Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 1999, p. 742-747, Vol. 37, No. 3
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Evaluation of Two Commercial Kits and Arbitrarily
Primed PCR for Identification and Differentiation of
Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans,
Haemophilus aphrophilus, and Haemophilus
paraphrophilus
Ba
ak
Do
an,1,2,*
Sirkka
Asikainen,1 and
Hannele
Jousimies-Somer3
Department of Periodontology, Institute of
Dentistry, 00014 University of Helsinki,
Helsinki,1 and
Anaerobe Reference
Laboratory, National Public Health Institute, 00300 Helsinki,3 Finland, and
Department of
Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Gazi University, Emek 06510, Ankara, Turkey2
Received 8 September 1998/Returned for modification 26 October
1998/Accepted 24 November 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
The closely related species Actinobacillus
actinomycetemcomitans, Haemophilus aphrophilus, and
Haemophilus paraphrophilus are common findings in oral
microbiota. The aims of this study were to evaluate the applicability
of the Rapid NH and API ZYM kits and arbitrarily primed PCR (AP-PCR) in
the identification and differentiation of the three species from each
other. The material included 62 clinical isolates and three reference
strains of A. actinomycetemcomitans representing the 5 serotypes and 18 AP-PCR genotypes. Haemophilus species
included 12 clinical isolates and 11 reference strains of H. aphrophilus, H. paraphrophilus, and 5 other species.
For the PCR amplification, the oligonucleotide 5'-CAGCACCCAC-3' was
used as a primer. Contrary to the consistent performance of API ZYM,
the Rapid NH system was able to identify only 10 of 65 (15%) A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates, whereas all
Haemophilus species were correctly identified. The API ZYM test differentiated A. actinomycetemcomitans from H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus by negative
-galactosidase and
-glucosidase reactions and a positive esterase
lipase reaction. However, the API ZYM test was unable to differentiate
H. aphrophilus from H. paraphrophilus, it also
could not differentiate A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes
from each other. Among the H. aphrophilus isolates three AP-PCR genotypes and among H. paraphrophilus isolates only
one AP-PCR genotype, distinct from those of A. actinomycetemcomitans, were found. The Rapid NH test showed poor
ability to identify clinical isolates of all A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes. Moreover, AP-PCR genotyping
proved to be a rapid method for the species differentiation of A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and H. paraphrophilus.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The closely related
Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Haemophilus
aphrophilus, and Haemophilus paraphrophilus are
gram-negative, facultatively anaerobic, and nonmotile coccobacilli that
are frequently recovered from healthy and diseased oral cavities and
may cause various extraoral infections, such as endocarditis, and
abscesses in brain, neck, and lungs (1, 27, 32). During the
past few decades A. actinomycetemcomitans has been
implicated as a major periodontal pathogen, occurring in 30 to 90% of
patients with adult and juvenile forms of periodontitis (10,
33). Based on differences in the carbohydrate moiety of cell
surface lipopolysaccharide A. actinomycetemcomitans can be
grouped into five serotypes (a to e) (11, 31). It has been
suggested that certain serotypes are associated with specific forms of
periodontitis, extraoral infections, and periodontal health (1,
11, 32). Although H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus have also been isolated from periodontal pockets,
they do not play a significant role in the etiology and pathogenesis of
periodontal diseases (12). Therefore, the correct
identification of A. actinomycetemcomitans in clinical samples is becoming increasingly important for screening, treatment planning, and monitoring of periodontal diseases (9).
Although distinguishing H. aphrophilus from H. paraphrophilus may have limited clinical importance due to the
infrequent occurrence of invasive infections, a species level
identification is required for epidemiological characterization.
