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
Clinical Veterinary Microbiology

Treponemes Detected in Digital Dermatitis Lesions in Brazilian Dairy Cattle and Possible Host Reservoirs of Infection

Ligia Valéria Nascimento, Marlise Teresinha Mauerwerk, Cibelli Lopes dos Santos, Ivan Roque de Barros Filho, Eduardo Harry Birgel Júnior, Cristina Santos Sotomaior, Humberto Maciel França Madeira, Rüdiger Daniel Ollhoff
B. W. Fenwick, Editor
Ligia Valéria Nascimento
aPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Animal, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marlise Teresinha Mauerwerk
aPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Animal, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cibelli Lopes dos Santos
bCurso de Medicina Veterinária, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ivan Roque de Barros Filho
cUniversidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eduardo Harry Birgel Júnior
dUniversidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cristina Santos Sotomaior
aPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Animal, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Cristina Santos Sotomaior
Humberto Maciel França Madeira
aPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Animal, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rüdiger Daniel Ollhoff
aPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Animal, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, São José dos Pinhais, Brazil
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
B. W. Fenwick
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03586-14
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

The main pathogenic treponemes causing bovine digital dermatitis were identified from 17 infected herds in southern Brazil for the first time in this study using PCR. We did not find a relationship between treponeme phylogroup composition and clinical classification. Treponema phagedenis was present in all lesions. Rumen fluid was implicated as a reservoir location for these pathogens.

TEXT

Although bovine digital dermatitis (BDD) has been known to occur in Brazil since the early 1990s (1), there have been no attempts to describe the possible pathogens involved, apart from reports of histopathological (2) and electron microscopic (3) findings. Treponema species are difficult to culture, so molecular approaches are useful for detecting and identifying these spirochetes (4, 5). The present study describes, for the first time, the frequencies of the major treponeme species in BDD lesions in Brazil. Similar results in Europe, North America, and Asia (6–11) confirm the polytreponemal aspect of this clinical condition.

Farms in southern Brazil where BDD infections are endemic (n = 28) were identified by consulting veterinary records. Previously identified dairy cows (n = 200) were individually reexamined and, if positive for BDD (n = 22), were photographed and their lesions classified according to clinical stage, from M1 to M4 (12–14). Samples (n = 22) were surgically excised, placed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution, and refrigerated (4°C to 8°C) until processing. The infected digit was then topically treated with antibiotics (oxytetracycline) and bandaged. Using a stomach tube, ruminal fluid (≥50 ml of fresh fluid) was collected from 15 cows from seven different BDD-positive herds, which were chosen by convenience. From one BDD-free herd with a history of lameness but without any clinical BDD lesions detected on previous examinations of the whole herd, ruminal fluid from 10 cows was sampled for use as a negative control. All samples underwent extraction of bacterial DNA, as previously described (12, 15). A nested-PCR method was used, as previously described (10). The treponeme-specific primers were called Treponema sp., Treponema medium/T. vincentii-like, Treponema phagedenis-like, and Treponema denticola/T. putidum-like (10). The research was approved by the Committee for the Ethical Use of Animals of Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUCPR) (registration no. 646) in 2011.

Of the herds, 17 (60.71%) had BDD lesions on the day of examination and were positive for subsequent molecular BDD detection. The lesions were in different clinical stages (14) and were classified as follows: 13.64% were M1, 45.45% were M2, 22.73% were M3, and 18.18% were M4. However, certain lesions classified as M2 or M3 contained areas that were M4 or M1. In comparison, the cows in the present study exhibited considerably more M2 lesions (45.45% versus 21.03% in the previous study) and fewer M4 lesions (18.18% versus 50.03% in the previous study) (Table 1). The reason for this observation or why the different forms can transition from one stage to another relatively quickly or in unexpected ways (14) or persist for months at the same score (16, 17) needs further investigation. Mixed M2 and M4 stages and mixed M3 and M1 stages were reported for the first time in Brazilian BDD cases.

