Antonie van Leeuwenhoek

, Volume 65, Issue 2, pp 111–131 | Cite as

Intraspecific metabolic diversity among strains ofBurkholderia cepacia isolated from decayed onions, soils, and the clinical environment

  • D. S. Yohalem
  • J. W. Lorbeer
Research Articles


A collection of 218 strains ofBurkholderia cepacia (including 18% strain replicates) was assembled from organic soils, decayed onions, and clinical sources. Each strain was characterized for virulence to onion, catabolic ability using the Biolog GN microtiter plate, and several other behaviors. Overall test reproducibility was estimated at 98%. The results obtained using the Biolog GN system corresponded well to those obtained using standard methods. Three coefficients of resemblance (Gower similarity, pattern difference, and Jaccard similarity) were calculated and clustered by the group-average method. The sorted matrices and phenograms, while giving evidence of an underlying phenetic structure to theB. cepacia nomenspecies, gave little evidence of sorting by broad source of isolation. Strains isolated from within fields or samples were frequently found to be similar, however, strains isolated from fields with similar cropping histories were not. The Gower-transformed centroids of ordained clusters were projected in a principal coordinate system and estimates of disjunction were calculated. Strains ofB. cepacia were shown to be non-uniformly distributed in taxonomic space. Strains isolated by serial dilution on onion slices formed a tight phenetic cluster which includes the type strain of the nomenspecies and that of a synonymous group (Pseudomonas multivorans); the strains in this phenon were generally virulent to onion and were partially differentiated from others by pectolytic behavior and by the production of diffusible pigment on King's medium A. Further characterization should better resolve the taxonomy of the nomenspecies.

