Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The aim of the present study was: - to compare methods for concentration and isolation of Legionella DNA from water; - to examine the efficacy of various modifications of PCR test (PCR, semi-nested PCR, and real-time PCR) for the detection of known numbers of Legionella pneumophila in water samples artificially contaminated with the strain of this bacterium and in randomly selected samples of environmental water, in parallel with examination by culture. It was found that filtration is much more effective than centrifugation for the concentration of DNA in water samples, and that the Qiamp DNA Mini-Kit is the most efficient for isolation of Legionella DNA from water. The semi-nested PCR and real-time PCR proved to be the most sensitive methods for detection of Legionella DNA in water samples. Both PCR modifications showed a high correlation with recovery of Legionella by culture (p<0.01), while no correlation occurred between the results of one-stage PCR and culture (p>0.1).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!