Pseudomonas monteilii sp. nov., Isolated from Clinical Specimens

Abstract

We propose the name Pseudomonas monteilii for a new species of gram-negative, rod-shaped, motile bacteria that were nonhemolytic on blood agar and were isolated from clinical sources. The 10 strains of P. monteilii were incapable of liquefing gelatin. They grew at 10°C but not at 41"C, produced fluorescent pigments, catalase, and cytochrome oxidase, and possessed the arginine dihydrolase system. They were capable of respiratory but not fermentative metabolism. They did not hydrolyze esculin or starch and were able to use benzylamine, aaminobutyrate, D-ribose, L-arabinose, butyrate, valerate, isovalerate, isobutyrate, inositol, phenylacetate, D-alanine, and amylamine. They possessed L-phenylalanine arylamidase, L-lysine arylamidase, L-alanine arylamidase, y-glutamyl-transferase, glycyl-phenylalanine arylamidase, L-tryptophan arylamidase, glycyl-L-alanine arylamidase, esterase C , , esterase C , , esterase C , , esterase C , , esterase Cl0, and esterase CIS. DNA relatedness studies revealed that P. monteilii strains formed a homogeneous DNA hybridization group. A total of 57 strains representing previously described or partially characterized taxa belonging to the genus Pseudomoms were 6 to 54% related to P. monteilii. The highest hybridization values were obtained with strains belonging to or related to Pseudomonasputida biovar A. The average G+C content of the DNA was 60.5 0.5 mol% for four of the P. monteilii strains studied. The type strain of P. monteilii is CFML 90-60 (= CIP 104883); it was isolated from bronchial aspirate and has a G+C content of 60 mol%. The clinical significance of these organisms is not known.It is generally accepted today that the genus Pseudomonas, as described in Beigey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology (32), was multigeneric and should not be maintained as a single genus (11-13, 33,34,53,60,61) Pseudomonas aeruginosa , Pseudomonas jfuorescens, Pseudomonas putida, Pseudomonas chlororaphis (5, 23, 39, 51), and the plant-pathogenic Pseudomonas species (Pseudomonas syringae and Pseudomonas cichorii) are the most important fluorescent species (34). Two other species, Pseudomonas veronii (16) and Pseudomonas rhodesiae (6), have been described recently for fluorescent Pseudomonas strains isolated from natural mineral waters (15). A common characteristic of all of the above organisms is the production of pigments that fluoresce under short-wavelength UV light (25). Taxonomically, the fluorescent pseudomonads are extremely complex. The plantpathogenic fluorescent pseudomonads (17, 32) are characterized by a negative arginine dihydrolase reaction and represent a branch that is phylogenetically separate from the other fluorescent organisms in similarity group I of Palleroni (32). P. aeruginosa, the type species of the genus Pseudomonas, is a typical opportunistic pathogen (3). Most strains of this species can be easily identified by a number of phenotypic characteristics (34). This is a homogeneous species on genotypic grounds (35).P. jfuorescens and P. putida were described a few years after...

Taxonomic heterogeneity, as shown by siderotyping, of strains primarily identified as Pseudomonas putida

“…sp., Pseudomonas sp. The CFML strains of siderovar 14 are now recognized as Pseudomonas monteilii (Elomari et al, 1997). Biovar assignation, if known, is indicated by the letter code A, B or C. PVD-pHi values of the PVD-isoform bands separated by isoelectrophoresis are indicated as bars with thickness proportional to the intensity of fluorescence demonstrated under UV-light illumination (see Fig.…”

“…For the others, commercially available galleries and treatment of the data by numerical taxonomy were the main means of identification (Elomari et al, 1994). Two phenotypic clusters analysed at the Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Faculté de Médecine, Lille, France, and further characterized by a polyphasic approach as Pseudomonas monteilii and Pseudomonas mosselii (Elomari et al, 1997;Dabboussi et al, 2002), were included in the present study as the majority of the isolates, which were all of medical origin, were first identified as P. putida. The other strains were isolated from soil, water or from the rhizospheres of various plants (Table 1).…”

“…Therefore, a second method for Table 1. Strains used in the study With the exception of the reference strains, all strains were primarily identified as Pseudomonas putida and are presently still recognized as such, except those which have been reclassified as Pseudomonas monteilii (Elomari et al, 1997) or as Pseudomonas mosselii (Dabboussi et al, 2002). CFBP, Collection Française de Bactéries Phytopathogènes; CFML, Collection de la Faculté de Médecine de Lille; ATCC, American type Culture Collection; DSM, Deutsche Sammlung von Mikroorganismen.…”

“…Interestingly, the CFML strains of sv. 14, first identified as isolates of P. putida, have been since recognized as representatives of a novel species, Pseudomonas monteilii (Elomari et al, 1997). Thus, the pyoverdine of sv.…”

“…Among P. putida isolates, some have been reclassified into novel species, namely P. monteilii (Elomari et al, 1997) and P. mosselii (Dabboussi et al, 2002). The DNA-DNA hybridization values between the strains used in the present study and these two species are reported in phenotypic groups was also hybridized against the labelled DNA of these six strains.…”