Key words

BIOLOG coefficients of resemblance infraspecific variation Pseudomonas cepacia taxonomy 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anonymous (1993) Validation of the publication of new names and new combinations previously effectively published outside the IJSB. List No. 45. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 43: 398–399Google Scholar
  2. Ballard RW, Palleroni NJ, Doudoroff M, Stanier RY & Mandel M (1970) Taxonomy of the aerobic pseudomonads:Pseudomonas cepacia, P. marginata, P. alliicola, P. caryophylli. J. Gen. Microbiol. 60: 199–214Google Scholar
  3. Burkholder WH (1950) Sour skin, a bacterial rot of onion bulbs. Phytopathology 40: 115–117Google Scholar
  4. Eldredge N & Cracraft J (1980) Phylogenetic patterns and the evolutionary process: Method and theory in comparative biology. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Esanu JG & Schubert RHW (1973) Zur Taxonomic und Nomenklatur vonPseudomonas cepacia. Zentrallblatt für Bakteriologie, Mikrobiologie and Hygiene, I. Abt. Orig. A 224: 478–483Google Scholar
  6. Fantino MG & Bazzi C (1982) Azione antagonista diPseudomonas cepacia versoFusarium oxysporum f.sp.cepae. Informatore Fitopatologico 32: 55–58Google Scholar
  7. Gilardi GL (1983)Pseudomonas cepacia: Culture and laboratory identification. Laboratory Management 21: 29–32Google Scholar
  8. —— (1978) Identification ofPseudomonas and related bacteria. In: Glucose nonfermenting gram-negative bacteria in clinical microbiology (pp 15–44). CRC press, BocanGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldman DA & Klinger JD (1986)Pseudomonas cepacia: biology, mechanisms of virulence, epidemiology. J. Pediatrics 108: 806–812Google Scholar
  10. Gonzalez CF & Vidaver AK (1979) Bacteriocin, plasmid, and pectolytic diversity inPseudomonas cepacia of clinical and plant origin. J. Gen. Microbiol. 110: 161–170Google Scholar
  11. Gower JC (1971) A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. Biometrics 27: 857–871Google Scholar
  12. —— (1966) Some properties of latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analysis. Biometrika 53: 325–338Google Scholar
  13. Hagedorn C, Gould WD, Bardinelli DR & Gustavson DR (1987) A selective medium for enumeration and recovery ofPseudomonas cepacia biotypes from soil. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 53: 2265–2268Google Scholar
  14. Haugland RA, Schlemm DJ, Lyons RP III, Sferra PR & Chakrabarty AM (1990) Degradation of the chlorinated phenoxyacetate herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid by pure and mixed bacterial cultures. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56: 1357–1362Google Scholar
  15. Hildebrand DC (1971) Pectate and pectin gels for differentiation ofPseudomonas sp. and other bacterial plant pathogens. Phytopathology 61: 1430–1436Google Scholar
  16. Holmes B (1986) The identification ofPseudomonas cepacia and its occurrence in clinical material. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 61: 299–314Google Scholar
  17. Homma Y, Sato Z, Hirayama F, Konno K, Shirahama S & Suzui T (1989) Production of antibiotics byPseudomonas cepacia as an agent for biological control of soilborne plant pathogens. Soil Biol. Biochem. 21: 723–726Google Scholar
  18. Janisiewicz WJ & Roitman J (1988) Biological control of blue and gray mold on apple and pear withPseudomonas cepacia. Phytopathology 78: 1697–1700Google Scholar
  19. Jayaswal RK, Fernandez MA & Schroeder RG III (1990) Isolation and characterization of aPseudomonas strain that restricts growth of various phytopathogenic fungi. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56: 1053–1058Google Scholar
  20. Jonsson V (1970) Proposal of a new species,Pseudomonas kingii. Int. J. System. Bact. 20: 255–257Google Scholar
  21. Kawamoto SO (1966) Studies of bacteria associated with decayed onions. MS Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  22. Kawamoto SO & Lorbeer JW (1976) Protection of onion seedlings fromFusarium oxysporum f.sp.cepae by seed and soil infestation withPseudomonas cepacia. Plant Dis. Rep. 60: 189–191Google Scholar
  23. King EO (1964) The identification of unusual pathogenic Gram negative bacteria. National Communicable Disease Center, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  24. King EO, Ward MK & Raney DE (1954) Two simple media for the demonstration of pyocyanin and fluorescein. J. Lab. Clin. Med. 44: 301–307Google Scholar
  25. Korth H, Romer A & Budzikiewicz H (1978) 4,9-dihydroxyphenazine-1,6-dicarboxylic acid dimethylester and the ‘missing link’ in phenazine biosynthesis. J. Gen. Microbiol. 104: 299–303Google Scholar
  26. Lelliott RA & Stead DE (1987) Methods for the diagnosis of bacterial diseases of plants. Blackwell Scientific, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Lumsden RD, Garcia-E R, Lewis JA & Frias-T GA (1987) Suppression of damping-off caused byPythium spp. in soil from the indigenous Mexican chinampa agricultural system. Soil Biol. Biochem. 19: 501–508Google Scholar
  28. Lumsden RD & Sasser M (1986) Medium for the isolation ofPseudomonas cepacia biotype from soil and the isolated biotype. U.S. Patent No. 4,588,584Google Scholar
  29. Mayr E (1988) Toward a new philosophy of biology. Belknap Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. McArthur JV, Kovacic DA & Smith MH (1988) Genetic diversity in natural populations of a soil bacterium across a landscape gradient. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 85: 9621–9624Google Scholar
  31. Meyers E, Bisacchi GS, Dean L, Liu WC, Minassian B, Slusarchyk DS, Sykes RB, Tanaka SK & Trejo W (1987) Xylocandin: a new complex of antifungal peptides. I. Taxonomy, isolation and biological activity. J. Antibiotics 40: 1515–1519Google Scholar
  32. Morris MB & Roberts JB (1959) A group of pseudomonads able to synthesize poly-β-hydroxybutyric acid. Nature 183: 1538–1539Google Scholar
  33. Nixon KC & Wheeler QD (1992) Extinction and the origin of species. In: Novacek MJ & Wheeler QD (Eds) Extinction and Phylogeny (pp. 119–143) Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Ochman H, Whittam TS, Caugant DA & Selander RS (1983) Enzyme polymorphism and genetic population structure inEscherichia coli andShigella. J. Gen. Microbiol. 129: 2715–2726Google Scholar
