4.5 Article

Molecular and phenotypic characterization of Vibrio aestuarianus subsp francensis subsp nov., a pathogen of the oyster Crassostrea gigas

期刊

SYSTEMATIC AND APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 31, 期 5, 页码 358-365

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.syapm.2008.06.003

关键词

Vibrio aestuarianus; French isolates; Pathogen; Crassostrea gigas; Summer mortalities; Polyphasic approach

资金

  1. Ifremer
  2. Conseil General du Calvados

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Eleven Vibrio isolates invading the hemolymph of live and moribund oysters (Crassostrea gigas) collected in the field and from a hatchery in France, were characterized by a polyphasic approach. Phylogenetic analysis of 16S rRNA, gyrB and toxR genes indicated high homogeneity between these strains and the Vibrio aestuarianus type strain (ATCC35048(T)), and confirmed previous 16S rRNA analysis. In contrast, DNA:DNA hybridization was from 61% to 100%, while phenotypic characters and virulence tests showed a large diversity between the strains. Nevertheless, several common characters allowed the isolates to be distinguished from the reference strain. On the basis of several distinct phenotypic characteristics, it is proposed to establish two subspecies within the V. aestuarianus spp. group, V. aestuarianus subsp. aestuarianus [D. Tison, R. Seidler, Vibrio aestuarianus: a new species from estuarine waters and shellfish, Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. (1983) 699-702] and V. aestuarianus subsp. francensis for these French isolates. The characters that differentiate the new strains from V. aestuarianus subsp. aestuarianus(T) are virulence (positive for 63% of the isolates) and 12:0 fatty acid content. The colonies were smaller and uncoloured, whereas no growth occurred at 35 degrees C or on TCBS, and the strains did not utilize several substrates, including L-serine, alpha-cyclodextrin, D-mannitol, alpha-glycyl-L-aspartic acid, L-threonine and glucose-1-phosphate. (c) 2008 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据