Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 26, 2026

Quantitative PCR of T7 Bacteriophage from Biopanning
Published on: September 27, 2018
Comparison among the Quantification of Bacterial Pathogens by qPCR, dPCR, and Cultural Methods
Matteo Ricchi1, Cristina Bertasio2, Maria B Boniotti2
1Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell'Emilia Romagna "Bruno Ubertini," National Reference Centre for ParatuberculosisPodenzano, Italy.
Abstract:
The demand for rapid methods for the quantification of pathogens is increasing. Among these methods, those based on nucleic acids amplification (quantitative PCRs) are the most widespread worldwide. Together with the qPCR, a new approach named digital PCR (dPCR), has rapidly gained importance. The aim of our study was to compare the results obtained using two different dPCR systems and one qPCR in the quantification of three different bacterial pathogens: Listeria monocytogenes, Francisella tularensis, and Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis. For this purpose, three pre-existing qPCRs were used, while the same primers and probes, as well as PCR conditions, were transferred to two different dPCR systems: the QX200 (Bio-Rad) and the Quant Studio 3D (Applied Biosystems). The limits of detection and limits of quantification for all pathogens, and all PCR approaches applied, were determined using genomic pure DNAs. The quantification of unknown decimal suspensions of the three bacteria obtained by the three different PCR approaches was compared through the Linear Regression and Bland and Altman analyses. Our results suggest that, both dPCRs are able to quantify the same amount of bacteria, while the comparison among dPCRs and qPCRs, showed both over and under-estimation of the bacteria present in the unknown suspensions. Our results showed qPCR over-estimated the amount of M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis and F. tularensis cells. On the contrary, qPCR, compared to QX200 dPCR, under-estimated the amount of L. monocytogenes cells. However, the maximum difference among PCRs approaches was <0.5 Log10, while cultural methods underestimated the number of bacteria by one to two Log10 for Francisella tularensis and Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis. On the other hand, cultural and PCRs methods quantified the same amount of bacteria for L. monocytogenes, suggesting for this last pathogen, PCRs approaches can be considered as a valid alternative to the cultural ones.
More Related Videos
11:37Simultaneous DNA-RNA Extraction from Coastal Sediments and Quantification of 16S rRNA Genes and Transcripts by Real-time PCR
Published on: June 11, 2016
12:14A Duplex Digital PCR Assay for Simultaneous Quantification of the Enterococcus spp. and the Human Fecal-associated HF183 Marker in Waters
Published on: March 9, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Microbial Growth Measurement: Direct Methods
Techniques for Isolation of Pure Cultures
Real Time RT-PCR
The real-time quantification of the number of amplified products is...
Microbial Growth Measurement: Indirect Methods