Next Article in Journal
Chlamydia trachomatis Infection: A Challenge for the Urologist
Previous Article in Journal
In Vitro Lethal Effect of Zingiber officinale R. on Protoscolices of Hydatid Cyst from Sheep Liver
 
 
Microbiology Research is published by MDPI from Volume 11 Issue 2 (2020). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with PAGEPress.
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluation of Two Anaerobic Systems for Isolation of Anaerobes

by
Louis Osayenum Egwari
1,*,
Maria Olanike Buraimoh
2 and
Nkiru Nneye Nwokoye
3
1
Department of Biological Sciences, School of Natural and Applied Sciences, College of Science and Technology, Covenant University, Canaan Land, Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria
2
Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria
3
National Tuberculosis Reference Laboratory, Microbiology Division, Nigeria Institute of Medical Research, Yaba, Lagos, Nigeria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Microbiol. Res. 2011, 2(2), e24; https://doi.org/10.4081/mr.2011.e24
Submission received: 16 June 2011 / Revised: 4 August 2011 / Accepted: 2 November 2011 / Published: 7 December 2011

Abstract

Many systems are available for the isolation of anaerobic bacteria from clinical specimens. The jar system is the oldest and more adapted while the pouches are not popular with many investigators. The anaerobic chambers are expensive to maintain and technically inflexible. This study evaluated the efficacy of the Oxoid anaerobic jar and the GENbag pouches as anaerobic incubation systems. Anaerobic cultures were set up for 145 middle ear exudates and incubation was in the anaerobic jar, GENbag or a combination of both. The effect of specimen transport system and time lapse before culturing on the performance of the anaerobic systems were evaluated Ten genera of anaerobic bacteria were isolated with both systems (P > 0.05). Peptostreptococcus and Prevotella were isolated more frequently in Oxoid jar than in GENbag (P < 0.05) but both systems were not discriminatory for Clostridium, Propionibacterium and Veillonella. The use of GENbag as a backup to Oxoid jar increased isolation rate from 56.6% to 90.3% (P > 0.05). Type of transport media or vehicle did not affect the recovery of anaerobes adversely as did delay in processing of specimen. A careful application of a number of variables may improve isolation of anaerobes from clinical specimens
Keywords: anaerobes; incubation systems; GENbag; oxoid anaerobic jar; otitis media anaerobes; incubation systems; GENbag; oxoid anaerobic jar; otitis media

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Egwari, L.O.; Buraimoh, M.O.; Nwokoye, N.N. Evaluation of Two Anaerobic Systems for Isolation of Anaerobes. Microbiol. Res. 2011, 2, e24. https://doi.org/10.4081/mr.2011.e24

AMA Style

Egwari LO, Buraimoh MO, Nwokoye NN. Evaluation of Two Anaerobic Systems for Isolation of Anaerobes. Microbiology Research. 2011; 2(2):e24. https://doi.org/10.4081/mr.2011.e24

Chicago/Turabian Style

Egwari, Louis Osayenum, Maria Olanike Buraimoh, and Nkiru Nneye Nwokoye. 2011. "Evaluation of Two Anaerobic Systems for Isolation of Anaerobes" Microbiology Research 2, no. 2: e24. https://doi.org/10.4081/mr.2011.e24

APA Style

Egwari, L. O., Buraimoh, M. O., & Nwokoye, N. N. (2011). Evaluation of Two Anaerobic Systems for Isolation of Anaerobes. Microbiology Research, 2(2), e24. https://doi.org/10.4081/mr.2011.e24

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop