Skip to main content
Journal of Clinical Microbiology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Microbiology
. 2016 Jan 28;54(2):449–452. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02730-15

A Simple and Safe Protocol for Preparing Brucella Samples for Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization–Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry Analysis

Jennifer Mesureur a,b, Sébastien Ranaldi a,b, Valérie Monnin c, Victoria Girard c, Sandrine Arend c, Martin Welker c, David O'Callaghan a,b, Jean-Philippe Lavigne a,b,d, Anne Keriel a,b,
Editor: C-A D Burnham
PMCID: PMC4733191  PMID: 26582837

Abstract

We describe a simple protocol to inactivate the biosafety level 3 (BSL3) pathogens Brucella prior to their analysis by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry. This method is also effective for several other bacterial pathogens and allows storage, and eventually shipping, of inactivated samples; therefore, it might be routinely applied to unidentified bacteria, for the safety of laboratory workers.

TEXT

Brucellosis is a zoonosis caused by bacteria of the genus Brucella, which are transmitted to humans through direct contact, ingestion of contaminated animal products, or aerosolization (1, 2). Brucellosis is endemic in several regions of the world, with more than 500,000 new cases each year (25). To date, 10 recognized species of Brucella have been described, with the most pathogenic for humans being Brucella melitensis (2). Diagnoses of clinical brucellosis are made initially using serological tests and are confirmed by isolation of the agent (6, 7). The recent introduction of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry (MS) has revolutionized the identification of bacteria and yeasts (8, 9). However, the procedures recommended by the manufacturers for non-biosafety level 3 (BSL3) organisms are not adequate for the manipulation of Brucella strains, which are classified as BSL3 (potential bioterrorism pathogens) and represent potential health hazards for laboratory workers (1, 10). Any inactivation procedure must allow safe sample handling outside the BSL3 environment and must avoid destruction of the biomarkers used for identification. Therefore, we developed a simple, safe, and efficient sample preparation method for Brucella isolates that is compatible with their analysis by the current MALDI-TOF MS platforms.

Solvent inactivation of Brucella.

We first applied the direct transfer procedure recommended by the manufacturer to a panel of Brucella strains, working in class II microbiological safety cabinets in a BSL3 laboratory (Table 1). The target plate (Vitek MS DS slide; bioMérieux) was inoculated by picking a portion of a colony from a plate with a 1-μl disposable loop (Sarsted), and the deposit was overlaid with 1 μl of α-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid (CHCA) matrix solution (saturated solution of CHCA in a solvent mixture composed of 33% acetonitrile, 33% absolute ethanol, 3% trifluoroacetic acid, and 31% water) and then air dried for 2 min at room temperature. The dried material was recovered with a sterile swab and spread on culture plates, which were then incubated for up to 3 weeks under the optimal growth conditions for the corresponding bacteria indicated in Table 1. Viable bacteria were recovered for most strains, showing that this protocol does not kill all Brucella strains, possibly because the bacterial deposit was not completely covered with the matrix solution. This risk is not acceptable for BSL3 pathogens. To overcome this problem, different liquid-phase inactivation protocols were tested in 1.5-ml Eppendorf tubes (see Fig. S1 in the supplemental material). Cunningham and Patel recently suggested that a short treatment with 70% ethanol effectively kills Brucella; however, they used Oligella ureolytica as a surrogate (11). In our hands, treating two full loops of Brucella with 100 μl to 1 ml of 70% ethanol did not consistently inactivate all bacteria after 10 min of incubation, which suggests that ethanol should not be used for short inactivation of Brucella. Vortex-mixing of bacteria in 5 μl of the CHCA matrix solution was systematically very efficient. However, this small volume could not ensure that the liquid would cover all bacteria consistently. Because the CHCA matrix is an expensive reagent, we tested the efficiency of the solvent alone, with an aim of reducing costs. Two full loops of bacteria of Brucella strains that form small (Brucella papionis F8/08-60), medium (B. melitensis 16M), or large (Brucella inopinata BO1) colonies (corresponding to 1.8 × 1011, 9.9 × 1011, or 2.2 × 1012 CFU, respectively) were vortex-mixed in 200 μl of freshly prepared solvent mixture. No colonies grew for any of the solvent-treated bacteria, showing that this protocol can inactivate up to 2 × 1012 CFU of Brucella. After inactivation, samples were manipulated under BSL2 containment.

