JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Funke, G
Right arrow Articles by Weiss, N
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Funke, G
Right arrow Articles by Weiss, N
J Clin Microbiol. 1994 November; 32(11): 2686-2691

Primary identification of Aureobacterium spp. isolated from clinical specimens as "Corynebacterium aquaticum".

G Funke, A von Graevenitz and N Weiss

Department of Medical Microbiology, University of Zürich, Switzerland.

ABSTRACT

Over a 6-year period 11 yellow-pigmented gram-positive rods (GPRs) with an oxidative carbohydrate metabolism were isolated from clinical specimens or were received as reference cultures and tentatively identified as "Corynebacterium aquaticum" according to the guide of Hollis and Weaver for the differentiation of GPRs (D. G. Hollis and R. E. Weaver, Gram-Positive Organisms: a Guide to Identification, 1981). Because these isolates seemed to be rather heterogeneous, comparative analyses with the type strain of "C. aquaticum" as well as six type strains of species belonging to the genus Aureobacterium were performed by biochemical and chemotaxonomic methods. Only four clinical strains were found to be "C. aquaticum," whereas seven strains were found to belong to the genus Aureobacterium. Discriminative phenotypic reactions between "C. aquaticum" and Aureobacterium spp. included hydrolysis of gelatin and casein (both reactions negative for "C. aquaticum" strains but positive for most Aureobacterium strains). Moreover, peptidoglycan analysis provided a reliable means of differentiating yellow-pigmented GPRs at the genus level (diaminobutyric acid as the interpeptide bridge in "C. aquaticum" and glycine-ornithine as the interpeptide bridge in Aureobacterium spp.). Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that vancomycin showed an intermediate MIC for three of the four clinical "C. aquaticum" isolates, whereas all Aureobacterium strains were susceptible to vancomycin. To our knowledge, this is the first report outlining the isolation of Aureobacterium spp. from clinical specimens. However, Aureobacterium isolates could not be identified to the species level by the tests used in the study.


J Clin Microbiol. 1994 November; 32(11): 2686-2691




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1994 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.