Previous Article | Next Article 
Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, January 2000, p. 86-90, Vol. 7, No. 1
1071-412X/0/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Detection of Francisella tularensis in
Biological Specimens Using a Capture Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent
Assay, an Immunochromatographic Handheld Assay, and a PCR
Roland
Grunow,1,*
Wolf
Splettstoesser,1
Sahra
McDonald,2
Christian
Otterbein,1
Tom
O'Brien,3
Cecilia
Morgan,3
Jennifer
Aldrich,3
Erwin
Hofer,4
Ernst-Jürgen
Finke,1 and
Hermann
Meyer1
Institute of Microbiology, Federal Armed
Forces Medical Academy, 80937 Munich, Germany1;
Porton Down, Salisbury, United Kingdom2;
Naval Medical Research Institute, Bethesda,
Maryland3; and Federal Institute for
Control of Infectious Diseases of Animals, 2340 Mödling,
Austria4
Received 30 March 1999/Returned for modification 19 August
1999/Accepted 20 October 1999
 |
ABSTRACT |
The early detection of Francisella tularensis, the
causative agent of tularemia, is important for adequate treatment by
antibiotics and the outcome of the disease. Here we describe a new
capture enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cELISA) based on monoclonal antibodies specific for lipopolysaccharide (LPS) of Francisella tularensis subsp. holarctica and Francisella
tularensis subsp. tularensis. No cross-reactivity
with Francisella tularensis subsp. novicida,
Francisella philomiragia, and a panel of other possibly related bacteria, including Brucella spp.,
Yersinia spp., Escherichia coli, and
Burkholderia spp., was observed. The detection limit of the
assay was 103 to 104 bacteria/ml. This
sensitivity was achieved by solubilization of the LPS prior to the
cELISA. In addition, a novel immunochromatographic membrane-based
handheld assay (HHA) and a PCR, targeting sequences of the 17-kDa
protein (TUL4) gene of F. tularensis, were used in this
study. Compared to the cELISA, the sensitivity of the HHA was about 100 times lower and that of the PCR was about 10 times higher. All three
techniques were successfully applied to detect F. tularensis in tissue samples of European brown hares (Lepus
europaeus). Whereas all infected samples were recognized by the
cELISA, those with relatively low bacterial load were partially or not
detected by PCR and HHA, probably due to inhibitors or lack of
sensitivity. In conclusion, the HHA can be used as a very fast and
simple approach to perform field diagnosis to obtain a first hint of an
infection with F. tularensis, especially in emergent
situations. In any suspect case, the diagnosis should be confirmed by
more sensitive techniques, such as the cELISA and PCR.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Within the genus
Francisella there are two known species, Francisella
tularensis and Francisella philomiragia, which have a
16S rRNA gene sequence similarity of more than 98% (6).
F. tularensis, a gram-negative, small (0.2 to 0.7 by 0.2 µm) facultative intracellular bacterium, is distributed on all
continents of the northern hemisphere. At least four subspecies of
F. tularensis are known. Francisella tularensis
subsp. tularensis (or type A; predominantly found in North
America), Francisella tularensis subsp.
holarctica, and Francisella tularensis subsp.
mediaasiatica (both referred to as type B) cause the
zoonotic disease tularemia in humans and animals (5, 11,
17). Only a few cases of human tularemia-like disease caused by
the fourth subspecies, Francisella tularensis subsp.
novicida, have been described (10). Depending on
the site of entry and the predominant infectious or pathogenic process,
tularemia can clinically manifest as an ulceroglandular, glandular,
pulmonary, typhoidal, or ocular form. High fever and enlarged lymph
nodes are predominant symptoms.
More than 250 different animal species can be infected by F. tularensis. Small rodents are the main natural hosts (reservoir), and blood-sucking ectoparasites are the most important vectors. In
addition, the bacteria are quite stable in the environment under
humidified and cold conditions. Humans can acquire the infection through the bites of infected arthropods or after contact with infected
animals or contaminated water, food, dust, and aerosols (15,
17).
The detection of specific antibodies in serum is the most widely used
approach for routine laboratory diagnosis of tularemia. However,
antibodies to F. tularensis are not detected until 2 weeks
or more after infection (2, 12). An early identification of
the pathogen is important, as the course and the outcome of the disease
is mainly dependent on early and adequate antibiotic treatment. The
classical methods for identification of F. tularensis are
the isolation of the pathogen by cultivation with subsequent identification by agglutination or immunofluorescence assay. These methods are time-consuming and require intensive handling of the infectious agent. Antigen detection in urine and RNA hybridization of
wound specimens have also been used as diagnostic methods (7, 16). More recently, PCR has been applied for the detection of F. tularensis (6, 13, 18).
In this study we describe a highly sensitive capture enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay (cELISA) based on monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) and
compare it with an immunochromatographic membrane-based handheld assay
(HHA) and a PCR for detection of F. tularensis in naturally
infected hare tissues.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Bacteria.
The F. tularensis live vaccine strain
(LVS; ATCC 29684) was cultivated on cysteine-heart agar (Difco,
Augsburg, Germany) supplemented with 10% sheep blood. The bacterial
isolates from European brown hares (Lepus europaeus) were
obtained by direct cultivation on cysteine-heart agar as described
previously (9). The bacteria were identified as F. tularensis by specific antisera. The classification of these
isolates as F. tularensis subsp. holarctica was
done on the basis of resistance to erythromycin and acid formation from
glucose and maltose, as well as by the absence of utilization of
glycerol and saccharose (4, 14). The sources of other bacteria used in this study are listed in Table
1. All bacterial isolates used were
inactivated by 0.5 to 1.0% formalin at room temperature for 20 min,
washed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; pH 7.4) and adjusted to an
optical density at 560 nm (OD560) of 1.0. In the case of
F. tularensis, this OD corresponded to approximately 109 CFU/ml (data not shown).
Tissue samples.
Spleen, lung, and kidney specimens from
European brown hares found dead or ill during an F. tularensis epizootic period of tularemia in northeast Austria
during the spring of 1997 were investigated. The primary identification
of the bacteria was performed by direct cultivation and indirect
immunofluorescence assays, as well as by a slide agglutination assay
with a specific polyclonal antiserum as described elsewhere
(9).
Tissue samples (about 0.5 to 1.0 cm3) from the hares were
transferred to a fivefold volume of PBS and cut with scissors into small pieces. After a 5-min sedimentation of the remaining larger tissue particles, the supernatants were removed and stored frozen.
Extraction of LPS of F. tularensis.
The
lipopolysaccharide (LPS) antigen was solubilized by incubating isolated
bacteria (Table 1) or 0.5 ml of cut tissue samples in extraction buffer
(Abbott, Solna, Sweden) at a ratio of 1:5 and boiling them for 15 min.
Insoluble material was removed either by passing the suspension through
0.2-µm-pore-size filters or by centrifugation at 1,000 × g for 10 min. To create a standard curve, LPS was extracted from
109 bacteria (LVS) and serial dilutions were prepared
corresponding to an LPS content of 107 to 103
bacteria/ml.
Antibodies.
The MAbs directed against F. tularensis had been developed as described previously
(8). Selected MAbs were produced in serum-free medium at
concentrations of approximately 500 to 1,000 µg/ml with a Miniperm
bioreactor (Heraeus, Hanau, Germany). The MAb Ft-11 of immunoglobulin
G1 (IgG1) isotype was purified by protein A affinity chromatography by
a standard protocol and biotinylated with the Biotin Labeling kit
(Boehringer, Mannheim, Germany). The MAb Ft-27 of IgM isotype was
concentrated to 2 mg/ml by stirring it in a concentrator chamber
containing a 100-kDa cutoff filter membrane (Amicon, Gloucestershire,
United Kingdom) and was extensively dialyzed against PBS.
