Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig. 1.
Flowchart for preliminary identification ofActinomyces species. All enzyme reactions were performed with Rosco diagnostic tablets. ∗, see Table 2; ssp., subsp.; α-fuc, α-fucosidase.
- Fig. 2.
Flowchart for preliminary identification ofArcanobacterium species and A. schalii. All enzyme reactions were performed with Rosco diagnostic tablets.
Tables
- Table 1.
Recent taxonomic changes among Actinomyces and closely related genera from human sources
Year Current name Previous nomenclature or taxonomic position Source Reference 1994 Actinomyces neuii subsp.anitratus CDC group 1 coryneform Abscess, blood 7 1994 Actinomyces neuii subsp.neuii CDC group 1-like coryneform Abscess, blood 7 1995 Actinomyces radingae A. pyogenes-like (APL1) Polymicrobial infection 27 1995 Actinomyces turicensis A. pyogenes-like (APL10) Polymicrobial infection 27 1995 Actinomyces europaeus New species Abscess 6 1997 Actinomyces graevenitzii New species Respiratory tract 19 2000 Actinomyces radicidentis New species Oral cavity 4 2000 Actinomyces urogenitalis New species Urogenital tract 16 2001 Actinomyces funkei New species Blood 12 1997 Actinobaculum schalii New species Blood 11 1997 Arcanobacterium bernardiae Actinomyces bernardiae Abscess, blood 18 1997 Arcanobacterium pyogenes Actinomyces pyogenes Polymicrobial infection 18 - Table 2.
Identification scheme for Actinomyces and closely related speciesa
Species and strain(s) Pigmentation Catalase production Nitrate reduction CAMP test Hydrolysis of: Production of: Fermentation of: Urea Esculin α-Fucosidase α-Glucosidase β- NAG β-Galalactosidase Arabinose Maltose Mannitol Raffinose Rhamnose Sucrose Xylose Trehalose A. europaeus CCUG 32789AT − − +b − − +b − + − + − + − − − − +b − A. funkei CCUG 42773T − − + +c − − +d + + + +e + − − − + + − A. georgiae ATCC 49285T − − + − − + − + − + − w − − w + + + 1 clinical strain − − − − − + − + − + − + − − + + + + A. gerencseriae ATCC 23860T − − + − − + − + − + − + + −f +f + +f + 12 clinical strains − − v − − + − + − + − + − + − + w v A. graevenitzii CCUG 27294T +g − − − − − − − + + − + − + − + − − 9 clinical strains + − v − − − − v + + − + − − − + w v A. israelii ATCC 10049 − − + − − + − + − + + + − + + + + + 10 clinical strains − − + − − + − + − + + + w + v + + + A. meyeri ATCC 35568T − − − +h − − − + +i +i − + − − − + + − 4 clinical strains − − v + − − − + + + + + − − − + + − A. naeslundii ATCC 12104T − − + − + + − + − + − + − + − + − + 8 clinical strains − − v − + v − + − + − + − + − + − + A. neuii subsp. neuii CCUG 32252T − + + + − − − + − + + + + −j wj + + −j A. neuii subsp. anitratus CCUG 32253T − + − + − +k − + − + − + + + − + + + A. odontolyticus ATCC 17929T + − + − − w + +l − +l − +m − − +m +m w − 10 clinical strains + − + − − v v v − + − + − − + + + − A. radicidentis CCUG 36733T +n + + − − w − + − + − + + + − + − + A. radingae CCUG 32394T − − − +o − + + + + + + + − − − + + − 5 clinical strains − − + + − + + + v + + + − w − + v v A. turicensis CCUG 34269T − − − − − − + + − − − + − − − + + −p 5 clinical strains − − − − − −+ v + − − − + − − − + + v A. urogenitalis CCUG 38702T +q − + − − + − + + + w w − −r w + + w A. viscous ATCC 15987T − + + − + − − + − + − + − + − + − − 6 clinical strains − + + − − − − + − v − + − + − + v − Arcanobacterium bernardiae CCUG 33419T − − − − − − +s + +t − w + − − w − − − Arcanobacterium haemolyticum ATCC 9345T − − − +Rev − − + + + + − + − − − + − − Arcanobacterium pyogenes CCUG 13230T − − − − − − − +u −v + − + w − − w + + Actinobaculum schalii CCUG 27420T − − − w − − − + − − + + − − + + + − ↵a All enzyme reactions in this table are based on results obtained with Rosco diagnostic tablets; fermentation reactions are based on tests with PRAS biochemicals. The other footnotes describe the reactions that are discrepant compared with previously published data. Abbreviations ATCC, American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, Va.; CCUG, Culture Collection, University of Gothenborg, Gothenborg, Sweden; +, positive reaction or result; −, negative reaction or result; w, weak reaction; v, variable reaction; Rev, reverse.