Differentiating between A. actinomycetemcomitans,
H. aphrophilus, and H. paraphrophilus
by culture methods may be difficult due to the similarities in cell
morphology, growth requirements, and colony morphology displayed
on the commonly used selective culture medium for A. actinomycetemcomitans, tryptic soy-bacitracin-vancomycin agar (25). Additionally, identification problems may
arise from inconsistent biochemical reactions: the presumptive
differentiation of A. actinomycetemcomitans from
Haemophilus species is generally based on the positive
catalase test and the ability to ferment sucrose and lactose (25,
26). However, some A. actinomycetemcomitans strains
are catalase negative, and some H. aphrophilus strains are
catalase positive (3, 32, 28, 29). The V factor (NAD) requirement for the growth of H. paraphrophilus is the only
criterion that differentiates this species from H. aphrophilus (27). However, this feature can be lost in
individual strains or be falsely obviated by medium carryover effect
(27). Therefore, in clinical laboratories A. actinomycetemcomitans may be overlooked, or H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus be misidentified as
A. actinomycetemcomitans. Additionally, intraspecies
variation of A. actinomycetemcomitans may cause confusion in
presumptive identification, e.g., there are limited data available on
the biochemical characteristics of the five A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes, especially of the recently found
serotypes d and e (11, 21).
The aims of this study were to determine whether A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes differ regarding biochemical
reactions used for species identification and also to evaluate the
applicability of the Rapid NH and API ZYM kits and of AP-PCR genotyping
for the identification and species differentiation of A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and H. paraphrophilus isolates.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
The study material comprised a total of 65 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates, including 62 clinical isolates and
three reference strains (ATCC 29523 serotype a, ATCC 43718 serotype b,
and NCTC 9710 serotype c). The Haemophilus isolates included
12 clinical isolates and 11 reference strains (CCUG 3715, ATCC 13252, ATCC 19415, CCUG 1802, CCUG 23945, ATCC 49766, CCUG 12836, MQCD 1947, CCUG 12834, CCUG 3716, and CCUG 10787) of 7 Haemophilus
species (H. aphrophilus, H. paraphrophilus,
H. influenzae, H. parainfluenzae, H. haemolyticus, H. parahaemolyticus, and H. segnis).
The identification of clinical isolates of A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, H. paraphrophilus, H. influenzae, and H. parainfluenzae were carried out by established methods (4, 21). The A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates were
serotyped as previously described (21) by using an
immunodiffusion assay. Polyclonal serotype-specific rabbit antisera
raised against the five serotypes (a to e) served as antibody, and the
antigen extracts were prepared by autoclaving harvested A. actinomycetemcomitans cells. The 65 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates represented the 5 serotypes (6 serotype a, 10 serotype b, 7 serotype c, 3 serotype d, and 38 serotype
e isolates and 1 nonserotypeable isolate) and 18 AP-PCR genotypes
(2, 7).
The isolates were revived from cultures frozen at
70°C in skim milk
and subcultured three times on enriched blood agar and chocolate agar
medium prior to biochemical testing.
Rapid NH test.
All A. actinomycetemcomitans
isolates (n = 65) and all Haemophilus
isolates (n = 23) were tested by the Rapid NH system.
The Rapid NH system (Innovative Diagnostic Systems, Inc., Norcross, Ga.) is a qualitative micromethod based on the detection of preformed bacterial enzymes. Dehydrated reactants are included for the following tests: hydrolysis of amide substrates proline p-nitroanilide
and
-glutamyl p- nitroanilide; fermentation of glucose
and sucrose; hydrolysis of
o-nitrophenyl-
-D-galactoside; hydrolysis of
fatty acid ester, resazurin, urea, and p-nitrophenyl
phosphate; utilization of ornithine; utilization of tryptophane to form
indole; and reduction of nitrate to nitrite and of nitrate to nitrogen.
The Rapid NH panels were inoculated, incubated, and interpreted
according to the manufacturer's instructions. Bacterial cells from
fresh cultures were suspended in 1 ml of Rapid NH inoculation fluid to
the recommended turbidity (McFarland no. 3 standard), and the entire
contents of the tube were transferred to the panel. After incubation in air at 37°C for 4 h, the color reactions were scored before and after reagent addition.
Nitrate broth test.
The indole-nitrate test was performed
for the A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes a, b, and e
isolates (n = 15) which were nitrate negative in the
Rapid NH test system. Indole-nitrate medium was prepared as previously
described (15). The fresh A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates from enriched blood agar and
Haemophilus isolates from chocolate agar were inoculated
into indole-nitrate medium and incubated in air at 37°C for 2 days.
