Skip to main content
Log in

Serotyping ofCampylobacter species by combined use of two methods

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Five hundred strains of thermophilicCampylobacter spp. from sporadic cases of enteritis and from epidemiologically related infections connected with outbreaks were serotyped. The haemagglutination method of Penner and the slide agglutination method of Lior were used together. Greater discrimination was obtained by the use of two methods together than by either alone; 96 % of sporadic strains were typed using a restricted set of typing sera. Of the sporadic strains, 50 % fell within five Penner serotypes and 50 % fell within four Lior serotypes, so the increased discrimination obtained by using both methods was particularly useful amongst these most common serotypes. In outbreaks associated with one serotype both methods gave consistent results, and in outbreaks due to multiple serotypes the two methods complimented each other.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Penner, J. L., Hennessy, P. N.: Passive haemagglutination technique for serotypingCampylobacter fetus subsp.jejuni on the basis of soluble heat-stable antigens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1980, 12: 732–737.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lior, H., Woodward, D. L., Edgar, J. A., Laroche, L. J., Gill, P.: Serotyping ofCampylobacter jejuni by slide agglutination based on heat-labile antigenic factors. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1982, 15: 761–768.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kaijser, B., Sjogren, E.: Serotyping by the Lior and Penner methods in parallel. In: Pearson, A. D., Skirrow, M. B., Rowe, B., Davies, J. R., Jones, D. M. (ed.): Campylobacter II. Public Health Laboratory Service, London, 1983, p. 95.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Skirrow, M. B., Benjamin, J.: Differentiation of enteropathogenic Campylobacter. Journal of Clinical Pathology 1980, 11: 1122.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hutchinson, D. N., Bolton, F. J., Jelley, W.C.N., Mathews, W. G., Telford, D. R., Counter, D. E., Jessop, E. G., Horsley, S. D.: Campylobacter enteritis associated with consumption of raw goat's milk. Lancet 1985, i: 1037–1038.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Robinson, D. A., Jones, D. M.: Milkborne Campylobacter infection. British Medical Journal 1981, 282: 1374–1376.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones, D. M., Abbott, J. D., Painter, M. J., Sutcliffe, E. M.: A comparison of biotypes and serotypes ofCampylobacter species isolated from patients with enteritis and from animal and environmental sources. Journal of Infection 1984, 9: 51–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bolton, F. J., Holt, A. V., Hutchinson, D. N.: Campylobacter biotyping scheme of epidemiological value. Journal of Clinical Pathology 1984, 37: 677–681.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, D.M., Sutcliffe, E.M. & Abbott, J.D. Serotyping ofCampylobacter species by combined use of two methods. Eur. J, Clin. Microbiol. 4, 562–565 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02013395

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02013395

Keywords

Navigation