TABLE 1.

Summary of results obtained in this study

Strain name Strain description Cultivation conditionsa
CFU/plate after inactivationb
No. identified/no. analyzed by MALDI-TOF MS (%)c
Temperature and time Medium Direct transfer 70% ethanol CHCA matrix Solvent Direct transfer Solvent Solvent with no centrifugation
16M Brucella melitensis biovar 1, reference strain (ATCC 23456) 37°C, 48 h COS-B 4 2 0 0 NT 10/11 (91) 4/4 (100)
544 Brucella abortus biovar 1, reference strain (ATCC 23448) 37°C, 48 h COS-B 8 >200 0 0 NT 6/6 (100) NT
1330 Brucella suis biovar 1, reference strain (ATCC 23444) 37°C, 48 h COS-B >200 0 0 0 NT 6/6 (100) NT
513 Brucella suis biovar 5, reference strain (NCTC 11996) 37°C, 48 h COS-B NT 0 0 0 NT 6/6 (100) NT
RM6/66 Brucella canis, reference strain (ATCC 23365) 37°C, 48 h COS-B 2 18 0 0 NT 6/6 (100) NT
5K33 Brucella neotomae, type strain (ATCC 23459) 37°C, 48 h COS-B 0 0 0 0 NT 6/6 (100) NT
BO1 Brucella inopinata (BCCN 07-01) 37°C, 24 h COS-B 0 2 0 0 NT 12/12 (100) NT
BO2 Brucella inopinata-like 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT 0 0 0 NT 10/10 (100) NT
CCM4915 Brucella microti (BCCN 07-01) 37°C, 24 h COS-B 0 0 0 0 NT 12/12 (100) NT
F8/08-60 Brucella papionis (NVSL) 37°C, 96 h COS-B >200 0 0 0 NT 4/4 (100) NT
B1/94 Brucella ceti, reference strain (NCTC 12891) 37°C, 5% CO2, 96 h COS-B NT 0 0 0 NT 7/8 (88) 2/2 (100)
B2/94 Brucella pinnipedialis, reference strain (NCTC 12890) 37°C, 5% CO2, 96 h COS-B NT 10 0 0 NT 4/4 (100) NT
63/290 Brucella ovis, reference strain (ATCC 25840) 37°C, 5% CO2, 96 h COS-B NT NT NT NT NT 2/2 (100) NT
NF2653 Brucella spp. (wild rodent, Australia) 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT 0 NT 13/13 (100) NT
bIN1983 16M transformed with GFP-encoding plasmid 37°C, 48 h COS-B NT NT NT NT NT 7/7 (100) NT
LMG 3301 Ochrobactrum intermedium 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT NT 2/2 (100) NT
ATCC 49188 Ochrobactrum anthropi 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT NT 1/2 (50) NT
BAA-747 Acinetobacter baumannii (ATCC BAA-747) 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 5/5 (100) 8/9 (89) 3/4 (75)
K56-2 Burkholderia cenocepacia 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 4/5 (80) 6/6 (100) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 29212 Enterococcus faecalis 37°C, 24 h TSA-S NT NT NT NT 4/5 (80) 4/7 (57) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 25922 Escherichia coli 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 6/7 (86) 7/10 (70) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 10211 Haemophilus influenzae 37°C, 5% CO2, 24 h CHOC NT NT NT NT 4/6 (67) 6/8 (75) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 19424 Neisseria gonorrhoeae 37°C, 5% CO2, 24 h CHOC NT NT NT NT 3/6 (50) 5/6 (83) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 27853 Pseudomonas aeruginosa 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 7/8 (88) 9/10 (90) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 14028 Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, reference strain 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 6/6 (100) 10/10 (100) 4/4 (100)
ATCC 25923 Staphylococcus aureus 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 6/6 (100) 8/8 (100) 4/4 (100)
LyfoCults Escherichia coli strain used to calibrate Vitek MS system (ATCC 8739) 37°C, 24 h COS-B NT NT NT NT 449/464 (97) 2/2 (100) NT
a

