Gram Negative Carbapenemase Detection Genome sequencing and assembly
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
PROVIDER: PRJNA292904 | ENA |
REPOSITORIES: ENA
Similar Datasets
Project description:Characterization of carbapenemase-producing Gram negative Bacilli Assembly
| PRJNA391501 | ENA
Project description:Gram negative bacteria Genome sequencing
| PRJNA594823 | ENA
Project description:Gram negative bacilli Genome sequencing
| PRJNA353060 | ENA
Project description:Non-carbapenemase-producing Gram negative bacteria, including ESBLs, AmpCs and non-beta-lactamase beta-lactams resistance mechanisms in clinical isolates from MDU Public Health Lab, Victoria, Australia Genome sequencing and assembly
| PRJNA842191 | ENA
Project description:Objective: It is unclear whether the host response of gram-positive sepsis differs from gram-negative sepsis at a transcriptome level. Using microarray technology, we compared the gene-expression profiles of gram-positive sepsis and gram-negative sepsis in critically ill patients. Design: A prospective cross-sectional study. Setting: A 20-bed general intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital. Patients: Seventy-two patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Interventions: Intravenous blood was collected for leukocyte separation and RNA extraction. Microarray experiements were then performed examing the expression level of 19,232 genes in each sample. Measurements and Main Results: There was no difference in the expression profile between gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis. The finding remained unchanged even when genes with lower expression level were included or after statistical stringency was lowered. There were, however, ninety-four genes differentially expressed between sepsis and control patients. These genes included those involved in immune regulation, inflammation and mitochondrial function. Hierarchical cluster analysis confirmed that the difference in gene expression profile existed between sepsis and control patients, but not between gram-positive and gram-negative patients. Conclusion: Gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis share a common host response at a transcriptome level. These findings support the hypothesis that the septic response is non-specific and is designed to provide a more general response that can be elicited by a wide range of different micro-organisms. Keywords: disease state analysis, gram-positive sepsis, gram-negative sepsis
2007-12-01 | GSE6535 | GEO
Project description:Objective: It is unclear whether the host response of gram-positive sepsis differs from gram-negative sepsis at a transcriptome level. Using microarray technology, we compared the gene-expression profiles of gram-positive sepsis and gram-negative sepsis in critically ill patients. Design: A prospective cross-sectional study. Setting: A 20-bed general intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital. Patients: Seventy-two patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Interventions: Intravenous blood was collected for leukocyte separation and RNA extraction. Microarray experiements were then performed examing the expression level of 19,232 genes in each sample. Measurements and Main Results: There was no difference in the expression profile between gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis. The finding remained unchanged even when genes with lower expression level were included or after statistical stringency was lowered. There were, however, ninety-four genes differentially expressed between sepsis and control patients. These genes included those involved in immune regulation, inflammation and mitochondrial function. Hierarchical cluster analysis confirmed that the difference in gene expression profile existed between sepsis and control patients, but not between gram-positive and gram-negative patients. Conclusion: Gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis share a common host response at a transcriptome level. These findings support the hypothesis that the septic response is non-specific and is designed to provide a more general response that can be elicited by a wide range of different micro-organisms. The study included seventy-two critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of Nepean Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Of these, fifty-five patients were diagnosed to have sepsis, as confirmed by microbiological culture. The remaining seventeen patients did not have sepsis and were therefore used as controls. The study was approved by the hospital ethics committee and informed consent was obtained from all patients or their relatives. Patient Samples. Whole blood was taken from each patient on admission to ICU. Neutrophils were separated from whole blood using density-gradient separation with Ficoll-PaqueP P(Amersham). Subsequent neutrophil RNA extraction was performed using guanidinium thiocyanate (Ambion). Microarray Experiment. The neutrophil RNA was converted to cDNA, fluorescently labeled and hybridized to its complimentary sequences on the microarray (Invitrogen). The fluorescent signals on each micrroarray were captured using the GenePix 4000B laser scanner (Axon Instruments). Expression level of each gene was represented by the intensity of its fluorescent signal. Data Extraction. All signal intensity values were processed using background-subtraction method. Prior to analysis, all values were log-transformed and normalized by fitting a print-tip group Lowess curve. Normalization minimizes bias due to dye chemistry, signal intensity or location of a gene on the array. It ensures the detection of genes that are truly differentially expressed, instead of those caused by experimental artifacts or variation in the hybridization process. After normalization, genes that had more than 50% of data missing were removed. We then selected genes that had at least 80% of the data showing two-fold changes from the geneâs median values. After filtering, 1617 genes were available for further analysis.
2010-05-25 | E-GEOD-6535 | biostudies-arrayexpress
Project description:Environmental Surveillance of ESBL and Carbapenemase-Producing Gram-Negative Bacteria in a hospital in Ghana
| PRJEB46496 | ENA
Project description:We profiled the expression of circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) in mice exposed to gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria using Illumina small RNA deep sequencing. Recombinant-specific gram-negative pathogen Escherichia coli (Xen14) and gram-positive pathogen Staphylococcus aureus (Xen29) were used to induce bacterial infection in mice at a concentration of 1 × 108 bacteria/100 μL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS). Small RNA libraries generated from the serum of mice after exposure to PBS, Xen14, Xen29, and Xen14+Xen29 via the routes of subcutaneous injection (I), cut wound (C), or under grafted skin (S) were analyzed using an Illumina HiSeq2000 Sequencer. Following exposure to gram-negative bacteria alone, no differentially expressed miRNA was found in the injection, cut, or skin graft models. Exposure to mixed bacteria induced a similar expression pattern of the circulating miRNAs to that induced by gram-positive bacterial infection. Upon gram-positive bacterial infection, 9 miRNAs (mir-193b-3p, mir-133a-1-3p, mir-133a-2-3p, mir-133a-1-5p, mir-133b-3p, mir-434-3p, mir-127-3p, mir-676-3p, mir-215-5p) showed upregulation greater than 4-fold with a p-value < 0.01. Among them, mir-193b-3p, mir-133a-1-3p, and mir-133a-2-3p presented the most common miRNA targets expressed in the mice exposed to gram-positive bacterial infection.
2014-08-19 | GSE60492 | GEO
Project description:soil metagenome breed:Gram-negative bacteria Raw sequence reads
| PRJNA545773 | ENA
Project description:Use of WGS to identify carbapenemase-encoding genes
| PRJEB8575 | ENA