AJTMH Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 80(6), 2009, pp. 1023-1028
Copyright © 2009 by The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Glass, M. B.
Right arrow Articles by Hoffmaster, A. R.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Glass, M. B.
Right arrow Articles by Hoffmaster, A. R.

Comparison of Four Selective Media for the Isolation of Burkholderia mallei and Burkholderia pseudomallei

Mindy B. Glass*, Cari A. Beesley, Patricia P. Wilkins, AND Alex R. Hoffmaster
Bacterial Zoonoses Branch, Division of Foodborne, Bacterial, and Mycotic Diseases, National Center for Zoonotic, Vector-borne, and Enteric Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia

Currently there are no commercially available selective media indicated for the isolation of Burkholderia mallei and Burkholderia pseudomallei. Ashdown’s agar, a custom selective medium for isolation of B. pseudomallei, is well described in the literature but unavailable commercially. Three commercially available media, Burkholderia cepacia selective agar (BCSA), oxidative-fermentative-polymyxin B-bacitracin-lactose (OFPBL) agar, and Pseudomonas cepacia (PC) agar are recommended for isolation of B. cepacia from respiratory secretions of cystic fibrosis patients. We evaluated the sensitivity and selectivity of these four media using 20 B. mallei, 20 B. pseudomallei, 20 Burkholderia spp., and 15 diagnostically challenging organisms. Ashdown’s agar was the most sensitive medium for the isolation of B. pseudomallei, but it was unable to support growth of B. mallei. Pseudomonas cepacia agar was highly sensitive and selective for both organisms. In non-endemic areas, we suggest the use of the commercially available PC agar for the isolation of B. mallei and B. pseudomallei.

Received August 25, 2008. Accepted for publication February 15, 2009.

Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

* Address correspondence to Mindy B. Glass, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Zoonotic, Vector-borne and Enteric Diseases, Division of Foodborne, Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, Bacterial Zoonoses Branch, 1600 Clifton Road, MS G-34, Atlanta, GA 30333. E-mail: mglass{at}cdc.gov

Authors’ addresses: Mindy B. Glass, Cari A. Beesley, Patricia P. Wilkins, and Alex R. Hoffmaster, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Zoonotic, Vector-borne and Enteric Diseases, Division of Foodborne, Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, Bacterial Zoonoses Branch, 1600 Clifton Road, MS G-34, Atlanta, GA 30333, Tel: 404-639-4055, Fax: 404-639-3023, E-mail: mglass{at}cdc.gov.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.