The test was carried out as previously described (15).
Serum sugar fermentation.
Sucrose fermentation was carried
out in 2 ml of phenol red broth (13) supplemented with 10%
rabbit serum and 1% sucrose for the A. actinomycetemcomitans serotype d and e isolates (n = 18) which were sucrose-positive in the Rapid NH test system. Heavy
suspension (corresponding to a McFarland no. 6 turbidity standard) was
prepared from test strains, and 160 µl of the specimen was inoculated
into the phenol red broth tube. The tubes were incubated in air at
35°C up to 9 days. A yellow color was interpreted as a positive
fermentation reaction, and a reddish-pink color was considered a
negative fermentation reaction.
API ZYM test.
A total of 34 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates (6 serotype a, 10 serotype b, 7 serotype c, 1 serotype d, 12 serotype e, and 1 nonserotypeable) and all
isolates (n = 23) of the seven Haemophilus species were tested by using the API ZYM system. The API ZYM system (bioMérieux Vitex, Inc., St. Louis, Mo.) is a micromethod that allows semiquantitative and rapid determination of 19 enzymatic reactions (alkaline phosphatase, esterase [C4], esterase lipase [C8], lipase, leucine arylamidase, valine arylamidase, cystine arylamidase, trypsin, chymotrypsin, acid phosphatase,
naphthol-AS-BI-phosphohydrolase,
-galactosidase,
-galactosidase,
-glucuronidase,
-glucosidase,
-glucosidase,
N-acetyl-
-glucosaminidase,
-mannosidase, and
-fucosidase). The API ZYM strips were inoculated, incubated, and
interpreted according to the manufacturer's instructions. After
inoculation each cupule of strips with 65 µl of a dense suspension
(McFarland no. 5 or 6 standards) in water, the panel was incubated in
air at 37°C for 4 h. Then, the reagents were added and reactions
were interpreted. If poor reactivity was scored after 4 hours in order
to confirm scoring the color intensity was checked again after an
overnight incubation. Color reactions were scored from 0 to 5 according
to a reference color chart supplied by the manufacturer. Color reaction
grade 0 was interpreted to correspond to a negative reaction; grades 1 and 2 corresponded to a weak reaction (5 to <20 nmol), and grades 3, 4, and 5 corresponded to a strong reaction (>20 nmol). To confirm the
reproducibility of the enzymatic reactions, 12 serotype e isolates and
reference strains of serotypes a, b, and c were examined twice on
different days from different subcultures.
AP-PCR genotyping.
For the AP-PCR amplification, A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and H. paraphrophilus chromosomal DNA was extracted as previously
described (22). The 50-µl PCR reaction volume consisted of
0.2 mM deoxynucleoside triphosphates (Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway,
N.J.), 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.3), 50 mM KCl, 4 mM MgCl2, 2.5 U of AmpliTaq (Perkin-Elmer Cetus, Norwalk, Conn.), 5 µl of template
DNA (1:100 to 1:500 dilution), and 0.4 µM primer OPA-13 (5'-CAGCACCCAC-3'). The amplification was carried out in a
thermocycler (Perkin-Elmer) as previously described (2).
Amplification products were analyzed electrophoretically in 1%
(wt/vol) agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide (0.5 µg/ml) and
photographed under UV light. The banding patterns were analyzed visually.
 |
RESULTS |
Rapid NH test.
