The specimen was processed similarly to case-1. Escherichia coli was grown in aerobic culture, and Bifidobacterium sp. was cultured in anaerobic culture. The identification of Bifidobacterium sp. was done by both MALDI-TOF Vitek MS and Vitek-2. Escherichia coli was found to be Extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) positive and sensitive to Piperacillin+Tazobactam, Cefoperazone+Sulbactam, Imipenem, Meropenem, Amikacin, Gentamicin, Tobramycin, Chloramphenicol, and Cotrimoxazole. Bifidobacterium sp. was found to be sensitive to Penicillin, Ceftriaxone, Imipenem, Meropenem, Amoxycillin+clavulanic acid, Piperacillin+Tazobactam and Clindamycin and resistant to Metronidazole. The patient showed a good response to Meropenem and recovered completely. …show more content…
has been studied on disease association with altered gut microbiota. The various species of Bifidobacterium which have been used as probiotics are B. bifidum, B. breve, B.lactis, B. longum, B. infantis and B. adolescentis [3]. It is important to note that all the species of Bifidobacteriumare not beneficial. Also, the species which have been used as probiotics have also been reported to cause infections especially in neonates and immunocompromised individuals (See Table 1). The case reports of Bifidobacterium sp. as significant pathogens are enlisted in Table …show more content…
is associated with good oral health. On the other hand, it has also been found to be a predominant microbe in dental caries, and Bifidobacterium dentium is strongly linked to dental caries.Bifidobacterium sp have also been reported in cases of meningitis [10]. Nevertheless, the reports of Bifidobacterium sp. association as a significant human pathogenic agent are less. Bifidobacterium sp. can cause significant infections, and the presentation of the case can mimic tubercular infection also like one of our patients was on antitubercular therapy based on the clinical features and radiological findings. The scarcity of the clinical cases can be because of their fastidious nature, a special requirement of anaerobic atmosphere and thus difficult isolation. The isolation of Bifidobacterium sp. can be improved by the direct microscopic examination i.e. Gram stain of the clinical specimen, appropriate anaerobic techniques and rapid and accurate identification system. In the present reports, Bifidobacterium species were isolated in combination with Escherichia coli. If Gram stain examination would not have been done, it could be overlooked. So, Gram stain examination gave us the initial clue of such type of bacteria. The anaerobic atmosphere was generated by more stringent Anoxomat technique and the identification was made by MALDI-TOF Vitek MS system. Moreover, the identification by the Vitek-2 system also corroborated with MALDI-TOF system.
The Kirby-Bauer antibiotic tests indicated that the unknown is susceptible to chloramphenicol and ampicillin and resistant to penicillin G and tetracycline. The disinfectant sensitivity tests indicated that C. Freundii is resistant to all four of the disinfectants.
This experiment was conducted to find the genus and species of an unknown bacteria prescribed by the lab teacher, which was unknown bacteria GA3 in my case. Identification of unknown bacteria techniques are used on an every day basis to figure out what type of bacteria it is and to find the best method of how to treat a patient with this bacteria (1). All five “I’s” of Microbiology were used in the testing for the unknown culture. Inoculation was used several times to put the unknown culture into agar plates or into biochemical test tubes. After Inoculation of these tubes or plates, they always were placed into the incubator for further growth and development. Isolation was used to make sure we got the correct bacteria we were testing for. After each further isolation, we gram stained the culture and inspected the culture under a microscope to further help in the identification process of the unknown bacteria. Multiple tests were done on the unknown culture to make sure we were confident in what kind of bacteria the unknown was.
The purpose of the bacterial unknown independent study experiment completed throughout the course of this lab was to determine the identity of an unknown bacterial species. The unknown bacteria sample was chosen from numerous samples provided by the instructor. The starting unknown sample, unknown #15 was a mixed bacterial culture and a broad approach taken to identify the sample. Various biochemical tests were completed to identify the bacterial species along with the use of databases such as Gideon and Bergey’s to compare the test results of known bacteria to the results of the unknown sample. Information was gathered from the other sources and databases and phenotypic testing completed and the results compared to the database results. Aseptic
2. Why do you think Mrs. Garner's students did not become ill, while Ms. Hines' kids did?
In conclusion, after conducting previously mentioned biochemical tests in order to identify the unknown bacteria, became obvious that unknown gram negative was Proteus Vulgaris. Having eliminated all the bacteria that didn’t show expected results and confirming with such tests as catalase, glucose, indole, citrate, urea, and SIM, it was accurate to name the unknown gram negative. Furthermore, gram positive became obvious it was Streptococcus Pneumoniae. Having eliminated all the bacteria that didn’t show expected results and confirming with such tests as blood agar, catalase, and optochin and bacitracin tests, it was accurate to name the unknown gram positive. I have learned that it is extremely important to be to able to identify what kind
AIM – The aim of the experiment is to determine the relative effectiveness of several anti-microbial substances on developing pathogens. (E. coli)
The CDC collaborated with public health officials in many states, the US FDA and the United States Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) to investigate an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 infections.
The study of two unknown microorganisms was completed by using methods taught in the microbiology laboratory. The basis of the study was identification of those two microorganisms. Identification of the microorganisms is important in many aspects of medicine. Some of these include source of infection, proper treatment, and which antibiotics are effective against the microorganism present.
Title: Studies of Large RNAPNusG70S TranscriptionTranslation Linking Complex Author: Dominique Gutierrez, Cristina GutierrezVargas, and Dr. Joachim Frank Abstract Escherichia coli (E.coli) is an ideal model organism. Many mechanisms found in E.coli are resembled in other species. S10, a protein on the 30S subunit of the ribosome, is highly conserved and found in pathogens, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. S10 has been shown to interact with NusG, a transcription elongation factor, linking the translational machinery to that of transcription. The coupling
: In the field of microbiology, there are times when a sample will contain more than one species of bacteria. The goal is to separate each bacterium and culture them independently from one another to identify them. This was the objective of this lab. Each stock contained two unknown bacterium, and the possible unknowns were Eserichia coli, Enterobacter aerogenes, Enterobacter cloacae, Serratia marcescens, Proteus vulgaris, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Shigella flexneri, Shigella sonnei, and Salmonella enterica. The tests available were MacConkey agar, Endo agar, Hektoen Enteric agar, Tryptone Soya Agar (TSA), carbohydrate sugar broths, Triple Sugar Iron (TSI) agar, decarboxylase broths (arginine, lysine, and ornithine), Simmon’s Citrate Agar, urease
In the world of microbiology it is vitally important to be able to discern the identities of microorganisms. Not only is it important in a lab setting but as well as in healthcare in general. Properly identify what strain of bacteria a person has will aid in the proper medicine and dose given. Throughout the semester we have learned about different types of bacteria and certain test that can clearly identify them. The purpose of this lab report is to identify a Gram-positive or Gram-negative bacterium. Using all the knowledge of procedures and lab techniques identify the unknown and discuss all the tests you performed.
There I was riding from Indiana to Chicago on a 1980’s-esque train that had an orange interior with three red horizontal lines sporadically placed along the walls, and a brown floor that looked as if it hadn’t been cleaned since it’s release. The gentle swaying of the car and the sometimes irritable screeching noise the metal wheels made on the rickety train tracks made for a truly solemn experience right down to the children screaming for their mother’s phone to play games, and the small bathroom obnoxiously placed between the two seating sections.
Each mixed culture that was tested had one gram positive and one gram negative bacterial species. The possible species of bacteria that could have been isolated from the mixtures included the following: Bacillus subtilis, Corynebacterium glutamicum, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterobacter aerogenes, Salmonella enterica, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The identities of the unknown species were determined through comparing the experimental data against data acquired from earlier experimentation.
Results and Discussion Our study was included 40 children patients and 10 healthy controls, their age was ranged from 3 to 12 years old, there were 25(62.5%) males and 15 (37.5%) females, as regard immunophenotyping 50% of patients were pre-B-ALL, 2.5% were mature B-ALL, early Int.J.Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci (2017) 6(9): 937-944 940 pre B 2.5%, Common B 35% (total: 90%) and 10% were T-ALL, as regard results of measuring BSP-1 levels by ELISA in patient group was 112.69 ± 11.54 ng/mL which was significantly higher than that of control group 8.58 ± 2.19 ng/mL (P value was 0.001) as shown in table 1, as regard CD44 variant 6 level by flowcytometry in patient group was 32.18 ± 15.26 which was significantly higher than that of control group 3.54
The human gastrointestinal tract contains up to 1013 - 1014 cells (Savage, 1977). It show that a human gastrointestinal tract have a complex ecosystem made up of the gastrointestinal epithelium, immune cells and resident microbiota (Moal, et al., 2006; McCraken, et al., 2001). It is estimated a generation or doubling time between 1 and 4 per day. The three major sections of the human gastrointestinal tract are the stomach, the small intestine, and the large intestine. Each section of the organ on gastrointestinal tract has its own specific microorganism can be called microbiota as well. The stomach is primarily inhabited by aerobic gram-positive microorganisms (<103 CFU/g). The small intestine contains with the bacteria from the genera of Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Bacteriocides, and Streptococcus (103 - 104 CFU/g) and the large intestine is populated by a large numbers (1011 - 1012 CFU/g) of bacteria from the genera of Bacteriocides, Fusobacterium, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Eubacterium (Savage,