  35. Palleroni NJ (1984) Gram negative aerobic rods and cocci: Family I. Pseudomonadaceae Winslow, Broadhurst, Buchanan, Krumwiede, Rogers and Smith 1917, 555AL. In: Krieg NR & Holt JG (Eds) Bergey's manual of systematic bacteriology, Vol. 1 (pp. 141–219) Williams and Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  36. Palleroni NJ & Holmes B (1981)Pseudomonas cepacia sp. nov. nom. rev. Int. J. System. Bact. 31: 479–481Google Scholar
  37. Parke JL, Rand RE, Joy AE & King KB (1991) Biological control of Pythium damping-off and Aphanomyces root rot of peas by application ofPseudomonas cepacia orP. fluorescens to seed. Plant Disease 775: 987–992Google Scholar
  38. Parker WL, Rathnum ML, Seiner V, Trejo WH, Principe PA & Sykes RB (1984) Cepacin A and cepacin B, two new antibioties produced byPseudomonas cepacia. J. Antibiotics 37: 431–440Google Scholar
  39. Ravin AW (1963) Experimental approaches to the study of bacterial phylogeny. American Naturalist 97: 307–318Google Scholar
  40. Ramsay BA, Ramsay JA & Cooper DG (1989) Production of poly-β-hydroxyalkanoic acid byPseudomonas cepacia. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 55: 584–589Google Scholar
  41. Sackin MJ (1987) Computer programs for classification and identification. Methods in Microbiol. 19: 459–494Google Scholar
  42. Sands DC, Schroth MN & Hildebrand DC (1970) Taxonomy of phytopathogenic pseudomonads. J. Bacteriol. 101: 9–23Google Scholar
  43. Scarlett CM, Fletcher JT, Roberts P & Lelliott RA (1978) Tomato pith necrosis caused byPseudomonas corrugata n. sp. Annals of Appl. Biol. 88: 105–114Google Scholar
  44. Selander RS & Levin BR (1980) Genetic diversity and structure inEscherichia coli populations. Science 210: 545–547Google Scholar
  45. Sinsabaugh HA & Howard GJ Jr (1975) Emendation of the description ofPseudomonas cepacia Burkholder (Synonyms:Pseudomonas multivorans Stanier et al.;Pseudomonas kingii Jonsson; EO-1 Group). Inter. J. System. Bact. 25: 187–201Google Scholar
  46. Skerman VBD, McGowan V & Sneath PHA (1980) Approved lists of bacterial names. Inter. J. System. Bacteriol. 30: 225–420Google Scholar
  47. Sneath PHA (1980a) Basic program for determining overlap between groups in an identification matrix of percent positive characters. Computers and Geosciences 6: 267–278Google Scholar
  48. —— (1980b) Basic program for the most diagnostic properties of groups from an identification matrix of percent positive characters. Computers and Geosciences 6: 21–26Google Scholar
  49. —— (1977) A method for testing the distinctness of clusters: A test of the disjunction of two clusters in Euclidean space as measured by their overlap. J. Mathematical Geology 9: 123–143Google Scholar
  50. —— (1968) Vigour and pattern in taxonomy. J. Gen. Bact. 54: 1–11Google Scholar
  51. —— (1957) Some thoughts on bacterial classification. J. Gen. Microbiol. 17: 201–226Google Scholar
  52. Sneath PHA & Johnson R (1972) The influence on numerical taxonomic similarities of errors in microbiological tests. J. Gen. Microbiol. 72: 377–392Google Scholar
  53. Sneath PHA & Sokal RR (1973) Numerical taxonomy. WH Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  54. Sneath PHA, Stevens M & Sackin MJ (1981) Numerical taxonomy ofPseudomonas based on published records of substrate utilization. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 47: 423–448Google Scholar
  55. Snell JJS, Hill LR, Lapage SP & Curtis MA (1972) Identification ofPseudomonas cepacia Burkholder and its synomy withPseudomonas kingii Jonsson. Inter. J. System. Bact. 22: 127–138Google Scholar
  56. Staley JT & Krieg NR (1984) Classification of procaryotic organisms: an overview. In: Krieg NR & Holt JG (Ed) Bergey's Manual of systematic bacteriology Vol. 1 (pp 1–23) Williams and Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  57. Stanier RY, Palleroni NJ & Doudoroff M (1966) The aerobic pseudomonads: a taxonomic study. J. Gen. Microbiol. 43: 159–271Google Scholar
  58. Stull TL, Lipuma JJ & Edlind TD (1988) A broad-spectrum probe for molecular epidemiology of bacteria: Ribosomal RNA. J. Infect. Dis. 157: 280–286Google Scholar
  59. Van Alfen NF & Kosuge T (1974) Microbial metabolism of the fungicide 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline. J. Agr. Food Chem. 22: 221–224Google Scholar
  60. Van Valen L (1976) Ecological species, multispecies, and oaks. Taxon 25: 233–239Google Scholar
  61. Venkateswarlu K & Sethunathan N (1985) Enhanced degradation of carbofuran byPseudomonas cepacia andNocardia sp. in the presence of growth factors. Plant and Soil 84: 445–449Google Scholar
  62. Whittam TS (1989) Clonal dynamics ofEscherichia coli in its natural habitat. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 55: 23–32Google Scholar
  63. Wright S (1969) Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol. 2: The theory of gene frequencies. University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  64. Wu BJ & Thompson ST (1984) Selective medium forPseudomonas cepacia containing 9 -chloro -9 — (4 -diethylaminophenyl) -10 — phenylacridan and polymyxin B sulfate. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 48: 743–746Google Scholar
  65. Yabuuchi E, Kosako Y, Oyaizu H, Yano I, Hotta H, Hashimoto Y, Ezaki T, Arakawa M (1992) Proposal ofBurkholderia gen. nov. and transfer of seven species of the genusPseudomonas homology group II to the new genus, with the type speciesBurkholderia cepacia (Palleroni and Holmes 1981) comb. nov. Microbiol. Immunol. 36: 1251–1275Google Scholar
  66. Yohalem DS (1993) Characterization of diversity amongPseudomonas cepacia strains isolated from soils, decayed onions, and clinical sources. Ph.D. Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  67. Yohalem DS & Lorbeer JW (1992) Characterization of diversity among strains ofPseudomonas cepacia isolated from clinical sources, soils, or infected onions. Phytopathology 82: 248–249 (Abstract)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. S. Yohalem
    • 1
  • J. W. Lorbeer
    • 1
  1. 1.New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Department of Plant PathologyCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations