↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of duplex PCR and phenotypic analysis in differentiating Candida dubliniensis from Candida albicans from oral samples

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of duplex PCR and phenotypic analysis in differentiating Candida dubliniensis from Candida albicans from oral samples
Published in
AMB Express, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13568-017-0435-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Asanga Sampath, Manjula Weerasekera, Ayomi Dilhari, Chinthika Gunasekara, Uditha Bulugahapitiya, Neluka Fernando, Lakshman Samaranayake

Abstract

Candida dubliniensis shares a wide range of phenotypic characteristics with Candida albicans including a common trait called germ tube positivity. Hence, laboratory differentiation of these two species is cumbersome. Duplex PCR analyses for C. albicans and C. dubliniensis was performed directly on DNA extracted from a total of 122 germ tube positive isolates derived from 100 concentrated oral rinse samples from a random cohort of diabetics attending a clinic in Sri Lanka. These results were confirmed by DNA sequencing of internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region of rDNA of the yeasts. Performance efficacy of duplex PCR was then compared with phenotypic identification using a standard battery of phenotypic tests. Of the 122 germ tube positive isolates three were identified by duplex PCR as C. dubliniensis and the remainder as C. albicans. On the contrary, when the standard phenotypic tests, sugar assimilation and chlamydospore formation, were used to differentiate the two species 13 germ tube positive isolates were erroneously identified as C. dubliniensis. Duplex PCR was found to be rapid, sensitive and more specific than phenotypic identification methods in discriminating C. dubliniensis from C. albicans. This is also the first report on the oral carriage of C. dubliniensis in a Sri Lankan population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 6 27%
Unknown 9 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 18%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,466,074
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#446
of 1,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,813
of 315,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#35
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,239 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.