» Articles » PMID: 4577172

Micromethod System for Identification of Anaerobic Bacteria

Overview
Journal Appl Microbiol
Specialty Microbiology
Date 1973 May 1
PMID 4577172
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A micromethod multitest system prepared by Analytab Products, Inc. and conventional tests employed at the Center for Disease Control for identification of anaerobes were compared. All procedures were conducted in an anaerobic glove box. A total of 104 cultures, including 18 reference strains and 86 diagnostic cultures, were examined. Ninety-one percent of the total tests performed with the two systems were in agreement. Greater than 90% agreement between the two systems was obtained with 12 of the 17 differential tests compared. The tests for nitrate reduction and H(2)S production gave the poorest agreement, 77.8 and 80.8%, respectively. Only 66% of the 86 diagnostic cultures could be presumptively identified with the micromethod system supplemented only with microscopy and colonial characteristics. However, when appropriate supplementary tests and gas-liquid chromatography were used with the micromethod system, 85% of the 86 strains could be identified. When Ehrlich reagent, instead of Kovac reagent, was used with the micromethod to test for indole, the agreement in identification was raised to 93%.

Citing Articles

Exogenous NADPH ameliorates myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury in rats through activating AMPK/mTOR pathway.

Zhu J, Wang Y, Chai X, Qian K, Zhang L, Peng P Acta Pharmacol Sin. 2019; 41(4):535-545.

PMID: 31776448 PMC: 7470878. DOI: 10.1038/s41401-019-0301-1.


Antigenic relationships and rapid identification of Peptostreptococcus species.

Wong M, Catena A, Hadley W J Clin Microbiol. 1980; 11(5):515-21.

PMID: 6769956 PMC: 273445. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.11.5.515-521.1980.


Comparison of three reagents for detecting indole production by anaerobic bacteria in microtest systems.

Lombard G, Dowell Jr V J Clin Microbiol. 1983; 18(3):609-13.

PMID: 6630445 PMC: 270862. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.18.3.609-613.1983.


Comparison of three methods for anaerobe identification.

Appelbaum P, Kaufmann C, Keifer J, Venbrux H J Clin Microbiol. 1983; 18(3):614-21.

PMID: 6355150 PMC: 270863. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.18.3.614-621.1983.


Capsular and 'O' serotype determinants of bacteroides fragilis.

TABAQCHALI S, Fiddian P, El-Hag K, Kasper D Infection. 1982; 10(6):333-7.

PMID: 6185437 DOI: 10.1007/BF01642293.


References
1.
Arank A, Syed S, Kenney E, Freter R . Isolation of anaerobic bacteria from human gingiva and mouse cecum by means of a simplified glove box procedure. Appl Microbiol. 1969; 17(4):568-76. PMC: 377745. DOI: 10.1128/am.17.4.568-576.1969. View

2.
Washington 2nd J, Yu P, Martin W . Evaluation of accuracy of multitest micromethod system for identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Appl Microbiol. 1971; 22(3):267-9. PMC: 376296. DOI: 10.1128/am.22.3.267-269.1971. View

3.
Kaufman L, WEAVER R . Rapid methods for the identification of clostridia. J Bacteriol. 1960; 79:119-21. PMC: 278643. DOI: 10.1128/jb.79.1.119-121.1960. View

4.
Dowell Jr V . Comparison of techniques for isolation and identification of anaerobic bacteria. Am J Clin Nutr. 1972; 25(12):1335-43. DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/25.12.1335. View

5.
Smith P, Tomfohrde K, RHODEN D, BALOWS A . API system: a multitube micromethod for identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Appl Microbiol. 1972; 24(3):449-52. PMC: 376540. DOI: 10.1128/am.24.3.449-452.1972. View