Microbiology Research - Academic Journals

More documents

Recommendations

Info

5218 Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. Table 2. Estimation of matrix genetic distances between the 6 isolates with enset clones studied using RAPD. ORI-S DEG-S SSP19 SSP2 SSP7 SSP21 ORI-S 0.0000 DEG-S 0.3026 0.0000 SSP19 0.3765 0.2834 0.0000 SSP2 0.4656 0.4890 0.4534 0.0000 SSP7 0.3865 0.4374 0.4777 0.4889 0.0000 SSP21 0.3906 0.4009 0.4656 0.3684 0.4089 0.0000 Figure 2. UPGMA dendrogram calculated from RAPD profiles in enset, based on matrix genetic distances among the 6 isolates. The shortest distance, 0.2834, was between SSP19 and Deg-S, followed by ORI-S and DEG-S (0.3026). These genetic distances and phenotypes were positively correlated. For example, ORI-S and DEG-S (0.3026) have the same colony and both of them can produce perithecial stromata. SSP19 and ORI-S (0.3765), SSP19 and DEG-S (0.2834) also have shorter distance along with their same colony characteristics. Based on the analysis of all primers, the average genetic distances between ORI-S and no fruiting isolates, DEG-S and no fruiting isolates, ORI-S and DEG-S, and the all no fruiting isolates were 0.4048, 0.4027, 0.3026, and 0.4438, respectively. The average distance of 0.4438 between no fruiting isolates showed higher diversity than those of others. These results also indicated that innerspecies genetic diversity of C. militaris was indeed high. Cluster analysis A dendrogram (Figure 2) was constructed using UPGMA program based on the matrix of genetic distance among the 6 isolates in which ORI-S, DEG-S, SSP7 and SSP19 formed one cluster, while SSP2 and SSP21 formed another. Within these two clusters, SSP19 and DEG-S are more closely related isolates. This result correlated well with phenotype similarity coefficients. PCR-based assay of the genotype MAT1-2 and fruiting The primer sets of MAT1-1-1 and MAT1-2-1 used in this study (Yokoyama et al., 2004) could amplify the MAT1-1- 1 gene of the 11 isolates and the MAT1-2-1 gene of the 13 isolates of C. militaris with a molecular weight of 220 to 250 bp respectively (Table 3, Figure 3). These results indicated that ORI-S, DEG-S, SSP1 and SSP3 which produced perithecial stromata possessed both MAT1-1-1 and MAT1-2-1 genes namely the genotype MAT1-1/2. While the other isolates which could not produce stromata possessed only either MAT1-1-1 or MAT1-2-1 namely the genotype MAT1-1 or MAT1-2. Isolates ORI-S and DEG-S, which were not derived
Table 3. Fruiting-body formation and mating type test of C. militaris. Strain Mating type Fruit body formation* Fruit body dry weight (g/bottle) † ORI-S MAT1-1/2 10/10 2.37 DEG-S MAT1-1/2 10/10 1.92 SSP1 MAT1-1/2 8/10 2.13 SSP3 MAT1-1/2 6/10 1.42 SSP5 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP6 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP8 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP9 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP10 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP12 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP14 MAT1-1 No fruiting 0 SSP2 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP4 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP7 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP11 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP13 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP15 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP16 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP19 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 SSP21 MAT1-2 No fruiting 0 * Fruiting-body formation was examined in 10 trials. † Values are mean of all fruiting-body formation determinations. Figure 3. Results of PCR assay for the MAT1-2-1(A) and MAT1-1-1 (B) genes. The PCR products were electrophoresed on a 1.5% agarose gel. Lane M is a 100bp DNA ladder (Fermentas, Burlington, Canada). Lanes 1 to 20 show the PCR products of MAT1-2-1(A) and MAT1-1-1 (B) genes from C. militaris isolates ORI-S, DEG-S, SSP9, SSP2, SSP6, SSP4, SSP5, SSP7, SSP10, SSP16, SSP1, SSP11, SSP13, SSP12, SSP15, SSP8, SSP19, SP14, SSP21 and SSP3, respectively. Wen et al. 5219
Page 1 and 2:
African Journal of Microbiology Res
Page 3 and 4:
Editors Prof. Dr. Stefan Schmidt Ap
Page 5 and 6:
Electronic submission of manuscript
Page 7 and 8:
Fees and Charges: Authors are requi
Page 9 and 10:
nces Table of Contents: Volume 6 Nu
Page 11 and 12:
Table of Contents: Volume 6 Number
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Table 1. Overview of the Soil prope
Page 17 and 18:
exactly. MICROBIAL BIOMASS IN ORGAN
Page 19 and 20:
Table 3. Advantages and disadvantag
Page 21 and 22:
analysis of polymerase chain reacti
Page 23 and 24:
Enzyme assay Triplicate samples of
Page 25 and 26:
Figure 2. Effect of a) incubation t
