Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Epidemiology

Molecular Diversity of Bacillus anthracis in Italy

Antonio Fasanella, Matthew Van Ert, Settimia A. Altamura, Giuliano Garofolo, Canio Buonavoglia, Guido Leori, Lynn Huynh, Shaylan Zanecki, Paul Keim
Antonio Fasanella
1Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata—Anthrax Reference Institute of Italy, Foggia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: a.fasanella@izsfg.it
Matthew Van Ert
2Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011-5649
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Settimia A. Altamura
1Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata—Anthrax Reference Institute of Italy, Foggia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Giuliano Garofolo
1Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata—Anthrax Reference Institute of Italy, Foggia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Canio Buonavoglia
3Dipartimento di Sanità, Patologia, Farmacotossicologia e Benessere degli Animali, Facoltà di Medicina Veterinaria, Bari
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Guido Leori
4Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Sardegna, Sassari, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lynn Huynh
2Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011-5649
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shaylan Zanecki
2Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011-5649
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paul Keim
2Department of Biological Sciences, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona 86011-5649
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3398-3401.2005
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

We used multiple-locus variable-number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) to type 64 Bacillus anthracis isolates from outbreaks that have occurred during the past 40 years in Italy. MLVA of the 64 isolates revealed 10 unique genotypes; 9 of these genotypes and the majority of isolates (63/64) belonged to the previously described genetic cluster A1.a. Within the A1.a isolates, two previously described genotypes (G1 and G3), which differ by a single mutation in the pX01 locus, account for the majority of isolates in the country (53/63). The low diversity of B. anthracis genotypes in Italy suggests a single, dominant historical introduction, followed by limited localized differentiation.

Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax, is a genetically homogeneous and recently emerged pathogen, which complicates efforts to subtype it (7, 8, 11). In 1995, Henderson et al. detected the first molecular difference among B. anthracis strains, and in the following year Andersen et al. demonstrated that the variation was due to a 12-nucleotide variable-number tandem repeat (VNTR), named vrrA (1, 4). The molecular basis for the variation was due to differences in the number of repeated units, and five different allelic forms could be detected (6). An expansion on this strategy that further advanced the subtyping of B. anthracis involved the analysis of multiple VNTR loci (8). Multiple-locus VNTR analysis (MLVA) typing systems use PCR amplification and fragment sizing to detect length polymorphisms in several VNTR regions (8, 10). MLVA has proven to be a powerful tool for distinguishing among B. anthracis isolates and has been applied to examination of bioterrorism events as well as naturally occurring anthrax outbreaks (5, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14). Keim et al. in 2000 used MLVA to examine a worldwide collection of B. anthracis isolates and described 89 unique genotypes (8). Further studies have used MLVA to examine regional patterns of anthrax diversity; these include studies of the genetic diversity of B. anthracis isolates in France and Poland (2, 3, 13, 14).

In Italy, anthrax is generally a sporadic disease that occurs, with a few exceptions, in the central and southern regions and in the major islands, where it almost exclusively affects animals at pasture. Since the late 1950s, the Italian anthrax epidemic situation has improved as a result of vaccination campaigns with an attenuated live vaccine, composed of spores in 1% saponin (Carbosap). This nationwide control system also includes disease outbreak surveillance, and over the past 5 years, the Anthrax Reference Institute of Italy has been recovering B. anthracis isolates from national outbreaks, including archived specimens from historical outbreaks. As a result of this collection effort, we have recovered 64 isolates of B. anthracis that are archived as spores at the maximum security laboratory of the Anthrax Reference Institute of Italy. However, the genetic composition of B. anthracis in Italy has not been adequately studied. Analysis of the genetic similarity or differences would lead to an understanding of the disease origins and transmission patterns. In this study we used MLVA to genotype the B. anthracis isolates from Italian outbreaks in order to examine relationships among these outbreaks and to understand the diversity of B. anthracis isolates in Italy as it relates on a regional and a global scale.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

B. anthracis isolates.We have analyzed a collection of 64 B. anthracis isolates that are representative samples from outbreaks occurring in Italy during the past 40 years. B. anthracis isolates were collected from the following regions: Puglia, Campania, Basilicata, Calabria, Tuscany, Sicily, Sardinia, Lazio, and Veneto.

DNA preparation.Each B. anthracis strain was streaked onto tryptose agar plates and then incubated at +37°C for 24 h. The single colonies were suspended in 1 ml of TE (Tris-HCl [pH 8], 1.0 mM EDTA) and incubated at +98°C for 20 min. After centrifugation at 15,000 × g for 1 min, the supernatant was collected and filtered using 0.22-μm filters.

