Department of Laboratory Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Dec;49(12):4142-9. doi: 10.1128/JCM.05213-11. Epub 2011 Oct 12.
We compared and analyzed 16S rRNA and tuf gene sequences for 97 clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) by use of the GenBank, MicroSeq, EzTaxon, and BIBI databases. Discordant results for definitive identification were observed and differed according to the different databases and target genes. Although higher percentages of sequence identity were obtained with GenBank and MicroSeq for 16S rRNA analysis, the BIBI and EzTaxon databases produced less ambiguous results. Greater discriminatory power and fewer multiple probable identifications were observed with tuf gene analysis than with 16S rRNA analysis. The most pertinent results for tuf gene analysis were obtained with the GenBank database when the cutoff values for the percentage of identity were adjusted to be greater than or equal to 98.0%, with >0.8% separation between species. Analysis of the tuf gene proved to be more discriminative for certain CNS species; further, this method exhibited better distinction in the identification of CNS clinical isolates.
我们使用 GenBank、MicroSeq、EzTaxon 和 BIBI 数据库比较和分析了 97 株临床凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌(CNS)的 16S rRNA 和 tuf 基因序列。不同的数据库和靶基因观察到明确鉴定的不一致结果。虽然 16S rRNA 分析中 GenBank 和 MicroSeq 获得了更高的序列同一性百分比,但 BIBI 和 EzTaxon 数据库产生了较少的模棱两可的结果。与 16S rRNA 分析相比,tuf 基因分析观察到更高的鉴别力和更少的多个可能鉴定。当将身份同一性百分比的截止值调整为大于或等于 98.0%,并且物种之间的分离大于 0.8% 时,tuf 基因分析获得了最相关的结果。tuf 基因分析对某些 CNS 物种具有更强的鉴别力;此外,该方法在 CNS 临床分离株的鉴定中表现出更好的区分。