Open AccessComparison of Genotypic and Phenotypic Methods for Species-Level Identification of Clinical Isolates of Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci
Author(s) -
E. Heikens,
A. Fleer,
Armand Paauw,
Alice Florijn,
Ad C. Fluit
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
journal of clinical microbiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.349
H-Index - 255
eISSN - 1070-633X
pISSN - 0095-1137
DOI - 10.1128/jcm.43.5.2286-2290.2005
Subject(s) - genotype , coagulase , biology , microbiology and biotechnology , phenotype , identification (biology) , genetics , staphylococcus , bacteria , gene , staphylococcus aureus , ecology
To compare commonly used phenotypic methods with genotypic identification methods 47 clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CONS), 10 CONS ATCC strains, and a Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolate were identified using the API Staph ID test, BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System, and 16S rRNA gene and tuf gene sequencing. When necessary part of the sodA gene was sequenced for definitive identification. The results show that tuf gene sequencing is the best method for identification of CONS, but the API Staph ID test is a reasonably reliable phenotypic alternative. The performance of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System for identification of CONS is poor. The present study also showed that although genotypic methods are clearly superior to phenotypic identifications, a drawback of sequence-based genotypic methods may be a lack of quality of deposited sequences in data banks. In particular, 16S rRNA gene sequencing suffers from the lack of high quality among sequences deposited in GenBank. Furthermore, genotypic identification based on 16S rRNA sequences has limited discriminating power for closely related Staphylococcus species. We propose partial sequencing of the tuf gene as a reliable and reproducible method for identification of CONS species.