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

Treponemes detected in BDD lesions and ruminal fluid of lesional and nonlesional cows in Brazil

As expected, all lesions and all samples of ruminal fluid were positive for the Treponema sp. primer. All treponeme groups were found in 81.82% of the lesions, whereas the T. phagedenis-like and T. medium/T. vincentii-like groups occurred together in 95.45% and T. phagedenis-like and T. denticola/T. putidum-like in 86.36% of the lesions. In 60% of the rumen fluid samples, we found at least one of the pathogenic phylogroups. In 15 rumen fluid samples, the T. phagedenis-like group was the most prevalent at 40%, followed by T. medium/T. vincentii-like at 33.33% and T. denticola/T. putidum-like at 26.67%. In two cows, all three phylogroups were identified in the rumen fluid. The T. medium/T. vincentii-like and T. phagedenis-like groups were identified together in two of the rumen fluid samples, whereas the T. phagedenis-like and T. denticola/T. putidum-like groups occurred alone in 13.33%, and the T. medium/T. vincentii-like group occurred in one cow (6.67%). None of the rumen fluid samples from the cows in the negative-control group were positive for pathogenic treponemes (Table 1). Although the phylogroups identified in the rumen fluid samples were also present in the lesions of the animals, not all phylogroups present in the lesions were identified in the rumen fluid. The phylogroups that were absent in the rumen fluid from BDD-positive cows were, in order of frequency, T. denticola/T. putidum-like (73.33%), T. medium/T. vincentii-like (66.67%), and T. phagedenis-like (60%). No association was established between the clinical classification of the lesion and the presence of a specific group of pathogenic treponemes.

We successfully detected the three main treponeme phylogroups implicated in BDD from the ruminal fluid of BDD-affected animals. The testing of ruminal fluid in the present study was based on a previous study (18) in which the T. phagedenis-like phylogroup was isolated from the dorsal sac and reticular pillar of the rumen; however, it was successfully isolated from the rumen fluid in only one case (18). Better yields were obtained (18) from the oral cavity and rectoanal junction, leading to a hypothesis of these regions being potential contributors to the transmission of BDD beyond direct lesion-to-skin contact. We hypothesized that the liquid and rich medium of the ruminal fluid, which is in constant contact with the oral cavity during rumination, might represent the actual vehicle of transmission, particularly considering that during rumination and even eructation, particles of ingesta may fall out of the oral cavity or be lost by drooling and contaminate the bovine environment. Initial infection of the oral cavity and ruminal fluid may occur by licking a BDD wound, during which a massive amount of bacteria can easily be debrided from the wound and superficial and deeper skin layers. Different types and amounts of treponemes would then be ingested according to the temporal microbiota changes during the development of BDD lesions (19). In addition, ingested treponemes are able to invade the epithelial cells of the crypts of the cecum and colon (20), with possible exfoliation into forming stool, which may explain the isolation of treponemes at the rectoanal junction (18).

Of the BDD-positive cows from which ruminal fluid was sampled, 10 had all three main phylogroups in the lesion, but only two had the three phylogroups together in the ruminal fluid, which can possibly be explained by the fact that survival of treponemes in the ruminal fluid is time limited and that treponemes populating the superficial layers are more likely to be ingested, thereby influencing the types of treponemes entering the ruminal fluid. The ruminal environment may favor the survival of certain treponemes, because an environment rich in volatile fatty acids favors T. phagedenis (21). Further, the ability of treponemes to colonize different environments depends, among other factors, on the presence of periplasmic flagella for better propulsion through highly viscous or viscoelastic material (22), such as ruminal fluid and humid claw skin.

None of the three main phylogroups were present in the ruminal fluid samples from healthy animals of a noninfected herd. A future study investigating these aspects is warranted to further elucidate the epidemiology of BDD.

