Skip to main content
  • Review Article
  • Published:

Recent literature review of soil processing methods for recovery of Bacillus anthracis spores

Abstract

Identifying virulent Bacillus anthracis within soil is a difficult task due to the number and diversity of other organisms and impeding chemical constituents within soil. Regardless of the detection assay, the initial sample must be processed efficiently to ensure that debris, chemical components, and biological impurities do not obstruct downstream analysis. Soil sample processing protocols can be divided into two general types: indirect and direct. There are two requirements for successful indirect isolation of B. anthracis from soil samples: dissociate the spores from the soil particles and physically separate the free spores from the soil particles. Adding an aqueous carrier medium to a soil sample creates a sample slurry for easier manipulation. Centrifugation, high specific gravity separation, immunomagnetic separation, filtration, and settling have been used to physically separate spores from soil. Direct processing utilizes a soil sample without first separating the spores from the bulk sample and falls under two principal types: culturing on B. anthracis selective agar and bulk DNA extraction. Direct and indirect processing steps each have associated advantages and disadvantages. The objective of this review was to consolidate information acquired from previous research, focusing primarily on data gleaned in the last decade, on the processing of soils contaminated with B. anthracis. As shown in this review, an optimized soil-processing protocol with a known recovery rate and associated confidence intervals is needed. A reliable processing protocol would allow for multiple investigators and laboratories to produce high-quality, uniform results in the event of a B. anthracis release.

Introduction

Bacillus anthracis, the etiological agent of anthrax, is a naturally occurring Gram-positive spore-forming bacteria found in many soil environments (Van Ert et al. 2007). Exposure of humans to Bacillus anthracis spores has been historically associated with agricultural contact with infected animals or animal products. Outbreaks of anthrax in livestock in the United States have been reported since the early 1800s (Mikesell et al. 1983) and were historically reported along cattle trails (Blackburn et al. 2007). In many instances, recent anthrax cases were associated with old graves of anthrax-stricken animals and adequate soil conditions (Pepper and Gentry 2002; Griffin et al. 2009; Hugh-Jones and Blackburn 2009).

There are a number of alternative theories regarding the lifecycle of B. anthracis in soil (Minett 1950; Lindeque and Turnbull 1994; Dragon and Rennie 1995; Atlas 2002; Coker 2002; Dragon et al. 2005; Saile and Koehler 2006; Johnson 2007; Lee et al. 2007; Hugh-Jones and Blackburn 2009; Schuch and Fischetti 2009; Schuch et al. 2010; Dey et al. 2012). Regardless of how B. anthracis spores came to a soil, it is generally accepted that some soils are better at harboring spores than others, and weather conditions influence the occurrence of environmental anthrax cases. B. anthracis is most often found in dry conditions with soils that are high in organic matter and calcium and are relatively alkaline (above pH 6) (Van Ness 1971; Johnson 2007; Hugh-Jones and Blackburn 2009). Spores are metabolically dormant and extremely resistant to environmental stresses (Ghosh and Setlow 2009, 2010). Spores can persist in soil for years (Graham-Smith 1930; Wilson and Russell 1964; Lewis 1969; Manchee et al. 1981; Lindeque and Turnbull 1994; Purcell et al. 2007; Sinclair et al. 2008) and are thought to migrate within the soil following the flow of water (Kim et al. 2009).

Soil is a complex matrix with multiple components and a plethora of microbial activities, and the properties of soil change with the seasons and over extended periods of time (USDA 1999). One gram of soil reportedly contains up to 10 billion microorganisms, and thousands of different species (Delmont et al. 2011a), and close relatives of B. anthracis can be collocated in the soil environments (Kuske et al. 2006). Chemical constituents of soil such as organics, humic acids, etc., can interfere with the chemistry involved in downstream microbiological detection assays (Zhou et al. 1996; Sjostedt et al. 1997; Beyer et al. 1999; Cheun et al. 2003; Robe et al. 2003; Balestrazzi et al. 2009; Dineen et al. 2010; Gulledge et al. 2010). Due to the number and diversity of organisms and impeding chemical constituents within soil, identifying B. anthracis within a soil sample is a difficult task.

While there are many B. anthracis detection assays, only a few of them can be utilized directly with environmental soil samples. The initial sample must be efficiently processed to ensure that debris, chemical components, and biological impurities do not obstruct microbiological detection. Without appropriate sample processing, the most sensitive detection assay will be ineffective. There is a need for a universal sample processing protocol to separate, concentrate, and purify target agents from any sample type (Lim et al. 2005). There have been multiple reviews detailing the various detection assays for B. anthracis (Edwards et al. 2006; Rao et al. 2010; Irenge and Gala 2012), but previous reviews have not included an in-depth discussion of various soil sample-processing protocols. Multiple processing protocols have been developed either to separate spores from soil samples before microbiological assessment or to directly extract bulk DNA to identify the initial organism(s) present within the soil. However, these studies have never been integrated to determine the overall breadth of knowledge regarding the processing efficiency. Therefore, the objective of this project was to consolidate information acquired from previous research and provide a summary regarding the direct and indirect processing of soils contaminated with B. anthracis that have been utilized in the recent literature.

Methods

Open-literature searches of PubMed®, Google Scholar, and the Battelle Library using the search criteria “Bacillus anthracis,” “soil,” and “soil microbiology” were used to collect nearly 100 pertinent documents. The search focused primarily on data gleaned in the last decade. A brief summary of the literature review findings are summarized here. Literature for processing protocols of similar pathogens or similar matrices were also included in the summary if found during the search and deemed to be applicable.

Results

Two types of processing protocols, indirect and direct, were identified in the literature by Delmont et al. (2011b). For indirect processing, spores are extracted from soil particles and concentrated prior to downstream detection with an analysis assay such as culture or polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Conversely, direct processes refers to utilization of a soil matrix with a detection assay without first extracting and concentrating the spores from the bulk sample. Direct and indirect processing are discussed in more detail in the subsequent sections.

Indirect processing: Separating B. anthracis from soil

Because spores have the potential to adhere to large soil aggregates (Nicholson and Law 1999), there are two requirements for successful isolation of B. anthracis from soil samples: dissociate the spores from the soil particles and separate the free spores physically from the soil particles. Protocols for spore purification from soil particles prior to use of detection assays (for example culture or PCR) involve steps to accomplish both of these objectives. The most common types of processing protocols can be broken down into three steps with the first two working together to disrupt spore–soil interactions: (1) introduce an aliquot of soil to an aqueous carrier medium; (2) mix the soil with the liquid to aid in chemical and/or physical dissociation of spores from soil aggregates; and (3) separate and concentrate spores away from soil particulates. In some cases, additional steps are taken to concentrate and further purify the final spore sample.

Aqueous carrier media

The hydrophobic exosporidium of B. anthracis interacts with solid soil particles and requires treatment prior to efficient spore recovery (Saikaly et al. 2007; Naclerio et al. 2009). Adding an aqueous carrier medium to a soil sample creates a sample slurry that can be manipulated. While deionized water has been utilized (Dragon and Rennie 2001), chemical additives (buffers, chelating agents, surfactants, salts, emulsifiers) are often included to aid spore–soil dissociation. Chelating agents [e.g., ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), Chelex® 100 and surfactants (e.g., Triton™ X-100, TWEEN® 20, TWEEN® 80, sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)] promote detachment of spores from soil particles, whereas salt solutions (sodium chloride, aluminum sulfate) form a complex and precipitate extracellular DNA and humic acids present within the soil (Lombard et al. 2011). The carrier medium (or spore extraction solution) has been said to be the most important factor influencing the efficiency of extracting spores from wipes (Da Silva et al. 2011).