The Rapid NH test results of 65 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates of all serotypes and genotypes are
shown in Table 1. For comparisons, the
Rapid NH differential chart obtained for A. actinomycetemcomitans is included. The Rapid NH system was unable
to identify 55 of 65 (85%) A. actinomycetemcomitans
isolates due to false reactions to proline p-nitroanilide
(n = 51), sucrose (n = 18), fatty acid ester (n = 42), resazurin (n = 38),
p-nitrophenyl phosphate (n = 20), and
nitrate reduction (n = 15). In other words, the Rapid NH system was unable to identify 5 of 6 (83%) A. actinomycetemcomitans serotype a, 1 of 3 (33%) serotype d, 31 of
38 (82%) serotype e, and any of the serotype b (n = 10), c (n = 7), and nonserotypeable (n = 1) isolates. The false reactions among serotypes can be seen in
Table 1 in detail. Although the Rapid NH system was unable to
differentiate H. aphrophilus from H. paraphrophilus or H. parainfluenzae from H. parahaemolyticus, the other Haemophilus species were
correctly identified to the species level.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1.
Comparison of Rapid NH test reaction results of 65 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates representing five
serotypes with those in the Rapid NH system differential chart for the
identification of A. actinomycetemcomitans
|
|
The database codes of the Rapid NH test panel obtained from all
A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and
H. paraphrophilus isolates are shown in Table
2. The predominant codes among
nonidentified A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes a, b, c, d,
and e and the nonserotypeable isolates were 3122, 3502, 3512, 3722, 3732, and 3522, respectively. The false A. actinomycetemcomitans codes were not overlapping with other
identifications. In the Rapid NH system,
o-nitrophenyl-
-D-galactosidase was the
only reaction negative for all A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates but positive for all H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus isolates.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 2.
All Rapid NH numerical codes obtained from 65 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates and 13 H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus isolatesa
|
|
Serum sugar fermentation and nitrate broth tests.
All tested
A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates (n = 18)
were negative to sucrose in the serum sugar test. Moreover, all
A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates (n = 15)
which were negative for nitrate reduction in the Rapid NH test showed a
positive nitrate reduction result in the nitrate broth test.
API ZYM test.
All A. actinomycetemcomitans
isolates, representing 5 serotypes and 1 nonserotypeable isolate and 18 AP-PCR genotypes showed an indistinguishable biochemical profile in the
API ZYM test. Additionally, the A. actinomycetemcomitans
isolates examined in duplicate showed no variation in their
enzyme-producing capacity. All of the test isolates gave
negative reactions to 9 enzymes: lipase, trypsin,
chymotrypsin,
-galactosidase,
-glucuronidase,
-glucosidase, N-acetyl-
-glucosaminidase,
-mannosidase, and
-fucosidase. Table
3 shows the results for the remaining 10 enzymatic reactions of the API ZYM test panel concerning the 34 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates representing all serotypes
and genotypes and all isolates (n = 23) of the 7 Haemophilus species. All Haemophilus and A. actinomycetemcomitans test isolates exhibited a strong reaction to
acid and alkaline phosphatases and to leucine arylamidase. None of the
Haemophilus species produced esterase lipase, but A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates were rather weakly positive for
this enzyme. In contrast to A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus produced
-galactosidase and
-glucosidase. The API ZYM system was unable to
differentiate between H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 3.
Results of API ZYM characterization of clinical A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates representing all serotypes and
various Haemophilus speciesa
|
|
Genetic diversity of A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and H. paraphrophilus isolates as
determined by AP-PCR genotyping.
The oligonucleotide
5'-CAGCACCCAC-3' primer distinguished 3 AP-PCR
genotypes among the H. aphrophilus isolates and 1 AP-PCR genotype among the H. paraphrophilus isolates that were
distinct from the 18 AP-PCR genotypes of the present A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates (Fig.
1). Of 11 H. aphrophilus
isolates, 5 (45%) belonged to the AP-PCR genotype 1, 5 (45%) belonged
to the AP-PCR genotype 2, and 1 belonged to the AP-PCR genotype 3. Two
H. paraphrophilus isolates showed identical banding patterns
with each other, and the patterns were different from those of 11 H. aphrophilus isolates (Fig.
2). Of the 18 AP-PCR genotypes of the
A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates, 2 belonged to serotype a,
6 to serotype b, 4 to serotype c, 2 to serotype d, and 3 to serotype e
and 1 was nonserotypeable.

