4.6 Review

Bacteriophage Tail Proteins as a Tool for Bacterial Pathogen Recognition-A Literature Review

Journal

ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics11050555

Keywords

RBP; tail fiber protein; pathogens detection; bacteriophages; diagnostic

Funding

  1. National Science Center, Poland [UMO-2017/26/E/NZ1/00249]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper provides an overview of various methodologies that utilize phage proteins for detecting pathogenic bacteria. These methodologies include the use of phage protein-coated nanoparticles, ELISA, and biosensors. Studies reviewed in this paper demonstrate that phage proteins are becoming increasingly important as a diagnostic tool, thanks to the discovery of new phages and increased understanding of the specificity and functions of phage tail proteins.
In recent years, a number of bacterial detection methods have been developed to replace time-consuming culture methods. One interesting approach is to mobilize the ability of phage tail proteins to recognize and bind to bacterial hosts. In this paper, the authors provide an overview of the current methodologies in which phage proteins play major roles in detecting pathogenic bacteria. Authors focus on proteins capable of recognizing highly pathogenic strains, such as Acinetobacter baumannii, Campylobacter spp., Yersinia pestis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus spp., Salmonella spp., and Shigella. These pathogens may be diagnosed by capture-based detection methods involving the use of phage protein-coated nanoparticles, ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay)-based methods, or biosensors. The reviewed studies show that phage proteins are becoming an important diagnostic tool due to the discovery of new phages and the increasing knowledge of understanding the specificity and functions of phage tail proteins.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available