Murakami Koichi, Maeda-Mitani Eriko, Kimura Hirokazu, Honda Mikiko, Ikeda Tetsuya, Sugitani Wakana, Konno Takayuki, Kawano Kimiko, Etoh Yoshiki, Sera Nobuyuki, Mizukoshi Fuminori, Saitoh Takehito, Kawamura Yoshiaki, Ishioka Taisei, Ohnishi Makoto, Oishi Kazunori, Fujimoto Shuji
Infectious Disease Surveillance Center, National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Musashimurayama, Japan.
Fukuoka Institute of Health and Environmental Sciences, Dazaifu, Japan.
Front Microbiol. 2019 Jul 5;10:1543. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01543. eCollection 2019.
, a zoonotic enteropathogen, is responsible for outbreaks of disease in humans. Identifying strains of by phenotypic characterization tests is difficult because of its poorly defined properties. Screening its phenotypic characteristics is, nevertheless, a necessary prerequisite for further genetic analysis of its properties, and species-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis can be used to type the pathogen. While two biogroups (1 and 2) have been described, strains with characteristics divergent from both biogroups have been reported worldwide. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the characteristics of non-biogroup 1 or 2 strains, and discern the characteristics common to all of the strains from this study. Altogether, 107/414 field isolates were selected for examination based on pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis. The 107 strains were isolated from 92 sources, including humans and pigeon feces, other wild birds, and retail chicken livers. All strains were then examined using various culture-based, biochemical (API 50CHE tests, API Zym test, and others) and molecular (virulence gene screening, multi-locus sequence analysis) testing methods. Our results revealed that all field strains ( = 107) showed non-biogroup 1 or 2 characteristics, with multiple sequence differences. Variations in indole production and the lysine decarboxylase activity profiles among the isolates made identification of very difficult. Therefore, we propose that non-biogroup 1 or 2 of should be assigned to biogroup 3 to make screening of them easier in public health and clinical laboratory settings. Clearly, having group criteria for indole-negative/lysine-positive, indole-positive/lysine-negative, and indole-positive/lysine-positive biogroups 1, 2, and 3 strains, respectively, should provide for more accurate identification of isolates. Based on our findings, we recommend that isolates displaying phenotype mobility-negativity (sulfide-indole-motility medium, 37°C), hydrogen sulfide production-negativity (triple sugar iron medium), acid production-negativity from xylose, negative β-glucuronidase activity properties, and showing indole production and lysine decarboxylase activity profiles in accordance with one of the three biogroups, should be further assessed using an -specific PCR assay.
作为一种人畜共患肠道病原体,可引发人类疾病的爆发。由于其特性界定不明确,通过表型特征测试鉴定该病原体的菌株很困难。然而,筛选其表型特征是对其特性进行进一步基因分析的必要前提,物种特异性聚合酶链反应(PCR)分析可用于对该病原体进行分型。虽然已描述了两个生物群(1和2),但世界各地均报道了具有不同于这两个生物群特征的菌株。本研究的目的是评估非生物群1或2菌株的特征,并识别本研究中所有该病原体菌株共有的特征。基于脉冲场凝胶电泳分析,共选择了107/414株现场分离株进行检测。这107株菌株从92个来源分离得到,包括人类和鸽子粪便、其他野生鸟类以及零售鸡肝。然后使用各种基于培养的、生化的(API 50CHE测试、API Zym测试等)和分子的(毒力基因筛选、多位点序列分析)检测方法对所有菌株进行检测。我们的结果显示,所有现场菌株(n = 107)均表现出非生物群1或2的特征,存在多个序列差异。分离株之间吲哚产生和赖氨酸脱羧酶活性谱的变化使得该病原体的鉴定非常困难。因此,我们建议将该病原体的非生物群1或2归为生物群3,以便在公共卫生和临床实验室环境中更便于对其进行筛选。显然,分别针对吲哚阴性/赖氨酸阳性、吲哚阳性/赖氨酸阴性以及吲哚阳性/赖氨酸阳性的该病原体生物群1、2和3菌株制定分组标准,应能更准确地鉴定该病原体分离株。基于我们的研究结果,我们建议对于表现出表型运动性阴性(硫化物 - 吲哚 - 运动性培养基,37°C)、硫化氢产生阴性(三糖铁培养基)、木糖产酸阴性、β - 葡萄糖醛酸酶活性阴性特性,且吲哚产生和赖氨酸脱羧酶活性谱符合三个生物群之一的分离株,应使用该病原体特异性PCR检测进行进一步评估。