View larger version (77K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
AP-PCR banding patterns of 18 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates representing 18 AP-PCR genotypes
and 5 serotypes. Lanes: 1 and 2, serotype a; 3 to 8, serotype b; 9 to
12 serotype c; 13 and 14, serotype d; 15 to 17 serotype e; 18, nonserotypeable isolate; M, molecular size marker.
|
|

View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
AP-PCR banding patterns of five H. aphrophilus and two H. paraphrophilus isolates. Lanes:
1 and 2, H. aphrophilus AP-PCR genotype 1; 3 and 4, H. aphrophilus AP-PCR genotype 2; 5, H. aphrophilus AP-PCR
genotype 3; 6 and 7, H. paraphrophilus AP-PCR genotype 1; M,
molecular size marker.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The Rapid NH identification kit has a database for
Haemophilus, Neisseria, and some other genera
that include fastidious gram-negative bacilli, such as A. actinomycetemcomitans. Although the identification performance of
the Rapid NH has been extensively studied for Haemophilus and Neisseria species (6, 8, 20), no data were
available for the five A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes.
The present study examined the ability of the Rapid NH test in the
identification of A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates
representing all five currently known serotypes and all AP-PCR
genotypes so far distinguished by the oligonucleotide
5'-CAGCACCCAC-3' primer among A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates in our culture collection (2,
7). The results showed that 55 of 65 (85%) A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates were not identified with the Rapid
NH system due to false-positive reactions for proline
p-nitroanilide, sucrose, and fatty acid ester and
false-negative reactions for resazurin, p-nitrophenyl phosphate, and nitrate reduction. Several studies have reported negative sucrose and lactose fermentation reactions and positive nitrate reduction of A. actinomycetemcomitans (3, 18,
23, 26, 27, 31). In these studies either the serotype
distribution of the test material was not mentioned or the recently
designated serotypes d and e were not included. Interestingly, in the
Rapid NH test the positive reaction for sucrose was only observed in some isolates of the recently found, rare A. actinomycetemcomitans serotypes d and e (11, 21). In
order to be sure that the sucrose fermentation and nitrate reduction by
certain isolates of these new serotypes are different from the
literature description of this species, all of the A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates which were positive for sucrose
and/or negative for nitrate reduction in the Rapid NH test were tested
by other testing methods, i.e., the serum sugar test and the
nitrate-broth test. The results of these tests showed that the
sucrose-positive and nitrate reduction-negative reactions obtained from
the Rapid NH test system were false-positive and false-negative
reactions. The false-negative test reaction in the Rapid NH test system
may be due to the fact that some of our A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates may have been unable to react with
the substrates in the Rapid NH test, but we found no answer for the
false-positive reactions. As no information was obtained from the
manufacturer about the A. actinomycetemcomitans strains used
to set up the database of the Rapid NH identification system, it is
difficult to explain the discrepancy between the results on our
A. actinomycetemcomitans strains and those of the manufacturer. However, it may be related to serotype, the number of
strains, or genetic or environmental differences among isolates. Our
test A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates showed several codes which were not present in the database of the kit. New codes obtained from our test isolates, if added to the Rapid NH database, may help to
identify clinical A. actinomycetemcomitans strains.
Although the Rapid NH system cannot differentiate between H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus and between H. parainfluenzae and H. parahaemolyticus without a
supplemental growth factor dependence test and the ability to grow on
blood agar, the Haemophilus isolates belonging to the seven
tested species were correctly identified. The key reaction
differentiating H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus from A. actinomycetemcomitans was the
hydrolysis of o-nitrophenyl-
-D-galactoside. It was positive among all H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus isolates tested but negative among all A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates, as previously shown by Slots
(26).
In the present study, the enzymatic activity of A. actinomycetemcomitans and Haemophilus species was also
evaluated by using the API ZYM rapid micromethod. All serotypes and
nonserotypeable isolates of A. actinomycetemcomitans showed
indistinguishable enzymatic profiles in the API ZYM test. However, the
API ZYM system was unable to differentiate between H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus isolates. The kit
differentiates A. actinomycetemcomitans from H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus on the basis of
-galactosidase and
-glucosidase reactions. Our results confirm
the previous results published by Slots (24, 26) and
Sakazaki et al. (23), but differ from those by Myhrvold et
al. (16). Slots (24, 26) reported that 70 to 86%
of A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates produced weak leucine
aminopeptidase but all of our test A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates strongly produced leucine aminopeptidase. This discrepancy may
be related to diversity in the origin of the isolates.
