Biochemical and Serological Characteristics of Rhodococcus equi Isolates from Animals and Humans

Abstract

In the present study, 17 Rhodococcus equi isolates from animals and 13 R. equi isolates from humans were correctly identified by the use of the API Coryne-test system. The biochemical characteristics revealed no significant differences between isolates from animals and humans. Heat extractions at acid p H or autoclave extractions of the bacteria and the use of monospecific antisera against type antigens 1-7 allowed the serotyping of the bacteria. The majority of the R. equi isolates reacted with serotype 1 and serotype 2-specific antisera, extracts of two human isolates reacted with serotype 5 and serotype 6-specific antisera, respectively. The determination of biochemical and serological properties of R. equi might help to characterize individual cultures of this species. This might be useful in epidemiological studies. U.S.

Characterization of Virulence Plasmids and Serotyping of Rhodococcus equi Isolates from Submaxillary Lymph Nodes of Pigs in Hungary

“…These results agree with the data in the literature (8,9,11); however, Prescott found serotype 1 to be the predominating serotype among isolates from swine (13). A similar dominance of serotype 2 among R. equi strains isolated from humans was described by several authors (4,9) and shows an epidemiological connection between pigs and humans. …”

Maturation of Rhodococcus equi‐Containing Vacuoles is Arrested After Completion of the Early Endosome Stage

“…Rabbit anti‐proteolipid subunit of vATPase antiserum was from Mhairi Skinner (University of Guelph, Canada) (58); rabbit anti‐vATPase E‐subunit was from Dennis Brown (Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA) (59); rabbit anti‐Rab7 serum was from Marino Zerial (Max‐Planck‐Institute for Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Dresden, Germany) (60); a mouse monoclonal antibody to LBPA was from Jean Gruenberg (Department of Biochemistry, University of Geneva, Switzerland) (5); monoclonal mouse antibody to Rab5 (clone Cl 621.1) was from Wolfram Antonin and Reinhard Jahn (Max‐Planck‐Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Göttingen, Germany) (61); rabbit anti‐EEA1 used in Figure 9 was from Silvia Corvera (University of Massachussetts, Worcester, MA, USA) (62); rabbit antiserum to mouse coronin‐1 (also known as TACO protein) was from Jean Pieters (Biocenter, University of Basel, Switzerland) (63); rabbit antibodies to cathepsin D were from Eiki Kominami (Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan) (64); monoclonal rat anti‐murine LAMP1 (clone 1D4B) and anti‐murine LAMP2 (clone ABL‐93) monoclonal antibodies (65) were obtained from the Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank (maintained by the University of Iowa; http://www.uiowa.edu/~dshbwww/info.html) and monoclonal antibody purified from the hybridoma supernatant, while anti‐TfR (TIB‐219) was purified from hybridomas obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA, USA). Polyclonal antibodies to R. equi serotypes 1 or 6 were from Christoph Lämmler (Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Giessen, Germany) (66).…”

The genus Rhodococcus

“…The large number of tests used by Goodfellow et al (1990) is inappropriate for routine use, while use of a smaller number of tests may be inadequate (McNeil and Brown 1994). The API Coryne system (Biomerieux, Marcy-l'Etoile, France) includes R. equi in its database and successful use of this system to identify R. equi isolates has been reported (Bern and Lammler 1994), but Soto et al (1994) found the system be unreliable as it incorrectly identified strains of R. rhodochrous as R. equi. The Biolog system (Biolog Inc., Hayward, CA, USA) has been used to identify rhodococci, although it is not yet clear how accurate and reliable it is for this purpose (Wang and Krawiec 1994;Harrisbaldwin and Gudmestad 1996).…”