Comparisons of Pasteurella multocida lipopolysaccharides by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis to determine relationship between group B and E hemorrhagic septicemia strains and serologically related group A strains

43Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Lipopolysaccharides (LPSs) purified from 16 reference somatic serotypes of Pasteurella multocida were examined and compared by discontinuous sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Resolution of LPS patterns in a gel was optimum when sample wells were cast separately from the stacking gel and the running gel consisted of 15% T (total monomer) polyacrylamide and 4 M deionized urea. Band patterns of P. multocida LPSs in a gel differed from control Salmonella minnesota wild-type and core mutant LPSs. Although the band patterns and mobilities of LPSs from some P. multocida reference serotypes were similar, none were identical. Evidence for O antigens similar to those produced by enterobacteria was not observed. Proteinase K digestion of whole P. multocida cells resulted in LPS band patterns similar to those of purified LPS. The presence or absence of a capsule on a strain had no major influence on band patterns in sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Comparisons of LPS patterns of group B and E hemorrhagic septicemia strains with those of serologically related group A strains of P. multocida indicated that they were similar. Typing antisera made with purified serotype 2 or 5 LPS reacted with electroblots of all these strains. However, the reactions did not distinguish strains as being serotype 2 or 5.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rimler, R. B. (1990). Comparisons of Pasteurella multocida lipopolysaccharides by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis to determine relationship between group B and E hemorrhagic septicemia strains and serologically related group A strains. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 28(4), 654–659. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.28.4.654-659.1990

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free