Within the reviewed studies, there were many different aqueous media used to separate spores from soil samples. The most common type of carrier medium was a buffered solution or a buffer solution with a surfactant. Recovery efficiency data are lacking in many studies. Three B. anthracis studies contained spore recovery data for various soil types. The aqueous carrier media used in these studies included: Triton™ X-100 in water (Dragon and Rennie 2001), Nonidet™ P-40 in water (Dragon and Rennie 2001), TWEEN 20 in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (Marston et al. 2008; Bradley et al. 2011), sucrose (Dragon and Rennie 2001), Triton™ X-100 in sucrose (Dragon and Rennie 2001; Bradley et al. 2011), and TWEEN 20 in sucrose (Dragon and Rennie 2001). Spore recovery efficiency varied depending on the soil type and aqueous carrier medium. A number of other parameters such as sample age, sample amount, and dissociation protocol may also have influenced the overall extraction efficiency. Carrier media that were typically used for comparisons of recovery of pathogens other than B. anthracis in soil in the literature included sterile deionized water (Dabiré et al. 2001; Ehlers et al. 2008), PBS (Fitzpatrick et al. 2010; Isabel et al. 2012), NaCl solution (Ehlers et al. 2008; Santana et al. 2008), and NaOH (Dabiré et al. 2001). Studies in which recovery efficiency data were lacking (Rastogi et al. 2009) or which looked at aqueous carrier media for matrices other than soil (Tims and Lim 2004; Hong-Geller et al. 2010; Leishman et al. 2010; Da Silva et al. 2011) were also found but are not discussed in this review. While no study provided statistical evidence for an optimized aqueous carrier medium, the individual studies each concluded that the addition of a surfactant aided spore recovery when compared to PBS or sucrose solutions alone (Dragon and Rennie 2001; Da Silva et al. 2011). Determination of an optimum aqueous carrier medium from the available information is therefore difficult.

Spore–soil dissociation

Microbial cells are tightly bound to soil colloids with clay and organic matter posing particular challenges in spore–soil separation (Zhou et al. 1996). One experiment found that 99 % of the natural spores present in a sandy test soil were associated with the soil aggregates and not within the aqueous carrier medium, indicating that additional steps are needed to dissociate the spores from the soil (Nicholson and Law 1999). Chemical additives added to the aqueous carrier medium are used to help dissociate spores from soil; however, physical means are also utilized. Physical agitation has taken the form of manual shaking, gentle agitation, use of a Stomacher®, use of blenders, vortexing, sonication, and/or bead beating.

More energetic dispersion protocols may yield greater spore recovery efficiencies (Dabiré et al. 2001). Dissociation of large soil aggregates was suggested as the primary cause for the increased spore recoveries. Other studies have confirmed that more energetic dispersion protocols aid in overall recovery rates. Vortexing was found to be statistically superior to sonication for separating B. anthracis spores from wipe samples (Da Silva et al. 2011) and enhanced homogenization has been achieved using a Waring® blender over sonication or chemical treatment alone (Courtois et al. 2001). Ultrasonication treatment and shaking have been found to be inferior dispersion protocols when compared to using a Waring® blender (Lindahl and Bakken 1995). Even with significant physical disruption, spore-soil interactions are powerful and may be only slightly interrupted by physical agitation (Nicholson and Law 1999). An estimated 35–55 % of the spores remained with large stable aggregates following total soil disruption with agate marbles (Dabiré et al. 2001).

Physical separation of spores from soil

After spore–soil dissociation, spores can be separated physically from soil particles using methods such as density separation [e.g., high and low speed centrifugation, high specific gravity separation (HSGS)], affinity capture [e.g., immunomagnetic separation (IMS)] or filtration (Fig. 1). While some protocols do not require debris-free sample material for downstream detection assays (culture, direct DNA extraction followed by molecular detection), many assays have higher sensitivities with purified samples.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Indirect soil processing steps. a Initial soil sample with soil-bound spores (). b Soil sample with added aqueous carrier medium. c Soil slurry with soil-bound spores and dissociated spores (). di Separation and concentration methods; density separation via: d low-speed centrifugation; e high-speed centrifugation; f high specific gravity separation; g settling. h affinity capture (imperfectly specific) using antibody-labeled magnetic beads (); i filtration with 20-and 0.45-μm pore size filters

Density separation methods include low-speed centrifugation, high-speed centrifugation, and HSGS. Low-speed centrifugation precipitates only dense soil particles leaving the more buoyant free dissociated spores within the supernatant. Spores remaining bound to soil particles after dissociation steps are removed with the soil particles. Spores within the supernatant can be detected directly or concentrated through additional steps. Two studies used low-speed centrifugation speeds of 123 g (Fitzpatrick et al. 2010) and 2,900 g (Roh et al. 2006) to separate soil particles from the microbial cell fraction before DNA extraction. However, neither study specifically targeted B. anthracis within the soil samples. The study using the 2,900 g centrifugation speed concluded that separation of cells prior to DNA extraction (indirect DNA extraction) yielded a lower quantity of higher quality DNA extracts when compared to directly extracted soil samples (Roh et al. 2006). Low-speed centrifugation (657 g and 2,000 rpm, respectively) was also used as part of the isolation steps of the GABRI (ground anthrax Bacillus refined identification) protocol and was successful in recovering B. anthracis from soil samples; however, the study did not specifically target determination of the recovery efficiency of the low-speed centrifugation step (Fasanella et al. 2013a, b).

In contrast to low-speed centrifugation, high-speed centrifugation precipitates free spores along with other microorganisms or soil particles present in the initial suspension. Therefore, high-speed centrifugation is typically used to wash away humic acids and extracellular DNA within a soil sample before further analysis (Gulledge et al. 2010). Seven studies utilized a high-speed centrifugation step to aid in pre-washing the soil samples (Maarit Niemi et al. 2001; Cheun et al. 2003; Bielawska-Drózd et al. 2008; Dauphin et al. 2009; Gulledge et al. 2010; Hong-Geller et al. 2010; Jain et al. 2011). A maximum 1 g aliquot of soil was utilized in these studies. In all but one study (Jain et al. 2011), soil particles were not separated from the spores before lysis and DNA extraction. In one study, additional soil pre-washing before DNA extraction was found to diminish PCR inhibition (Jain et al. 2011), but in a second study it was determined that pre-washed soil samples were not significantly different from soil samples placed directly into the extraction kit process (Gulledge et al. 2010). A settling period following vigorous shaking has also been used in combination with other separation procedures such as high-speed centrifugation (EPA 2013).

The studies discussed in this review used four types of HSGS solutions used as a density separation method: sucrose solutions (Pillai et al. 1991; Dragon and Rennie 2001; Ryu et al. 2003; Bradley et al. 2011; Stratilo and Bader 2012), Nycodenz® density gradient medium (Lindahl 1996; Courtois et al. 2001; Ehlers et al. 2008; Pote et al. 2010; Delmont et al. 2011b), sodium bromide solution (Nicholson and Law 1999), and two-phase liquid systems (Sacks and Alderton 1961; Agarwal et al. 2002; Parachin et al. 2010). Irrespective of gradient medium, HSGS utilizes differences in specific gravity to separate B. anthracis spores from other organisms and soil components. Depending upon the sub-species, B. anthracis spores range in density from 1.162 to 1.184 g mL−1 (Carrera et al. 2008) and are concentrated in the upper layers of most density gradient solutions post-centrifugation. Sucrose and Nycodenz® solutions are utilized at densities of 1.22 and 1.3 g mL−1, respectively, allowing spores to concentrate within the uppermost layer following centrifugation. Two comparative studies concluded that HSGS with 1.22 g mL−1 sucrose was the most effective protocol for spore separation, though yields were not high (Dragon and Rennie 2001; Ryu et al. 2003), while results from a third study were variable (Bradley et al. 2011). The utility of Nycodenz® HSGS for recovering B. anthracis spores is unknown. Conflicting efficiency results were found in the literature for use of Nycodenz® density gradient medium to prepare soil samples for total indigenous DNA extraction (Lindahl and Bakken 1995; Courtois et al. 2001). Two-phase liquid systems and sodium bromide include a wider range of liquid densities within a single centrifugation tube (1.0–1.3 g mL−1) (Nicholson and Law 1999; Parachin et al. 2010). The spore-rich layer in these solutions is midway within the tube; the uppermost layers with lower density cell debris must be removed prior to spore collection. The added step of removing the uppermost layer significantly reduced the spore yield within the final sample. The addition of sodium bromide HSGS has been shown to decrease indigenous spore yields from 2–4 % to less than 0.1 % (Nicholson and Law 1999). Using a two-phase liquid HSGS protocol, recovery of B. anthracis Sterne spores from garden soil and sand samples was approximately 9–20 % and >50 %, respectively (Agarwal et al. 2002).

