1887

Abstract

Among the five generally recognized species in the genus Meyer and Shaw, a type strain exists only for Stoenner and Lackman. Described herein are the characteristics of . (Schmidt and Weis) Meyer and Shaw, strain 544 (ATCC 23488); . Huddleson, strain 1330 (ATCC 23444); . (Hughes) Meyer and Shaw, strain 16M (ATCC 23456); and . Buddle strain 6690 (ATCC 25840). Each of these strains has features similar to those reported for the original isolates of the species, each simultaneously fits the revised species descriptions and, when viewed in toto, these strains reflect the current concept of this genus. Thus, in accordance with the recommendations of the International Subcommittee on the Taxonomy of the Genus , these strains here are designated as the neotype strains of these species. Because three of the species in this genus are divided into biotypes that are of epidemiological significance we have, again at the recommendation of the International Subcommittee, selected a representative strain for each biotype for use as a reference. The characteristics of each of the reference strains are also described herein.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-23-2-135
1973-04-01
2022-01-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/23/2/ijs-23-2-135.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-23-2-135&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Alton G. G., Jones L. M. 1967; Laboratory techniques in brucellosis. W.H.O. Monogr. Ser55 World Health Organization; Geneva:
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bang B. 1897; The etiology of epizootic abortion. J. Comp. Pathol 10:125–149
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bruce D. 1887; Note on the discovery of a microorganism in Malta fever. Practitioner 39:161–170
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bruce D. 1893; Sur une nouvelle forme de fievre. Ann. Inst. Pastour (Paris) 7:289–304
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Buddle M. B. 1956; Studies on Brucella ovis (n. sp.). A cause of genital disease of sheep in New Zealand and Australia. J. Hyg 54:351–364
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Buddle M. B., Boyes B. W. 1953; A Brucella mutant causing genital disease in sheep in New Zealand. Aust. Vet. J 29:145–153
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Carmichael L. E., Bruner D. W. 1968; Characteristics of a newly recognized species of Brucella responsible for infectious canine abortions. Cornell Vet 48:579–592
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Charnock R. S. 1859; Local etymology: a derivative dictionary of geographic names. Houston Wright; London:
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Evans A. C. 1918; Further studies on Bacterium abortus and related bacteria. II. A comparison of Bacterium abortus and Bacterium bronchisepticus and with the organism which causes Melta fever. J. Infect. Dis 22:580–593
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Huddleson I. F. 1929; The differentiation of the species in the genus Brucella . Mich. State Coll. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech Bull. No. 100. East Lansing, Mich:
    [Google Scholar]
  11. International Committee on Nomenclature of Bacteria, Subcommittee on the Taxonomy of Brucella 1971; Minutes of Meeting, 7 August 1970. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol 21126–128
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Meyer K. F., Shaw E. B. 1920; A comparison of the morphologic, cultural, and biochemical characteristics of B. abortus and B. melitensis. J. Infect. Dis 27:173–184
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Meyer M. E. 1961; Metabolic characterization of the genus Brucella. III. Oxidative metabolism of strains that show anomalous characteristics by conventional determinative methods. J. Bacteriol 82:401–410
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Meyer M. E. 1961; Metabolic characterization of the genus Brucella. IV. Correlation of oxidative metabolic pattern and phage susceptibility. J. Bacteriol 82:950–953
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Meyer M. E. 1964; The epizootiology of brucellosis and its relationship to the identification of Brucella organisms. Amer. J. Vet. Res 25:553–557
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Meyer M. E. 1964; Species identity and epidemiology of Brucella strain isolated from Alaskan Eskimos. J. Infect. Dis 114:169–173
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Meyer M. E. 1960; Phenotypic comparison of Brucella ovis to the DNA-homologous Brucella species. Amer. J. Vet. Res 30:1957–1964
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Meyer M. E., Cameron H. S. 1958; Species metabolic patterns within the genus Brucella. Amer. J. Vet. Res 72:754–758
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Meyer M. E., Cameron H. S. 1961; Metabolic characterization of the genus Brucella. I. Statistical evaluation of the oxidative rates by which type 1 of each species can be identified. J. Bacteriol 82:387–395
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Meyer M. E., Cameron H. S. 1961; Meta-bolic characterization of the genus Brucella. II. Oxidative metabolic patterns of the described biotypes. J. Bacteriol 82:396–400
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Meyer M. E., Cameron H. S. 1963; Identifica-tion of the causative agents and epidemiology of porcine brucellosis. Bull. W.H.O 28:499–503
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Morgan W. J. B., Gower S. G. M. 1966; Techniques in the identification and classification of Brucella . 35–40 Gibbs B. M., Skinner F. A. Identification methods for microbiologists Academic Press Inc.; London:
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Renoux G. 1958; La notion d’espece dans le genere Brucella . Ann. Inst. Pasteur (Paris) 94:179–206
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Renoux G., Philippon A. 1969; Position taxonomique dans de genre Brucella de bacteries isolees de brebis et de vaches. Ann. Inst. Pasteur 117:524–528
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Schmidt J., Weis F. 1902; Die Bakterien. Naturhistorische Grundlage Fur Das Bakteriologische Stadium. Verlag von Gustav Fischer; Jena:
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Stableforth A. W. 1959; Brucellosis. 53–159 Stableforth A. W., Galloway I. A. Infectious Diseases of Animals. I. Diseases Due to Bacteria Butterworth Scientific Publications; London:
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Stableforth A. W., Jones L. M. 1962; Report of the Subcommittee on Taxonomy of the Genus Brycekka . Int. Bull. Bacteriol. Nomencl. Taxon 13:145–158
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Stinebring W. R., Braun W. 1959; Brucella phage. J. Bacteriol 78:736–737
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Stoenner H. G., Lackman D. B. 1957; A new species of Brucella isolated from the desert wood rat, Neotoma lepida. Thomas. Amer. J. Vet. Res 69:947–951
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Traum J. 1914; Report of the Chief of the Bureau of Animal Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 30 U. S. Department of Agriculture; Washington, D. C:
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Wilson G. S. 1933; The classification of the Brucella group: a systematic study. J. Hyg 33:516–541
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Wilson G. S., Miles A. A. 1932; The serologi-cal differentiation of smooth strains of the Brucella group. Brit. J. Exp. Pathol 13:1–13
    [Google Scholar]
  33. World Health Organization 1971; Joint FAO/ WHO Expert Committee on Brucellosis. Fifth report. Food and Agricultural Oranization (United Nations) Agricultural Studies85 Geneva:
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Van der Schaaf A., Roza M. 1940; Brucellosis en onchocerciasis in verband met een chronish gewrichtelijden bij runderen. Ned. Ind. Bl. Diergenseek 52:1–20
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-23-2-135
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/00207713-23-2-135
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error