1887

Abstract

A representative selection of strains isolated from different environmental habitats or clinical cases was characterized in a polyphasic approach in order to assess their intraspecies taxonomic position. Recently, the recognition of distinct phenotypic clusters has been reported as the assignment of ‘variants’. In the present study, 11 strains were compared by a number of phenotypic and genetic criteria, including growth characteristics, biochemical reactions and serotyping results. Based on emended standards for biotype identification, strains showed auxanographic differences and distinct assimilation patterns with respect to utilization of amino acids and glycerol. Serotyping by means of immunoblotting revealed that all isolates of variant II obtained from clinical cases, i.e. isolates from bovine mastitis or from human enteropathia, showed specific antigen patterns. They were found to be different from strains assigned to the other two variants with respect to their immunogenic antigens. Furthermore, comparison of partial 18S rDNA sequences confirmed distinct differences between the former variants. Based on these results, it is proposed that merits classification as a species comprising three biotypes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijs.0.02556-0
2003-07-01
2019-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/53/4/ijs531195.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijs.0.02556-0&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Arnold, P. & Ahearn, D. G. ( 1972; ). The systematics of the genus Prototheca with a description of a new species P. filamenta. Mycologia 64, 265–275.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bianchi, M., Robles, A. M., Vitale, R., Helou, S., Arechavala, A. & Negroni, R. ( 2000; ). The usefulness of blood culture in diagnosing HIV-related systemic mycoses: evaluation of a manual lysis centrifugation method. Med Mycol 38, 77–80.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Blaschke-Hellmessen, R., Schuster, H. & Bergmann, V. ( 1985; ). Differenzierung von Varianten bei Prototheca zopfii (Krüger 1894). Arch Exp Veterinarmed 39, 387–397.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Blaschke-Hellmessen, R., Wilhelm, A., Teichmann, G., Schuster, H. & Boeltzig, K. ( 1987; ). Orientierende Untersuchungen zum Nachweis von Antikörpern gegen Prototheca zopfii bei Rindern. Monatsh Vetmed 42, 48–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Blogg, J. R. & Sykes, J. E. ( 1995; ). Sudden blindness associated with protothecosis in a dog. Aust Vet J 72, 147–149.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Costa, E. O., Ribeiro, A. R., Watanabe, E. T. & Melville, P. A. ( 1998; ). Infectious bovine mastitis caused by environmental organisms. Zentbl Veterinarmed B 45, 65–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ginel, P. J., Perez, J., Molleda, J. M., Lucena, R. & Mozos, E. ( 1997; ). Cutaneous protothecosis in a dog. Vet Rec 140, 651–653.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Janosi, S., Ratz, F., Szigeti, G., Kulcsar, M., Kerenyi, J., Lauko, T., Katona, F. & Huszenicza, G. ( 2001; ). Review of the microbiological, pathological, and clinical aspects of bovine mastitis caused by the alga Prototheca zopfii. Vet Q 23, 58–61.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Jensen, H. E., Aalbaek, B., Bloch, B. & Huda, A. ( 1998; ). Bovine mammary protothecosis due to Prototheca zopfii. Med Mycol 36, 89–95.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Matsuda, T. & Matsumoto, T. ( 1992; ). Protothecosis: a report of two cases in Japan and a review of the literature. Eur J Epidemiol 8, 397–406.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Pore, R. S. ( 1973; ). Selective medium for the isolation of Prototheca. Appl Microbiol 26, 648–649.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Pore, R. S. ( 1985; ). Prototheca taxonomy. Mycopathologia 90, 129–139.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Pore, R. S. ( 1986; ). The association of Prototheca spp. with slime flux in Ulmus americana and other trees. Mycopathologia 94, 67–73.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Roesler, U., Scholz, H. & Hensel, A. ( 2001; ). Immunodiagnostic identification of dairy cows infected with Prototheca zopfii at various clinical stages and discrimination between infected and uninfected cows. J Clin Microbiol 39, 539–543.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Schmalreck, A. F., Trankle, P., Vanca, E. & Blaschke-Hellmessen, R. ( 1998; ). Differenzierung und Charakterisierung von humanpathogenen Hefen (Candida albicans, Exophiala dermatidis) und tierpathogenen Algen (Prototheca spp.) mittels Fourier-Transform-Infrarot-Spektroskopie (FT-IR) im Vergleich zu konventionellen Methoden. Mycoses 41 (Suppl. 1), 71–77.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Schultze, A. E., Ring, R. D., Morgan, R. V. & Patton, C. S. ( 1998; ). Clinical, cytologic and histopathologic manifestations of protothecosis in two dogs. Vet Ophthalmol 1, 239–243.[CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Schuster, H. & Blaschke-Hellmessen, R. ( 1983; ). Zur Epidemiologie der Protothekenmastitis des Rindes – Anzüchtung von Algen der Gattung Prototheca aus der Umgebung landwirtschaftlicher Nutztiere. Monatsh Vetmed 38, 24–29.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijs.0.02556-0
Loading
/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijs.0.02556-0
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most Cited This Month

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