IMS is an affinity capture method that utilizes anti-B. anthracis spore antibodies associated with magnetic beads to capture and concentrate B. anthracis spores. Following the addition of the aqueous carrier medium and spore–soil dissociation steps, magnetic beads conjugated with B. anthracis antibodies are added to the soil sample suspension. Spores present in the sample bind to the antibodies. A magnet is used to concentrate the bead–antibody–spore complex away from the soil slurry and allows the transfer of the bead–antibody–complex to a buffer solution for further washing and purification. The recovered spores can be assayed using either culture, chemical, or molecular protocols. One study compared automated IMS recovery efficiencies for four different soil types (Arizona test dust, Minnesota loam, potting soil, and sand) and found an overall minimum limit of detection (LOD) of 102 spores g−1 of soil (Bradley et al. 2011). Recoveries ranged from 17 to 51 % among the four soils with the Minnesota loam and potting soil being the most recalcitrant (Bradley et al. 2011). However, microorganisms other than B. anthracis were detected after culture with sand and potting soil, and may have been transferred to the final sample as an aggregate with magnetic soil particles (Bradley et al. 2011). Antibody specificity was tested using time-resolved fluorescence, and results indicated that the B. anthracis antibody can differentiate between closely related and nonrelated bacterial strains (only B. anthracis spores were tested, not vegetative cells) (Bradley et al. 2011). In an effort to improve the selectivity of IMS-treated soil samples, a separate study directly extracted small acid-soluble spore protein-B from the spores for highly sensitive liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry detection (Chenau et al. 2011). While selectivity was improved, the added processing/detection steps decreased overall sensitivity to a LOD of 7 × 104 spores g−1 soil. Fig. 1h illustrates how both bound spores and dissociated spores can be captured.

The adsorption of B. anthracis to immunoglobulin G labeled magnetic beads has been shown to be increased significantly with the addition of didecyldimethylammonium bromide in pure laboratory standards; however, adsorption efficiencies may decrease by 20–40 % for environmental samples (Yitzhaki et al. 2006). While IMS adsorption efficiencies for environmental samples may be of concern, IMS does have the advantage of being rapid. Researchers (Fisher et al. 2009) developed a rapid IMS-lateral flow protocol for identification of B. anthracis spores in milk samples within approximately 40 min. IMS may be an attractive option for detecting B. anthracis spores in soil due to its simplicity, speed, and utility for large numbers of samples (Bruno and Yu 1996). “Liquid-phase” immunoassays have been used for spore capture of B. anthracis spores from dust by adding anti-B. anthracis antibodies to spore suspensions, incubating, and further processing the sample (Hang et al. 2008).

Filtration is another method that has been used to dissociate spores such as Pasteuria penetrans and B. atrophaeus spores from soil samples (Dabiré et al. 2001; Isabel et al. 2012). Pasteuria penetrans spores have been concentrated into the 0- to 20-μm sample fraction, but a significant number of spores were also associated with larger clay aggregates (Dabiré et al. 2001). One study used dual syringe filters to establish rapid filtration separation-based sample processing (Isabel et al. 2012). Their protocol utilized a 5-μm pore-sized filter to separate spores from a variety of matrices including soil, dust, silica, and bentonite. An additional 0.45-μm pore-sized filter was used to concentrate the spores recovered from the 5-μm pore-sized filter. On average for all matrices tested, 68 and 51 % of the B. atrophaeus spores were recovered using the capture filtration step only (0.45-μm pore-sized filter) and the dual filter protocol, respectively.

Direct processing

Direct processing protocols include direct culturing of soil and bulk DNA extraction. It has been said that clinical identification of B. anthracis is not a problem; it is the presence of organic and inorganic compounds and extraneous bacterial flora (particularly other spore-forming Bacillus species) in environmental samples that interferes with B. anthracis detection and identification (Bielawska-Drózd et al. 2008). While selective media have been used to isolate other Bacillus species from soil (Travers et al. 1987), and DNA extraction has been evaluated for isolation of B. anthracis from other matrices such as food, powders, and clinical samples (Panning et al. 2007; Wielinga et al. 2011) or for other bacterial organisms in soil (Jacobsen and Rasmussen 1992), direct processing of B. anthracis in soil requires more research. Extensive testing must be done to develop a selective culture medium that allows differentiation between B. anthracis and other Bacillus spp. In addition, DNA obtained directly from soil samples must be purified carefully and DNA signature specificity must be carefully selected to ensure species selectivity.

Selective culture media

Although culturing is time consuming and laborious for large sample sets, there are times when it is critical to determine the quantity of viable B. anthracis within a sample or to assess the antimicrobial susceptibility of an environmental strain (Tomaso et al. 2006; Luna et al. 2009). Researchers have sought a B. anthracis-specific agar-based medium that deters background cultures and other Bacillus species, yet allows B. anthracis to flourish. Sheep or horse blood is often included within a B. anthracis-selective medium to evaluate hemolysis. B. anthracis is non-hemolytic, and the agar will remain red surrounding the cultures. Conversely, the near-neighbor bacterium Bacillus cereus is hemolytic and produces an enzyme that lyses red blood cells and changes the appearance of the agar surrounding B. cereus growth. This review found several culture media selective for B. anthracis within the open literature as discussed below.

Mannitol-egg yolk-polymyxin B agar (MEP) has been used as a selective medium (Luna et al. 2005). B. anthracis colonies on MEP are colorless with a weak lecithinase production giving an opaque zone just beneath the colony, whereas other organisms turn yellow with mannitol fermentation and are translucent without lecithinase production. While MEP can distinguish B. anthracis from a number of Bacillus species, MEP is not sufficiently reliable (Luna et al. 2005).

R & F® anthracis chromogenic agar (ChrA) has also been used to distinguish B. anthracis from other Bacillus species (Juergensmeyer et al. 2006; Marston et al. 2008). ChrA includes the substrate 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indoxylcholine phosphate, which converts to a water-insoluble blue dye in the presence of phosphatidylcholine-specific phospholipase C (PC-PLC). Among Bacillus species, only B. anthracis, B. cereus, and B. thuringiensis produce PC-PLC. For B. cereus and B. thuringiensis, the color change occurs within 24 h, whereas for B. anthracis, the color change is seen only after 48 h due to a nonsense mutation that reduces PC-PLC activity and eliminates its hemolytic activity (Juergensmeyer et al. 2006). Selective ingredients within ChrA spiked into soil or other materials have been found to reduce the number of background soil flora capable of growing to approximately 103 colony-forming units (CFU) g−1 (Juergensmeyer et al. 2006). The color changing properties of B. anthracis colonies on the ChrA allowed them to be distinguished easily among the remaining background flora. However, B. anthracis colonies are harder to identify when B. cereus and B. thuringiensis growth is overwhelming (Juergensmeyer et al. 2006).

The utility of Cereus Ident Agar™ (CEI) and Anthrax Blood Agar™ (ABA) has been examined (Tomaso et al. 2006). CEI contains a chromatogenic substrate similar to ChrA. Only the turquoise coloration of non-anthracis spp. can be used to discriminate B. anthracis from its near-neighbors (Tomaso et al. 2006). ABA is a nutrient medium containing sheep blood and supplements to inhibit many fast-growing organisms. The hemolysin gene of B. cereus has been found within B. anthracis strains on a few occasions, so hemolytic morphology is not a definitive assessment (Tomaso et al. 2006). B. anthracis could be identified appropriately 71 and 72 % of the time on CEI and ABA, respectively, when tested against 92 environmental B. anthracis isolates and 132 other Bacillus spp. (Tomaso et al. 2006).

