Cultural and Serological Studies on Haemophilus vaginalis

Abstract

SUMMARYWhen several strains of Haemophilus vaginalis were grown on Casman rabbit blood agar, individual morphological and cultural differences were noted between the Amies strains which formed pleomorphic and filamentous organisms and large, umbonate colonies, and the Dukes, Edmunds, King and U/L strains which were microscopically coccobacillary to bacillary, non-filamentous, and formed minute convex smooth colonies. Dukes, Edmunds, King and U/L strains required whole blood for maintenance while a whole blood derivative, e.g. peptic digest or Difco chocolate-yeastolate agar, was sufficient for the maintenance of the Amies strains. Serological studies by tube agglutination, direct, indirect and inhibition immunofluorescent methods showed that Dukes, Edmunds, King and U/L strains reacted in a homologous manner with H . vaginalis antisera nos. 317, 394 and 4984. Amies strains did not react with these antisera. However, Amies strains cross-reacted with H . aegyptius antiserum 1 8 0~, while the Dukes, Edmunds, King and U / L strains did not react with this antiserum.

Characterization of Haemophilus vaginalis, Corynebacterium cervicis, and related bacteria

“…The Dingham strain of H. vaginalis and the Gramnegative culture of strain GP2 (GP2H) were identified with the Haemoplzilus group. Dingham appears to be most closely related to H. influenzae in further confirmation of the serological identification of this strain by Pease and Laughton (1965) and Redmond and Kotcher (1963). Strain GP2H required the V factor, an observation previously reported by Dukes and Gardner (1961) for their strains, thus confirming its close relationship with the genus Haemophilus.…”

A Taxonomic Study of Gardnerella vaginalis (Haemophilus vaginalis) Gardner and Dukes 1955

“…The present results were not always in agreement with earlier findings, particularly concerning acid production from sugars, antibiotic sensitivity patterns and the detection of P-haemolysis. The latter is a particularly Taxonomy of Gardnerella vaginalis 393 difficult test to interpret with variable results being reported on media containing blood from the same source (Leopold, 1953;Gardner & Dukes, 1955;Lutz et al, 1956;Lapage, 1961 ;Redmond & Kotcher, 1963), the variable response probably being due to factors such as the basal medium, concentration of blood, thickness of agar, time of incubation and gaseous environment. However, several workers have reported that human and rabbit blood are better than sheep blood for detecting diffuse haemolysis (Edmunds, 1960a, b ;Park eta/., 1968;Greenwood & Pickett, 1979), although Malone et al (1975) found sheep blood satisfactory.…”

Comparison of Cultural and Immunofluorescent Procedures in the Identification of Haemophilus vaginalis

“…The staining methods, immunization of rabbits, the method of conjugating fluorescein isothiocyanate to the globulin from the antiserum of immunized rabbits, and the immunofluorescent procedures were as described by Redmond & Kotcher (1963 A comparison were examined for clue cells by Gram-stained smears rather than by wet…”

“…The organism was regarded as quite fastidious. In view of these problems, it was decided to compare immunofluorescent procedures, which had been found to be highly specific (Redmond & Kotcher, 1963) with cultural procedures, Gramstained smears, and ' clue-cells ' in the isolation and identification of this organism from clinical material at Houston, Texas and Louisville, Kentucky, U.S.A.…”