positive Bacteria - genetics Gram-Positive Bacteria - isolation & purification Humans Identification methods Ions Laboratories Lasers Mass spectrometry Mass spectroscopy Medicine and Health Sciences Ribonucleic acid RNA RNA, Ribosomal, 16S - genetics Rods RpoB protein rRNA 16S Species Spectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization - methods Spectroscopy |
| title | Comparison of the Bruker MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry system and conventional phenotypic methods for identification of Gram-positive rods |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T16%3A47%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20Bruker%20MALDI-TOF%20mass%20spectrometry%20system%20and%20conventional%20phenotypic%20methods%20for%20identification%20of%20Gram-positive%20rods&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Barberis,%20Claudia&rft.date=2014-09-03&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=e106303&rft.epage=e106303&rft.pages=e106303-e106303&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0106303&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_plos_%3E1560582931%3C/proquest_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1559779781&rft_id=info:pmid/25184254&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_2800717940bd4bd8914826aea68a6ca7&rfr_iscdi=true |