Western blotting.
Inactivated LVS samples were adjusted to
an OD560 of 2.5. The samples were mixed at a 1:2 ratio with
electrophoresis sample buffer (Novex, Frankfurt, Germany) and 5%
mercaptoethanol. After 15 min of boiling, the solution was centrifuged
for 20 min at 400 × g and submitted to sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis with a 4 to 20%
separating Tris-glycine gel (Novex). The gel was electrotransferred
onto a nitrocellulose membrane (0.45 µm) at 30 V for 1 h
(Novex). The membrane was blocked with 5% skim milk in Tris-buffered
saline (pH 8.1) overnight at 4°C. MAbs were incubated with membrane
strips at 5 µg/ml in PBS-10% goat serum at room temperature for
2 h. For specificity control, the MAbs were preincubated with PBS
or extracted LPS from various numbers of F. tularensis LVS
overnight at room temperature. After three washes, the membranes were
incubated with goat anti-mouse immunoglobulin-peroxidase (Dako,
Glostrup, Denmark) or goat anti-human immunoglobulin-peroxidase (Sigma,
St. Louis, Mo.) at room temperature for 1 h followed by substrate
reaction with precipitating tetramethylbenzidine (Seramun, Dolgenbrodt, Germany).
cELISA.
For cELISA, a 96-well microplate (Maxisorb; Nunc,
Roskilde, Denmark) was coated with 100 µl of the MAb Ft-27 at 10 µg/ml in carbonate buffer (pH 9.0) overnight. The plate was washed
and blocked at 37°C for 30 min with PBS containing 0.05% Tween 20 and 4% skim milk powder. Antigen was diluted in dilution buffer (PBS
with 0.05% Tween 20 and 2% skim milk) and incubated at 37°C for 60 min. After being washed, the bound antigen was incubated with 100 µl
of biotinylated Ft-11 per well at 2 µg/ml at 37°C for 60 min. After
being washed, 100 µl of streptavidin-peroxidase (Dako) diluted in
dilution buffer at 1:4,000 was added and incubated at 37°C for
another 60 min. The plate was washed, and 100 µl of tetramethylbenzine substrate (Seramun) was added and incubated at
37°C for 10 min. The OD was read with a photometer (Digiscan; AsysHitech, Eugendorf, Austria) at wavelengths of 450 and 620 nm as references.
Immunochromatographic HHA.
The HHAs and the antibodies used
to manufacture them were produced at the Naval Medical Research
Institute. This assay employs an affinity-purified polyclonal antibody
and a MAb with an isotype of IgG3. The specificity of the
MAb is for LPS of F. tularensis LVS.
The HHA used the same antigen preparations as were used for the cELISA.
Diluted samples were mixed at 1:2 in PBS containing 0.1% Triton X-100
and 0.1% sodium azide (pH 7.4). Two hundred microliters of the sample
was pipetted into the starting chamber of the device, where specific
gold-labeled MAbs were placed, and reacted with the F. tularensis antigen. Complexed and free antibodies migrated through
a nitrocellulose membrane by capillary forces. The detection window
contained a line of coated specific anti-F. tularensis
rabbit antibody and further downstream a control line of coated
anti-mouse immunoglobulin. The result was visually determined as a
relative intensity of the specific line after 15 min, when the control
line was completely developed (1).
Preparation of DNA and PCR.
