Characteristics of CDC group 1 and group 1-like coryneform bacteria isolated from clinical specimens

Abstract

Fifteen strains of CDC group 1 coryneform and biochemically similar bacteria were isolated from clinical specimens. Of the 15 strains isolated, 11 were derived from abscesses and purulent lesions, mostly from the upper part of the body, and 3 were grown from blood cultures. Nine strains were associated with mixed anaerobic but no other aerobic flora. Seven strains exhibited the classical biochemical profile of CDC coryneform group 1; however, eight strains were unable to reduce nitrate and were called "group 1-like." Other reactions to differentiate CDC group 1 and group 1-like coryneform rods include alpha-hemolysis on human blood agar, fermentation of adonitol, and the presence of alkaline phosphatase. Fifteen strains showed marked CAMP reactions on different erythrocyte agars. Gas-liquid chromatography of volatile and nonvolatile fatty acids as well as cellular fatty acid patterns and the composition of cell wall components suggest that CDC group 1 and group 1-like coryneform bacteria do not belong to the genus Corynebacterium but possibly to the genus Actinomyces or Arcanobacterium. DNA-DNA hybridization studies revealed that group 1 and group 1-like strains represent different species. * Corresponding author. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, Ga., as reference strains. Strains 4 and 5, initially diagnosed as "atypical CDC coryneform group A-4" (7), were later also shown to be members of CDC coryneform group 1 (23) and were therefore used as reference strains as well. Strains 6 to 20 were isolated in our clinical laboratory between July

Identification of coryneform and other Gram‐positive rods with several methods

“…The "gold standard" for the identification of an isolate was a combination of: traditional morphological and biochemical data provided by the schemes of Hollis & Weaver (20) and Hollis (19), cellular fatty acid profiles as published previously (2, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 21, 28, 33, 34, 36), and production of metabolic fatty acids as reported for Gram-positive rods (7,9,18,29,31,32,36). Diagnoses provided by the API Coryne and MIDI systems were not used for identification.…”

“…), and because new taxa have been outlined or named since their publication (1 1,12, 15, 30, 36). If identification could still not be established by these three parameters, or if one parameter contradicted the other(s), chemotaxonomic studies were undertaken and evaluated according to published data (1,9,15,30,32). Tests not covered in the Hollis & Weaver scheme (DNase, starch, hippurate, methanethiol, en-zymes [API ZYM], susceptibility to 0/129 and the six antimicrobials listed above) were used in order to find out if any species or genus specificities could be detected.…”

“…Failure to identify Actinomyces strains was due to the absence of all species in the data base except for A. pyogenes. We had isolated eight strains of A. neuii (9,12), seven A. pyogenes-like strains (36), and one each of A. odontolyticus and A. naeslundii.…”

“…Recent studies from this (9,10,11,12,15,36) and other (1, 4, 6, 27, 28, 30, 35) laboratories, however, have shown that a precise identification of these organisms can be worthwhile in (a) detecting unsuspected species, (b) ascribing potential pathogenicity to species so far thought to be "non-pathogenic", and (c) outlining hitherto undescribed taxa. We thought it therefore appropriate to try to identify a large number of clinical isolates of aerobically growing GPR by using several techniques that are now at the disposal of many laboratories.…”

Aureobacterium resistens sp. nov., exhibiting vancomycin resistance and teicoplanin susceptibility

“…The biochemical pro¢les of strains DMMZ 1589 and DMMZ 1710 were determined as described previously [5]. Hydrolysis of tyrosine, casein, and starch were tested according to Nash and Krenz [6].…”