Skip to main content
Log in

Esculin hydrolysis by gram positive bacteria

A rapid test and it's comparison with other methods

  • Published:
Medical Microbiology and Immunology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A number of bacteria hydrolyze esculin enzymatically to esculetin. This characteristic is used by taxonomists and clinical microbiologists in the differentiation and identification of bacteria, especially to distinguish Lancefield group D streptococci from non-group D organisms andListeria monocytogenes from morphologically similarErysipelothrix rhusipoathiae and diphtheroids. Conventional methods used for esculin hydrolysis require 4–48 h for completion. We developed and evaluated a medium which gives positive results more rapidly. The 2,330 isolates used in this study consisted of 1,680 esculin positive and 650 esculin negative organisms. The sensitivity and specificity of this method were compared with the PathoTec esculin hydrolysis strip and the procedure of Vaughn and Levine (VL). Of the 1,680 esculin positive organisms, 97% gave positive reactions within 30 minutes with the rapid test whereas PathoTec required 3–4 h incubation for the same number of organisms to yield a positive reaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baird-Parker AC (1974)Micrococcaceae. In: Buchanan RE, Gibbons NE (eds) Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, Md, pp 478–489

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barnes EM (1956) Tetrazolium reduction as a means of differentiatingStreptococcus faecalis fromStreptococcus faecium. J Gen Microbiol 14:57–68

    Google Scholar 

  3. Braunstein H, Tucker EB, Gibson BC (1969) Identification and significance ofStreptococcus agalactiae (Lancefield group B). Amer J Clin Pathol 51:207–213

    Google Scholar 

  4. Deibel RH, Seeley HW Jr (1974)Streptococcaceae. In: Buchanan RE, Gibbons NE (eds) Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacterioloy. The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, Md., pp 490–509

    Google Scholar 

  5. Edberg SC, Gam K, Bottenbley CJ, Singer JM (1976) Rapid spot test for the determination of esculin hydrolysis. J Clin Microbiol 4:180–184

    Google Scholar 

  6. Facklam R, Moody M (1970) Presumptive identification of group D Streptococci: The bile-esculin test. Appl Microbiol 20:225–250

    Google Scholar 

  7. Facklam RR, Padula JF, Wortham EC, Cooksey RC, Rountree HA (1979) Presumptive identification of goup A, B and D streptococci on agar plate media. J Clin Microbiol 9:665–672

    Google Scholar 

  8. Graham NC, Bartley EO (1939) Some observations on the classification of enterococci. J Hyg 39:538–552

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hajna AA, Perry CA (1943) Comparative study of presumptive and confirmatory media for bacteria of the coliform group and for fecal streptococci. Am J Public Health 33:550–558

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hartman PA (1968) Miniaturized microbiological methods. Academic Press, Inc., New York, N.Y., pp 3–16

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hartman PA, Reinhold GW, Saraswat DS (1966) Media and methods for isolation and enumeration of the enterococci. Adv Appl Microbiol 8:253–289

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hermann GJ, Bickmann ST (1974)Corynebacteria. In: Lennette EH, Spaulding EH, Truant JP (eds) Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 2nd ed. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C., pp 130–134

    Google Scholar 

  13. Isenberg DH, Gildberg D, Sampson J (1970) Laboratory studies with a selective enterococcus medium. Appl Microbiol 20:433–436

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ivler D (1974)Staphylococci. In: Lennette EH, Spaulding EH, Truant JP (eds) Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 2nd ed. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C., pp 91–95

    Google Scholar 

  15. Killinger AH (1974)Listeria monocytogenes. In: Lennette EH, Spaulding EH, Truant JP (eds) Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 2nd ed. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C., pp 135–139

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lee W (1972) Improved procedure for identification of group D enterococci with two new media. Appl Microbiol 24:1–3

    Google Scholar 

  17. Meulen H (1907) (Title unknown). K Akad Wet Amsterdam. In: Harrison FC, van der Leck J (1909) Aesculin bile salt media for water analysis. Zentralbl Bakteriol Parasitenkd Infektionskr Hyg Abt 2 22:547–551

  18. Qadri SMH, DeSilva MI, Qadri SGM, Villarreal A (1979) Presumptive identification of enterococci from other D streptococci by a rapid sodium chloride tolerance test. Med Microbiol Immunol 167:197–203

    Google Scholar 

  19. Qadri SMH, Nichols CW, Qadri SGM (1978) Rapid sodium chloride tolerance test for presumptive identification of enterococci. J Clin Microbiol 7:238

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rochaix A (1924) Milieux à l'esculin pour le diano-stid différential des bactéries du group strepto-enter-pneumocoque. CR Soc Biol 90:771–772

    Google Scholar 

  21. Shattock PMF (1955) The identification and classification ofStreptococcus faecalis and some related streptococci. Ann Inst Pasteur Lille 7:95–100

    Google Scholar 

  22. Smith PB, Rhoden DL, Tomforhrde KM (1975) Evaluation of the PathoTec Rapid I-D System for identification ofEnterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol 1:359–362

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vaughn RH, Levine M (1942) Differentiation of the “intermediate” coli-like bacteria. J Bacteriol 44:487–505

    Google Scholar 

  24. Weaver RE (1974)Erysipelothrix. In: Lennette EH, Spaulding EH, Truant JP (eds) Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 2nd ed. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C., pp 140–142

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hussain Qadri, S.M., Smith, J.C., Zubairi, S. et al. Esculin hydrolysis by gram positive bacteria. Med Microbiol Immunol 169, 67–74 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02171773

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02171773

Keywords

Navigation