Conventional phenotypic tests, including fermentation of sucrose and
lactose, used for differentiating A. actinomycetemcomitans from H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus are
time-consuming and labor-intensive. The conventional fermentation tests
take 5 or 10 days depending on the method (18, 26).
Moreover, phenotypical tests can sometimes be unreliable, since, for
example, some catalase-negative strains of A. actinomycetemcomitans and catalase-positive strains of H. aphrophilus or H. paraphrophilus have been reported
(28, 29). In such cases, these species would be
misidentified due to these phenotypically variable strains. Molecular
methods such as hybridization to species-specific oligonucleotide
probes (5) or cloned DNA probes (28) or analysis
of the 23S rRNA gene (17) or the 16S rRNA gene
(19) have been developed to discriminate between A. actinomycetemcomitans and H. aphrophilus or H. paraphrophilus. However, sufficient differentiation between
H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus could not be
achieved in most of these studies (5, 17, 28). AP-PCR, which
has proven to be a rapid and useful technique for detecting DNA
polymorphism in various prokaryotic organisms (30), applies
short oligonucleotide primers of random sequence for the amplification
of certain DNA fragments. Although isolates of many bacterial species,
such as A. actinomycetemcomitans and Porphyromonas
gingivalis, can be differentiated by using AP-PCR (2, 7,
14), to our knowledge this technique has not previously been
applied for H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus isolates.
In this study, the inter- and intraspecies genetic heterogeneity of
A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and
H. paraphrophilus isolates was determined by AP-PCR
genotyping by using oligonucleotide 5'-CAGCACCCAC-3' as a
primer. The primer distinguished 3 AP-PCR genotypes among 11 H. aphrophilus and 18 AP-PCR genotypes among a total of 65 A. actinomycetemcomitans isolates. It is obvious that more AP-PCR
genotypes can be distinguished when more H. aphrophilus isolates are analyzed. Although a limited number of H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus isolates were
analyzed in the present study, it is worth noticing that AP-PCR
genotypes of these three species were distinct from each other. We
suggest that the AP-PCR method may prove to be a useful supplement to
conventional methods in the differentiation of the three species,
A. actinomycetemcomitans, H. aphrophilus, and
H. paraphrophilus.
In conclusion, we showed that the present Rapid NH system has a poor
ability for identifying A. actinomycetemcomitans, whereas the API ZYM system consistently gave correct identifications and was
able to differentiate A. actinomycetemcomitans from H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus. However, the API ZYM
system is unable to distinguish the A. actinomycetemcomitans
serotypes from each other and H. aphrophilus from H. paraphrophilus. The performance of Rapid NH may be improved by
including the present serotype-specific test results in a reconstructed
database. To discriminate these three closely related species from each
other we have developed a rapid-PCR-based method which can be
alternatively used as an aid for identifying isolates that exhibit
atypical phenotypic features.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
This work was supported by Ankara Gazi University, Ankara,
Turkey, grant 2547-33; Center for International Mobility, grant 97-2908212; and The Academy of Finland, grant 1011575.
We thank Arja Kanevo for expert technical assistance.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute of
Dentistry, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 41 (Mannerheimintie 172), 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland. Phone: 358-9-19127318. Fax:
358-9-19127517. E-mail: Basak.Dogan{at}Helsinki.Fi.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Asikainen, S.,
C.-H. Lai,
S. Alaluusua, and S. Slots.
1991.
Distribution of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans serotypes in periodontal health and disease.
Oral Microbiol. Immunol.
6:115-118[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Asikainen, S.,
C. Chen, and J. Slots.
1995.
Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans genotypes in relation to serotypes and periodontal status.
Oral Microbiol. Immunol.