MLVA PCR.For the MLVA test, we utilized fluorescently labeled primers that flank the eight VNTR regions (vrrA, vrrB1, vrrB2, vrrC1, vrrC2, CG3, pXO1, pXO2) as described by Keim et al. in 2000 (8). Three different dyes are used for the reaction primers (6-carboxyfluorescein, VIC, and NED), while one is reserved for molecular weight size standards (ROX). Primers amplifying VNTRs that exhibit overlapping allele size ranges are labeled with different fluorophores to ensure that the VNTRs can be examined in a single electrophoretic injection. The final volume (50 μl) of reaction mixture contained 200 μM deoxynucleoside triphosphates (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, N.J.), 0.2 μM primers (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, Calif.), 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.3 (Perkin-Elmer, Wellesley, Mass.), 50 mM KCl (Perkin-Elmer), 1.5 mM MgCl2 (Perkin-Elmer), 1.25 U of Taq DNA polymerase gold (Perkin-Elmer), and 5.0 μl of extracted DNA. The PCR samples were amplified in a Mastercycler Personal (Eppendorf AG, Hamburg, Germany) as follows: 95°C for 10 min, followed by 30 cycles of 92°C for 30 s, annealing for 30 s (57°C for VrrA, VrrB1, VrrB2, and VrrC1; 60°C for VrrC2; 55°C for CG3, pX01, and pX02), and extension at 72°C for 30 s. To ensure that the loci were amplified, 20.0 μl of each amplified sample was subjected to electrophoresis in a 2.0% agarose gel with 0.5 μg/ml of ethidium bromide at 100 V for 120 min. The amplified DNA bands were visualized upon UV light exposure (Eagle Eye II; Stratagene, La Jolla, Calif.).

Automated genotype analysis.The amplified MLVA PCR products were subjected to capillary electrophoresis in polyacrylamide gels under denaturing conditions on an ABI Prism 310 automated DNA sequencer (Applied Biosystems) and were analyzed using Genescan and Genotyper software (Applied Biosystems).

Data analysis.UPGMA (unweighted-pair group method using arithmetic averages) cluster analysis was performed on genotype scores from a combined data set of the Italian isolates and a panel of 89 diverse genotypes as reported by Keim et al. in 2000 (8). To ensure comparability of genotype scores between the 89 diverse genotypes and Italian isolates, a subset of isolates was genotyped at both the Keim Genetics Laboratory (Northern Arizona University) and the Anthrax Reference Institute of Italy (Foggia, Italy), and raw VNTR sizes were compared and normalized.

RESULTS

Geographical distribution and sources of Italian isolates.While anthrax occurs in much of Italy, the majority of anthrax outbreaks occurred in central Italy, southern Italy, and major islands (Table 1; Fig. 1B). The samples from this study are representative of anthrax activity for the past 40 years.

FIG. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG. 1.

Genetic and geographic relationships among Italian B. anthracis isolates. (A) Mutational-step model for isolate genetic relationships. Shown is a network of genotypes with the minimum mutational changes needed to convert one genotype into another. Note that genotype designations are consistent with those in Table 1. The GI designation is given first, and GK designation is given in parentheses following GI if an equivalent genotype was described by Keim et al. in 2000 (8). Connecting lines are labeled with the genetic locus and the number of repeat units that differ between individual genotypes. (B) Geographic distribution of B. anthracis isolates. Genotype distribution and frequency are indicated by colors corresponding to designations in panel A. Pie chart sizes are scaled categorically according to the number of isolates (in three categories: 1 to 5, 6 to 10, and >10 isolates). Note that the two isolates with missing data (plasmid markers) were not included in either panel.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Characteristics of Bacillus anthracis isolates in this study

Genetic diversity of B. anthracis in Italy.While MLVA of 64 B. anthracis isolates revealed 10 unique genotypes, these were very closely related genetically (Fig. 1A; Table 1). UPGMA cluster analysis grouped 63/64 isolates with the previously described A1.a cluster (8), with only a single isolate associated with the A3.b cluster (Table 1). Four of the genotypes were exact matches to previously described genotypes, including the two dominant Italian genotypes (GI) A (n = 28) and F (n = 25), which match the Keim et al. 2000 genotypes (GK) 1 and 3, respectively (Fig. 1; Table 1). Not all of the Italian isolates matched previously described genotypes (GK); those that did not were assigned only Italian genotype designations (GI). For two samples, assigning genotypes was difficult due to missing data. One A1.a isolate is missing the pXO2 plasmid marker (GI H), whereas the single A3.b representative (GI J) is missing both the pXO2 and pXO1 markers. Therefore, these samples could match several previously defined genotypes in these groups or could represent novel genotypes.

