General Unknown . Introduction: . The General Unknown Lab

The following tests according to the lab manual were performed: gram stain, fermentation tubes, methyl red, vogues proskauer, sulfur, indole, motility and growing it up on MacConkey agar. The gram stain was performed incorrectly the first time. This is because the decolorizer was not on the bacterium slide for long enough, giving a false outcome.

Three ways to assess water are positive/negative, membrane filtration and IDEXX Colilert and Enterolert assays. For membrane filtration, petri dishes and an incubator are used. For IDEXX coliert powdered medium is used for total coliform and E. Coli, while Enterolert media is used for enterococci. Also an incubator, colilert trays are used. IDEXX is more expensive than membrane filtration.

This experiment was centered on metabolic and biochemical testing procedures. The rationale of performing these tests was to distinguish six different microbes from one another and to compare how their metabolic and biochemical processes differ from species to species to determine the unknown sample.

The colonies were smooth, translucent, and had a white brownish color. The Gram stain resulted in Gram positive cocci. After the Gram stain was completed, the bacteria were streaked on a Mannitol-Salt Agar plate and a Catalase test was performed. After these test were completed a Phenol Red Dextrose Fermentation tube was inoculated, and a SIM Tube inoculated.

For many years the identification of microorganisms has been important in the world of medicine. It is essential or correct disease diagnosis in patients and for proper treatment. Knowing the correct identity and characteristics of microorganism is crucial when disease outbreaks occur in populations, also knowing how humans can benefit from microorganisms is important; many can be used in making certain foods or antibiotics.

Using the information found in the Gram Negative Enteric Baccilli and Gram Positive Cocci Reference books,

Often scientists work with bacteria that do not come in a labeled test tube— for example, bacterial samples taken from infected human tissue or from the soil—and the scientist must then identify the unknown microorganism in order to understand what behavior to expect from the organism, for example, a certain type of infection or antibiotic resistance. However, because of the relatively few forms of bacteria compared to animals and because of the lack of bacterial fossil records due to their asexually reproductive nature, the taxonomy used to classify animals cannot be applied to bacteria (Brown 275). In order to classify unknown bacteria, a variety of physiological and metabolic tests are available to narrow a sample down from the fathomless number of possibilities into a more manageable range. Once these tests have been performed, the researcher can consult Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, a systematically arranged and continually updated collection of all known bacteria based on their structure, metabolism, and other attributes.

There are many reasons for knowing the identity of microorganisms. The reasons range from knowing the causative agent of a disease in a patient, so as to know how it can be treated, to knowing the correct microorganism to be used for making certain foods or antibiotics. This study was done by applying all of the methods that I have been learned so far in the microbiology laboratory class for the identification of an unknown bacterium.

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 IMViC test is a series of different tests that differentiate between enterics. One is the Indole test. This test tells whether the bacterium possesses tryptophanase which is the enzyme that breaks down tryptophan into indole. The agar contains tryptic soy broth so if the bacterium contains tryptophanase, indole is produced. This production of indole is seen by adding Kovac’s reagent which causes a red ring to be seen at the top of the tube. The citrate test is also used to see which kind of products the bacteria make. It uses a green agar slant that contains sodium and ammonium phosphate. Bromythymol blue dye is late added as an indicator. Inoculation of the slant with a needle using a zig-zag then stab technique was used with the gram positive bacterium. Conversion of the medium to blue is a positive citrate result. All plates, slants, and broths were incubated at 37°C for 24‐48 hours.

The main idea of this experiment was to correctly identify the unknown bacteria, #3. Identification of unknown bacteria yields multiple benefits in many different areas in the research of microorganisms. In this experiment I performed many different test dealing with things such as the presence of enzymes, fermentation abilities and different chemical reactions. Observations made from the tests were then compared to a gram negative unknown chart in order to identify the bacteria. Based off of my results and the chart, I concluded the bacteria #3 was the bacteria Escherichia coli. E. coli is most commonly found in the intestines of warm blooded organisms. Most E. coli strands are non pathogenic however, there are strands

This lab experiment was done for the purpose of learning how to determine a gram negative bacterium based on multiple tests learned throughout the semester. My gram negative unknown bacterium given to me was Salmonella typhimurium based off of the following tests; Triple Sugar Iron Agar (TSIA), Sulfate Indole Motility (SIM), Methyl Red (MR), Voges-Proskaur (VP), Citrate, Urea Hydrolysis, and Gelatin Hydrolysis. Each test performed gives results such as motility, acid production, fermentation, carbon requirements, or detection of certain coenzymes. With a process of elimination, I determined which bacteria it was not and which bacterium I had, S. typhimurium. The expectation was to master the techniques for each test and utilize the results to determine the unknown bacterium I was given within a two-week period.

As the flowchart shows, a series of tests were conducted to identify the unknown bacterium #65. Microscopic observation of the gram stain indicated a gram-positive coccus bacterium. S. epidermidis was used as the gram-positive control while E. coli was used as the gram-negative control. This observation led to the elimination of all gram negative and rod-shaped genera: Enterobacter, Citrobacter, Klebsiella, Escherichia, Pseudomonas, Serratia, Alcaligenes, Neisseria, Proteus, Salmonella, Shigella, Erwinia, Veillonella, Flavobacterium, Bacillus, Arthrobacter, Lactobacillus, Listeria and Kurthia (2). By performing the catalase test, it was determined that the bacterium was catalase negative and it did not produce bubbles. M. luteus and E. faecalis were used as positive and negative controls, respectively.

The purpose of this study was to identify the unknown bacterium using biochemical tests and various methods that had been learned from previous the microbiology laboratory class. Identifying the unknown bacterium was determined by separating and differentiating possible

A great deal of cultural tests and physiological procedures were performed on the unknown before the conclusion of P. aeruginosa was made. The first test preformed was Gram’s staining which involves the use of crystal violet, Gram’s Iodine, Ethyl Alcohol, and Safranin. Gram staining is known as a differentiating stain, since it can determine the presence or absence of peptidoglycan in the cell wall. The unknown bacteria were Gram stain negative. After that the motility of the cell was tested using a hanging drop slide. The slide was examined, but the results were inconclusive due to the inability to make a clear distinction between motility and Brownian motion. This test was not