Jackson Emily E, Forsythe Stephen J
Pathogen Research Group, School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Clifton Lane, Nottingham, NG11 8NS, UK.
BMC Microbiol. 2016 Jul 11;16(1):146. doi: 10.1186/s12866-016-0768-6.
Microbiological criteria applied to powdered infant formula (PIF) require the absence of all Cronobacter spp. Consequently, misidentification of isolates from finished products can lead to significant financial losses for manufacturers and could increase the risk of neonatal infection. Biochemical identification of suspect isolates using commercially available test panels is recommended for use by PIF manufacturers by both the US FDA and ISO standard methods for Cronobacter species; however, phenotyping can be unreliable, particularly for a genus such as Cronobacter where the taxonomy has been subject to frequent changes. This study compared the predicted identification by commonly used phenotyping kits (API20E and ID32E) for over 240 strains of Cronobacter from diverse sources, which had been identified using DNA sequence analysis. In 2015, the databases associated with the API20E and ID32E biochemical test panels were updated, including the recognition of the Cronobacter genus. Thus, the identifications from multiple versions the databases were compared to each other and to identifications based on DNA sequencing methods.
Using previous versions of the API20E database, 90.0 % of strains (216/240) resulted in a match for the species identification; however, version 5.0 produced matches for only 82.3 % of strains (237/288). Similarly, the update to version 4.0 in the ID32E database caused the percentage of matches to drop from 88.9 % (240/270) to 43.2 % (139/322). A smaller study showed that the Vitek GN system identified all 14 strains, belonging all seven Cronobacter species, as members of the 'C. sakazakii group,' but also attributed three strains of Franconibacter helveticus and F. pulveris to this group. In silco analysis of a PCR-based method targeting ompA predicted that amplification would only occur with Cronobacter species and this method may be a feasible alternative to biochemical phenotyping.
These results indicate that commercially available biochemical test panels are not sufficiently reliable for speciation of Cronobacter isolates. Although DNA-sequence based methods would be the more reliable approach; however, this is not currently feasible for many food microbiology laboratories. Instead, a previously published PCR-based method targeting ompA is suggested as an alternative for identification of Cronobacter species based on in silico analysis.
适用于婴儿配方奶粉(PIF)的微生物标准要求不得含有任何阪崎肠杆菌属细菌。因此,成品中分离菌株的错误鉴定可能会给制造商带来重大经济损失,并可能增加新生儿感染的风险。美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)和阪崎肠杆菌属的ISO标准方法均建议PIF制造商使用市售测试板对可疑分离株进行生化鉴定;然而,表型分析可能不可靠,尤其是对于像阪崎肠杆菌属这样分类经常变化的属。本研究比较了常用表型分析试剂盒(API20E和ID32E)对240多株来自不同来源的阪崎肠杆菌菌株的预测鉴定结果,这些菌株已通过DNA序列分析进行了鉴定。2015年,与API20E和ID32E生化测试板相关的数据库进行了更新,包括对阪崎肠杆菌属的识别。因此,将多个版本数据库的鉴定结果相互比较,并与基于DNA测序方法的鉴定结果进行比较。
使用API20E数据库的早期版本时,90.0%的菌株(216/240)在物种鉴定上得到匹配;然而,5.0版本仅对82.3%的菌株(237/288)产生了匹配结果。同样,ID32E数据库更新到4.0版本后,匹配百分比从88.9%(240/270)降至43.2%(139/322)。一项规模较小的研究表明,Vitek GN系统将所有14株属于7个阪崎肠杆菌物种的菌株均鉴定为“阪崎肠杆菌组”的成员,但也将3株瑞士弗兰肯氏菌和粉状弗兰肯氏菌归为该组。对基于ompA的PCR方法进行的硅基分析预测,只有阪崎肠杆菌属细菌会发生扩增,该方法可能是生化表型分析的一种可行替代方法。
这些结果表明,市售生化测试板对于阪崎肠杆菌分离株的物种鉴定不够可靠。虽然基于DNA序列的方法会是更可靠的方法;然而,目前这对许多食品微生物实验室来说并不可行。相反,根据硅基分析,建议采用先前发表的针对ompA的基于PCR的方法作为鉴定阪崎肠杆菌属物种的替代方法。