A mutational-step model attempts to describe genetic relationships based on the minimum number of mutations needed to create the observed diversity in the Italian B. anthracis genotypes (Fig. 1A). The A3.b GI genotype J, which is multiple mutational steps different from the A1.a genotypes and which lacks data for the plasmid markers, is not included in this model. The most common genotypes (GI genotypes A and F, GK genotypes 1 and 3) differ by only a single mutation in the pXO1 marker locus. With the exception of GI genotypes D and E, there is only a single mutational step separating the rarer genotypes from either of the two dominant genotypes. In this study, with one exception (GI J), the B. anthracis isolates are closely genetically related within the A1.a cluster.

Different Italian regions have distinctive genotype compositions and population structures (Fig. 1B). The A genotype (GK 1) dominates the peninsular provinces of Puglia, Basilicata, and Calabria. This genotype is not found in Sardinia or Sicily, where the F genotype (GK 3) is dominant. The close genetic relationship between these genotypes argues for a historical relationship, but the spatial differences indicate that recent anthrax outbreaks are now independent between the regions.

DISCUSSION

Worldwide, B. anthracis exhibits a clonal population structure with ties among geographically distant regions (8, 10). A worldwide distribution is particularly true for the A1.a group, which has been highly successful. The major Italian genotypes are part of this very fit strain complex, which has succeeded in becoming ecologically established in many regions. This result is in contrast to that for adjacent southern France, where B2 genotypes have become established and are the most common subtype (2).

The close similarity of the B. anthracis isolates is consistent with a single introduction of the pathogen into Italy. Only a few postulated mutations are needed to explain most of the genotypes observed. Of the 10 genotypes observed in this study, the vast majority of samples (53/64) belonged to genotype A (GK 1) or F (GK 3), which differ only by a single 3-bp mutation in the pXO1 plasmid marker (Table 1; Fig. 1). Based on these data, it could be supposed that the B. anthracis strains responsible for anthrax outbreaks in Italy are the result of evolution from a recent, common ancestral strain. These genotyping markers are highly mutable loci, and the few mutational events that separate the isolates could have occurred in Italy after the introduction of this strain. A single origin would be true for most of the recent anthrax outbreaks but not for genotype J, which likely was independently introduced into Sardinia, Italy. The center of diversity for Italian B. anthracis is in Puglia, where five different genotypes are observed. Other regions, notably Sardinia, are more homogeneous. It appears that the B. anthracis populations in Puglia are older and have had time to generate more diverse genotypes that were then dispersed to other sites. Dispersal can be associated with population bottlenecks that eliminate diversity due to founder effects in the new locations. Alternatively, the low sample sizes from other regions could result in underestimation of their diversity.

