ОПТИМИЗАЦИЯ МЕТОДОВ ВЫДЕЛЕНИЯ И ОЧИСТКИ ДНК ДЛЯ МОЛЕКУЛЯРНОГЕНЕТИЧЕСКОГО АНАЛИЗА НЕКУЛЬТИВИРУЕМЫХ МИКРООРГАНИЗМОВ РУБЦА КОРОВ

424

В данной статье проведена оптимизация методов выделения и очистки тотальной ДНК микроорганизмов рубца у клинически здоровых коров.

Журнал номиFarDU Ilmiy Xabarlari
Нашр номи2018-3
Кўришлар сони 424

Internet ҳавола

DOI

UzSCI тизимида яратилган сана 11-08-2022

Ўқишлар сони 0

Нашр санаси 15-08-2018

Мақола тилиRus

Саҳифалар сони20-23

Калит сўзлар

рубец

микробиота

молекулярно-генетический анализ

крупный рогатый скот

Ўзбек

Мақолада клиник жиҳатдан соғлом сигирларда жароҳат микроорганизмларининг жами ДНКларини ажратиб олиш ва тозалаш усулларини оптималлаштириш кўрсатилган.

Калит сўзлар

микробиота

молекуляр-генетик анализ

ямоқ

чорва ҳайвонлари

Русский

В данной статье проведена оптимизация методов выделения и очистки тотальной ДНК микроорганизмов рубца у клинически здоровых коров.

Калит сўзлар

рубец

микробиота

молекулярно-генетический анализ

крупный рогатый скот

English

This work optimizes the methods of isolation and purification of the ruminal microorganisms’ total DNA in clinically healthy cows.

Калит сўзлар

cattle

microbiota

molecular-genetic analysis

rumen

№ Муаллифнинг исми Лавозими Ташкилот номи

1 Ilina L.. 1 Fergana State University

2 Laptev G.. 2 Fergana State University

3 Yildirim E.. 3 Fergana State University

4 Zaytsev S.. 4 Fergana State University

№ Ҳавола номи

1 1. Van Soest P.J. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. 2nd edn. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New, 1994.

2 2. Hungate R.E. A roll tube method for cultivation of strict anaerobes. In: Norris J.R., Ribbons D.W. (eds). Methods in microbiology, vol. 3B. Academic Press, London and New York, p. 117–132, 1969.

3 3. Dehority B.A, Tirabasso P.A, Grifo AP. Most-probable-number procedures for enumerating ruminal bacteria, including the simultaneous estimation of total and cellulolytic numbers in one medium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55:2789– 2792, 1989.

4 4. Amann R.I., Ludwig W., Schleifer K.H. Phylogenetic identifi¬cation and in situ detection of individual microbial cells without cultivation. Microbiol. Rev. 59:143–169, 1995.

5 5. Брюханов А.Л., Рыбак К.В., Нетрусов А.И. Молекулярная биология. М.: Изд-во МУ, 2012. -480 c.

6 6. Kocherginskaya S., Aminov, R. I. and White, B. A. Analysis of the rumen bacterial diversity under two different diet conditions using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, random sequencing, and statistical ecology approaches // Anaerobe. - 2001. – Vol.7. -P.119-134.

7 7. Forster R., J. Gong, and R. Teather. Group-specific 16S rRNA hybridization probes for determinative and community structure studies of Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens in the rumen // Appl. Environ. Microbiol. - 1997. – Vol.63.- P.1256- 1260.

8 8. Whitehead T.R. and M.A. Cotta. Characterization and comparison of microbial populations in swine faeces and manure storage pits by 16S rDNA gene sequence analyses // Anaerobe. - 2001. – Vol.7. -P.181-187

9 9. Yu Z. and M. Morrison. Comparisons of different hypervariable regions of rrs genes for use in fingerprinting of microbial communities by PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis // Appl. Environ. Microbiol. - 2004. – Vol.70. №8.- P.4800-4806.

10 10. Flint H.J., A.M. Thomson. Deoxyribonuclease activity in isolated rumen bacteria and rumen fluid // Lett. Appl. Microbiol. - 1990. – Vol.11. -P.18-21.

11 11. Tebbe C. C. and W. Vahjen. Interference of humic acids and DNA extracted directly from soil in detection and transformation of recombinant DNA from bacteria and a yeast // Appl. Environ. Microbiol. - 1993. – Vol.59. -P.2657-2665.

Кутилмоқда

№	Муаллифнинг исми	Лавозими	Ташкилот номи
1	Ilina L..	1	Fergana State University
2	Laptev G..	2	Fergana State University
3	Yildirim E..	3	Fergana State University
4	Zaytsev S..	4	Fergana State University

№	Ҳавола номи
1	1. Van Soest P.J. Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. 2nd edn. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New, 1994.
2	2. Hungate R.E. A roll tube method for cultivation of strict anaerobes. In: Norris J.R., Ribbons D.W. (eds). Methods in microbiology, vol. 3B. Academic Press, London and New York, p. 117–132, 1969.
3	3. Dehority B.A, Tirabasso P.A, Grifo AP. Most-probable-number procedures for enumerating ruminal bacteria, including the simultaneous estimation of total and cellulolytic numbers in one medium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55:2789– 2792, 1989.
4	4. Amann R.I., Ludwig W., Schleifer K.H. Phylogenetic identifi¬cation and in situ detection of individual microbial cells without cultivation. Microbiol. Rev. 59:143–169, 1995.
5	5. Брюханов А.Л., Рыбак К.В., Нетрусов А.И. Молекулярная биология. М.: Изд-во МУ, 2012. -480 c.
6	6. Kocherginskaya S., Aminov, R. I. and White, B. A. Analysis of the rumen bacterial diversity under two different diet conditions using denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, random sequencing, and statistical ecology approaches // Anaerobe. - 2001. – Vol.7. -P.119-134.
7	7. Forster R., J. Gong, and R. Teather. Group-specific 16S rRNA hybridization probes for determinative and community structure studies of Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens in the rumen // Appl. Environ. Microbiol. - 1997. – Vol.63.- P.1256- 1260.
8	8. Whitehead T.R. and M.A. Cotta. Characterization and comparison of microbial populations in swine faeces and manure storage pits by 16S rDNA gene sequence analyses // Anaerobe. - 2001. – Vol.7. -P.181-187
9	9. Yu Z. and M. Morrison. Comparisons of different hypervariable regions of rrs genes for use in fingerprinting of microbial communities by PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis // Appl. Environ. Microbiol. - 2004. – Vol.70. №8.- P.4800-4806.
10	10. Flint H.J., A.M. Thomson. Deoxyribonuclease activity in isolated rumen bacteria and rumen fluid // Lett. Appl. Microbiol. - 1990. – Vol.11. -P.18-21.
11	11. Tebbe C. C. and W. Vahjen. Interference of humic acids and DNA extracted directly from soil in detection and transformation of recombinant DNA from bacteria and a yeast // Appl. Environ. Microbiol. - 1993. – Vol.59. -P.2657-2665.