Polymyxin B, lysozyme, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, thallous acetate (PLET) is another selective medium described in the literature. Bradley et al. (2011) compared PLET agar to Trypticase® soy agar amended with 5 % sheep red blood cells (TSA II) and determined the two media to be comparable (PLET CFU were within 72–77 % of the TSA II CFU counts). In a comparison of PLET with ChrA, PLET was found to be more sensitive and more selective against other Bacillus and non-Bacillus species than ChrA (Marston et al. 2008). However, PLET and ChrA had similar B. anthracis recovery rates for the bacteria when spiked into Texas soil and Arizona test dust. Selective PLET agar has been used to differentiate B. anthracis colonies from other organisms, but it was found that PLET was not specific for B. anthracis (Moazeni Jula et al. 2007; Vahedi et al. 2009). After confirmatory biochemical testing of multiple B. anthracis-like colonies, B. cereus, B. circulans, B. megaterium, B. subtilis, and B. sphaericus were all found on the original formulation of PLET agar. However, in one study, only approximately 33 % of the B. anthracis-like colonies tested were in fact B. anthracis colonies (Moazeni Jula et al. 2007). Columbia blood agar with trimethoprim, sulfamethoxazole, methanol, and polymyxin has also been used for recovery of spores from soil samples, but no recovery efficiencies were recorded (Fasanella et al. 2013a).

Researchers have sought to improve the original 1966 formulation of PLET medium for better selectivity (Dragon and Rennie 2001; Luna et al. 2009). In 2001, Dragon and Rennie compared non-selective sheep blood agar (SBA) to PLET and PLET amended with 5 % defibrinated horse blood. Results demonstrated that, although the original PLET was more selective than PLET amended with horse blood, SBA recovered significantly more B. anthracis than PLET. These findings led Dragon and Rennie (2001) to conclude that, although PLET is selective for B. anthracis, PLET is not an ideal recovery medium and may underestimate the number of spores within a sample. Luna et al. (2009) sought to improve the utility of the original PLET medium further with the addition of the antibiotics sulfamethoxazole (38 μg mL−1) and trimethoprim (2 μg mL−1). Plates were incubated at both 30 and 35 °C. The modified PLET medium was tested against 283 environmental isolates, including 23 isolates of B. anthracis, and could be used in a liquid broth or solid agar state. Results indicated that the additional antibiotics in the PLET medium delayed the appearance of resistant B. cereus and inhibited the growth of other Bacillus species. Additionally, the concentrations of polymyxin B and lysozyme, both components of the original formulation of PLET, were found to be optimal at 15,000 and 150,000 units L−1, respectively. Work-safety regulations in some countries prevent the use of PLET due to the high concentrations of toxic thallium acetate (1.9 mg ml−1) within its composition (Tomaso et al. 2006; Luna et al. 2009). Based upon the breadth of data known regarding the specificity of modified PLET medium, modified PLET medium is the most promising selective culture medium for B. anthracis documented within the literature.

A compounding difficulty for spore culturing is the existence of superdormant spores of Bacillus species (Ghosh and Setlow 2009, 2010) which require elevated concentrations of germination compounds and/or extended incubation periods before they germinate (Ghosh et al. 2009). Even after a suitable processing or culturing protocol for most spores is employed, any superdormant spores present within a sample might not germinate. Previous work has indicated that B. anthracis superdormant spores might react in a manner similar to B. cereus and B. megaterium superdormant spores. However, no studies were found that specifically outline how to process soil-borne superdormant spores (Ghosh and Setlow 2010).

Direct DNA extraction from bulk soils

Prior to performing PCR analysis, DNA must be extracted from the sample. For direct DNA extraction, a small amount of soil (0.1–10 g) is added to a DNA extraction buffer. Cells from all organisms present in a sample are lysed through both chemical and physical means. DNA-identifying reactions are used to seek, amplify, and detect the DNA segments of interest within the total mass of extracted DNA. The DNA extraction protocol influences the quantity and quality of template DNA available.

DNA can be extracted directly from bulk soils or from spores already removed from the soil. Two studies found that direct DNA extraction produced over 33 times more DNA per gram of soil than indirect HSGS separation and over 100 times more DNA per gram of soil than low-speed centrifugation separation (Roh et al. 2006; Delmont et al. 2011b). While indirect DNA extraction had a reduced concentration of DNA, the overall quality of DNA was increased compared to direct extraction protocols. It has been estimated that as much as 40 % of the total microbial DNA contained within a soil sample is lost during direct DNA extraction, and an additional 30 % can be lost during downstream purification procedures (Lombard et al. 2011). The initial soil conditions also have an effect on the quality and quantity of the DNA extracts. Increased carbon content within the bulk soil sample has been shown to correspond to increased DNA yield (Zhou et al. 1996), while the organic content in the soil is directly proportional to humic acids, known PCR inhibitors (Sjostedt et al. 1997). Therefore, appropriate measures must be taken to reduce PCR inhibitors in soil DNA extracts.

Numerous kits are available from vendors that are specific for DNA extraction from soil samples. There are two critical steps to cellular DNA extraction: cell lysis and DNA separation. The components of most kits are proprietary, but there are a few general types of lysis and DNA separation protocols. Many extraction kits utilize a combination of chemical disruption (detergents) and physical agitation (bead beating) for effective lysis of cellular membranes and release of spore DNA. In one study, 40 freeze–thaw cycles with liquid nitrogen were not sufficient to lyse B. atrophaeus spores, but a combination of chemical and physical agitation showed promising lysing efficiency (Kuske et al. 1998). Once released, DNA is often bound to silica filters or magnetic beads for purification. Humic acids, polysaccharides, and urea show solubility properties equivalent to DNA and are often co-extracted, especially at higher pHs (Frostegard et al. 1999; Balestrazzi et al. 2009). Washing steps are utilized to reduce the presence of co-extracted compounds post-lysis before purified DNA is concentrated in an elution buffer. In particular, polyvinylpyrrolidone is used to adsorb inhibiting phenols, including humic acids (Frostegard et al. 1999). The final elution buffer often contains Tris and EDTA to protect the extracted DNA from nuclease activity over time (Frostegard et al. 1999).

While there are a multitude of commercial extraction kits available for soil samples, determining the overall best kit is difficult. This literature search found only three studies that directly compared two or more extraction kits for analyzing B. anthracis in environmental soil samples (Dineen et al. 2010; Gulledge et al. 2010; Bradley et al. 2011). Gulledge et al. 2010 concluded that no one kit from the five tested was superior [UltraClean™ Soil DNA Isolation Kit (MO BIO Laboratories, Carlsbad, CA, USA); SoilMaster™ DNA Extraction Kit (Epicentre Biotechnologies, Madison, WI, USA); Fast DNA® SPIN Kit for Soil (MP Biomedicals, Solon, OH, USA); MagNa Pure®LC (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN, USA); and the Qiagen® BioRobot M48 Workstation (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA)]. Bradley et al. (2011) determined that the QIAamp® DNA Blood Mini Kit (Qiagen) was more efficient for Arizona test dust, while the UltraClean® Soil DNA Isolation Kit (MO BIO Laboratories) was more efficient for potting soil. The most comprehensive comparison looked at six commercial DNA extraction kits and found that the FastDNA® SPIN Kit for Soil (MP Biomedicals, Solon, OH, USA) yielded significantly higher amounts of spore DNA from each of the three tested soil types (sand, clay, and loam) compared to the other kits tested (Dineen et al. 2010).

