Comparison of the capillary and agarose electrophoresis based multiple locus VNTR (variable number of tandem repeats) analysis (MLVA) on Mycobacterium bovis isolates

Abstract

Electrophoretic techniques that can be used for genotyping of bacterial pathogens ranges from manual, low-cost, agarose gels to high-throughput capillary electrophoresis sequencing machines. These two methods are currently employed in the electrophoresis of PCR products used in multiple locus VNTR (variable number of tandem repeats) analysis (MLVA), i.e. the agarose electrophoresis (AE) and the capillary electrophoresis (CE). Some authors have suggested that clusters generated by AE are less reliable than those generated by CE and that the latter is a more sensitive technique than the former when typing Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTC) isolates. Because such a claim could have significant consequences for investigators in this field, a comparison was made on 19 Belgian Mycobacterium bovis strains which had previously been genotyped using CE VNTR analysis. The VNTR profiles of the CE VNTR analysis were compared with those obtained by AE VNTR analysis at 14 VNTR loci. Our results indicated that there were no differences in copy numbers at all loci tested when the copy numbers obtained by the AE VNTR analysis were compared with those obtained by CE VNTR analysis. The use of AE VNTR analysis in mycobacterial genotyping does not alter the sensitivity of the MLVA technique compared with the CE VNTR analysis. The AE VNTR can therefore be regarded as a viable alternative in moderately equipped laboratories that cannot afford the expensive equipment required for CE VNTR analysis and data obtained by AE VNTR analysis can be shared between laboratories which use the CE VNTR method.