Detailed Information on Publication Record
2017
Methods of Candida dubliniensis identification and its occurrence in human clinical material
MAHELOVÁ, Martina and Filip RŮŽIČKABasic information
Original name
Methods of Candida dubliniensis identification and its occurrence in human clinical material
Authors
MAHELOVÁ, Martina (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution) and Filip RŮŽIČKA (203 Czech Republic, guarantor, belonging to the institution)
Edition
Folia microbiologica, Praha, Mikrobiologický ústav Praha AV ČR, 2017, 0015-5632
Other information
Language
English
Type of outcome
Článek v odborném periodiku
Field of Study
10606 Microbiology
Country of publisher
Netherlands
Confidentiality degree
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Impact factor
Impact factor: 1.311
RIV identification code
RIV/00216224:14110/17:00095672
Organization unit
Faculty of Medicine
UT WoS
000409167900005
Keywords in English
Candida dubliniensis
Tags
Tags
International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 20/3/2018 16:41, Soňa Böhmová
Abstract
V originále
Candida dubliniensis was reported as a new species in 1995. This species is often misidentified as Candida albicans. The aims of this work were to determine the occurrence of C. dubliniensis in various clinical materials, to evaluate several ways to identify it and to examine the genetic variability of isolates. Among 7706 isolates originally identified as C. albicans, 237 were identified as C. dubliniensis (3.1%). Most of the C. dubliniensis isolates were obtained from the upper and lower respiratory tract (61.4 and 22.9%). Five phenotypic methods including latex agglutination were used (cultivation on CHROMagar Candida, on Staib agar, at 42 A degrees C and in medium with 6.5% NaCl), but only cultivation on the medium with an increased concentration of NaCl and latex agglutination gave reliable results. Species-specific polymerase chain reaction was used as the confirmation method. Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry provided less reliable results. In fact, 78.9% of C. dubliniensis isolates had scores above 1.7. However, the rest of them (21.1%) were also identified as C. dubliniensis even when the scores were lower than 1.7. Divergences among C. dubliniensis strains were evaluated by means of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Eighty-six selected C. dubliniensis isolates showed a 69.6% level of similarity. The results of this study expand the knowledge of the incidence, means of identification and genotypic divergence of C. dubliniensis isolates.
Links
LG15056, research and development project |
| ||
NV16-31593A, research and development project |
|