As a comparison to a similar study on Photorhabdus strains, 15 Xenorhabdus bacterial strains and secondary phenotypic variants of two strains were screened for proteolytic activity by five detection methods. Although the number and intensity of proteolytic activities were different, every strain was positive for proteolytic activity by several tests. Zymography following native PAGE detected two groups of activities with different substrate affinities and a higher and lower electrophoretic mobility that were distinguished as activity 1 and 2, respectively. Zymography following SDS-PAGE resolved three activities, which were provisionally named proteases A, B, and C. Only protease B, an ϳ55-kDa enzyme, was produced by every strain. This enzyme exhibited higher affinity to the gelatin substrate than to the casein substrate. Of the chromogenic substrates used, three were hydrolyzed: furylacryloyl-Ala-Leu-Val-Tyr (Fua-ALVY), Fua-LGPA (LGPA is Leu-Gly-Pro-Ala) (a substrate for collagen peptidases), and succinyl-Ala-Ala-Pro-Phe-thiobenzyl (Succ-AAPF-SBzl). All but the Fua-LGPAase activity seemed to be from secreted enzymes. According to their substrate preference profiles and inhibitor sensitivities, at least six such proteolytic enzymes could be distinguished in the culture medium of Xenorhabdus strains. The proteolytic enzyme that was secreted the earliest, protease B and the Succ-AAPF-SBzl-hydrolyzing enzyme, appeared from the early logarithmic phase of growth. Protease B could also be detected in the hemolymph of Xenorhabdus-infected Galleria mellonella larvae from 15 h postinfection. The purified protease B hydrolyzed in vitro seven proteins in the hemolymph of Manduca sexta that were also cleaved by PrtA peptidase from Photorhabdus. The N-terminal sequence of protease B showed similarity to a 55-kDa serralysin type metalloprotease in Xenorhabdus nematophila, which had been identified as an orthologue of Photorhabdus PrtA peptidase.Xenorhabdus and Photorhabdus bacteria are highly virulent, fatal pathogens for insects. Phylogenetically, they are sister genera in the family Enterobacteriaceae (3, 4). There are some differences between Xenorhabdus and Photorhabdus in their biology (e.g., light production), and they also differ in their interaction with their symbiotic nematode partners, which are in the Steinernematidae and Heterorhabditidae genera, respectively (8, 9). At the same time, they also have several properties in common. For example, due to their similar strategy of infection, their entrance into the hemocoel is absolutely dependent on the invasion of insects by their symbiotic nematode partners. An interesting feature of both genera is that they have two phenotypic (form) variants, primary and secondary (9). The primary form is natural, while the secondary form can be observed (generated) mostly in the laboratory. They differ in, for example, antibiotic production, outer membrane proteins, and cell surface structures (fimbriae and flagellae [23], symbiotic capabilities with nematode partners, and exoenzym...