Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:28:07.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluation of numerical analysis of SDS-PAGE of protein patterns for typing Enterobacter cloacae

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

M. Costas
Affiliation:
National Collection of Type Cultures
L. L. Sloss
Affiliation:
National Collection of Type Cultures
R. J. Owen
Affiliation:
National Collection of Type Cultures
M. A. Gaston
Affiliation:
Gram-negative Unit, Division of Hospital Infection, Central Public Health Laboratory, London NW9 5HT, England
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Twenty cultures comprising 13 clinical isolates of Enterobacter cloacae from two hospitals. the type and another reference stain of E. cloacae and the type strains of four other Enterobacter sp. and of Escherichia coli, were characterized by one-dimensional sodium dodecyl sulphate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDSPAGE) of whole-cell proteins. The protein patterns were highly reproducible and were used as the basis of a numerical analysis which divided the clinical isolates into nine clearly defined protein types. Comparison with established typing methods indicated that the discrimination of SDS-PAGE was similar to that achieved with conventional typing methods and all strain groups recognized by combined sero/phage typing were also found by SDS-PAGE. In addition, protein typing sub-divided a group of four serotype O3 isolates that were difficult to distinguish by phage typing. We conclude that high-resolution SDS-PAGE of proteins provides an effective method of typing isolates of E. cloacae.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

References

REFERENCES

1.Gaston, MA.Enierobacter: an emerging nosocomial pathogen. J Hosp Infect 1988; 11: 197208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Gaston, MABucher, CPitt, TL.O Serotyping scheme for Enterobacter cloacae. J Clin Microbiol 1983; 18: 1079–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Gaston, MA, Crees-Morris, JA, Pitt, TL.Serotypes and biochemical profiles of British hospital strains of Enterobacter cloacae in relation to site of infection and antibiotic susceptibility. J Hosp Infect 1987; 10: 1727.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Old, DC.Biotyping of Enterobacter cloacae. J Clin Pathol 1982; 35: 875–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Freitag, V, Friedrich, O.Bacteriocin typing of Enterobacter cloacue strains. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg [A] 1981; 249: 6375.Google ScholarPubMed
6.Traub, WH, Spohr, M, Blech, R.Bacteriocin typing of clinical isolates of Enterobacter cloacae. J Clin Microbiol 1982; 16: 885–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Bauernfeind, A. Petermüller, C.Typing of Enterobacter spp. by bacteriocin susceptibility and its use in epidemiological analysis. J Clin Microbiol 1984; 20: 70–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Gaston, MA.Isolation and selection of a bacteriophage-typing set of Enterobacter cloacae. J Med Microbiol 1987; 24: 285–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Gaston, MA.Evaluation of a bacteriophage-typing set for Enterobacter cloacae. J Med Microbiol 1987; 24: 291–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Jackman, PJH. Bacterial taxonomy based on electrophoretic whole-cell protein patterns. In: Goodfellow, M, Minnikin, DE. eds. Chemical methods in bacterial systematics. London: Academic Press, 1985: 115–29. (Society for Applied Bacteriology Technical Series: No. 20)Google Scholar
11.Kersters, K. Numerical methods in the classification of bacteria by protein electrophoresis. In: Goodfellow, M, Jones, D, Priest, FG. eds. Computer assisted bacterial systematics. London: Academic Press, 1985: 337–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Tabaqchali, S, O'Farrell, S, Holland, D, Silman, R.Method for the typing of Clostridium difficile based on PAGE of 35S-methionine-labelled proteins. J Clin Microbiol 1986; 23: 197–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Mulligan, ME, Peterson, LR, Kwok, RYY, Clabots, CR, Gerding, DN.Immunoblots and plasmid fingerprints compared with serotyping and polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for typing Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol 1988; 26: 41–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Stephenson, JR, Crook, SJ, Tabaqchali, S.New method for typing Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin based on sulphur-35 methionine labelled proteins: its application in an outbreak. Br Med J 1986; 293: 581–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Holmes, B, Costas, M, Sloss, LL.Numerical analysis of electrophoretic protein patterns of Providencia alcalifaciens strains from human faeces and veterinary specimens. J Appl Bacteriol 1988; 64: 2735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Owen, RJ, Costas, M, Morgan, DD, On SLW, , Hill, LR, Pearson, AD, Morgan, DR.Strain variation in Campylobacter pylori detected by numerical analysis of one-dimensional electrophoretic protein patterns. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 1989; 55: 253267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Alexander, M, Rahman, M, Taylor, M, Noble, WC.A study of the value of electrophoretic and other techniques for typing Acinetobacter calcoaceticus. J Hosp Infect 1988; 12: 273–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Costas, M, Holmes, B, Sloss, LL.Numerical analysis of electrophoretic protein patterns of Providencia rustigianii strains from human diarrhoea and other sources. J Appl Bacteriol 1987; 63: 319328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Costas, M, Holmes, B, Wood, AC, On SLW, Numerical analysis of electrophoretic protein patterns of Providencia rettgeri strains from human faeces, urine and other specimens. J Appl Bacteriol 1989. In press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Jackman, PJH, Feltham, RKA, Sneath, PHA.A program in BASIC for numerical taxonomy of microorganisms based on electrophoretic protein patterns. Microbios Lett 1983; 23: 8793.Google Scholar
21.Brenner, DJ. Family 1. Enterobacteraceae Rahn 1937. In: Krieg, NR, Holt, JG, eds. Bergey's Manual of systematic bacteriology. Vol. 1. Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Co. 1984: 408–20.Google Scholar
22.Sneath, PHA, Johnson, R.The influence on numerical taxonomic similarities of errors in microbiological tests. J Gen Microbiol 1972; 72: 377–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Walia, S, Madhavan, T, Williamson, T, Kaiser, A, Tewari, R.Protein patterns, serotyping and plasmid DNA profiles in the epidemiological fingerprinting of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1988; 7: 248–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Delmée, M, Laroche, Y, Avesani, V, Cornelis, G.Comparison of serogrouping and polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for typing Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol 1986; 24: 991–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed