国际食品微生物标准委员会方法研究。十二。粪便中产气荚膜梭菌计数的比较研究。

ICMSF methods studies. XII. Comparative study for the enumeration of Clostridium perfringens in feces.

作者信息

Hauschild A H, Desmarchelier P, Gilbert R J, Harmon S M, Vahlefeld R

出版信息

Can J Microbiol. 1979 Sep;25(9):953-63. doi: 10.1139/m79-146.

PMID:232005

Abstract

As the second phase of an international comparative study for the enumeration of Clostridium perfringens, four methods were compared for "total" and spore counts of C. perfringens in fecal specimens: the SFP (Shahidi-Ferguson perfringens) agar (A), TSC (tryptose-sulfite-cycloserine) agar (B), SC (sulfite-cycloserine) agar (C), and neomycin blood agar (D) methods. In both the total and spore count procedures, the confirmed C. perfringens counts in method D were lower than in methods A, B, and C. Little differences among methods were found in the percentages of presumptive colonies confirmed as C. perfringens. The nonspecific counts in methods A and D were generally greater than in B and C, but nonspecific microorganisms did not interfere in the enumeration of C. perfringens spores by any of the four methods. In overall performance, methods B and C were superior to A and D. The mean C. perfringens spore count was only 0.17 log lower than the mean total count. Spore counts alone are, therefore, adequate in investigations of C. perfringens outbreaks.

摘要

作为产气荚膜梭菌计数国际比较研究的第二阶段，对粪便标本中产气荚膜梭菌的“总数”和芽孢计数比较了四种方法：沙希迪-弗格森产气荚膜梭菌（SFP）琼脂法（A）、胰蛋白胨-亚硫酸盐-环丝氨酸（TSC）琼脂法（B）、亚硫酸盐-环丝氨酸（SC）琼脂法（C）和新霉素血琼脂法（D）。在总数和芽孢计数程序中，方法D中经确认的产气荚膜梭菌计数均低于方法A、B和C。在被确认为产气荚膜梭菌的推定菌落百分比方面，各方法之间差异不大。方法A和D中的非特异性计数通常高于B和C，但非特异性微生物并未干扰这四种方法中任何一种对产气荚膜梭菌芽孢的计数。总体而言，方法B和C优于A和D。产气荚膜梭菌芽孢的平均计数仅比平均总数低0.17个对数。因此，仅芽孢计数在产气荚膜梭菌暴发调查中就足够了。