| Literature DB >> 31333633 |
Koichi Murakami1,2, Eriko Maeda-Mitani2, Hirokazu Kimura3, Mikiko Honda4, Tetsuya Ikeda5, Wakana Sugitani6, Takayuki Konno7, Kimiko Kawano8, Yoshiki Etoh2, Nobuyuki Sera2, Fuminori Mizukoshi9, Takehito Saitoh1, Yoshiaki Kawamura10, Taisei Ishioka11, Makoto Ohnishi12, Kazunori Oishi1, Shuji Fujimoto13.
Abstract
Escherichia albertii, a zoonotic enteropathogen, is responsible for outbreaks of disease in humans. Identifying strains of E. albertii by phenotypic characterization tests is difficult because of its poorly defined properties. Screening its phenotypic characteristics is, nevertheless, a necessary prerequisite for further genetic analysis of its properties, and species-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis can be used to type the pathogen. While two E. albertii biogroups (1 and 2) have been described, strains with characteristics divergent from both biogroups have been reported worldwide. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the characteristics of non-biogroup 1 or 2 strains, and discern the characteristics common to all of the E. albertii strains from this study. Altogether, 107/414 field isolates were selected for examination based on pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis. The 107 strains were isolated from 92 sources, including humans and pigeon feces, other wild birds, and retail chicken livers. All strains were then examined using various culture-based, biochemical (API 50CHE tests, API Zym test, and others) and molecular (virulence gene screening, multi-locus sequence analysis) testing methods. Our results revealed that all field strains (n = 107) showed non-biogroup 1 or 2 characteristics, with multiple sequence differences. Variations in indole production and the lysine decarboxylase activity profiles among the isolates made identification of E. albertii very difficult. Therefore, we propose that non-biogroup 1 or 2 of E. albertii should be assigned to biogroup 3 to make screening of them easier in public health and clinical laboratory settings. Clearly, having group criteria for indole-negative/lysine-positive, indole-positive/lysine-negative, and indole-positive/lysine-positive E. albertii biogroups 1, 2, and 3 strains, respectively, should provide for more accurate identification of E. albertii isolates. Based on our findings, we recommend that isolates displaying phenotype mobility-negativity (sulfide-indole-motility medium, 37°C), hydrogen sulfide production-negativity (triple sugar iron medium), acid production-negativity from xylose, negative β-glucuronidase activity properties, and showing indole production and lysine decarboxylase activity profiles in accordance with one of the three biogroups, should be further assessed using an E. albertii-specific PCR assay.Entities:
Keywords: Escherichia albertii; biogroups; food microbiology; identification; public health
Year: 2019 PMID: 31333633 PMCID: PMC6624678 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01543
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
FIGURE 1Map of Escherichia albertii isolation sites (S1–S22, pigeon isolates and isolates from other sources) in Japan.
FIGURE 2Dendrogram showing the pulsed-field profiles of the Escherichia albertii isolates from this study after XbaI digestion. Numbers indicate fragment sizes. The origin of each isolate is indicated. The scale bar shows the percentage similarity, as determined by the Dice coefficient analysis. Strains belonging to biogroups 1 and 2 are indicated and the remaining non-indicated strains belong to biogroup 3. A strain (strain 3406; AZN-8) isolated from the pigeon droppings collected at S11 was untypeable so there is no image associated with it in this figure.
FIGURE 3Hierarchical clustering tree (Globally Closest Pir clustering) of 111 Escherichia albertii isolates showing 81 profiles based on 77 biochemical characteristics (scaling factor: 7; tree cut-off: 10; n locus variant: 0). The origin of each isolate is indicated. The number of divergent biochemical characteristics between the different profiles is indicated in red on the smaller tree.
FIGURE 4Multi-locus sequence analysis-based phylogenetic tree for 111 Escherichia albertii isolates and ATCC11775, a representative Escherichia coli strain, using the maximum-likelihood method. The evolutionary history was inferred using the maximum-likelihood method based on the general time-reversible model. Initial tree(s) for the heuristic search were obtained automatically by applying the Neighbor-Join and BioNJ algorithms to a matrix of pairwise distances estimated using the maximum composite likelihood approach, and then selecting the topology with the superior log likelihood value. A discrete gamma distribution was used to model evolutionary rate differences among sites [five categories (+G, parameter = 0.1325)]. The rate variation model allowed for some sites to be evolutionarily invariable [(+I), 45.6617% sites]. The tree is drawn to scale, with branch lengths measured by the number of substitutions per site. The analysis involved 112 nucleotide sequences. Included codon positions were 1st+2nd+3rd+Non-coding. Isolates belonging to biogroups 1 and 2 are indicated, while the remaining non-indicated isolates belong to biogroup 3.