The Burkholderia cepacia complex consists of nine closely related species: Burkholderia cepacia genomovars I and VI, Burkholderia multivorans (genomovar II), Burkholderia cenocepacia (genomovar III), Burkholderia stabilis (genomovar IV), Burkholderia vietnamiensis (genomovar V), Burkholderia ambifaria (genomovar VII), Burkholderia anthina (genomovar VIII), and Burkholderia pyrrocinia (genomovar IX) (2, 9, 10). Despite the advances that have been made in the understanding of the taxonomy and epidemiology of this group, infections of the respiratory tract with B. cepacia complex organisms still have a considerable impact on morbidity and mortality in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients (4, 5, 6). B. cepacia complex strains have also attracted attention as possible biocontrol and bioremediation agents that could be used as antagonists of soil-borne plant pathogens, as plant growth-promoting agents, and for the bioremediation of various recalcitrant xenobiotics (3, 8). To aid in identification, epidemiological tracking, and virulence studies, a set of strains representative of the first five known genomovars of the B. cepacia complex was assembled (7). A review of the literature reveals that this panel has been used extensively in various areas of research (for a complete list of publications using this panel, see http://go.to/cepacia and follow the link to B. cepacia experimental strain panel). Since its assembly, however, several additional species within the B. cepacia complex have been described, and therefore we propose to update the previously described panel.
Strains were selected such that they represent the currently known diversity in isolation sources and geography and the intraspecies diversity. The strains included in the expanded panel (Table 1) were cultured as described previously (7). All isolates were identified to the species level using a polyphasic approach (2). To avoid the inclusion of members of the same clone, all strains were typed using previously described typing methods (1).
TABLE 1.
Update of the B. cepacia complex strain panel
| Species and strain name | Accession no. from BCCM/ LMG Culture Collection | Source and location |
|---|---|---|
| B. cepacia (genomovar VI) | ||
| AU0645 | LMG 18943 | CF patient (United States) |
| CEP021 | LMG 21819 | CF patient (United States) |
| E12 | LMG 21820 | CF patient (United Kingdom) |
| STM1441 | LMG 21443 | Rhizosphere (Senegal) |
| B. ambifaria (genomovar VII) | ||
| AMMDT | LMG 19182T | Soil (United States) |
| ATCC 53266 | LMG 17828 | Soil (United States) |
| CEP0996 | LMG 19467 | CF patient (Australia) |
| B. anthina (genomovar VIII) | ||
| W92T | LMG 20980T | Soil (United States) |
| C1765 | LMG 20983 | CF patient (United Kingdom) |
| J2552 | LMG 16670 | Rhizosphere (United Kingdom) |
| AU1293 | LMG 21821 | CF patient (United States) |
| B. pyrrocinia (genomovar IX) | ||
| ATCC 15958T | LMG 14191T | Soil (Japan) |
| ATCC 39277 | LMG 21822 | Soil (United States) |
| BC011 | LMG 21823 | Water (United States) |
| C1469 | LMG 21824 | CF patient (United Kingdom) |
Molecular typing showed that all strains had clearly different fingerprint patterns.
Four B. cepacia genomovar VI strains are included in the panel. Strains CEP021 and AU0645 were isolated from CF patients in the United States, while E12 was isolated from a CF patient in the United Kingdom. Strain STM1441 was isolated from the rhizosphere of Alysicarpus glumaceus in Senegal.
Three B. ambifaria strains are included in the panel. DNA-based fingerprinting showed that all possessed a unique genetic fingerprint. The type strain of B. ambifaria, AMMDT, was isolated from the rhizosphere of peas (Pisum sativum L.) in the United States. It is one of the most studied biocontrol isolates. B. ambifaria ATCC 53266 is another strain with possible biocontrol applications; it was isolated from corn roots in the United States. Strain CEP0996 was isolated from the sputum of a CF patient in Australia.
Four B. anthina strains are included. The type strain W92T was isolated from the rhizosphere of a houseplant in Nashville, Tenn., in 1997, while strain C1765 was isolated from the respiratory tract of a CF patient in the United Kingdom. J2552 was isolated from the rhizosphere of Carludaucas palmata in the tropical aquatic house of a botanic garden in the United Kingdom. Isolate AU1293 was isolated from the respiratory tract of a CF patient in the United States; this patient has been chronically infected with this organism for over 2 years.
Four B. pyrrocinia isolates are included in the panel. The type strain ATCC 15958T was isolated from soil. B. pyrrocinia ATCC 39277 was isolated from cornfield soil in the United States. Isolate BC011 was isolated from a blackwater stream the United States. Isolate C1469 was isolated from a CF patient attending a treatment center in the United Kingdom.
All strains were deposited in and can be obtained from the BCCM/LMG Bacteria Collection, Ghent, Belgium. On the website of the International Burkholderia cepacia Working Group (http://go.to/cepacia), all available information on the updated B. cepacia complex experimental strain panel will be compiled.
REFERENCES
- 1.Coenye, T., T. Spilker, A. Martin, and J. J. LiPuma. 2002. Comparative assessment of genotyping methods for epidemiologic study of Burkholderia cepacia genomovar III. J. Clin. Microbiol. 40:3300-3307. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Coenye, T., P. Vandamme, J. R. W. Govan, and J. J. LiPuma. 2001. Taxonomy and identification of the Burkholderia cepacia complex. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39:3427-3436. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Holmes, A., J. Govan, and R. Goldstein. 1998. Agricultural use of Burkholderia (Pseudomonas) cepacia: a threat to human health? Emerg. Infect. Dis. 4:221-227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Jones, A. M., M. E. Dodd, and A. K. Webb. 2001. Burkholderia cepacia: current clinical issues, environmental controversies and ethical dilemmas. Eur. Respir. J. 17:295-301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.LiPuma, J. J. 1998. Burkholderia cepacia: management issues and new insights. Clin. Chest Med. 19:473-486. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Mahenthiralingam, E., A. Baldwin, and P. Vandamme. 2002. Burkholderia cepacia complex infection in patients with cystic fibrosis. J. Med. Microbiol. 51:533-538. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Mahenthiralingam, E., T. Coenye, J. W. Chung, D. P. Speert, J. R. W. Govan, P. Taylor, and P. Vandamme. 2000. Diagnostically and experimentally useful panel of strains from the Burkholderia cepacia complex. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38:910-913. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Parke, J. L., and D. Gurian-Sherman. 2001. Diversity of Burkholderia cepacia complex and implications for risk assessment of biological control strains. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 39:225-258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Vandamme, P., D. Henry, T. Coenye, S. Nzula, M. Vancanneyt, J. J. LiPuma, D. P. Speert, J. R. W. Govan, and E. Mahenthiralingam. 2002. Burkholderia anthina sp. nov. and Burkholderia pyrrocinia, two additional Burkholderia cepacia complex bacteria, may confound test results of new molecular diagnostic tools. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 33:143-149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Vandamme, P., B. Holmes, T. Coenye, J. Goris, E. Mahenthiralingam, J. J. LiPuma, and J. R. W. Govan. 2003. Burkholderia cenocepacia sp. nov., a new twist of an old story. Res. Microbiol. 154:91-96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]