The most commonly used commercial extraction kits for soil samples found in the literature search were the UltraClean® Soil DNA Isolation Kit and the Powersoil® DNA Isolation Kit, both produced by MO BIO Laboratories. Both kits require approximately 90 min for bead-beating lysis followed by a silica spin filter to concentrate the extracted DNA. While the UltraClean® Soil DNA Isolation Kit can process a larger quantity of soil (1.0 vs. 0.25 g), the primary difference between the two kits is the presence of an Inhibitor Removal Technology® within the Powersoil® DNA Isolation Kit. In addition, each kit has a large volume companion that uses the same technology to process 10 g samples. Researchers (Whitehouse and Hottel 2007) compared the two kit technologies and found that the UltraClean® Soil DNA Isolation Kit outperformed the PowerMax® Soil DNA Isolation Kit; however, the differences were minimal (Whitehouse and Hottel 2007). The soil conditions apparently have a pronounced effect on the quality and quantity of extracted DNA. Additional information on DNA extraction kits which have been used for similar biological agents and soils or other sample types can also be found in the literature (Maarit Niemi et al. 2001; Cheun et al. 2003; Luna et al. 2003; Roh et al. 2006; Panning et al. 2007; Saikaly et al. 2007; Whitehouse and Hottel 2007; Balestrazzi et al. 2009; Dauphin et al. 2009; Griffin et al. 2009; Fitzpatrick et al. 2010; Hong-Geller et al. 2010; Irenge et al. 2010; Parachin et al. 2010; Pote et al. 2010; Delmont et al. 2011b; Rose et al. 2011; Wielinga et al. 2011; Isabel et al. 2012; EPA 2013).

Care should be taken when using different lots of DNA extraction kits. If different lots of extraction kits are to be used, the lots should be checked for consistency, quality control measures should be used, and new standard curves should be run with each new lot (Bushon et al. 2010).

Enrichment steps

Enrichment steps have been added to processing protocols to help improve recovery of spores from samples that contain a low density of spores (Sjostedt et al. 1997; Cheun et al. 2003; Gulledge et al. 2010; Patel et al. 2013). Addition of an enrichment medium to the sample allows both germination of spores and growth of vegetative cells. As nutrients are depleted, spore-forming bacteria begin sporulation, while the proportion of vegetative cells and other non-spore-forming bacteria decreases or are killed (Patel et al. 2013). Incubation and heat treatment have been used to kill remaining vegetative cells (Patel et al. 2013). The use of selective enrichment agar significantly lowered the detection limits in three studies (Sjostedt et al. 1997; Cheun et al. 2003; Gulledge et al. 2010). The relatively new process of rapid-viability (RV) PCR also incorporates an enrichment step between two PCR reactions to determine the presence of germinated B. anthracis spores rapidly within a collected sample, although, to date, no soil samples have been analyzed using this technique (Kane et al. 2009; EPA 2011).

Purification protocols

Because endospores of B. anthracis are highly resistant to unfavorable environmental conditions in comparison to vegetative cells (Dragon and Rennie 2001; Koehler 2009), purification protocols such as heat treatment and treatment with ethanol are used to help improve recovery of spores from soil and may be used during either direct or indirect processing of the sample. Heat treatment is a method of purification that has been used as part of the soil processing protocol to kill off vegetative cells in soil samples while leaving viable spores (Moazeni Jula et al. 2007; Santana et al. 2008; Vahedi et al. 2009; Gulledge et al. 2010; Jain et al. 2011; Patel et al. 2013). Bacillus spores have been shown to be resistant to ethanol, therefore ethanol has alternatively been used for removing vegetative cells from the sample and is comparable to heat treatment (Dragon and Rennie 2001).

Conclusions

As evident through this review, a significant amount of work has been done to ascertain the most efficient protocol for processing soil samples for B. anthracis detection. Direct and indirect protocols for sample processing were reviewed in detail and both have their associated advantages and disadvantages.

Indirect processing uses multiple steps to separate spores from other organisms and particles prior to analysis and increase the proportion of target spores within the final detected sample; however, spore loss prior to analysis also increases. The presence of a detergent in the aqueous carrier medium was consistently found to improve the separation of spores from soil particles, but no consensus on an optimum aqueous carrier medium could be determined among the reviewed works. Future research focusing on the aqueous carrier medium for processing multiple soil types under uniform dissociation and separation conditions is needed. Spore/soil separation is a critical step in determining the overall recovery efficiency of indirect processing protocols. IMS is an attractive option for separating B. anthracis in soil due to its simplicity, speed, and utility for large numbers of samples, but continued work on IMS and its ability to bind B. anthracis selectively at low concentrations is needed. The overall utility of HSGS as a separation protocol needs to be determined before HSGS is applied within large-scale projects. Although novel dual syringe filtration has shown promise for being able to separate spores rapidly from diverse matrices, future work that combines an optimized aqueous carrier medium with the dual filter steps may be needed to increase recovery rates further.

Direct processing utilizes bulk sample aliquots without first separating spores from soil particles and falls under two principal types: culturing B. anthracis on selective agar and bulk DNA extraction. When samples are directly processed, there is a potential for background organisms to overwhelm the detection assay and prevent target spores from being observed. Researchers have sought a B. anthracis-specific medium that deters background cultures and other Bacillus species and yet allows B. anthracis propagation and identification. Based upon the amount of specificity testing, modified PLET medium was identified as the most promising selective culture medium for B. anthracis documented in the reviewed literature. To date no studies have utilized modified PLET agar as an enrichment step prior to B. anthracis detection. Future recovery efficiencies could be dramatically increased with such an effort. There are multiple commercial DNA extraction kits available for bulk soil samples. While there are numerous advantages to using a commercial kit for sample processing, due to the difference in study designs, an overall optimum DNA extraction kit was not determined. A study which compares multiple soil DNA extraction kits uniformly across multiple soil types to determine their overall DNA recovery is needed.

The type of sample processing employed, direct or indirect, depends upon the desired downstream applications (Lindahl and Bakken 1995). For DNA detection assays, direct bulk DNA extraction with suitable DNA purification steps may be more appropriate. However, indirect processing might be more appropriate if viability testing is required. Regardless of whether direct or indirect processing protocols are employed, the overall recovery rates and confidence intervals are critical pieces of information for downstream human health and consequence decisions. As shown through this review, an optimized soil processing protocol with a known recovery rate and associated confidence intervals is needed. A reliable processing protocol would allow for multiple investigators and laboratories to produce high quality uniform results in the event of a B. anthracis release. A laboratory evaluation of the processing protocols described in this review is necessary in order to provide a recommendation for a standardized processing protocol.

References

  • Agarwal GS, Kamboj DV, Alam SI, Dixit M, Singh L (2002) Environmental detection of Bacillus anthracis spores. Curr Sci 83(6):697–699

    Google Scholar 

  • Atlas RM (2002) Responding to the threat of bioterrorism: a microbial ecology perspective–the case of anthrax. Int Microbiol 5(4):161–167. doi:10.1007/s10123-002-0084-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balestrazzi A, Bonadei M, Calvio C, Galizzi A, Carbonera D (2009) DNA extraction from soil: comparison of different methods using spore-forming bacteria and the swrAA gene as indicators. Ann Microbiol 59(4):827–832. doi:10.1007/BF03179230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer W, Pocivalsek S, Bohm R (1999) Polymerase chain reaction-ELISA to detect Bacillus anthracis from soil samples-limitations of present published primers. J Appl Microbiol 87(2):229–236. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2672.1999.00875.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bielawska-Drózd A, Niemcewicz M, Bartoszcze M (2008) The evaluation of methods for detection of Bacillus anthracis spores in artificially contaminated soil samples. Pol J Environ Stud 17(1):5–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn JK, McNyset KM, Curtis A, Hugh-Jones ME (2007) Modeling the geographic distribution of Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax disease, for the contiguous United States using predictive ecologic niche modeling. Am J Trop Med Hyg 77(6):1103–1110

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley MD, Rose L, Nobel-Wang J, Arduino MJ (2011) Biological Sample Preparation Collaboration Project: Detection of Bacillus anthracis Spores in Soil- Final Study Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security Research Center, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cincinnati, OH. EPA 600/R-10/177

  • Bruno JG, Yu H (1996) Immunomagnetic-electrochemiluminescent detection of Bacillus anthracis spores in soil matrices. Appl Environ Microbiol 62(9):3474–3476