In order to isolate DNA, two
different protocols for treatment of tissue and spiked serum samples
prior to PCR were assessed. For method A, a 400-µl aliquot of ground
tissue slurry or of spiked serum was mixed with 50 µl of TEN buffer
(100 mM Tris, 10 mM EDTA, 1 M NaCl, pH 8.0), 20 µl of SDS (20%
[wt/vol]), and 50 µl of proteinase K (1 mg/ml) and incubated at
56°C for 3 to 5 h. After two phenol extractions followed by two
extractions with chloroform-isoamyl alcohol (24:1), the DNA was ethanol
precipitated. The pellet was washed twice with 70% ethanol and
resuspended in 20 µl of water. Method B was applied for spiked serum
samples only. Lysis buffer (50 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% Tween 20 [pH
8.0]; 190 µl) and 10 µl of proteinase K (1 mg/ml) were added to
200 µl of spiked serum. Incubation at 56°C for 3 h was
followed by 10 min at 95°C to inactivate the proteinase K. The PCR
was performed as described by Sjöstedt (18) with 1 µl of DNA template prepared by either method A or B and 40 cycles of
amplification with primers specific for sequences of the gene encoding
a 17-kDa lipoprotein, TUL 4 (13). After amplification, 5 µl of each reaction mixture was analyzed on a 2% agarose gel.
 |
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
Development and evaluation of the cELISA.
Two specific murine
MAbs to F. tularensis (8), Ft-11 (IgG1) and Ft-27
(IgM), were utilized for the cELISA. Both MAbs reacted strongly with
the LPS of F. tularensis as shown by Western blot analysis
(Fig. 1). The reactivity of the MAbs
could be blocked by free LPS of F. tularensis in a
concentration-dependent fashion, indicating the specificity of the
binding. A key step in the configuration of the assay was the
extraction of the LPS from the bacteria. Compared to the crude
bacterial preparation, a 10-fold increase in sensitivity was achieved
with cELISA (Fig. 2). Furthermore, the
handling of infectious material was reduced by this first step of the
assay, as the LPS extraction was accompanied by inactivation of the
bacteria. This procedure was the method of choice, as it also allowed
the lysis of eukaryotic cells, which is important for the availability
of intracellularly localized bacteria.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Western blot of LPS-specific MAbs to F. tularensis. Whole bacterial antigen of F. tularensis
was separated by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis with 4 to 20%
Tris-glycine gel and blotted onto a nitrocellulose membrane. The MAbs
Ft-27 and Ft-11 were used at 5 µg/ml in PBS (A). For specificity
control, the MAbs were preincubated with extracted LPS from
104 (B), 106 (C), and 108 (D)
bacteria/ml (lane E, molecular mass markers).
|
|

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Comparison of detection of whole bacteria and extracted
LPS of F. tularensis by cELISA. Serial dilutions of whole
bacteria and extracted LPS antigen of F. tularensis LVS from
spiked PBS and pooled human sera were tested in the LPS-specific
cELISA. The results are given as OD450.
|
|
The sensitivity of the cELISA was proven with 26 strains of F. tularensis, including 3 reference strains obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), 8 strains of F. tularensis subsp. holarctica isolated from European
brown hares, and 13 strains of F. tularensis subsp.
tularensis (type A [Table 1]). All tested isolates of
F. tularensis except F. tularensis subsp.
novicida were recognized. This underlines the unique LPS
composition of both F. tularensis subsp.
holarctica and F. tularensis subsp. tularensis, which is different from that of F. tularensis subsp. novicida (3, 19). No
cross-reactivity with other tested bacteria, including
Brucella spp., E. coli serotypes O:118 and O:157,
and Yersinia spp., was observed. Therefore, a highly
sensitive and specific cELISA for the diagnosis of tularemia was developed.
Detection limits of cELISA, HHA, and PCR.
In order to compare
the sensitivities of the different assays used in this study, serial
dilutions of F. tularensis LVS were prepared in PBS and in
human sera from healthy donors, representing biological fluids which
could contain inhibiting factors for the assays. The detection limit of
the cELISA was 103 bacteria/ml in PBS and 104
bacteria/ml in human serum (Fig. 3). This
represents detecting 102 and 103 bacteria/100
µl of sample. Further evaluation of the assay has revealed that the
bacteria and the LPS antigen, respectively, could be detected in spiked
human urine, sputum, and stool with nearly the same sensitivity (data
not shown).

