Detection of Coccidioides immitis in Kern County, California, by multiplex PCR

Literature cited

• AkkermansADLMirzaMSHarmsenHJMBlokHJHerronPRSessitschAAkkermansWM. 1994. Molecular ecology of microbes: a review of promises, pitfalls and true progress. FEMS Microbiol Rev 15:185–194, 10.1111/j.1574-6976.1994.tb00134.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AndersonICCairneyJWG. 2004. Diversity and ecology of soil fungal communities: increased understanding through the application of molecular techniques. Environ Microbiol 6:769–779, 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2004.00675.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AndersonICCampbellCDProsserJI. 2003. Potential bias of fungal 18S rDNA and internal transcribed spacer polymerase chain reaction primers for estimating fungal biodiversity in soil. Environ Microbiol 5:36–47, 10.1046/j.1462-2920.2003.00383.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DanielsJIWilsonWJDeSantisTZGouveiaFJAndersonGLShinnJHPletcherRJohnsonSMPappagianisD. 2001. Development of a quantitative TaqManTM-PCR assay and feasibility of atmospheric collection for Coccidioides immitis for ecological studies. Department of Energy, Lawrence Livermore National Library, UCRL-ID-146977.
   Google Scholar
• DelgadoNXueJYuiJJHungCYColeGT. 2003. A recombinant β-1,3-Gluconosyltransferase homolog of Coccidioides posadasii protects mice against Coccidioidomycosis. Infect Immun 71:3010–30419, 10.1128/IAI.71.6.3010-3019.2003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Water Resources California. 2010. California’s drought: an update. State of California, The Natural Resources Agency. p 4–5. Figs. 1, 2. http://www.water.ca.gov/drought/docs/DroughtUpdate-030110.pdf
   Google Scholar
• EgebergROEgebergMCElconinAE. 1964. Effects of salinity and temperature on Coccidioides immitis and three antagonistic soil saprophytes. J Bacteriol 88:473–476.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EgebergROElyAF. 1959. Coccidioides immitis in the soil of the southern San Joaquin Valley. Am J Med Sci 231:151–154.
   Google Scholar
• EinsteinHEJohnsonRH. 1993. Coccidioidomycosis: new aspects of epidemiology and therapy. Clin Infect Dis 16: 349–356, 10.1093/clind/16.3.349
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ElconinAFEgebergROLubarskyR. 1957. Growth patterns of Coccidioides immitis in the soil of an endemic area. U.S. Public Health Service 575:168–170.
   Google Scholar
• FelskeAWolterinkAvan LisRde VosWMAkkermansADL. 1999. Searching for predominant soil bacteria: 16S rDNA cloning versus strain cultivation. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 30:137–145, 10.1111/j.1574-6941.1999.tb00642.x
   Google Scholar
• FiererNBreitbartMNultonJSalamonPLozuponeCJonesRRobesonMEdwardsRAFeltsBRayhawkSKnightRRohwerFJacksonRB. 2007. Metagenomic and small-subunit rRNA analyses reveal the genetic diversity of bacteria, archaea, fungi and viruses in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 73:7059–7066, 10.1128/AEM.00358-07
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FisherFSBultmanMWJohnsonSMPappagianisDZaborskyE. 2007. Coccidioides niches and habitat parameters in the southwestern United States: a matter of scale. Ann NY Acad Sci 1111:47–72, 10.1196/annals.1406.031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FisherMCKoenigGLWhiteTJSan-BlasGNegroniRGutierrez AlvarezIWankeBTaylorJW. 2001. Biogeographic range expansion into South America by Coccidioides immitis mirrors New World patterns of human migration. PNAS 98:4558–4562, 10.1073/pnas.071406098
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FrostegårdÅCourtoisSRamisseVCercSBernillonDLe GallFJeanninPNesmeXSimonetP. 1999. Quantification of bias related to the extraction of DNA directly from soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 65: 5409–5420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GermanoDJRathbunGBSaslawLRCypherBLCypherEAVredenburghLM. 2010. The San Joaquin desert of California: ecologically misunderstood and overlooked. Nat Area J 31:138–147, 10.3375/043.031.0206
   Google Scholar
• GobernaMInsamHPascualJASánchezJ. 2005. Storage effects on the community level physiological profiles of Mediterranean forest soils. Soil Biol Biochem 37:173–178, 10.1016/j.soilbio.2004.06.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GreeneDRKoenigGFisherMCTaylorJW. 2000. Soil isolation and molecular identification of Coccidioides immitis. Mycologia 92:406–410, 10.2307/3761498
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HugenholtzPGoebbelBMPaceNR. 1998. Impact of culture independent studies on the emerging phylogenetic view of bacterial diversity. J Bacteriol 180:4765–4774.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• InnisMAGelfandDHSninskyJJWhiteTJ, eds. 1990. PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. San Diego, California: Academic Press. 482 p.
   Google Scholar
• KempR. 1974. The distribution of Coccidioides immitis at Sharktooth Hill, Oildale, California [master’s thesis]. Long Beach: California State College. 62 p.
   Google Scholar
• KirklandTNFiererJ. 1996. Coccidioidomycosis: a reemerging infectious disease. Emerging Infect Dis 2:192–199, 10.3201/eid0203.960305
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LacyGHSwatekFE. 1974. Soil ecology of Coccidioides immitis at Amerindian middens in California. Appl Microbiol 27:379–388.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• LauberCLZhouNGordonJIKnightRFiererN. 2010. Effect of storage conditions on the assessment of bacterial community structure in soil and human-associated samples. FEMS Microbiol Lett 307:80–86, 10.1111/j.1574-6968.2010.01965.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloyd-JonesGHunterDWF. 2001. Comparison of rapid DNA extraction methods applied to contrasting New Zealand soils. Soil Biol Biochem 33:2053–2059, 10.1016/S0038-0717(01)00133-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MaddyK. 1957. Ecological factors of the geographic distribution of Coccidioides immitis. J Am Vet Med Ass 130:475–476.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• OmieczynskiBSSwatekFE. 1967. The comparison of two methods for the direct isolation of Coccidioides immitis from soil using three different media. In: AjelloL, ed. Coccidioidomycosis, Proceedings of the 2nd Coccidioidomycosis Symposium. Tucson, Arizona: Univ. Arizona Press. p 265–272.
   Google Scholar
• OrrGF. 1968. Some fungi isolated with Coccidioides immitis from soils of endemic areas in California. J Torrey Bot Soc 95:424–431.
   Google Scholar
• PanSSiglerLColeGT. 1994. Evidence for a phylogenetic connection between Coccidioides immitis and Uncinocarpus reesii (Onygenaceae). Microbiology 140:1481–94, 10.1099/00221287-140-6-1481
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PappagianisD. 1988. Epidemiology of coccidioidomycosis. Curr Top Med Mycol 2:199–238.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• RipponJW. 1988. Coccidioidomycosis. Medical Mycology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co. 433 p.
   Google Scholar
• SiglerLFlisALCarmichaelJW. 1998. The genus Uncinocarpus (Onygenaceae) and its synonym Brunneospora: new concepts, combinations and connections to anamorphs in Chrysosporium, and further evidence of relationship with Coccidioides immitis. Can J Bot 76:1624–1636.
   Google Scholar
• StaleyJTKonopkaA. 1985. Measurement of in situ activities of nonphotosynthetic microorganisms in aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Annu Rev Microbiol 39:321–346, 10.1146/annurev.mi.39.100185.001541
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SuzukiMTGiovannoniSJ. 1996. Bias caused by template annealing in the amplification of mixtures of 16S rRNA genes by PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol 62:625–630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SwatekFE. 1970. Ecology of Coccidioides immitis. Mycopathol Mycol App 40:3–12, 10.1007/BF02051479
   Google Scholar
• SýkorováZIneichenKWiemkenARedeckerD. 2007. The cultivation bias: different communities of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi detected in roots from the field, from bait plants transplanted to the field, and from a greenhouse trap experiment. Mycorrhiza 18:1–14, 10.1007/s00572-007-0147-0
   Google Scholar
• TaborJMOrbachMShubitzLet al. 2002. Disease prevention through detection of Coccidioides immitis in the environment (Project TS 325). Final report to the Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine & Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Arizona College of Public Health, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, & Valley Fever Center for Excellence. Tucson: Univ Arizona Press, http://arsc.arid.arizona.edu/dogfever/index.htm
   Google Scholar
• TiedjeJMAsumin-BrempongSNüssleinKMarshTLFlynnSJ. 1999. Opening the black box of soil microbial diversity. Appl Soil Ecol 13:109–122, 10.1016/S0929-1393(99)00026-8
   Google Scholar
• TzenevaVASallesJFNaumovaNde VosWMKuikmanPJDolfingJSmidtH. 2009. Effect of soil sample preservation, compared to the effect of other environmental variables, on bacterial and eukaryotic diversity. FEMS Res Microbiol 160:89–98.
   Google Scholar
• VartoukianSRPalmerRMWadeWG. 2010. Strategies for culture of ‘unculturable’ bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Lett 309:1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von WintzingerodeFVGoebelUBStackebrandtE. 1997. Determination of microbial diversity in environmental samples: pitfalls of PCR-based rRNA analysis. FEMS Microbiol Rev 21:213–229, 10.1111/j.1574-6976.1997.tb00351.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WallensteinMDMcMahonSSchimelJ. 2007. Bacterial and fungal community structure in arctic tundra tussock and shrub soils. FEMS Microbial Ecol 59:428–435, 10.1111/j.1574-6941.2006.00260.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WoodsCWMcRillCPlikaytis RosensteinNEMosleyDBoydDEnglandBPerkinsBAAmpelNMHajjehRA. 2000. Coccidioidomycosis in human immunodeficiency virus-infected persons in Arizona, 1994–1997: incidence, risk factors and prevention. J Infect Dis 181: 1428–1434, 10.1086/315401
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZingerLCoissacECholerPGeremiaRA. 2009. Assessment of microbial communities by graph partitioning in a study of soil fungi in two alpine meadows. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:5863–5870, 10.1128/AEM.00748-09
   Google Scholar