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 Peele, D.
Right arrow Articles by Vore, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peele, D.
Right arrow Articles by Vore, S.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 01 1997, 213-216, Vol 35, No. 1
Copyright © 1997 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Comparison of identifications of human and animal source gram-negative bacteria by API 20E and crystal E/NF systems

D Peele, J Bradfield, W Pryor and S Vore
Department of Comparative Medicine, East Carolina University School of Medicine, Greenville, North Carolina 27858, USA.

This study compared the abilities of API 20E and BBL Crystal E/NF identification systems to correctly identify human and animal source gram-negative bacilli of known identifications, as provided by the American Type Culture Collection, Rockville, Md., and the Research Diagnostic and Investigative Laboratory, Columbia, Mo. Also addressed in the comparison are the cost, the relative ease of performing and interpreting the tests, and the potential problems surrounding each system. The two systems were comparable in terms of their respective costs and abilities to identify the bacteria tested. The cost per test was calculated as $4.69 for API 20E and $4.62 for Crystal E/NF. Of the animal source bacteria tested, Crystal E/NF identified 68% to the correct genus and species and 90% to the correct genus or group. The remaining 10% of the animal source bacteria were unidentified by Crystal. Human source bacteria tested by BBL Crystal E/NF gave very similar results: 47% correctly identified to genus and species, 90% correctly identified to genus or group, 7% unidentified, and 3% incorrectly identified. API 20E results were as follows for animal source bacteria: 53% correctly identified to genus and species, 76% correctly identified to genus or group, and 24% unidentified; the results for human source bacteria were as follows: 40% correctly identified to genus and species, 83% correctly identified to genus or group, and 17% unidentified. API 20E has a slightly more labor- intensive protocol for setting up the test than BBL Crystal E/NF but produced fewer questionable results.


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 © 1997 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.