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Sensitivity of cELISA, HHA, and PCR for the detection of
F. tularensis. Serial dilutions of the solubilized LPS
antigen of F. tularensis in PBS and in pooled human normal
sera (NS-P) were tested in the specific cELISA (upper diagram). The
results are given as OD450. The same dilutions of bacteria
were tested in the immunochromatographic HHA and in the PCR (lower
table). The results are expressed as relative intensity of obtained
visible bands. +, light; ++, medium; +++, dark; neg, negative; n.t.,
not tested.
|
|
Using the same samples, the detection limit of the
immunochromatographic assay was 106 and 106 to
107 bacteria per ml of PBS or human serum, respectively
(Fig. 3). The required sample volume was 200 µl for this assay. The
sensitivity could be increased to about 1 log10 unit after an
extraction of LPS from bacteria, as used with the cELISA. Although the
assay was completed within 15 min, specimens containing a high
bacterial load produced a positive signal in less than 1 min. A longer
incubation time did not increase the sensitivity of the assay. This
assay is principally applicable to field diagnostic use due to its fast and easy performance.
In comparison, 102 bacteria/ml of PBS and 103
to 104 bacteria/ml of spiked serum, respectively, could be
detected with the TUL4-specific PCR (Fig. 3).
Detection of F. tularensis in tissue specimens.
For further evaluation, the assays were applied to detect and quantify
F. tularensis in tissue samples from dead or sick and killed
European brown hares (Table 2). The
bacteria were isolated by direct cultivation or were detected by
immunofluorescence from 14 samples from hares (no. 3 to 16) and were
classified as F. tularensis subsp. holarctica. In
one case (no. 17) tularemia was diagnosed serologically by a slide
agglutination assay. In two cases (no. 1 and 2) the bacteriological and
serological studies remained negative. Eleven of the animals (no. 3 to
13) showed pathomorphologic signs of an acute septicemic tularemia with
enlarged spleen. Pneumonia, pericarditis, or nephritis was observed in four animals (no. 14 to 17) and was considered to represent chronic forms of the disease. In 15 cases, spleen tissues were studied; in two
cases, kidney or lung, respectively, was available.
Two samples (no. 1 and 2) found to be negative after cultivation or by
the immunofluorescence technique were also found to be negative in all
three assays evaluated in this study. Fifteen of 15 tissue samples from
infected hares were also identified as positive in cELISA, revealing a
100% agreement with the first diagnosis. Eleven of 15 samples were
found to be positive with the HHA, and 13 of 15 samples were detected
by PCR. The bacterial load, calculated from the standard curve of LVS
created by the cELISA, had a broad range, between 108
bacteria and 105 bacteria/ml of suspended tissue. Negative
results with the HHA and PCR were obtained for tissue samples with a
low bacterial load from hares suffering from a chronic form of the
disease. The endpoint titers for the cELISA and PCR were quite similar, whereas those of the HHA were significantly lower. The reason for the
high sensitivity of the cELISA might be the high stability of LPS, as
has been previously experienced with long-term storage of LPS and from
studies of autolysated tissues (data not shown).
In conclusion, the HHA could be used as a field approach for the
diagnosis of tularemia in emergent situations due to its simple
application. However, because of its relatively low sensitivity, negative results obtained with this assay do not allow the exclusion of
tularemia. Therefore, each suspect sample should be investigated by
more sensitive laboratory methods, such as the highly sensitive cELISA
and PCR. Conventional diagnostic tools, such as cultivation, immunofluorescence, and agglutination assays, are less sensitive, more
time-consuming, and hazardous.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
As listed in Table 2, bacteria were kindly provided by A. Sjöstedt (FOA, Umea, Sweden) and B. Niederwöhrmeier (WIS,
Munster, Germany). We also thank Gudrun Zöller, Mandy Macholeth,
Ulli M. Hohenester, and Rudi Kühn for excellent technical
assistance, as well as Gale Brightwell and David Pulford (DERA Porton
Down, United Kingdom) for reviewing the English language.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute of
Microbiology, Federal Armed Forces Medical Academy, Neuherbergstr. 11, D-80937 Munich, Germany. Phone: 41-89-3168 3277. Fax: 49-89-3168 3292. E-mail: tbl01cn{at}mail.lrz-muenchen.de.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Burans, J.,
A. Keleher,
T. O'Brien,
J. Hager-Aldrich,
A. Plummer, and C. Morgan.
1996.