10:65-68[Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Boyce, J. M. H.,
J. Frazer, and K. Zinnemann.
1969.
The growth requirements of Haemophilus aphrophilus.
J. Med. Microbiol.
2:55-62[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Campos, J. M.
1995.
Haemophilus, p. 556-565.
In
P. R. Murray, E. J. Baron, M. A. Pfaller, F. C. Tenover, and R. H. Yolken (ed.), Manual for clinical microbiology, 6th ed. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
|
| 5.
|
Dix, K.,
S. M. Watanabe,
S. McArdle,
D. I. Lee,
C. Randolph,
B. Moncla, and D. E. Schwartz.
1990.
Species-specific oligodeoxynucleotide probes for the identification of periodontal bacteria.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
28:319-323[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Doern, G. V., and K. C. Chapin.
1984.
Laboratory identification of Haemophilus influenzae: basal media and the results of the satellitism test and evaluation of the RapID NH system.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
20:599-601[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
| Do an, B., M. H. Saarela, H. Jousimies-Somer, S. Alaluusua, and S. Asikainen. Actinobacillus
actinomycetemcomitans serotype e biotypes, genetic diversity and
distribution in relation to periodontal status. Oral Microbiol.
Immunol., in press.
|
| 8.
|
Eriquez, L. A., and N. E. Hodinka.
1983.
Development of a test system for rapid differentiation of Neisseria and Haemophilus spp.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
18:1032-1039[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Flemmig, T. F.,
S. Rüdiger,
U. Hofmann,
H. Schmidt,
B. Plaschke,
A. Strätz,
B. Klaiber, and H. Karch.
1995.
Identification of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans in subgingival plaque by PCR.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
33:3102-3105[Abstract].
|
| 10.
|
Fives-Taylor, P.,
D. Meyer, and K. Mintz.
1996.
Virulence factors of the periodontopathogen Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans.
J. Periodontol.
67(Suppl.):291-297.
|
| 11.
|
Gmür, R.,
H. McNabb,
T. J. M. Van Steenbergen,
P. Baehni,
A. Mombelli,
A. J. Van Winkelhoff, and B. Guggenheim.
1993.
Seroclassification of hitherto nontypeable Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans strains: evidence for a new serotype e.
Oral Microbiol. Immunol.
8:116-120[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Liljemark, W. F.,
C. G. Bloomquist,
L. A. Uhl,
E. M. Schaffer,
L. F. Wolff,
B. L. Pihlstrom, and C. L. Bandt.
1984.
Distribution of oral Haemophilus species in dental plaque from a large adult population.
Infect. Immun.
46:778-786[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
MacFaddin, J. F.
1985.
Media for isolation-cultivation-identification-maintenance of medical bacteria, vol. 1. , p. 620-628.
The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, Md.
|
| 14.
|
Ménard, C.,
R. Brousseau, and C. Mouton.
1992.
Application of polymerase chain reaction with arbitrary primer (AP-PCR) to strain identification of Porphyromonas (Bacteroides) gingivalis.
FEMS Microbiol. Lett.
95:163-168.
|
| 15.
|
Moore, L. V. H., and W. E. C. Moore.
1991.
Anaerobe laboratory manual update, p. 146.
In
Supplement to the VPI anaerobe laboratory manual, 4th ed. (1977). Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Va.
|
| 16.
|
Myhrvold, V.,
I. Brondz, and I. Olsen.
1992.
Application of multivariate analyses of enzymic data to classification of members of the Actinobacillus-Haemophilus-Pasteurella group.
Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol.
42:12-18[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Preus, H. R.,
G. J. Sunday,
V. I. Haraszthy, and J. J. Zambon.
1992.
Rapid identification of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans based on analysis of 23S ribosomal RNA.
Oral Microbiol. Immunol.
7:372-375[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Pulverer, G., and H. L. Ko.
1970.
Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans: fermentative capabilities of 140 strains.
Appl. Microbiol.
20:693-695[Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Riggio, M. P., and A. Lennon.
1997.