↵b In the original description (6), the type strain is nitrate, esculin, and xylose negative with the API CORYNE kit.
↵c In the original description (12), the strain is not reported to be CAMP test positive.
↵d In the original description (12), the strain is negative with API systems.
↵e In the original description (12), acid is not produced from l-arabinose with API systems.
↵f In the original description (10), the type strain does not ferment rhamnose or xylose and ferments raffinose.
↵g In the original description (19), the strain is nonpigmented.
↵h Wüst et al. (27) reported a negative reaction by the CAMP test.
↵i Schaal (22), in Bergey's manual, reports a negative reaction with the API ZYM system.
↵j In the original description (7), acid is produced from raffinose and trehalose but acid is not produced from l-rhamnose with the API 50CH system.
↵k In the original description (7), the strain is reported to be esculin negative with the API CORYNE kit.
↵l Schaal (22), in Bergey's manual, reports a negative reaction with the API ZYM kit.
↵m Johnson et al. (10) report a negative reaction with PRAS biochemicals.
↵n In the original description (4), the strain is not reported to be a pigment producer.
↵o Vandamme et al. (25) reported a negative CAMP test reaction.
↵p Vandamme et al. (25) reported a positive reaction with a tryptone soy broth plus horse serum (Oxoid) and a variable reaction with the API CORYNE kit.
↵q In the original description (16), the strain was not reported to be a pigment producer.
↵r Nikolaitchouk et al. (16) reported a positive reaction for d-raffinose with the API RAPID ID 32 STREP kit.
↵s In the original description (18), the strain was reported to have a negative reaction with the API ZYM kit.
↵t Funke et al. (6) and Lawson et al. (11) reported negative reactions (the test system was not traceable).
↵u Lawson et al. (11) reported a negative reaction.
↵v Lawson et al. (11) reported a positive reaction.
- Table 3.
Enzyme reactions of three different test methodsa
Strain Rosco diagnostic tabletsb 4-MU-linked substratesb APIZYM kitc α-Fucosidase α-Glucosidase β- NAG β-Galactosidase α-Fucosidase α-Glucosidase β- NAG β-Galactosidase α-Fucosidase α-Glucosidase β- NAG β-Galactosidase A. europaeus − + − + − − − + 0 3 0 5 A. funkei + + + + + + + + 0 4 5 3 A. georgiae − + − + − + − + 0 3 0 0 A. gerencseriae − + − + − + − + 0 5 0 5 A. graevenitzii − − + + − − + + 0 2 5 5 A. israelii − + − + − + − + 0 5 0 5 A. meyeri − + + + − + − w 0 3 0 3 A. naeslundii − + − + − w − w 0 0 0 3 A. neuii subsp.anitratus − + − + − + − + 0 4 0 5 A. neuii subsp.neuii − + − + − − − + 0 5 0 5 A. odontolyticus + + − + w w − + 1 1 0 2 A. radicidentis − + − + − + − + 0 4 0 5 A. radingae + + + + + + + w 5 5 5 5 A. turicensis + + − − + + − − 5 1 0 0 A. urogenitalis − + + + − + + + 0 5 4 5 A. viscosus − + − + − − − w 0 1 0 5 A. bernardiae + + + − − + + − 0 5 5 0 A. haemolyticum + + + + w + + + 0 3 4 3 A. pyogenes − + − + − + − + 0 0 0 0 A. schalii − + − − − + − − 0 5 0 0 ↵a The results with major discrepancies are indicated in boldface. β-galactosidase substrates were ONPG for Rosco diagnostic tablets, β-d-galactopyranoside for the 4-MU-linked substrates, and 2-naphthyl-β-d-galactopyranoside for the API ZYM kit.
↵b −, negative reaction; +, positive reaction; w, weak reaction.
↵c Color intensities: 0, negative; 1 to 2, weakly positive; 3 to 5, positive.