Rapid method for the diagnosis of Bacillus anthracis infection in clinical samples using a hand-held assay.
Salisbury Med. Bull. Special Suppl.
87:36-37.
|
| 2.
|
Carlsson, H. E.,
A. A. Lindberg,
G. Lindberg,
B. Hederstedt,
K. A. Karlsson, and B. O. Agell.
1979.
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for immunological diagnosis of human tularemia.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
10:615-621[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Cowley, S. C.,
S. V. Myltseva, and F. E. Nano.
1996.
Phase variation in Francisella tularensis affecting intracellular growth, lipopolysaccharide antigenicity and nitric oxide production.
Mol. Microbiol.
20:867-874[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Downs, C. M., and G. C. Bond.
1935.
Studies on the cultural characterization of Pasteurella tularense.
J. Bacteriol.
30:485-490[Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Evans, M. E.,
D. W. Gregory,
W. Schaffner, and Z. A. McGee.
1985.
Tularemia. A 30-year experience with 88 cases.
Medicine
64:251-269[Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Forsman, M.,
G. Sandström, and A. Sjöstedt.
1994.
Analysis of 16S ribosomal DNA sequences of Francisella strains and utilization for determination of the phylogeny of the genus and for identification of strains by PCR.
Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol.
44:38-46[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Forsman, M.,
K. Kuoppa,
A. Sjöstedt, and A. Tärnvik.
1990.
Use of RNA hybridization in the diagnosis of a case of ulceroglandular tularemia.
Eur. J. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
9:784-785.
|
| 8.
|
Greiser-Wilke, I.,
C. Soine, and V. Moenning.
1989.
Monoclonal antibodies reacting specifically with Francisella sp.
J. Vet. Med.
36:593-600.
|
| 9.
|
Hofer, E.,
H. Schildorfer,
J. Flatscher, and M. Müller.
1997.
Detection of tularemia in European brown hares (Lepus europaeus) in Austria.
Wien. Tierärztl. Monatsschr.
84:301-306.
|
| 10.
|
Hollis, D. G.,
R. E. Weaver,
A. G. Steigerwalt,
J. D. Wenger,
C. W. Moss, and D. J. Brenner.
1989.
Francisella philomiragia comb. nov. (formerly Yersinia philomiragia) and Francisella tularensis biogroup novicida (formerly Francisella novicida) associated with human disease.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
27:1601-1608[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 11.
|
Hornick, R. B., and H. T. Eigelsbach.
1966.
Aerogenic immunization of man with live tularemia vaccine.
Bacteriol. Rev.
30:532-538[Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Koskela, P., and A. Salminen.
1985.
Humoral immunity against Francisella tularensis after natural infection.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
22:973-979[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Long, G. W.,
J. J. Oprandy,
R. B. Narayanan,
A. H. Fortier,
K. R. Portier, and C. A. Nacy.
1993.
Detection of Francisella tularensis in blood by polymerase chain reaction.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:152-154[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 14.
|
Olsufjev, N. G., and I. S. Meshcheryakova.
1983.
Subspecific taxonomy of Francisella tularensis McCoy and Chapin 1912.
Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol.
33:872-874[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Olsufjev, N. G.
1974.
Tularemia.
Presented at the WHO Inter-regional traveling seminar on natural foci of zoonoses. Moscow, USSR.
|
| 16.
|
Sandström, G. E.,
H. Wolf-Watz, and A. Tärnvik.
1986.
Duct ELISA for detection of bacteria in fluid samples.
J. Microbiol. Methods
5:41-47.
|
| 17.
|
Sandström, G.
1994.