Standard cultivation conditions for the bacterial strains used. COS-B, Columbia agar with 5% sheep blood (bioMérieux); TSA-S, trypticase soy agar with 5% sheep blood (Becton, Dickinson); CHOC, chocolate agar with vitox (Oxoid).

b

Efficiency of the indicated inactivation methods with several Brucella strains. Shown are the maximal colony numbers obtained from several independent repeats.

c

Results of identification by MALDI-TOF MS using the direct transfer procedure or the solvent-based method, with or without centrifugation. Shown are the numbers of successful identifications/numbers of spectra analyzed, as well as the rate of success. NT, not tested.

MALDI-TOF MS analysis of solvent-inactivated Brucella.

Solvent-inactivated bacteria were centrifuged (10,000 × g for 2 min) and resuspended in ∼10 μl of solvent left in the tube. One microliter was spotted on target slides, air dried, and overlaid with 1 μl of CHCA matrix solution. All data presented were acquired using a Vitek MS Plus system (bioMérieux) and were analyzed with Launchpad V2.8 software and the Vitek MS research use only (RUO) 4.10 database. Only spectra containing 100 to 300 peaks were retained for analysis (except for the stability assays, in which all spectra were analyzed). Correct identification with a confidence value above 75% was considered successful identification.

After using this inactivation protocol on strain 16M, we obtained high-quality MALDI-TOF MS spectra (with 13 peaks with resolutions of ≥500) (Fig. 1), which allowed its identification as Brucella sp. (Tables 1 and 2). All tested cultivation conditions for B. melitensis allowed its correct identification, which is of importance since these conditions may vary among laboratories. Strain bIN1983 (strain 16M overexpressing green fluorescent protein [GFP], which is widely used in research laboratories) was also identified correctly (Table 2). All other Brucella strains analyzed (also inactivated with solvent) were correctly identified (Table 1). When testing B. melitensis strain 16M, we found that concentration of the samples by centrifugation was not required (Table 1); the 200-μl suspensions contained enough biomass to allow direct spotting of 1 μl on the target slide, thus reducing the sample processing time. In the event of nonidentification, the remaining sample could be concentrated by centrifugation and retested. The solvent inactivation procedure was also applied to a panel of other bacterial pathogens that are regularly encountered in hospital laboratories. This method allowed their correct identification by MALDI-TOF MS (Table 1).

FIG 1.

FIG 1

Representative MALDI-TOF MS spectrum obtained for Brucella melitensis strain 16M that had been inactivated using the solvent-based protocol. Resolution (Resol.) values and signal/noise (S/N) ratios for the main masses are given in the table. Int., intensity.

TABLE 2.

Rate of identification of B. melitensis 16M, cultivated under different conditions and inactivated with the solvent mixture before MALDI-TOF MS

Strain Mediuma Incubation conditions No. identified/
no. analyzed (%)b
16M COS-B 24 h 2/2 (100)
16M COS-B 48 h 10/11 (91)
16M COS-B 48 h, +5% CO2 2/2 (100)
16M COS-B 72 h 2/2 (100)
16M COS-B 96 h 2/2 (100)
16M COS-B 96 h, +5% CO2 2/2 (100)
16M COS-O 48 h 2/2 (100)
16M MHB 48 h 3/4 (75)
16M MHF 48 h 3/4 (75)
16M BAS 48 h 6/6 (100)
16M BBA 48 h 4/4 (100)
16M CHOC 48 h 4/4 (100)
16M TS 48 h 2/2 (100)
16M TSA-S 48 h 3/4 (75)
bIN1983c COS-B 48 h 7/7 (100)
a