Three treponeme phylogroups, T. medium/T. vincentii-like, T. phagedenis-like, and T. denticola/T. putidum-like, were identified in Brazilian dairy-cattle herds. The polytreponemal nature of bovine dermatitis digitalis lesions was reinforced in this study, and lesions of different clinical stages can coexist in the same cow. A possible reservoir of the treponemes other than the skin lesion is the ruminal fluid.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank the Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná and CAPES for funding this project.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 17 December 2014.
    • Returned for modification 7 February 2015.
    • Accepted 14 March 2015.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 18 March 2015.
  • Copyright © 2015, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Borges JRJ,
    2. Pitombo CA,
    3. Santiago SS,
    4. Ribeiro PN,
    5. Ronconi MA
    . 1992. Incidência de afecções podais em bovinos leiteiros submetidos a diferentes sistemas de manejo. Arq Esc Med Vet UFBA 14:34–42.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.↵
    1. Cruz CE,
    2. Pescador CA,
    3. Nakajima Y,
    4. Driemeier D
    . 2005. Immunopathological investigations on bovine digital epidermitis. Vet Rec 157:834–840. doi:10.1136/vr.157.26.834.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Rodrigues CA,
    2. Luvizoto MCR,
    3. Alves ALG,
    4. Teodoro PHM,
    5. Gregório EA
    . 2010. Digital dermatitis of the accessory digits of dairy cows. Pesq Vet Bras 30:246–248. doi:10.1590/S0100-736X201000030001000.0.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Klitgaard K,
    2. Boye M,
    3. Capion N,
    4. Jensen TK
    . 2008. Evidence of multiple Treponema phylotypes involved in bovine digital dermatitis as shown by 16S rRNA gene analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization. J Clin Microbiol 46:3012–3020. doi:10.1128/JCM.00670-08.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Klitgaard K,
    2. Bretó AF,
    3. Boye M,
    4. Jensen TK
    . 2013. Targeting the treponemal microbiome of digital dermatitis infections by high-resolution phylogenetic analyses and comparison with fluorescent in situ hybridization. J Clin Microbiol 51:2212–22119. doi:10.1128/JCM.00320-13.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Demirkan I,
    2. Carter SD,
    3. Murray RD,
    4. Blowey RW,
    5. Woorward MJ
    . 1998. The frequent detection of a treponeme in bovine digital dermatitis by immunocytochemistry and polymerase chain reaction. Vet Microbiol 60:285–292. doi:10.1016/S0378-1135(98)00146-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    1. Stamm LV,
    2. Bergen HL,
    3. Walker RL
    . 2002. Molecular typing of papillomatous digital dermatitis-associated Treponema isolates based on analysis of 16S-23S ribosomal DNA intergenic spacer regions. J Clin Microbiol 40:3463–3469. doi:10.1128/JCM.40.9.3463-3469.2002.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Demirkan I,
    2. Williams HF,
    3. Dhawi A,
    4. Carter SD,
    5. Winstanley C,
    6. Bruce KD,
    7. Hart CA
    . 2006. Characterization of a spirochaete isolated from a case of bovine digital dermatitis. J Appl Microbiol 101:948–955. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2006.02976.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Evans NJ,
    2. Brown JM,
    3. Demirkan I,
    4. Murray RD,
    5. Vink WD,
    6. Blowey RW,
    7. Hart CA,
    8. Carter SD
    . 2008. Three unique groups of spirochetes isolated from digital dermatitis lesions in UK cattle. Vet Microbiol 130:141–150. doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2007.12.019.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. 10.↵
    1. Evans NJ,
    2. Brown JM,
    3. Demirkan I,
    4. Birtles R,
    5. Hart CA,
    6. Carter SD
    . 2009. Association of unique, isolated spirochetes with BDD lesions. J Clin Microbiol 47:689–696. doi:10.1128/JCM.01914-08.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Yano T,
    2. Moe KK,
    3. Yamazaki K,
    4. Ooka T,
    5. Hayashi T,
    6. Misawa N
    . 2010. Identification of candidate pathogens of papillomatous digital dermatitis in dairy cattle from quantitative 16S rRNA clonal analysis. Vet Microbiol 143:352–365. doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2009.12.009.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Sambrook J,
    2. Fritsch EF,
    3. Maniatis T
    . 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY.
  13. 13.↵
    1. Bergsten C
