Medical Microbiology and Immunology

, Volume 169, Issue 2, pp 67–74 | Cite as

Esculin hydrolysis by gram positive bacteria

A rapid test and it's comparison with other methods
  • S. M. Hussain Qadri
  • Janet C. Smith
  • Sabiha Zubairi
  • M. I. DeSilva
Article

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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 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 478–489Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnes EM (1956) Tetrazolium reduction as a means of differentiatingStreptococcus faecalis fromStreptococcus faecium. J Gen Microbiol 14:57–68Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braunstein H, Tucker EB, Gibson BC (1969) Identification and significance ofStreptococcus agalactiae (Lancefield group B). Amer J Clin Pathol 51:207–213Google Scholar
  4. 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 490–509Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Edberg SC, Gam K, Bottenbley CJ, Singer JM (1976) Rapid spot test for the determination of esculin hydrolysis. J Clin Microbiol 4:180–184Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Facklam R, Moody M (1970) Presumptive identification of group D Streptococci: The bile-esculin test. Appl Microbiol 20:225–250Google Scholar
  7. 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 9:665–672Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Graham NC, Bartley EO (1939) Some observations on the classification of enterococci. J Hyg 39:538–552Google Scholar
  9. 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 33:550–558Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hartman PA (1968) Miniaturized microbiological methods. Academic Press, Inc., New York, N.Y., pp 3–16Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hartman PA, Reinhold GW, Saraswat DS (1966) Media and methods for isolation and enumeration of the enterococci. Adv Appl Microbiol 8:253–289Google Scholar
  12. 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 130–134Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Isenberg DH, Gildberg D, Sampson J (1970) Laboratory studies with a selective enterococcus medium. Appl Microbiol 20:433–436Google Scholar
  14. 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 91–95Google Scholar
  15. 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 135–139Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee W (1972) Improved procedure for identification of group D enterococci with two new media. Appl Microbiol 24:1–3Google Scholar
  17. 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 22:547–551Google Scholar
  18. 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 167:197–203Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Qadri SMH, Nichols CW, Qadri SGM (1978) Rapid sodium chloride tolerance test for presumptive identification of enterococci. J Clin Microbiol 7:238Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rochaix A (1924) Milieux à l'esculin pour le diano-stid différential des bactéries du group strepto-enter-pneumocoque. CR Soc Biol 90:771–772Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shattock PMF (1955) The identification and classification ofStreptococcus faecalis and some related streptococci. Ann Inst Pasteur Lille 7:95–100Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smith PB, Rhoden DL, Tomforhrde KM (1975) Evaluation of the PathoTec Rapid I-D System for identification ofEnterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol 1:359–362Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vaughn RH, Levine M (1942) Differentiation of the “intermediate” coli-like bacteria. J Bacteriol 44:487–505Google Scholar
  24. 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 140–142Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. M. Hussain Qadri
    • 1
  • Janet C. Smith
    • 2
  • Sabiha Zubairi
    • 3
  • M. I. DeSilva
    • 4
  1. 1.University of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma City
  2. 2.U.S. Department of LaborOccupational Safety and Health AdministrationOklahoma City
  3. 3.Veterans Administration Medical CenterWashington, D.C.
  4. 4.Veterans Administration Medical CenterNewington

Personalised recommendations