COS-B, Columbia agar with 5% sheep blood (bioMérieux); COS-O, Columbia agar with 5% sheep blood (Oxoid); MHB, Mueller-Hinton agar with 5% sheep blood (Bio-Rad); MHF, Mueller-Hinton agar with 5% horse blood and β-NAD (Bio-Rad); BAS, Brucella agar with 5% sheep blood, hemin, and vitamin K1 (Becton, Dickinson); BBA, Brucella blood agar (bioMérieux); CHOC, chocolate agar with vitox (Oxoid); TS, homemade trypticase soy agar; TSA-S, trypticase soy agar with 5% sheep blood (Becton, Dickinson).

b

Shown are the numbers of successful identifications/number of spectra analyzed, as well as the rate of success.

c

bIN1983, strain 16M plus pMR10-GFP.

Sample stability.

Samples prepared from B. melitensis 16M in the solvent mixture were stored at room temperature (25°C) or at 4°C prior to analysis by MALDI-TOF MS. For samples stored at 4°C, the percentage of identified samples remained above 70% for 6 days; for samples stored at room temperature, the spectrum quality and hence the identification rate decreased after 3 days (Fig. 2). These findings suggest that these microbiologically safe samples could be shipped for analysis on MALDI-TOF MS platforms, provided that national and international regulations are respected. This is of particular interest for low-income countries, where brucellosis and other highly infectious bacterial infections are common but frequently missed because laboratory facilities cannot afford such modern tools.

FIG 2.

FIG 2

MALDI-TOF MS spectra for Brucella melitensis strain 16M samples that had been stored in solvent at 4°C or 25°C for up to 2 weeks before analysis. Shown are the number of successful identifications/number of spectra analyzed, as well as the rate of success. For each condition, a representative spectrum is also shown.

In conclusion, we describe a simple approach for inactivation of Brucella isolates prior to their analysis by MALDI-TOF MS. This protocol is considerably faster than previously described protocols, which require several reagents, centrifugation steps, and long incubations (1216) or expensive gamma ray sources (17). Sample preparation with the solvent mixture allowed correct MALDI-TOF MS identification of all Brucella strains tested and several other bacterial pathogens. Further studies are needed to determine whether the solvent-based protocol can be used to inactivate other bacterial pathogens and allow their identification by MALDI-TOF MS, which would allow routine application of this method to all unidentified bacteria, as a safety measure for laboratory workers and/or for the shipment of erstwhile infectious samples to mass spectrometry platforms.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental material

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

V.M., V.G., S.A., and M.W. are employees of bioMérieux, the manufacturer of the MALDI-TOF MS system used in this study. bioMérieux had no influence on data collection or the interpretation of the study results. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Funding Statement

Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), Université de Montpellier, and Institut de Veille Sanitaire (InVS) provided funding to David O’Callaghan through recurrent (yearly) sources. This work was also partially sponsored by bioMérieux, through a private research contract.

