Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Clinical Pathology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Pathology
. 1978 Jan;31(1):22–30. doi: 10.1136/jcp.31.1.22

Identification of Enterobacteriaceae by the API 20E system.

B Holmes, W R Willcox, S P Lapage
PMCID: PMC476713  PMID: 342546

Abstract

Since the introduction of the API 20E kit a number of identification schemes have been developed by the manufacturer for use with the kit. We evaluated the success of these various schemes in identifying 206 strains belonging to 34 taxa of the family Enterobacteriaceae. Many of the strains were atypical and only 94% could be identified by our own system of 50 conventional tests and a computer program. The most advanced identification scheme so far developed for the API 20E kit (the Analytical Profile Index and complementary Computer Service) allowed 88% of the 206 strains to be correctly identified, although 2% were incorrectly identified. The tests in the API 20E kit and 52 conventional tests were separately evaluated for their ability to discriminate between the 34 taxa considered in this study. Our results suggest that replacing some of the tests in the present API 20E kit might further improve its diagnostic performance.

Full text

PDF
22

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bascomb S., Lapage S. P., Curtis M. A., Willcox W. R. Identification of bacteria by computer: identification of reference strains. J Gen Microbiol. 1973 Aug;77(2):291–315. doi: 10.1099/00221287-77-2-291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bascomb S., Lapage S. P., Willcox W. R., Curtis M. A. Numerical classification of the tribe Klebsielleae. J Gen Microbiol. 1971 Jun;66(3):279–295. doi: 10.1099/00221287-66-3-279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bisgaard M., Gregersen T., Petersen E. Sammenlignende undersøglser over vaerdien af engangsforgaeringssaet (API systemet and enterotube) til brug ved identifikation af enterobacteriaceae. Nord Vet Med. 1974 Mar;26(3):243–247. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bourgaux-Ramoisy D., Béland S., Brochu B. Etude comparative du système API, de l'Entérotube et de la méthode habituelle pour l'identification des entérobactéries. Vie Med Can Fr. 1973;2(2):107–109. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brooks K. A., Jens M., Sodeman T. M. A clinical evaluation of the API microtube system for identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Am J Med Technol. 1974 Feb;40(2):55–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Butler D. A., Lobregat C. M., Gavan T. L. Reproducibility of the analytab (API 20E) system. J Clin Microbiol. 1975 Oct;2(4):322–326. doi: 10.1128/jcm.2.4.322-326.1975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gardner J. M., Snyder B. A., Gröschel D. Experiences with the Analytab system for the identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Pathol Microbiol (Basel) 1972;38(2):103–106. doi: 10.1159/000162395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hayek L. J., Willis G. W. A comparison of two commerical methods for the identification of the Enterobacteriaceae--API 20E and the Enterotube--with conventional methods. J Clin Pathol. 1976 Feb;29(2):158–161. doi: 10.1136/jcp.29.2.158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Holmes B., Willcox W. R., Lapage S. P., Malnick H. Test reproducibility of the API (20E), Enterotube, and Pathotec systems. J Clin Pathol. 1977 Apr;30(4):381–387. doi: 10.1136/jcp.30.4.381. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lapage S. P., Bascomb S., Willcox W. R., Curtis M. A. Identification of bacteria by computer: general aspects and perspectives. J Gen Microbiol. 1973 Aug;77(2):273–290. doi: 10.1099/00221287-77-2-273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Nord C. E., Lindberg A. A., Dahlbäck A. Evaluation of five test-kits-API, AuxoTab, Enterotube, PathoTec and R-B-for identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Med Microbiol Immunol. 1974 Mar 22;159(3):211–220. doi: 10.1007/BF02121337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Robertson E. A., MacLowry J. D. Construction of an interpretive pattern directory for the API 10 S kit and analysis of its diagnostic accuracy. J Clin Microbiol. 1975 Jun;1(6):515–520. doi: 10.1128/jcm.1.6.515-520.1975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Robertson E. A., MacLowry J. D. Mathematical analysis of the API enteric 20 profile register using a computer diagnostic model. Appl Microbiol. 1974 Oct;28(4):691–695. doi: 10.1128/am.28.4.691-695.1974. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Smith P. B., Tomfohrde K. M., Rhoden D. L., Balows A. API system: a multitube micromethod for identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Appl Microbiol. 1972 Sep;24(3):449–452. doi: 10.1128/am.24.3.449-452.1972. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sneath P. H., Johnson R. The influence on numerical taxonomic similarities of errors in microbiological tests. J Gen Microbiol. 1972 Sep;72(2):377–392. doi: 10.1099/00221287-72-2-377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Washington J. A., 2nd, Yu P. K., Martin W. J. Evaluation of accuracy of multitest micromethod system for identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Appl Microbiol. 1971 Sep;22(3):267–269. doi: 10.1128/am.22.3.267-269.1971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Willcox W. R., Lapage S. P., Bascomb S., Curtis M. A. Identification of bacteria by computer: theory and programming. J Gen Microbiol. 1973 Aug;77(2):317–330. doi: 10.1099/00221287-77-2-317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Pathology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES