Back

Cross-Genera Amplification of prs/hlyA by Multiplex PCR Resulted in Misidentification of Enterococcus faecium as Listeria monocytogenes

Ali, H. B.; Kumurya, A. S.; J.M, A.; Usman, Y.; Baba, A. S.; Usman, M.

2026-01-21 microbiology
10.64898/2026.01.20.700535 bioRxiv
Show abstract

ImportanceMolecular confirmation of Listeria monocytogenes typically employs a multiplex PCR method that targets both genus-specific prs and species-specific hlyA genes. This study assessed the specificity of this assay within Nigeria, where local microbial diversity may influence performance outcomes. MethodsOut of eight phenotypically presumptive L. monocytogenes food isolates tested, six produced the expected prs and hlyA amplicons, with five classified as serogroup 1/2b. However, all six isolates tested negative for the crucial virulence regulator prfA, necessitating further investigation. ResultsDefinitive 16S rRNA gene sequencing revealed that only two of the six PCR-positive isolates were identified as L. monocytogenes, while the remaining four were identified as Enterococcus faecium. This results in a false-positive rate of 66.7% (4/6) for the assay in this particular context. Phylogenetic analysis corroborated the taxonomic distinction, exhibiting a robust clustering of the four E. faecium isolates with reference strains. In contrast, the two confirmed L. monocytogenes isolates formed a separate sub-clade, indicating regional divergence and further underscoring the assays inability to differentiate between L. monocytogenes and Enterococcus species. ConclusionThese findings highlight a significant lack of specificity, as the prs/hlyA primers exhibited cross-reactivity with non-target E. faecium. The anomalous negative result for prfA served as a critical diagnostic indicator. Consequently, the positive outcomes from this widely utilized confirmatory assay should be regarded as presumptive and necessitate additional verification.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.1%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 16%
12.1%
3
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.8%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.2%
5
International Journal of Food Microbiology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.5%
6
Microbiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
7
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
301 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.5%
8
Journal of Microbiological Methods
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
9
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.0%
50% of probability mass above
10
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.6%
11
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.0%
12
Microbial Genomics
204 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
13
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
14
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
15
One Health
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
16
BMC Microbiology
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
17
mSphere
281 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
18
Antibiotics
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.6%
19
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
20
Access Microbiology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.6%
21
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
22
Journal of Hospital Infection
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
23
Pathogens
53 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.2%
24
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.2%
25
Journal of Applied Microbiology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
26
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
28
Journal of Medical Virology
137 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
29
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.7%
30
Journal of General Virology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%