Kell D B, Kaprelyants A S, Weichart D H, Harwood C R, Barer M R
Institute of Biological Sciences, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, U.K.
Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 1998 Feb;73(2):169-87. doi: 10.1023/a:1000664013047.
In microbiology the terms 'viability' and 'culturability' are often equated. However, in recent years the apparently self-contradictory expression 'viable-but-nonculturable' ('VBNC') has been applied to cells with various and often poorly defined physiological attributes but which, nonetheless, could not be cultured by methods normally appropriate to the organism concerned. These attributes include apparent cell integrity, the possession of some form of measurable cellular activity and the apparent capacity to regain culturability. We review the evidence relating to putative VBNC cells and stress our view that most of the reports claiming a return to culturability have failed to exclude the regrowth of a limited number of cells which had never lost culturability. We argue that failure to differentiate clearly between use of the terms 'viability' and 'culturability' in an operational versus a conceptual sense is fuelling the current debate, and conclude with a number of proposals that are designed to help clarify the major issues involved. In particular, we suggest an alternative operational terminology that replaces 'VBNC' with expressions that are internally consistent.
在微生物学中，“生存能力”和“可培养性”这两个术语常被视为等同。然而，近年来，“活的但不可培养的”（“VBNC”）这一明显自相矛盾的表述已被用于描述具有各种生理特性且往往定义不明确的细胞，尽管如此，这些细胞却无法通过通常适用于相关生物体的方法进行培养。这些特性包括明显的细胞完整性、具备某种形式的可测量细胞活性以及恢复可培养性的明显能力。我们回顾了与假定的VBNC细胞相关的证据，并强调我们的观点，即大多数声称恢复可培养性的报告未能排除有限数量从未丧失可培养性的细胞的再生长。我们认为，在操作意义与概念意义上未能明确区分“生存能力”和“可培养性”这两个术语的使用，正在加剧当前的争论，并以一些旨在帮助澄清所涉主要问题的提议作为结论。特别是，我们建议采用一种替代的操作术语，用内部一致的表述来取代“VBNC”。
