Skip to main content
Journal of Clinical Pathology logoLink to Journal of Clinical Pathology
. 1983 Sep;36(9):991–995. doi: 10.1136/jcp.36.9.991

Evaluation of some methods for the laboratory identification of Haemophilus influenzae.

G M Tebbutt
PMCID: PMC498457  PMID: 6411774

Abstract

Five tests--satellitism, synthesis of porphyrins, acid production from sucrose, beta-galactosidase activity (ONPG), and indole production--to differentiate between strains of Haemophilus influenzae and strains of V-dependent Haemophilus species were evaluated. Six per cent of strains of H influenzae were misidentified as H parainfluenzae by a test for satellitism using filter paper discs impregnated with X factor, V factor, or both, applied to Columbia Agar. None of seven nutrient agars tested grew Haemophilus species, and determined accurately the X factor requirement. Synthesis of porphyrins from delta-aminolaevulinic acid provided a reliable means of demonstrating that X factor was required. A test for the production of acid from sucrose discriminated successfully between strains of V-dependent Haemophilus species (positive) and H influenzae (negative). Most isolates were identified correctly by the ONPG test, but occasional V-dependent strains were negative and could be misidentified as H influenzae. The discriminative value of the indole test was unsatisfactorily low. The results of the tests are discussed in relation to the identification of H influenzae in the diagnostic laboratory.

Full text

PDF
991

Selected References

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

  1. CLARKE P. H., COWAN S. T. Biochemical methods for bacteriology. J Gen Microbiol. 1952 Feb;6(1-2):187–197. doi: 10.1099/00221287-6-1-2-187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Kilian M. A rapid method for the differentiation of Haemophilus strains. The porphyrin test;. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand B Microbiol Immunol. 1974 Dec;82(6):835–842. doi: 10.1111/j.1699-0463.1974.tb02381.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Kilian M. A taxonomic study of the genus Haemophilus, with the proposal of a new species. J Gen Microbiol. 1976 Mar;93(1):9–62. doi: 10.1099/00221287-93-1-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Mehtar S., Afshar S. A. Biotyping of Haemophilus using API 10S--an epidemiological tool? J Clin Pathol. 1983 Jan;36(1):96–99. doi: 10.1136/jcp.36.1.96. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. MØLLER V. Simplified tests for some amino acid decarboxylases and for the arginine dihydrolase system. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand. 1955;36(2):158–172. doi: 10.1111/j.1699-0463.1955.tb04583.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Pickett M. J., Pedersen M. M. Nonfermentative bacilli associated with man. II. Detection and identification. Am J Clin Pathol. 1970 Aug;54(2):164–177. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/54.2.164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Tebbutt G. M., Coleman D. J. Evaluation of some methods for the laboratory examination of sputum. J Clin Pathol. 1978 Aug;31(8):724–729. doi: 10.1136/jcp.31.8.724. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. WOLIN H. L. Defined medium for Haemophilus influenzae type B. J Bacteriol. 1963 Jan;85:253–254. doi: 10.1128/jb.85.1.253-254.1963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Welch D. F., Ahlin P. A., Matsen J. M. Differentiation of Haemophilus spp. in Respiratory isolate cultures by an indole spot test. J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Feb;15(2):216–219. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.2.216-219.1982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

RESOURCES