This study establishes a genetic landscape for Italy that can be used for future epidemiological and forensic analyses. As was shown in the U.S. anthrax letter attacks, strain identity can differentiate between a natural outbreak and one associated with bioterrorism (5, 10, 12). We would expect to see genotypes A and F associated with future Italian anthrax outbreaks caused by current ecological foci. In contrast, association with an exotic B. anthracis strain would point to a new introduction via commodities or even the deliberate release of this pathogen. Strain identity is useful in these situations only if the natural population is characterized and its strain genotype composition known.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Antonio Battisti of the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale of Lazio and Toscana, Lucio Cirelli of the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale of Venezie, and Vincenzo Di Marco of the Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale of Sicilia for the B. anthracis strains collected in their regions.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 24 January 2005.
    • Returned for modification 21 February 2005.
    • Accepted 1 April 2005.
  • Copyright © 2005 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Andersen, G. L., J. M. Simchock, and K. H. Wilson. 1996. Identification of a region of genetic variability among Bacillus anthracis strains and related species. J. Bacteriol.178:377-384.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    Fouet, A., K. L. Smith, C. Keys, J. Vaissaire, C. Le Doujet, M. Lévy, M. Mock, and P. Keim. 2002. Diversity among French Bacillus anthracis isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.40:4732-4734.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Gierczynski, R., S. Kaluzewski, A. Rakin, M. Jagielski, A. Zasada, A. Jakubczak, B. Borkowska-Opacka, and W. Rastawicki. 2004. Intriguing diversity of Bacillus anthracis in eastern Poland—the molecular echoes of the past outbreaks. FEMS Microbiol. Lett.239:235-240.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    Henderson, I., D. Yu, and P. C. Turnbull. 1995. Differentiation of Bacillus anthracis and other ‘Bacillus cereus group’ bacteria using IS231-derived sequences. FEMS Microbiol. Lett.128:113-118.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    Hoffmaster, A. R., C. C. Fitzgerald, E. Ribot, L. W. Mayer, and T. Popovic. 2002. Molecular subtyping of Bacillus anthracis and the 2001 bioterrorism-associated anthrax outbreak, United States. Emerg. Infect. Dis.8:1111-1116.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    Jackson, P. J., E. A. Walthers, A. S. Kalif, K. L. Richmond, D. M. Adair, K. K. Hill, C. R. Kuske, G. I. Andersen, K. H. Wilson, M. E. Hugh-Jones, and P. Keim. 1997. Characterization of the variable-number tandem repeats in vrrA from different Bacillus anthracis isolates. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.63:1400-1405.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    Keim, P., A. Kalif, J. M. Schupp, K. K. Hill, S. E. Travis, K. L. Richmond, D. M. Adair, M. E. Hugh-Jones, C. R. Kuske, and P. Jackson. 1997. Molecular evolution and diversity in Bacillus anthracis as detected by amplified fragment length polymorphism markers. J. Bacteriol.179:818-824.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    Keim, P., L. B. Price, A. M. Klevytska, K. L. Smith, J. M. Schupp, R. Okinaka, P. Jackson, and M. E. Hugh-Jones. 2000. Multiple-locus variable-number tandem repeat analysis reveals genetic relationships within Bacillus anthracis. J. Bacteriol.182:2928-2936.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    Keim, P., K. L. Smith, C. Keys, H. Takahashi, T. Kurata, and A. Kaufmann. 2001. Molecular investigation of the Aum Shinrikyo anthrax release in Kameido, Japan. J. Clin. Microbiol.39:4566-4567.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    Keim, P., M. N. Van Ert, T. Pearson, A. J. Vogler, L. Y. Hyunh, and D. M. Wagner. 2004. Anthrax molecular epidemiology and forensics: using the appropriate marker for different evolutionary scales. Infect. Genet. Evol.4:205-213.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    Pearson, T., J. D. Busch, J. Ravel, T. D. Read, S. D. Rhoton, J. M. U'Ren, T. S. Simonson, S. M. Kachur, R. R. Leadem, M. L. Cardon, M. N. Van Ert, L. Y. Huynh, C. M. Fraser, and P. Keim. 2004. Phylogenetic discovery bias in Bacillus anthracis using single-nucleotide polymorphism from whole-genome sequencing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA101:13536-13541.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    Read, T. D., S. L. Salzberg, M. Pop, M. Shumway, L. Umayam, L. Jiang, E. Holtzapple, J. D. Busch, K. L. Smith, J. M. Schupp, D. Solomon, P. Keim, and C. M. Fraser. 2002. Comparative genome sequencing for discovery of novel polymorphisms in Bacillus anthracis. Science296:2028-2033.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    Smith, K. L., V. De Vos, H. B. Bryden, M. E. Hugh-Jones, A. Klevytska, L. B. Price, P. Keim, and D. T. Scholl. 1999. Meso-scale ecology of anthrax in southern Africa: a pilot study of diversity and clustering. J. Appl. Microbiol.87:204-207.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    Smith, K. L., V. DeVos, H. Bryden, L. B. Price, M. E. Hugh-Jones, and P. Keim. 2000. Bacillus anthracis diversity in Kruger National Park. J. Clin. Microbiol.38:3780-3784.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Molecular Diversity of Bacillus anthracis in Italy
Antonio Fasanella, Matthew Van Ert, Settimia A. Altamura, Giuliano Garofolo, Canio Buonavoglia, Guido Leori, Lynn Huynh, Shaylan Zanecki, Paul Keim
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Jul 2005, 43 (7) 3398-3401; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3398-3401.2005

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Molecular Diversity of Bacillus anthracis in Italy
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Molecular Diversity of Bacillus anthracis in Italy
Antonio Fasanella, Matthew Van Ert, Settimia A. Altamura, Giuliano Garofolo, Canio Buonavoglia, Guido Leori, Lynn Huynh, Shaylan Zanecki, Paul Keim
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Jul 2005, 43 (7) 3398-3401; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3398-3401.2005
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

anthrax
Bacillus anthracis
Disease Outbreaks
Genetic Variation
Minisatellite Repeats

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X