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bushon RN, Kephart CM, Koltun GF, Francy DS, Schaefer FW 3rd, Alan Lindquist HD (2010) Statistical assessment of DNA extraction reagent lot variability in real-time quantitative PCR. Lett Appl Microbiol 50(3):276–282. doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2009.02788.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carrera M, Zandomeni RO, Sagripanti JL (2008) Wet and dry density of Bacillus anthracis and other Bacillus species. J Appl Microbiol 105(1):68–77. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2008.03758.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chenau J, Fenaille F, Ezan E, Morel N, Lamourette P, Goossens PL, Becher F (2011) Sensitive detection of Bacillus anthracis spores by immunocapture and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Anal Chem 83(22):8675–8682. doi:10.1021/ac2020992

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cheun HI, Makino SI, Watarai M, Erdenebaatar J, Kawamoto K, Uchida I (2003) Rapid and effective detection of anthrax spores in soil by PCR. J Appl Microbiol 95(4):728–733. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.02038.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coker PR (2002) Bacillus anthracis spore concentrations at various carcass sites. PhD disseration, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Baton Rouge

  • Courtois S, Frostegard A, Goransson P, Depret G, Jeannin P, Simonet P (2001) Quantification of bacterial subgroups in soil: comparison of DNA extracted directly from soil or from cells previously released by density gradient centrifugation. Environ Microbiol 3(7):431–439. doi:10.1046/j.1462-2920.2001.00208.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Da Silva SM, Filliben JJ, Morrow JB (2011) Parameters affecting spore recovery from wipes used in biological surface sampling. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(7):2374–2380. doi:10.1128/AEM.01932-10

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dabiré KR, Chotte J-L, Fardoux J, Mateille T (2001) New developments in the estimation of spores of Pasteuria penetrans. Biol Fertil Soils 33(4):340–343. doi:10.1007/s003740000320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dauphin LA, Moser BD, Bowen MD (2009) Evaluation of five commercial nucleic acid extraction kits for their ability to inactivate Bacillus anthracis spores and comparison of DNA yields from spores and spiked environmental samples. J Microbiol Methods 76(1):30–37. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2008.09.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Delmont TO, Robe P, Cecillon S, Clark IM, Constancias F, Simonet P, Hirsch PR, Vogel TM (2011a) Accessing the soil metagenome for studies of microbial diversity. Appl Environ Microbiol 77(4):1315–1324. doi:10.1128/AEM.01526-10

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Delmont TO, Robe P, Clark I, Simonet P, Vogel TM (2011b) Metagenomic comparison of direct and indirect soil DNA extraction approaches. J Microbiol Methods 86(3):397–400. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2011.06.013

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dey R, Hoffman PS, Glomski IJ (2012) Germination and amplification of anthrax spores by soil-dwelling amoebas. Appl Environ Microbiol 78(22):8075–8081. doi:10.1128/AEM.02034-12

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dineen SM, Aranda R 4th, Anders DL, Robertson JM (2010) An evaluation of commercial DNA extraction kits for the isolation of bacterial spore DNA from soil. J Appl Microbiol 109(6):1886–1896. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04816.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dragon DC, Rennie RP (1995) The ecology of anthrax spores: tough but not invincible. Can Vet J 36(5):295–301

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dragon DC, Rennie RP (2001) Evaluation of spore extraction and purification methods for selective recovery of viable Bacillus anthracis spores. Lett Appl Microbiol 33(2):100–105. doi:10.1046/j.1472-765x.2001.00966.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dragon DC, Bader DE, Mitchell J, Woollen N (2005) Natural dissemination of Bacillus anthracis spores in northern Canada. Appl Environ Microbiol 71(3):1610–1615. doi:10.1128/AEM.71.3.1610-1615.2005

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards KA, Clancy HA, Baeumner AJ (2006) Bacillus anthracis: toxicology, epidemiology and current rapid-detection methods. Anal Bioanal Chem 384(1):73–84. doi:10.1007/s00216-005-0090-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ehlers K, Bünemann EK, Oberson A, Frossard E, Frostegård Å, Yuejian M, Bakken LR (2008) Extraction of soil bacteria from a ferralsol. Soil Biol Biochem 40(7):1940–1946. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.04.005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • EPA (2011) Development and Verification of Rapid Viability Polymerase Chain Reaction (RV-PCR) Protocols for Bacillus anthracis - For application to air filters, water and surface samples. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security Research Center, Cincinnati, OH. EPA 600/R-10/156

  • EPA (2013) Bio-Response Operational Testing and Evaluation (BOTE) Project - Phase 1: Decontamination Assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security Research Center, Cincinnati, OH. EPA/600/R-13/168

  • Fasanella A, Di Taranto P, Garofolo G, Colao V, Marino L, Buonavoglia D, Pedarra C, Adone R, Hugh-Jones M (2013a) Ground anthrax Bacillus refined isolation (GABRI) method for analyzing environmental samples with low levels of Bacillus anthracis contamination. BMC Microbiol 13(1):167. doi:10.1186/1471-2180-13-167

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fasanella A, Garofolo G, Hossain MJ, Shamsuddin M, Blackburn JK, Hugh-Jones M (2013b) Bangladesh anthrax outbreaks are probably caused by contaminated livestock feed. Epidemiol Infect 141(5):1021–1028. doi:10.1017/S0950268812001227

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher M, Atiya-Nasagi Y, Simon I, Gordin M, Mechaly A, Yitzhaki S (2009) A combined immunomagnetic separation and lateral flow method for a sensitive on-site detection of bacillus anthracis spores–assessment in water and dairy products. Lett Appl Microbiol 48(4):413–418. doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2008.02542.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzpatrick KA, Kersh GJ, Massung RF (2010) Practical method for extraction of PCR-quality DNA from environmental soil samples. Appl Environ Microbiol 76(13):4571–4573. doi:10.1128/AEM.02825-09

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frostegard A, Courtois S, Ramisse V, Clerc S, Bernillon D, Le Gall F, Jeannin P, Nesme X, Simonet P (1999) Quantification of bias related to the extraction of DNA directly from soils. Appl Environ Microbiol 65(12):5409–5420

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Setlow P (2009) Isolation and characterization of superdormant spores of Bacillus species. J Bacteriol 191(6):1787–1797. doi:10.1128/JB.01668-08

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Setlow P (2010) The preparation, germination properties and stability of superdormant spores of Bacillus cereus. J Appl Microbiol 108(2):582–590. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04442.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh S, Zhang P, Li YQ, Setlow P (2009) Superdormant spores of Bacillus species have elevated wet-heat resistance and temperature requirements for heat activation. J Bacteriol 191(18):5584–5591. doi:10.1128/JB.00736-09

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Smith GS (1930) The longevity of dry spores of B. anthracis. J Hyg 30(2):213–215

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin DW, Petrosky T, Morman SA, Luna VA (2009) A survey of the occurrence of bacillus anthracis in north american soils over two long-range transects and within post-Katrina New Orleans. Appl Geochem 24(8):1464–1471. doi:10.1016/j.apgeochem.2009.04.016

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gulledge JS, Luna VA, Luna AJ, Zartman R, Cannons AC (2010) Detection of low numbers of Bacillus anthracis spores in three soils using five commercial DNA extraction methods with and without an enrichment step. J Appl Microbiol 109(5):1509–1520. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04774.x

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hang J, Sundaram AK, Zhu P, Shelton DR, Karns JS, Martin PA, Li S, Amstutz P, Tang CM (2008) Development of a rapid and sensitive immunoassay for detection and subsequent recovery of Bacillus anthracis spores in environmental samples. J Microbiol Methods 73(3):242–246. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2008.02.018

