JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Heikens, E.
Right arrow Articles by Fluit, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Heikens, E.
Right arrow Articles by Fluit, A. C.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2005, p. 2286-2290, Vol. 43, No. 5
0095-1137/05/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.43.5.2286-2290.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparison of Genotypic and Phenotypic Methods for Species-Level Identification of Clinical Isolates of Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci

E. Heikens, A. Fleer, A. Paauw, A. Florijn, and A. C. Fluit*

Eijkman-Winkler Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Received 30 September 2004/ Accepted 3 January 2005

To compare commonly used phenotypic methods with genotypic identification methods 47 clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CONS), 10 CONS ATCC strains, and a Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolate were identified using the API Staph ID test, BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System, and 16S rRNA gene and tuf gene sequencing. When necessary part of the sodA gene was sequenced for definitive identification. The results show that tuf gene sequencing is the best method for identification of CONS, but the API Staph ID test is a reasonably reliable phenotypic alternative. The performance of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System for identification of CONS is poor. The present study also showed that although genotypic methods are clearly superior to phenotypic identifications, a drawback of sequence-based genotypic methods may be a lack of quality of deposited sequences in data banks. In particular, 16S rRNA gene sequencing suffers from the lack of high quality among sequences deposited in GenBank. Furthermore, genotypic identification based on 16S rRNA sequences has limited discriminating power for closely related Staphylococcus species. We propose partial sequencing of the tuf gene as a reliable and reproducible method for identification of CONS species.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Eijkman-Winkler Institute, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Phone: 31302507630. Fax: 31302541770. E-mail: A.C.Fluit{at}lab.azu.nl.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2005, p. 2286-2290, Vol. 43, No. 5
0095-1137/05/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.43.5.2286-2290.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



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 © 2005 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.