The tularemia vaccine.
J. Chem. Tech. Biotechnol.
59:315-320[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Sjöstedt, A.,
U. Eriksson,
L. Berglund, and A. Tärnvik.
1997.
Detection of Francisella tularensis in ulcers of patients with tularemia by PCR.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
35:1045-1048[Abstract].
|
| 19.
|
Vinogradov, E. V.,
A. S. Shashkov,
Y. A. Knirel,
N. K. Kochetkov,
N. V. Tochtamysheva,
S. F. Averin,
O. V. Goncharova, and V. S. Khlebnikov.
1991.
Structure of O-antigen of Francisella tularensis strain 15.
Carbohydr. Res.
214:289-297[CrossRef][Medline].
|
Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, January 2000, p. 86-90, Vol. 7, No. 1
1071-412X/0/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Porsch-Ozcurumez, M., Kischel, N., Priebe, H., Splettstosser, W., Finke, E.-J., Grunow, R.
(2004). Comparison of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay, Western Blotting, Microagglutination, Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay, and Flow Cytometry for Serological Diagnosis of Tularemia. CVI
11: 1008-1015
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Stenmark, S., Sjostedt, A.
(2004). Transfer of specific antibodies results in increased expression of TNF-{alpha} and IL12 and recruitment of neutrophils to the site of a cutaneous Francisella tularensis infection. J Med Microbiol
53: 501-504
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Golovliov, I., Baranov, V., Krocova, Z., Kovarova, H., Sjostedt, A.
(2003). An Attenuated Strain of the Facultative Intracellular Bacterium Francisella tularensis Can Escape the Phagosome of Monocytic Cells. Infect. Immun.
71: 5940-5950
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Peruski, A. H., Peruski, L. F. Jr.
(2003). Immunological Methods for Detection and Identification of Infectious Disease and Biological Warfare Agents. CVI
10: 506-513
[Full Text]
-
Tarnvik, A., Berglund, L.
(2003). Tularaemia. Eur Respir J
21: 361-373
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Emanuel, P. A., Bell, R., Dang, J. L., McClanahan, R., David, J. C., Burgess, R. J., Thompson, J., Collins, L., Hadfield, T.
(2003). Detection of Francisella tularensis within Infected Mouse Tissues by Using a Hand-Held PCR Thermocycler. J. Clin. Microbiol.
41: 689-693
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Ellis, J., Oyston, P. C. F., Green, M., Titball, R. W.
(2002). Tularemia. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
15: 631-646
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Garcia Del Blanco, N., Dobson, M. E., Vela, A. I., De La Puente, V. A., Gutierrez, C. B., Hadfield, T. L., Kuhnert, P., Frey, J., Dominguez, L., Rodriguez Ferri, E. F.
(2002). Genotyping of Francisella tularensis Strains by Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis, Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism Fingerprinting, and 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing. J. Clin. Microbiol.
40: 2964-2972
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Marik, P. E., Bowles, S.
(2002). Management of Patients Exposed to Biological and Chemical Warfare Agents. J Intensive Care Med
17: 147-161
[Abstract]
-
Farlow, J., Smith, K. L., Wong, J., Abrams, M., Lytle, M., Keim, P.
(2001). Francisella tularensis Strain Typing Using Multiple-Locus, Variable-Number Tandem Repeat Analysis. J. Clin. Microbiol.
39: 3186-3192
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Dennis, D. T., Inglesby, T. V., Henderson, D. A., Bartlett, J. G., Ascher, M. S., Eitzen, E., Fine, A. D., Friedlander, A. M., Hauer, J., Layton, M., Lillibridge, S. R., McDade, J. E., Osterholm, M. T., O'Toole, T., Parker, G., Perl, T. M., Russell, P. K., Tonat, K., for the Working Group on Civilian Biodefense,
(2001). Tularemia as a Biological Weapon: Medical and Public Health Management. JAMA
285: 2763-2773
[Abstract]
[Full Text]