Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2025
Author Spotlight: Methods for Electroporation and Transformation Confirmation in Limosilactobacillus reuteri DSM20016
Published on: June 23, 2023
Real-time polymerase chain reaction methods for strain specific identification and enumeration of strain
Hanan R Shehata1,2,3, Basma Hassane3, Steven G Newmaster1
1Natural Health Product Research Alliance, Department of Integrative Biology, College of Biological Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
Introduction:
Reliable and accurate methods for probiotic identification and enumeration, at the strain level plays a major role in confirming product efficacy since probiotic health benefits are strain-specific and dose-dependent. In this study, real-time PCR methods were developed for strain specific identification and enumeration of L. paracasei 8700:2, a probiotic strain that plays a role in fighting the common cold.
Methods:
The assay was designed to target a unique region in L. paracasei 8700:2 genome sequence to achieve strain level specificity. The identification assay was evaluated for specificity and sensitivity. The enumeration viability real-time PCR (v-qPCR) method was first optimized for the viability treatment, then the method was evaluated for efficiency, limit of quantification, precision, and its performance was compared to plate count (PC) and viability droplet digital PCR (v-ddPCR) methods.
Results:
The identification method proved to be strain specific and highly sensitive with a limit of detection of 0.5 pg of DNA. The optimal viability dye (PMAxx) concentration was 50 μM. The method was efficient (> 90% with R 2 values > 0.99), with a linear dynamic range between 6*102 and 6*105 copies. The method was highly precise with a relative standard deviation below 5%. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was 0.707 for PC and v-qPCR methods, and 0.922 for v-qPCR and v-ddPCR. Bland-Altman method comparison showed that v-qPCR always gave higher values compared to PC method (relative difference ranging from 119% to 184%) and showed no consistent trend (relative difference ranging from -20% to 22%) when comparing v-qPCR and v-ddPCR methods.
Discussion:
The difference between PC and v-PCR methods can potentially be attributed to the proportion of cells that exist in a viable but non culturable (VBNC) state, which can be count by v-PCR but not with PC. The developed v-qPCR method was confirmed to be strain specific, sensitive, efficient, with low variance, able to count VBNC cells, and has shorter time to results compared to plate count methods. Thus, the identification and enumeration methods developed for L. paracasei 8700:2 will be of great importance to achieve high quality and efficacious probiotic products.
