Guthertz L S, Okoluk R L
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1978 Jan;35(1):109-12. doi: 10.1128/aem.35.1.109-112.1978.
Four miniaturized multiple test systems were compared with tube methodology used to identify Enterobacteriaceae encountered in foods. Identification aids supplied with each system were used to assign names to isolates at the species level. For the 129 strains tested, the Minitek system demonstrated a 96.9 percent agreement with reactions in tubed media. The Inolex, Analytab, and PathoTec test systems exhibited 94.3, 93.8, and 92.7 percent agreement, respectively. Analytab identified 96.1 percent of the isolates to the species level, whereas the Minitek, PathoTec, and Inolex systems were able to identify 78.3, 32.6, and 27.1 percent, respectively. The results indicate that the Analytab and Minitek systems are acceptable substitutes for the tube methodology routinely employed in identifying enterics from foods. Although the PathoTec system might be used to screen isolates for their identity, neither the presently available PathoTec nor the Inolex systems should be substituted for current methodology when definitive identification of foodborne organisms is required.
将四种小型化多重检测系统与用于鉴定食品中肠杆菌科细菌的试管法进行了比较。使用每个系统附带的鉴定辅助工具在种水平上为分离株命名。对于所测试的129株菌株,Minitek系统与试管培养基中的反应显示出96.9%的一致性。Inolex、Analytab和PathoTec检测系统的一致性分别为94.3%、93.8%和92.7%。Analytab将96.1%的分离株鉴定到种水平,而Minitek、PathoTec和Inolex系统分别能够鉴定78.3%、32.6%和27.1%。结果表明,Analytab和Minitek系统是从食品中鉴定肠道菌常规使用的试管法的可接受替代方法。尽管PathoTec系统可用于筛选分离株的身份,但当需要对食源性病原体进行明确鉴定时,目前可用的PathoTec系统和Inolex系统都不应替代当前方法。