Rapid identification of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Haemophilus aphrophilus, and Haemophilus paraphrophilus by restriction enzyme analysis of PCR-amplified 16S rRNA genes.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
35:1630-1632[Abstract].
|
| 20.
|
Robinson, M. J., and T. R. Oberhofer.
1983.
Identification of pathogenic Neisseria species with Rapid NH system.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
17:400-404[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Saarela, M.,
S. Asikainen,
S. Alaluusua,
T. Asikainen,
L. Pyhälä,
C.-H. Lai, and H. Jousimies-Somer.
1992.
Frequency and stability of mono- or poly-infection by Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans serotypes a, b, c, d, or e.
Oral Microbiol. Immunol.
7:277-279[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Saarela, M.,
S. Asikainen,
C. Chen,
S. Alaluusua, and J. Slots.
1995.
Comparison of arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction and ribotyping for subtyping Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans.
Anaerobe
1:97-102.
|
| 23.
|
Sakazaki, R.,
E. Yoshizaki,
K. Tamura, and S. Kuramochi.
1984.
Increased frequency of isolation of Pasteurella and Actinobacillus species and related organisms.
Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol.
3:244-248[Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Slots, J.
1981.
Enzymatic characterization of some oral and nonoral gram-negative bacteria with the API ZYM system.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
14:288-294[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Slots, J.
1982.
Selective medium for isolation Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
15:606-609[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Slots, J.
1982.
Salient biochemical characteristics of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans.
Arch. Microbiol.
131:60-67[Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Tanner, A.,
C.-H. Lai, and M. Maiden.
1992.
Characteristics of oral gram-negative species, p. 299-341.
In
J. Slots, and M. Taubman (ed.), Contemporary oral microbiology and immunology. Mosby-Year Book, Inc., St. Louis, Mo.
|
| 28.
|
Tønjum, T.,
G. Bukholm, and K. Bøvre.
1990.
Identification of Haemophilus aphrophilus and Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans by DNA-DNA hybridization and genetic transformation.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
28:1994-1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Tønjum, T., and R. Haas.
1993.
Identification of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans by leukotoxin gene-specific hybridization and polymerase chain reaction assays.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:1856-1859[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Williams, J. G. K.,
A. R. Kubelik,
K. J. Livak,
J. A. Rafalski, and S. V. Tingey.
1990.
DNA polymorphisms amplified by arbitrary primers are useful genetic markers.
Nucleic Acids Res.
18:6531-6535[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Zambon, J. J.,
J. Slots, and R. J. Genco.
1983.
Serology of oral Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans and serotype distribution in human periodontal disease.
Infect. Immun.
41:19-27[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Zambon, J. J.,
T. Umemoto,
E. De Nardin,
F. Nakazawa,
L. A. Christersson, and R. J. Genco.
1988.
Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans in the pathogenesis of human periodontal disease.
Adv. Dent. Res.
2:269-274[Abstract].
|
| 33.
|
Zambon, J. J.
1996.
Periodontal disease: microbial factors.
Ann. Periodontol.
1:879-925[Medline].
|
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 1999, p. 742-747, Vol. 37, No. 3
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Rennie, R. P., Brosnikoff, C., Shokoples, S., Reller, L. B., Mirrett, S., Janda, W., Ristow, K., Krilcich, A.
(2008). Multicenter Evaluation of the New Vitek 2 Neisseria-Haemophilus Identification Card. J. Clin. Microbiol.
46: 2681-2685
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Pasqualini, L., Mencacci, A., Scarponi, A. M., Leli, C., Fabbriciani, G., Callarelli, L., Schillaci, G., Bistoni, F., Mannarino, E.
(2008). Cervical spondylodiscitis with spinal epidural abscess caused by Aggregatibacter aphrophilus. J Med Microbiol
57: 652-655
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Becker, K., Badehorn, D., Keller, B., Schulte, M., Bohm, K. H., Peters, G., Fegeler, W.
(2001). Isolation and Characterization of a Species-Specific DNA Fragment for Identification of Candida (Torulopsis) glabrata by PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol.
39: 3356-3359
[Abstract]
[Full Text]