论文部分内容阅读
目的评价两株副溶血弧菌标准株在肠毒性、细胞毒性和溶血活性上的毒力差异。方法通过兔回肠袢实验、Raw264细胞毒性实验和兔红细胞溶血实验比较临床分离株RIMD2210633(tdh+、T3SS1+、T3SS2α+、T3SS2β-、trh-)和环境分离株S251(tdh-、T3SS1+、T3SS2α-、T3SS2β-、trh-)的毒力表型差异。结果 S251株产生的肠积液量、对Raw264细胞的细胞毒性均弱于RIMD2210633株[(12.37±1.07)mlvs.(1.50±1.50)ml;(35.69±3.07)%vs.(14.07±0.91)%],且有统计学差异(P<0.05),另外S251株对兔红细胞的相对溶血活性明显弱于RIMD2210633株,且具有统计学差异(P<0.01),这与基因预测结果相符。结论 S251株的肠毒性、Raw264细胞毒性和溶血活性均弱于RIMD2210633株,该两株菌可作为后续副溶血弧菌致病机制研究的模式菌株。
Objective To evaluate the virulence of two strains of Vibrio parahaemolyticus on enterotoxicity, cytotoxicity and hemolytic activity. Methods The clinical isolates RIMD2210633 (tdh +, T3SS1 +, T3SS2α +, T3SS2β-, trh-) and environmental isolates S251 (tdh-, T3SS1 +, T3SS2α-, T3SS2β) were compared by rabbit ileotensis test, Raw264 cytotoxicity test and rabbit erythrocyte hemolysis test. -, trh-) virulence phenotype differences. Results The intestinal fluid volume of S251 strain was weaker than that of RIMD2210633 strain [(12.37 ± 1.07) ml vs (1.50 ± 1.50) ml; (35.69 ± 3.07)% vs (14.07 ± 0.91)% ], And there was a significant difference (P <0.05). In addition, the relative hemolytic activity of S251 against rabbit erythrocytes was weaker than that of RIMD2210633 (P <0.01), which was in good agreement with the predicted result. Conclusion The enterotoxicity, Raw264 cytotoxicity and hemolytic activity of S251 strain are weaker than that of RIMD2210633 strain. These two strains can be used as model strains for the follow-up pathogenic mechanism of Vibrio parahaemolyticus.