English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

SUMMARY: In an attempt to elucidate the taxonomic relationship of CZostridium bifermentans and C. sordeZZii about sixty strains assigned to one or other of the two species were examined. Two groups of strains differing in their cultural and biochemical properties were recognized. One closely resembled the type culture of C. bifermentans (Tissier & Martelly, 1902), and the other, in which some strains were pathogenic, resembled the C. sordeZZii isolate '82' of Sordelli. The former of these groups is clearly to be regarded as C. bifermentans and the latter as C. sordellii. It has been shown that the two species, although similar in many respects, are distinct and easily distinguishable. In view of this, the present practice of some bacteriologists of combining the two species under the name C. bifermentans is incorrect and should be discontinued. Although Clostridium bifermentans was first isolated by Tissier & Martell y in 1902, and C. sordellii by Sordelli in 1922, the taxonomic relationship of these two organisms is still the subject of controversy. The use of either of two criteria (cultural and biochemical character or pathogenicity) for the separation of C. bifermentans and C. sordellii, together with the failure of many American and British bacteriologists to recognize their existence as separate species, has given rise to much confusion. In the English-language literature most authors combine the two species under the name C. bvermentans (noting the existence of C. sordellii as a pathogenic variety) and quote a description including features of the two organisms only some of which are common to both. Most French workers recognize the existence of the two species, mainly on serological grounds, but the evidence they present is based on the examina- tion of very few C. sordellii strains. To confuse the matter further, each species has been described under at least three names. The original isolate of Clostridiurn bifemzmtans was named Bacillus bifermentans qorogenes (Tissier & Martelly, 1902) and later re-named B. bifermentuns (Weinberg & Skguin, 1918), in accordance with the principle of binominal nomenclature. In 1922 Hall examined a number of alleged B. bifermentans strains and found some to be non-motile (as in the original description) and others to be motile; for the latter he proposed the creation of a new species, B. centrosporogenes. Consequent on the demonstration of motility in young cultures of B. bifermentans (Levenson, 1936), the two species were recombined (McCoy & McClung, 1986; Clark & Hall, 1937). C. sordellii was originally named B. oedematis sporogenes (Sordelli, 1922), and was re- named B. sordellii by Hall & Scott in 1927. In the same year Meleney, Humph- reys & Carp (1927) isolated an anaerobic bacillus which they considered to be a new species and named B. oedematoides, and which was later shown to be

Taxonomic Studies of the Genus Clostridium: Clostridium bifermentans and C. sordellii