AEM
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wiedmann-al-Ahmad, M
Right arrow Articles by Schön, G
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wiedmann-al-Ahmad, M
Right arrow Articles by Schön, G
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Wiedmann-al-Ahmad, M
Right arrow Articles by Schön, G

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Appl Environ Microbiol. 1994 November; 60(11): 4066-4071

Characterization of Acinetobacter type strains and isolates obtained from wastewater treatment plants by PCR fingerprinting.

M Wiedmann-al-Ahmad, H V Tichy and G Schön

Institut für Biologie II/Mikrobiologie, Freiburg, Germany.

ABSTRACT

Acinetobacter type strains and isolates from wastewater treatment plants were differentiated by PCR fingerprinting. On the first level, PCR fingerprinting with two tRNA-gene specific primers (T5B and T3A) was used for the identification of species (genospecies 1 to 17). On the second level, a single arbitrary primer (DAF 4) was employed for strain differentiation. Upon comparison of Acinetobacter type strains with 28 sewage sludge isolates, 2 could be classified as belonging to A. johnsonii, 8 isolates could be classified as A. lwoffii, 8 could be classified as A. baumannii, and 9 isolates were very closely related to the Acinetobacter species A. junii; only 1 isolate could not be classified as one of the Acinetobacter type strains. The PCR fingerprinting method was found to be a reproducible and fast method for differentiation and identification of Acinetobacter isolates. Because of some resulting discrepancies compared with previously described identification schemes, e.g., DNA-DNA hybridization methods, the original identification experiments should be repeated and the results should be reassessed.


Appl Environ Microbiol. 1994 November; 60(11): 4066-4071




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
J. Bacteriol. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. Eukaryot. Cell All ASM Journals

Copyright © 1994 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.