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hong-Geller E, Valdez YE, Shou Y, Yoshida TM, Marrone BL, Dunbar JM (2010) Evaluation of Bacillus anthracis and Yersinia pestis sample collection from nonporous surfaces by quantitative real-time PCR. Lett Appl Microbiol 50(4):431–437. doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2010.02821.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hugh-Jones M, Blackburn J (2009) The ecology of Bacillus anthracis. Mol Aspects Med 30(6):356–367. doi:10.1016/j.mam.2009.08.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Irenge LM, Gala JL (2012) Rapid detection methods for Bacillus anthracis in environmental samples: a review. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 93(4):1411–1422. doi:10.1007/s00253-011-3845-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Irenge LM, Durant JF, Tomaso H, Pilo P, Olsen JS, Ramisse V, Mahillon J, Gala JL (2010) Development and validation of a real-time quantitative PCR assay for rapid identification of Bacillus anthracis in environmental samples. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 88(5):1179–1192. doi:10.1007/s00253-010-2848-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Isabel S, Boissinot M, Charlebois I, Fauvel CM, Shi LE, Levesque JC, Paquin AT, Bastien M, Stewart G, Leblanc E, Sato S, Bergeron MG (2012) Rapid filtration separation-based sample preparation method for Bacillus spores in powdery and environmental matrices. Appl Environ Microbiol 78(5):1505–1512. doi:10.1128/AEM.06696-11

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen CS, Rasmussen OF (1992) Development and application of a new method to extract bacterial DNA from soil based on separation of bacteria from soil with cation-exchange resin. Appl Environ Microbiol 58(8):2458–2462

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jain N, Kumar JS, Parida MM, Merwyn S, Rai GP, Agarwal GS (2011) Real-time loop mediated isothermal amplification assay for rapid and sensitive detection of anthrax spores in spiked soil and talcum powder. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 27(6):1407–1413. doi:10.1007/s12223-012-0117-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson R (2007) Differentiation of naturally occurring from non-naturally occurring epizootics of anthrax in livestock populations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Plant and Animal Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, Ft. Collins, CO

  • Juergensmeyer MA, Gingras BA, Restaino L, Frampton EW (2006) A selective chromogenic agar that distinguishes Bacillus anthracis from Bacillus cereus and Bacillus thuringiensis. J Food Prot 69(8):2002–2006

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kane SR, Létant SE, Murphy GA, Alfaro TM, Krauter PW, Mahnke R, Legler TC, Raber E (2009) Rapid, high-throughput, culture-based PCR methods to analyze samples for viable spores of Bacillus anthracis and its surrogates. J Microbiol Methods 76(3):278–284. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2008.12.005

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kim M, Boone SA, Gerba CP (2009) Factors that influence the transport of Bacillus cereus spores through sand. Water Air Soil Pollut 199:151–157. doi:10.1007/s11270-008-9867-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler TM (2009) Bacillus anthracis physiology and genetics. Mol Aspects Med 30(6):386–396. doi:10.1016/j.mam.2009.07.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuske CR, Banton KL, Adorada DL, Stark PC, Hill KK, Jackson PJ (1998) Small-scale DNA sample preparation method for field PCR detection of microbial cells and spores in soil. Appl Environ Microbiol 64(7):2463–2472

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuske CR, Barns SM, Grow CC, Merrill L, Dunbar J (2006) Environmental survey for four pathogenic bacteria and closely related species using phylogenetic and functional genes. J Forensic Sci 51(3):548–558. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00131.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee K, Costerton JW, Ravel J, Auerbach RK, Wagner DM, Keim P, Leid JG (2007) Phenotypic and functional characterization of Bacillus anthracis biofilms. Microbiology 153(Pt 6):1693–1701. doi:10.1099/mic.0.2006/003376-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leishman ON, Labuza TP, Diez-Gonzalez F (2010) Hydrophobic properties and extraction of Bacillus anthracis spores from liquid foods. Food Microbiol 27(5):661–666. doi:10.1016/j.fm.2010.03.001

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis JC (1969) Dormancy. In: Hurst P, Gould GW (eds) The Bacterial Spore, vol 1. Academic, London, pp 301–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim DV, Simpson JM, Kearns EA, Kramer MF (2005) Current and developing technologies for monitoring agents of bioterrorism and biowarfare. Clin Microbiol Rev 18(4):583–607. doi:10.1128/CMR.18.4.583-607.2005

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl V (1996) Improved soil dispersion procedures for total bacterial counts, extraction of indigenous bacteria and cell survival. J Microbiol Methods 25(3):279–286. doi:10.1016/0167-7012(95)00102-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl V, Bakken LR (1995) Evaluation of methods for extraction of bacteria from soil. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 16(2):135–142. doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.1995.tb00277.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeque PM, Turnbull PC (1994) Ecology and epidemiology of anthrax in the etosha national park, Namibia. Onderstepoort J Vet Res 61(1):71–83

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lombard N, Prestat E, van Elsas JD, Simonet P (2011) Soil-specific limitations for access and analysis of soil microbial communities by metagenomics. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 78(1):31–49. doi:10.1111/j.1574-6941.2011.01140.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luna VA, King D, Davis C, Rycerz T, Ewert M, Cannons A, Amuso P, Cattani J (2003) Novel sample preparation method for safe and rapid detection of Bacillus anthracis spores in environmental powders and nasal swabs. J Clin Microbiol 41(3):1252–1255. doi:10.1128/JCM.41.3.1252-1255.2003

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luna VA, Peak KK, Veguilla WO, Reeves F, Heberlein-Larson L, Cannons AC, Amuso P, Cattani J (2005) Use of two selective media and a broth motility test can aid in identification or exclusion of Bacillus anthracis. J Clin Microbiol 43(9):4336–4341. doi:10.1128/JCM.43.9.4336-4341.2005

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luna VA, Gulledge J, Cannons AC, Amuso PT (2009) Improvement of a selective media for the isolation of B. anthracis from soils. J Microbiol Methods 79(3):301–306. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2009.09.023

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maarit Niemi R, Heiskanen I, Wallenius K, Lindstrom K (2001) Extraction and purification of DNA in rhizosphere soil samples for PCR-DGGE analysis of bacterial consortia. J Microbiol Methods 45(3):155–165. doi:10.1016/S0167-7012(01)00253-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Manchee RJ, Broster MG, Melling J, Henstridge RM, Stagg AJ (1981) Bacillus anthracis on Gruinard Island. Nature 294(5838):254–255. doi:10.1038/294254a0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marston CK, Beesley C, Helsel L, Hoffmaster AR (2008) Evaluation of two selective media for the isolation of Bacillus anthracis. Lett Appl Microbiol 47(1):25–30. doi:10.1111/j.1472-765X.2008.02375.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mikesell P, Ivins BE, Ristoph JD, Vodkin MH, Dreier TM, Leppia SH (1983) Plasmids, Pasteur, and anthrax. ASM News 49:320–322

    Google Scholar 

  • Minett FC (1950) Sporulation and viability of B. anthracis in relation to environmental temperature and humidity. J Comp Pathol 60(3):161–176

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moazeni Jula G, Jabbari A, Vahedi darmian F (2007) Determination of anthrax foci through isolation of Bacillus anthracis from soil samples of different regions of Iran. Arch Razi Inst 62(1):23–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Naclerio G, Fardella G, Marzullo G, Celico F (2009) Filtration of bacillus subtilis and bacillus cereus spores in a pyroclastic topsoil, carbonate Apennines, southern Italy. Colloids Surf B 70(1):25–28. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfb.2008.12.009

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson WL, Law JF (1999) Method for purification of bacterial endospores from soils: UV resistance of natural Sonoran desert soil populations of Bacillus spp. with reference to B. subtilis strain 168. J Microbiol Methods 35(1):13–21. doi:10.1016/S0167-7012(98)00097-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Panning M, Kramme S, Petersen N, Drosten C (2007) High throughput screening for spores and vegetative forms of pathogenic B. anthracis by an internally controlled real-time PCR assay with automated DNA preparation. Med Microbiol Immunol 196(1):41–50. doi:10.1007/s00430-006-0029-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parachin NS, Schelin J, Norling B, Rådström P, Gorwa-Grauslund MF (2010) Flotation as a tool for indirect DNA extraction from soil. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87(5):1927–1933. doi:10.1007/s00253-010-2691-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patel KD, Bhanshali FC, Chaudhary AV, Ingle SS (2013) A new enrichment method for isolation of Bacillus thuringiensis from diverse sample types. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 170(1):58–66. doi:10.1007/s12010-013-0145-y

