Huys G, Kämpfer P, Altwegg M, Coopman R, Janssen P, Gillis M, Kersters K
Laboratorium voor Microbiologie, Universiteit Gent, Belgium.
Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1997 Oct;47(4):1157-64. doi: 10.1099/00207713-47-4-1157.
The recently reported chemotaxonomic and genotypic description of two well-separated subgroups (I and II) in Aeromonas eucrenophila and their affiliation to Aeromonas encheleia and the unnamed Aeromonas DNA hybridization group (HG) 11 (G. Huys, M. Altwegg, M.-L. Hänninen, M. Vancanneyt, L. Vauterin, R. Coopman, U. Torck, J. Lüthy-Hottenstein, P. Janssen, and K. Kersters, Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 19:616-623, 1996) has questioned the original species descriptions of A. eucrenophila and A. encheleia. In order to elucidate the unclear taxonomic status of these taxa in the genus Aeromonas, we have further investigated a collection of 14 reference strains and 14 related isolates encompassing the taxa A. eucrenophila subgroups I and II, A. encheleia, and HG11 by DNA-DNA hybridization (on 17 of the 28 strains) and phenotypic characterization (on all 28 strains). Genotypically, the investigated strains could be grouped into two DNA hybridization groups that exhibited between-group homologies ranging from 42 to 52%. The members of DNA homology group I (DNA binding, 76 to 100%) were strains of A. eucrenophila subgroup I, including the type strain LMG 3774, and two A. eucrenophila-like isolates, leading to the conclusion that these strains should be considered true representatives of the species A. eucrenophila. The strains of A. eucrenophila subgroup II, HG11, and A. encheleia, on the other hand, were closely joined in DNA homology group II (DNA binding, 74 to 105%) together with two presumptive A. encheleia isolates. The fact that strain LMG 16330T of A. encheleia was the only type strain residing in DNA homology group II implies that HG11 and A. eucrenophila subgroup II should be classified in the species A. encheleia. Except for the somewhat aberrant phenotypic positions of HG11 strains LMG 13075 and LMG 13076, the establishment of DNA homology groups I and II was supported by the delineation of phena 1 and 2 (level of correlation, 90%), respectively, as revealed by numerical analysis of 136 phenotypic test results. These data indicate that A. eucrenophila and A. encheleia are phenotypically highly related but can be easily separated by testing the production of acid from D-cellobiose and lactose and the assimilation of D-cellobiose. Extended descriptions of both species are given.
最近报道了嗜泉气单胞菌中两个明显不同的亚群（I和II）的化学分类学和基因型描述，以及它们与鳗气单胞菌和未命名的气单胞菌DNA杂交群（HG）11的关系（G. Huys、M. Altwegg、M.-L. Hänninen、M. Vancanneyt、L. Vauterin、R. Coopman、U. Torck、J. Lüthy-Hottenstein、P. Janssen和K. Kersters，《系统与应用微生物学》19:616 - 623，1996年），这对嗜泉气单胞菌和鳗气单胞菌的原始物种描述提出了质疑。为了阐明气单胞菌属中这些分类单元不明确的分类地位，我们通过DNA - DNA杂交（对28株菌株中的17株）和表型特征分析（对所有28株菌株），进一步研究了一组包含嗜泉气单胞菌亚群I和II、鳗气单胞菌以及HG11的14株参考菌株和14株相关分离株。从基因型上看，所研究的菌株可分为两个DNA杂交群，群间同源性在42%至52%之间。DNA同源群I（DNA结合率为76%至100%）的成员包括嗜泉气单胞菌亚群I的菌株，其中包括模式菌株LMG 3774，以及两株嗜泉气单胞菌样分离株，由此得出结论，这些菌株应被视为嗜泉气单胞菌物种的真正代表。另一方面，嗜泉气单胞菌亚群II、HG11和鳗气单胞菌的菌株，与两株推测的鳗气单胞菌分离株一起，紧密地归入DNA同源群II（DNA结合率为74%至105%）。鳗气单胞菌的菌株LMG 16330T是唯一属于DNA同源群II的模式菌株，这一事实表明HG11和嗜泉气单胞菌亚群II应归入鳗气单胞菌物种。除了HG11菌株LMG 13075和LMG 13076在表型上有些异常外，DNA同源群I和II的建立分别得到了表型1和表型2（相关性水平为90%）划分的支持，这是通过对一百三十六项表型测试结果的数值分析得出的。这些数据表明，嗜泉气单胞菌和鳗气单胞菌在表型上高度相关，但通过检测D - 纤维二糖和乳糖产酸情况以及D - 纤维二糖同化情况可以很容易地将它们区分开来。文中给出了这两个物种的详细描述。
