Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-79b67bcb76-6rw4p Total loading time: 0.273 Render date: 2021-05-14T05:22:43.828Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Comparison of clinical acinetobacter strains using a carbon source growth assay

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

L. Dijkshoorn
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Microbiology, University Hospital Rotterdam Dijkzigt, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
A. Van Ooyen
Affiliation:
Bioinformatica Group, University of Utrecht
W. C. J. Hop
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Erasmus University of Rotterdam, The Netherlands
M. Theuns
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Microbiology, University Hospital Rotterdam Dijkzigt, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
M. F. Michel
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Microbiology, University Hospital Rotterdam Dijkzigt, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Summary

A quantitative carbon source growth assay, comprising ten carbon sources, was used to compare acinetobacter strains from three hospitals. The strains had been obtained during episodes of increased prevalence of isolations and were, for each hospital, assumed to be epidemiologically related. This assumption was supported by the electrophoretic protein profiles of the strains. Univariate analysis of growth data showed significant differences between strains from the three hospitals. Moreover, cluster analysis revealed that the major pattern in the data was related to the epidemiological origin of the strains. Exceptions to the epidemic-related pattern were observed. Thus, apart from epidemiological factors, other factors might contribute to carbon source growth profiles of the strains. It is concluded that the carbon growth assay may be useful to distinguish roughly between acinetobacter strains from different sites of origin. Further studies are required to analyse additional factors which influence carbon source growth of strains.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

References

1.Glew, RH, Moellering, RC, Kunz, LJ. Infections with Acinetobacter caloaceticus (Herelleavaginicola): clinical and laboratory studies. Medicine 1977; 56: 7997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Gerner-Smidt, P, Hansen, L, Knudsen, A, Siboni, K, Søgaard., I. Epidemic spread of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus in a neurosurgical department analyzed by electronic data processing. J Hosp Infect 1985; 6: 166–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Allen, KD, Green, HT. Hospital outbreak of multi-resistant Acinetobacter anitratus: an airborne mode of spread? J Hosp Infect 1987; 9: 110–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Vieu, JF, Minck, R, Bergogne-Bérézin, E.Bactériophages et lysotypie de ‘Acinetobacter’.Ann Microbiol (Inst Pasteur) 1979; 130A: 405–6.Google Scholar
5.Andrews, HJ. Acinetobacter bacteriocin typing. J Hosp Infect 1986; 7: 169–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Bouvet, PJM, Grimont, PAD. Identification and biotyping of clinical isolates of Acinetobacter. Ann Inst Pasteur Microbiol 1987; 138: 569–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Alexander, M, Ismail, F, Jackman, PJH, Noble, WC. Fingerprinting Acinetobacter strains from clinical sources by numerical analysis of electrophoretic patterns. J Med Microbiol 1984; 18: 5564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Dijkshoorn, L, Michel, MF, Degener, JE. Cell envelope protein profiles of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus strains isolated in hospitals. J Med Microbiol 1987; 23: 313–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Crombach, WHJ, Dijkshoorn, L, Van Noort-Klaassen, M., Niessen, J., Van Knippenberg-Gordebeke, G. Control of an epidemic spread of a multi-resistant strain of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus in a hospital. Intensive Care Med 1989; 15: 166–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Juni, E. Acinetobacter Brisou Prévot 1954, 727. In: Krieg, NR, ed. Bergey's manual of systematic bacteriology, Vol 1. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins. 1984: 303–7.Google Scholar
11.Cowan, ST, Cowan and Steel's manual for the identification of medical bacteria. 2 ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
12.Gilardi, GL. Carbon assimilation by the Achromobacter-Moraxella group (DeBord's tribe Mimeae). Am J Med Technol 1968; 34: 388–93.Google Scholar
13.Sneath, PHA, Johnson, R. The influence on numerical taxonomic similarities of errors in microbiological tests. J Gen Microbiol 1972; 72: 377–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Snell, JJS, Lapage, SP. Carbon source utilization tests as an aid to the classification of non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria. J Gen Microbiol 1973; 74: 920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Everitt, B. Cluster analysis, 2nd ed.New York: Halstead Press, 1980: 18.Google Scholar
16.Ward, JH. Hierarchical grouping to optimise an objective function. J Am Stat Ass 1963; 58: 236–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Hogeweg, P. Topics in biological pattern analysis [Thesis].Utrecht: University of Utrecht, 1976. 208 pp.Google Scholar
18.Hogeweg, P, Hesper, B. Oligothetic characterization of clusters. Pattern Recognition 1981; 12: 131–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Sneath, PHA, Sokal, RR. Numerical taxonomy. San Francisco. London: Freeman. 1973.Google Scholar
20.Den Dooren de Jong, LE. Bijdrage tot de kennis van het mineralisatie-proces [Thesis]. Delft: Technische Hoogeschool, 1926. 200 pp.Google Scholar
21.Stanier, RY, Palleroni, NJ, Doudoroff, M. The aerobic pseudomonads: a taxonomie study. J Gen Microbiol 1966; 43: 159271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Baumann, P, Doudoroff, M, Stanier, RY. A study of the Moraxella Group II. Oxidative-negative species (Genus Acinetobacter). J Bacteriol 1968; 95: 1520–41.Google Scholar
23.Bouvet, PJM, Grimont, PAD. Taxonomy of the genus Acinetobacter with the recognition of Acinetobacter baumannii sp. nov., and Acinetobacter haemolyticus sp. nov., Acinetobacter johnsonii sp. nov., and Acinetobacter junii sp. nov. and emended descriptions of Acinetobacter calcoaceticus and Acinetobacter lwoffii. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1986; 36: 228–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24.Hugh, R. Classical methods for isolation and identification of glucose nonfermenting Gram-negative rods. In: Gilardi, GL, ed. Glucose nonfermenting Gram-negative bacteria in clinical microbiology. West Palm Beach, Florida: CRC Press, 1978: 78.Google Scholar
You have Access

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Comparison of clinical acinetobacter strains using a carbon source growth assay
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Comparison of clinical acinetobacter strains using a carbon source growth assay
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Comparison of clinical acinetobacter strains using a carbon source growth assay
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *