溶菌酶3种测定方法的比较  

Comparison and appraisal of the three mehods for lysozyme assay.

作　　者：覃倩萍[1] 彭崇基[1] 

机构地区：[1]广西医科大学预防医学系,南宁530021

出　　处：《广西预防医学》1998年第3期138-140,共3页Guangxi Journal of Preventive Medicine

摘　　要：为探讨用于测定溶菌酶（LZM）活性的琼脂板扩散法、比浊法和琼脂糖火箭电泳法测定结果的准确性和偏差程度，我们采用同一标准品、底物和唾液样品，分别对这3种方法进行了实验研究，3种方法的标准LZM线性试验，精密度和准确度试验结果表明，琼脂糖火箭电泳法的各项评价指标均优于琼脂板扩散法和比浊法。用3种方法分别测定50份唾液LZM活性结果的比较显示，琼脂板扩散法与比浊法及琼脂糖火箭电泳法的结果有显著差异（P＜0．01），而比浊法与琼脂糖火箭电泳法的结果无显著差异（P＞0．05），3种方法结果高度相关，但琼脂扩散法测定结果整体偏高，本文就有关影响因素进行了讨论。In order to probe into accuracy and deviation degree of agar diffusion method and turbidimetric method and agarose rocket electrophoresis method for lysozyme assay, a experimental study was engaged that assayed the same salivary samples using these methods respectively, with the same standard matter and base matter. The results of linear test of standard lysozyme and test of reproducibility and recovery rate showed that every appraisal indices of agarose rocket electrophoresis method were better than the other methods. The results of lysozyme assay of 50 salivary samples using these methods respectively showed that the results of agar diffusion method were significantly different from those of the other methods (P<0. 001), but the difference of those of between turbidimetric method and agarose rocket electrophoresis was not significant (P > 0. 05). The results of these methods had high correlation each other, but those of agar diffusion method were on the high side as a whole. The relevant factors influenced on assay results were also discussed in this research.

关 键 词：溶菌酶 火箭电泳法 比浊法 琼脂板扩散法 

分 类 号：R446.1[医药卫生—诊断学]