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pepper IL, Gentry TJ (2002) Incidence of Bacillus anthracis in soil. Soil Sci 167(10):627–635

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pillai SD, Josephson KL, Bailey RL, Gerba CP, Pepper IL (1991) Rapid method for processing soil samples for polymerase chain reaction amplification of specific gene sequences. Appl Environ Microbiol 57(8):2283–2286

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pote J, Bravo AG, Mavingui P, Ariztegui D, Wildi W (2010) Evaluation of quantitative recovery of bacterial cells and DNA from different lake sediments by Nycodenz density gradient centrifugation. Ecol Indic 10(2):234–240. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2009.05.002

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell BK, Worsham PL, Friedlander AM (2007) Anthrax. In: Dembek ZF (ed) Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare. Office of The Surgeon General, US Army Medical Department Center and School. Borden Institute, Washington, pp 69–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao SS, Mohan KV, Atreya CD (2010) Detection technologies for Bacillus anthracis: prospects and challenges. J Microbiol Methods 82(1):1–10. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2010.04.005

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rastogi VK, Wallace L, Smith LS, Ryan SP, Martin B (2009) Quantitative method to determine sporicidal decontamination of building surfaces by gaseous fumigants, and issues related to laboratory-scale studies. Appl Environ Microbiol 75(11):3688–3694. doi:10.1128/AEM.02592-08

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robe P, Nalin R, Capellano C, Vogel TM, Simonet P (2003) Extraction of DNA from soil. Euro J Soil Biol 39(4):183–190. doi:10.1016/S1164-5563(03)00033-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Roh C, Villatte F, Kim BG, Schmid RD (2006) Comparative study of methods for extraction and purification of environmental DNA from soil and sludge samples. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 134(2):97–112

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rose HL, Dewey CA, Ely MS, Willoughby SL, Parsons TM, Cox V, Spencer PM, Weller SA (2011) Comparison of eight methods for the extraction of Bacillus atrophaeus spore DNA from eleven common interferents and a common swab. PLoS ONE 6(7):e22668. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022668

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ryu C, Lee K, Yoo C, Seong WK, Oh HB (2003) Sensitive and rapid quantitative detection of anthrax spores isolated from soil samples by real-time PCR. Microbiol Immunol 47(10):693–699

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sacks LE, Alderton G (1961) Behavior of bacterial spores in aqueous polymer two-phase systems. J Bacteriol 82(3):331–341

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saikaly PE, Barlaz MA, de los Reyes FL 3rd (2007) Development of quantitative real-time PCR assays for detection and quantification of surrogate biological warfare agents in building debris and leachate. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(20):6557–6565. doi:10.1128/Aem.00779-07

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Saile E, Koehler TM (2006) Bacillus anthracis multiplication, persistence, and genetic exchange in the rhizosphere of grass plants. Appl Environ Microbiol 72(5):3168–3174. doi:10.1128/AEM.72.5.3168-3174.2006

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Santana MA, Moccia-V CC, Gillis AE (2008) Bacillus thuringiensis improved isolation methodology from soil samples. J Microbiol Methods 75(2):357–358. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2008.06.008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuch R, Fischetti VA (2009) The secret life of the anthrax agent Bacillus anthracis: bacteriophage-mediated ecological adaptations. PLoS ONE 4(8):e6532. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006532

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuch R, Pelzek AJ, Kan S, Fischetti VA (2010) Prevalence of Bacillus anthracis-like organisms and bacteriophages in the intestinal tract of the earthworm Eisenia fetida. Appl Environ Microbiol 76(7):2286–2294. doi:10.1128/AEM.02518-09

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair R, Boone SA, Greenberg D, Keim P, Gerba CP (2008) Persistence of category a select agents in the environment. Appl Environ Microbiol 74(3):555–563. doi:10.1128/AEM.02167-07

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sjostedt A, Eriksson U, Ramisse V, Garrigue H (1997) Detection of B. anthracis spores in soil by PCR. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 23(2):159–168. doi:10.1016/S0168-6496(97)00023-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stratilo CW, Bader DE (2012) Genetic diversity among Bacillus anthracis soil isolates at fine geographic scales. Appl Environ Microbiol 78(18):6433–6437. doi:10.1128/AEM.01036-12

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tims TB, Lim DV (2004) Rapid detection of Bacillus anthracis spores directly from powders with an evanescent wave fiber-optic biosensor. J Microbiol Methods 59(1):127–130. doi:10.1016/j.mimet.2004.02.016

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tomaso H, Bartling C, Al Dahouk S, Hagen RM, Scholz HC, Beyer W, Neubauer H (2006) Growth characteristics of bacillus anthracis compared to other Bacillus spp. On the selective nutrient media anthrax blood agar and cereus ident agar. Syst Appl Microbiol 29(1):24–28. doi:10.1016/j.syapm.2005.05.008

  • Travers RS, Martin PA, Reichelderfer CF (1987) Selective process for efficient isolation of soil Bacillus spp. Appl Environ Microbiol 53(6):1263–1266

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • USDA (1999) Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. U.S. Department of Agriculture

  • Vahedi F, Moazeni Jula G, Kianizadeh M, Mahmoudi M (2009) Characterization of Bacillus anthracis spores isolates from soil by biochemical and multiplex PCR analysis. East Mediterr Health J 15(1):149–156

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ert MN, Easterday WR, Huynh LY, Okinaka RT, Hugh-Jones ME, Ravel J, Zanecki SR, Pearson T, Simonson TS, U’Ren JM, Kachur SM, Leadem-Dougherty RR, Rhoton SD, Zinser G, Farlow J, Coker PR, Smith KL, Wang B, Kenefic LJ, Fraser-Liggett CM, Wagner DM, Keim P (2007) Global genetic population structure of Bacillus anthracis. PLoS ONE 2(5):e461. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000461

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Ness GB (1971) Ecology of anthrax. Science 172(3990):1303–1307. doi:10.1126/science.172.3990.1303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehouse CA, Hottel HE (2007) Comparison of five commercial DNA extraction kits for the recovery of Francisella tularensis DNA from spiked soil samples. Mol Cell Probes 21(2):92–96. doi:10.1016/j.mcp.2006.08.003

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wielinga PR, de Heer L, de Groot A, Hamidjaja RA, Bruggeman G, Jordan K, van Rotterdam BJ (2011) Evaluation of DNA extraction methods for Bacillus anthracis spores spiked to food and feed matrices at biosafety level 3 conditions. Int J Food Microbiol 150(2–3):122–127. doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.07.023

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JB, Russell KE (1964) Isolation of Bacillus anthracis from soil stored 60 years. J Bacteriol 87:237–238

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yitzhaki S, Zahavy E, Oron C, Fisher M, Keysary A (2006) Concentration of Bacillus spores by using silica magnetic particles. Anal Chem 78(18):6670–6673. doi:10.1021/ac060497g

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou J, Bruns MA, Tiedje JM (1996) DNA recovery from soils of diverse composition. Appl Environ Microbiol 62(2):316–322

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclaimer

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, through its Office of Research and Development, funded and managed the literature review described herein under an Interagency Agreement with the Defense Technical Information Center through the Battelle/Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Defense Information and Analysis Center Contract No. SP0700-00-D-3180, Delivery Order 0679/Technical Area Task 886 and Delivery Order 0729/Technical Area Task CB-11-0232. This document has been subjected to the Agency’s review and has been approved for publication. This article was generated using references (secondary data) that could not be evaluated for accuracy, precision, representativeness, completeness, or comparability and therefore no assurance can be made that the data extracted from these publications meet EPA’s stringent quality assurance requirement. The contents of this document reflect the views of the contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this document or in the literature referenced in this document does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erin E. Silvestri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Silvestri, E.E., Perkins, S.D., Feldhake, D. et al. Recent literature review of soil processing methods for recovery of Bacillus anthracis spores. Ann Microbiol 65, 1215–1226 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-014-0932-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-014-0932-x

Keywords