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Table 2. Plasmid profile. Emerenini
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Table 1. Properties and identity of
Page 35 and 36:
more understandable by the fact tha
Page 37 and 38:
fertilizers considered the most imp
Page 39 and 40:
Table 3. Effect of NPK levels and s
Page 41 and 42:
Table 4. Effect of NPK levels and s
Page 43 and 44:
Table 5. Effect of NPK levels and f
Page 45 and 46:
with mineral NPK on wheat plant. Eg
Page 47 and 48:
to synthetic antibiotics. In spite
Page 49 and 50:
Among these, the K. pneumonia and V
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 5. Pseudomonas aeruginosa An
Page 53 and 54:
pathogens of their environment (She
Page 55 and 56:
cultivable indigenous fishes of Ind
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Table 1. Oxidative stress parameter
Page 61 and 62:
of tularemia. Ann N Y Acad. Sci., 1
Page 63 and 64:
al., 1998; Heubuelt 1929) have alre
Page 65 and 66:
Table 2. Influence of organic compo
Page 67 and 68:
NO2 NO2 Zare et al. 5131 Figure 4.
Page 69 and 70:
Sundermeyer-Klinger H, Meyer W, War
Page 71 and 72:
Table 1. Composition of Mueller-Hin
Page 73 and 74:
dose level, and is effective antibi
Page 75 and 76:
wearing a mask is useful during the
Page 77 and 78:
Novel Swine-Origin Influenza A H1N1
Page 79 and 80:
that it produces lactic acid, bacte
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 2. DMRT Graph, effect of var
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Bacillus colony Fig 1. Colony morph
Page 87 and 88:
thuringiensis isolate S1 (Figure 6)
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Figure 1. The Kinetic of P. aerugin
Page 93 and 94:
Figure 3. DNA-dosimeter determined
Page 95 and 96:
Relative Fluorescence Unit Figure 4
Page 97 and 98:
Conclusion The public health risk i
Page 99 and 100:
general are members of the normal i
Page 101 and 102:
Table 2. Distribution of Nosocomial
Page 103 and 104: and also to assess the influence of
Page 105 and 106: Table 1. List of decamers used in R
Page 107 and 108: Figure 2. RAPD profile of Fusarium
Page 109 and 110: African Journal of Microbiology Res
Page 111 and 112: Table 1. Biosurfactant production p
Page 113 and 114: Figure 3. The correlation of reduct
Page 117 and 118: To estimate the water content, stra
Page 119 and 120: Kraiem et al. 5183 Table 2. Effect
Page 121 and 122: log CFU/g log CFU/g log CFU/g 8.5 7
Page 123 and 124: delays to cooling and wrapping on s
Page 125 and 126: pilus (tcp) that is a subtle of pol
Page 127 and 128: protein. DISCUSSION 70 kda 60 kda 5
Page 131 and 132: Percentage repellency (%) Percentag
Page 133 and 134: Fumigant toxicity of essential oils
Page 135 and 136: Table 1. Primers used for PCR and s
Page 137 and 138: Table 3. Amino acid substitutions i
Page 139 and 140: composition in qnrB alleles. Althou
Page 143 and 144: Figure 1. Overview the Yongxing isl
Page 145 and 146: standard, XSLJ1, XSLJ2, XSLJ5, XSLJ
Page 147 and 148: Table 1. primer information: sequen
Page 149 and 150: conventional method. The reasons fo
Page 153: Figure 1. Comparison of amplificati
Page 157 and 158: Yokoyama E, Yamagishi K, Hara A (20
Page 159 and 160: Table 1. Primer oligonucleotide seq
Page 161 and 162: Figure 2. Nucleotide and putative a
Page 163 and 164: Figure 6. Ghrelin expression induce
Page 167 and 168: Table 1. The SNPs related to the pr
Page 169 and 170: Figure 2. The phylogenetic trees of
Page 171 and 172: a c Rex DNA Tang et al. 5235 Figure
Page 175 and 176: Table 1. Gender and division wise d
Page 177 and 178: 62% were genotype D, A (14%), C (6%
Page 181 and 182: Swimming time (s) 1000 800 600 400
Page 183 and 184: Hepatic glycogen (mg/g) Hemoglobin
Page 187 and 188: Table 2. Sporulation index. Sign In
Page 189 and 190: Table 4. Conidial size of different
Page 191 and 192: Table 6. Sporulation of Alternaria
Page 193 and 194: Table 7. Reaction of different geno
Page 197 and 198: Table 2. Susceptibility of the clin
Page 199 and 200: Table 4. Aminoglycoside resistance
Page 201 and 202: Young, and the Councils on Clinical
Page 203 and 204: oleaginous microorganisms have been
Page 205 and 206:
Table 2. Actual and predicted value
Page 207 and 208:
Table 4. Analysis of variance (ANOV
Page 209 and 210:
Huang et al. 5273 Figure 3. Respons
Page 211 and 212:
the Central Universities (Grant No.
Page 213 and 214:
Figure 1. Mechanism of enzymatic co
Page 215 and 216:
Enzymatic activity (U/mL) Enzymatic
Page 217 and 218:
prunin so far. By using the HPLC me
Page 219 and 220:
Figure 7. Enzymatic conversion of n
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
vaccine, HBs-Ab is negative in all
Page 225 and 226:
Conferences and Advert August 2012
show all

Microbiology Research - Academic Journals

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?