    . 1993. A photometric method for recording hoof diseases in cattle with special reference to haemorrhages of the sole. Acta Vet Scand 34:281–286.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Döpfer D,
    2. Koopmans A,
    3. Meijer FA,
    4. Szakáll I,
    5. Schukken YH,
    6. Klee W,
    7. Bosma RB,
    8. Cornelisse JL,
    9. van Asten AJ,
    10. ter Huurne AA
    . 1997. Histopathological and bacteriological evaluation of digital dermatitis in cattle, with special reference to spirochaetes and Campylobacter faecalis. Vet Rec 140:620–623. doi:10.1136/vr.140.24.620.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Zhu XY,
    2. Zhong T,
    3. Padya Y,
    4. Joerger RD
    . 2002. 16S rRNA-based analysis of microbiota from the cecum of broiler chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol 68:124–137. doi:10.1128/AEM.68.1.124-137.2002.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Nielsen BH,
    2. Thomsen PT,
    3. Sørensen JT
    . 2009. A study of duration of digital dermatitis lesions after treatment in a Danish dairy herd. Acta Vet Scand 51:27–31. doi:10.1186/1751-0147-51-27.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Krull A,
    2. Gorden P,
    3. Shearer J,
    4. Leuschen B,
    5. Scott HM,
    6. Plummer P
    . 2013. Digital dermatitis: a description of lesion progression and regression of natural disease in Holstein dairy cattle over three years, p 187. In Whay B, Hockenhull J (ed), Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium and 9th International Conference on Lameness in Ruminants, 11 to 14 August 2013, Bristol, United Kingdom.
  18. 18.↵
    1. Evans NJ,
    2. Timofte D,
    3. Isherwood DR,
    4. Brown JM,
    5. Williams JM,
    6. Sherlock K,
    7. Lehane MJ,
    8. Murray RD,
    9. Birtles RJ,
    10. Hart CA,
    11. Carter SD
    . 2012. Host and environmental reservoirs of infection for bovine digital dermatitis treponemes. Vet Microbiol 156:102–109. doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2011.09.029.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Krull AC,
    2. Shearer JK,
    3. Gorden PJ,
    4. Cooper VL,
    5. Phillips GJ,
    6. Plummer PJ
    . 2014. Deep sequencing analysis reveals temporal microbiota changes associated with development of bovine digital dermatitis. Infect Immun 82:3359–3373. doi:10.1128/IAI.02077-14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Shibahara T,
    2. Ohya T,
    3. Ishii R,
    4. Ogihara Y,
    5. Maeda T,
    6. Ishikawa Y,
    7. Kadota K
    . 2002. Concurrent spirochaetal infections of the feet and colon of cattle in Japan. Aust Vet J 80:497–502. doi:10.1111/j.1751-0813.2002.tb12474.x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    1. Wilson-Welder JH,
    2. Elliott MK,
    3. Zuerner RL,
    4. Bayles DO,
    5. Alt DP,
    6. Stanton TB
    . 2013. Biochemical and molecular characterization of Treponema phagedenis-like spirochetes isolated from a bovine digital dermatitis lesion. BMC Microbiol 13:280–289. doi:10.1186/1471-2180-13-280.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Wolgemuth CW,
    2. Charon NW,
    3. Goldstein SF,
    4. Goldstein RE
    . 2006. The flagellar cytoskeleton of the spirochetes. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 11:221–227. doi:10.1159/000094056.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Treponemes Detected in Digital Dermatitis Lesions in Brazilian Dairy Cattle and Possible Host Reservoirs of Infection
Ligia Valéria Nascimento, Marlise Teresinha Mauerwerk, Cibelli Lopes dos Santos, Ivan Roque de Barros Filho, Eduardo Harry Birgel Júnior, Cristina Santos Sotomaior, Humberto Maciel França Madeira, Rüdiger Daniel Ollhoff
Journal of Clinical Microbiology May 2015, 53 (6) 1935-1937; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03586-14

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.
Treponemes Detected in Digital Dermatitis Lesions in Brazilian Dairy Cattle and Possible Host Reservoirs of Infection
(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
Treponemes Detected in Digital Dermatitis Lesions in Brazilian Dairy Cattle and Possible Host Reservoirs of Infection
Ligia Valéria Nascimento, Marlise Teresinha Mauerwerk, Cibelli Lopes dos Santos, Ivan Roque de Barros Filho, Eduardo Harry Birgel Júnior, Cristina Santos Sotomaior, Humberto Maciel França Madeira, Rüdiger Daniel Ollhoff
Journal of Clinical Microbiology May 2015, 53 (6) 1935-1937; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03586-14
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • TEXT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

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