Footnotes

Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02730-15.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Traxler RM, Lehman MW, Bosserman EA, Guerra MA, Smith TL. 2013. A literature review of laboratory-acquired brucellosis. J Clin Microbiol 51:3055–3062. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00135-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.de Figueiredo P, Ficht TA, Rice-Ficht A, Rossetti CA, Adams LG. 2015. Pathogenesis and immunobiology of brucellosis: review of Brucella-host interactions. Am J Pathol 185:1505–1517. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2015.03.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Moreno E. 2014. Retrospective and prospective perspectives on zoonotic brucellosis. Front Microbiol 5:213. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Godfroid J, DeBolle X, Roop RM, O'Callaghan D, Tsolis RM, Baldwin C, Santos RL, McGiven J, Olsen S, Nymo IH, Larsen A, Al Dahouk S, Letesson JJ. 2014. The quest for a true One Health perspective of brucellosis. Rev Sci Tech 33:521–538. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Mableson HE, Okello A, Picozzi K, Welburn SC. 2014. Neglected zoonotic diseases: the long and winding road to advocacy. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 8:e2800. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002800. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Al Dahouk S, Nöckler K. 2011. Implications of laboratory diagnosis on brucellosis therapy. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 9:833–845. doi: 10.1586/eri.11.55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Al Dahouk S, Sprague LD, Neubauer H. 2013. New developments in the diagnostic procedures for zoonotic brucellosis in humans. Rev Sci Tech 32:177–188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Patel R. 2015. MALDI-TOF MS for the diagnosis of infectious diseases. Clin Chem 61:100–111. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2014.221770. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nomura F. 2015. Proteome-based bacterial identification using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS): a revolutionary shift in clinical diagnostic microbiology. Biochim Biophys Acta 1854:528–537. doi: 10.1016/j.bbapap.2014.10.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Traxler RM, Guerra MA, Morrow MG, Haupt T, Morrison J, Saah JR, Smith CG, Williams C, Fleischauer AT, Lee PA, Stanek D, Trevino-Garrison I, Franklin P, Oakes P, Hand S, Shadomy SV, Blaney DD, Lehman MW, Benoit TJ, Stoddard RA, Tiller RV, De BK, Bower W, Smith TL. 2013. Review of brucellosis cases from laboratory exposures in the United States in 2008 to 2011 and improved strategies for disease prevention. J Clin Microbiol 51:3132–3136. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00813-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Cunningham SA, Patel R. 2015. Standard matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry reagents may inactivate potentially hazardous bacteria. J Clin Microbiol 53:2788–2789. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00957-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lasch P, Beyer W, Nattermann H, Stämmler M, Siegbrecht E, Grunow R, Naumann D. 2009. Identification of Bacillus anthracis by using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry and artificial neural networks. Appl Environ Microbiol 75:7229–7242. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00857-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Drevinek M, Dresler J, Klimentova J, Pisa L, Hubalek M. 2012. Evaluation of sample preparation methods for MALDI-TOF MS identification of highly dangerous bacteria. Lett Appl Microbiol 55:40–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2012.03255.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ferreira L, Vega Castaño S, Sánchez-Juanes F, González-Cabrero S, Menegotto F, Orduña-Domingo A, González-Buitrago JM, Muñoz-Bellido JL. 2010. Identification of Brucella by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry: fast and reliable identification from agar plates and blood cultures. PLoS One 5:e14235. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Karger A, Melzer F, Timke M, Bettin B, Kostrzewa M, Nöckler K, Hohmann A, Tomaso H, Neubauer H, Al Dahouk S. 2013. Interlaboratory comparison of intact-cell matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry results for identification and differentiation of Brucella spp. J Clin Microbiol 51:3123–3126. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01720-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lista F, Reubsaet FA, De Santis R, Parchen RR, de Jong AL, Kieboom J, van der Laaken AL, Voskamp-Visser IA, Fillo S, Jansen HJ, Van der Plas J, Paauw A. 2011. Reliable identification at the species level of Brucella isolates with MALDI-TOF-MS. BMC Microbiol 11:267. doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-11-267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Lasch P, Wahab T, Weil S, Pályi B, Tomaso H, Zange S, Kiland Granerud B, Drevinek M, Kokotovic B, Wittwer M, Pflüger V, Di Caro A, Stämmler M, Grunow R, Jacob D. 2015. Identification of highly pathogenic microorganisms using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry: results of an interlaboratory ring trial. J Clin Microbiol 53:2632–2640. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00813-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental material

Articles from Journal of Clinical Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES