Proteus Vulgaris Lab Report

Next I performed a KOH test to further confirm that my organism was a Gram-negative species. For the KOH test, I added 3 drops of 10% potassium hydroxide (KOH) to a small drop of distilled water onto a clean microscope slide, transferred a visible clump of organism to the KOH solution using my inoculating loop. I than mixed the cells into the solution using small, circular motions for 60 seconds and then lifted up the loop to look for what appears to be a “stringing” affect which means it’s confirmed that it is gram- negative species. Next, I created a streak plate using nutrient agar so that I could see pure culture of my organism. I aseptically obtained a loop full of my organism and gently inoculated one quarter of the nutrient agar plate by running the loop back and forth across the surface. I then flame sterilized the inoculating loop, allowing it to cool for 10 seconds, and then streaked the organism from quadrant I into quadrant II using a zigzag motion technique. I repeated those steps streaking from quadrant II to quadrant III and then streaking from quadrant III to quadrant IV. Once completed, I put the streak plate in the incubator at 37° for 24-48 hours. 48 hours later, I check my streak plate and it had a lot of growth on it. I was able to determine that the organism was definitely an off white color, opaque. The IV quadrant was the quadrant that best

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

The bases of this experiment was to discover the identify of the unknown from three possible specimens: Klebsiella pneumonia, Escherichia coli, and Enterobacter aerogenes. Utilizaing the T streak technique, the bacteria was isolated into pure colonies for further study. The Gram Stain method was used to identity the morhphology of the bacteria such as the shape and whether the bacteria was Gram positive or Gram negative. Biochemical test were also used to help identify the unknown bacteria. The biochemical test used was the Triple Sugar Iron Agar, Sulfur Indole Motility test, Methyl Red test, Voges-Proskauer test, Citrate test, Urease test, and the Gelatin test. After observing the morphology of the bacteria using the Gram Stain method and utilizing all the possible biochemical test, the bacteria was identified to be Enterobacter aerogenes.

pneumoniae I believe I have a subspeciesof K. pneumoniae perhaps K. pheumoniae ozaenae or K. pneumoniae rhinoscleromatis. Indole, MR-VP and Citrate will vary among different subspecies according to bergey's manual of determinative bacteriology. The reason why I decided on K. pneumoniae over E. aerogenes is because of the gelatin and motile test. According to bergey's manual, Enterobacter liquefies gelatin very slowly and in addition E. aerogenes will test positive for motility. To further differentiate K. pneumoniae from Enterobacter and narrow down the exact species of K. pneumoniae the urea hydrolysis assay could have been the determining factor. Subspecies ozaenae and rhinosclermatis will result in a negative reaction for VP but bergey’s Manual indicates a positive reaction for

Proteus vulgaris also produces urease which can increase the chances of pyelonephritis. It does this by hydrolyzing urea to ammonia, which in turn, makes urine more basic. The basic environment allows the bacteria to survive and flourish (NCBI, 2008). Another important virulence factor includes the microbe’s motility. It moves by a mechanism called swarming, which is defined as a rapid surface movement by use of rotating flagella. The swarming effect allows the bacteria to move about the host in great numbers (NCBI, 2010). The combination of fimbriae, urease production and swarming favors the production of urinary tract infections.

T.M. was admitted to the sub-acute unit for an UTI. UTI is usually cause by an organism called Escherichia coli. Risk factors for UTI in males can be bladder stones, kidney stones, an enlarge prostate, catheter use, or bacterial prostatitis. Some of the symptoms of UTI are burning sensation when urinating, frequent urination, fever, chills, foul smelling urine, urine retention, and lethargy. T.M. has a diagnosis of BPH and repeated history of UTI which increase his risk for UTI. A short-term goal will be that the patient will be display no UTI sign of symptoms. A long-term goal will be that the patient will demonstrate behavioral techniques to prevent future UTI. To accomplish these goals, the patient should be encouraged to void every 2 to

An unknown microorganism from three potential microbes—Bacillus megaterium, Escherichia coli, and Enterococcus faecalis—was determined by performing eight biochemical tests. Biochemical tests that were used to differentiate these possible microorganisms from each other were gram staining, motility with a semi-solid agar tube, oxygen requirements, catalase test, phenylalanine deaminase test, eosin methylene blue agar (EMB) and mannitol salt agar (MSA). The unknown microorganism was further clarified through a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test and basic local alignment search tool (BLAST) database. Based on all the observations of the tests, the unknown bacterium was identified as B. megaterium.

The second bacterium was gram positive. There are three tests that are used to identify gram positive bacteria. The three tests are hemolyses on blood agar, Mannitol fermentation on mannitol salt agar, and the coagulase test using plasma-containing serum in coagulase tubes.

The biochemical tests, the Gram stain, the Bartholomew and Mittwer’s stain, the microscopic and macroscopic observations, and chemical sensitivity tests helped to identify the unknown bacteria as Citrobacter Freundii. Each biochemical test result maintained consistency with the

Characteristics of F. tularensis’ next taxonomic rank, as part of the Phylum Proteobacteria, characterize it as a Gram-negative bacterium. When gram-stained, this microorganism appears as a reddish color under the microscope. This is mainly because Gram-negative bacteria have an inner

The first step in identifying my organism was to put it on a slide, stain it, and look at it under the microscope. I used the gram stain to figure out whether my organism was gram-positive or gram-negative. When I looked into the microscope it was all pink so I determined that it was gram-negative. The organism was bacillus in shape and was single and diplo. Then I determined that I had to focus on tests specific to gram-negative organisms. The tests I chose to perform were: OF glucose test, Citrate test, H2S test, Indole test, Motility test, and Urease test. The OF glucose test concluded that the organism was a fermenter. The citrate, H2S, and Urease tests were all positive. The Indole test was negative. The organism is motile. The unknown organism is Proteus mirabilis.

The initial percentage match was 9% similarity. However, majority of these matches were due to the reference list. Once a filter was applied to exclude the reference list, the percentage match decreased to 2%. The 2% similarity was in reference to general statements such as “minimising random errors increases reliability” and “membrane permeability increases with temperature”. This indicates that the assignment is the student’s original work and that the student did not plagiarise from other sources. Therefore, due to the low percentage, the student was not required to change the structure of the sentences.

: 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.

The Unknown Bacteria 36/Bacteria # 2 on a TSA plate was examined by the naked eye and under a dissecting microscope. Bacteria # 2 was approximately 3 - 4 mm in diameter. They were circular in form with an entire margin and a flat elevation. The colonies were rough (granular), translucent, and white brownish color with black granules. The Gram stain resulted in a Gram negative rod. After the Gram stain was completed, the bacteria were streaked on an Eosin -Methylene Blue Agar plate and an Enterotube II was inoculated.