Cited by 184Enterobacteriaceae and Cronobacter ResearchAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Identification of plant-associated enterococci

Muller, T., Ulrich, A., Ott, E.-M., Muller, M.·2001·Journal of Applied Microbiology

Abstract

AIMS: Enterococcus isolates from forage grass were subjected to taxonomical investigations and tested for antibiotic resistance. METHODS AND RESULTS: The identification procedure included phenotypic characterizations, restriction analyses of polymerase chain reaction-amplified 16S rDNA, whole-cell protein profile analyses and 16S rDNA sequence analyses. Agar diffusion tests were performed to detect antibiotic resistance. CONCLUSION: The isolates were identified as belonging to the species Enterococcus faecium, Ent. mundtii, Ent. casseliflavus, Ent. faecalis and Ent. sulfureus. However, the majority of isolates differed distinctly in their restriction patterns from those of known species. They formed a group of a homogeneous 16S rDNA genotype (VI). The 16S rDNA sequence of a representative isolate revealed the closest relationship to the species Ent. faecalis (similarity of 97.4%). All isolates were sensitive to vancomycin, but almost all were resistant to gentamycin and streptomycin. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The taxonomical investigations suggest that the isolates of the 16S rDNA genotype VI represent a new plant-associated Enterococcus species.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2672.2001.01373.x

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Muller, T., Ulrich, A., Ott, E.-M., & Muller, M.
Affiliations
  • Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (DE)
  • University of Rostock (DE)
Venue
Journal of Applied Microbiology
Published
2001-08-02
Volume
91
Issue
2
Pages
268-278
ISSN
  • 1364-5072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2672
OpenAlex
W2050503327
Cited by
184
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 16
FWCI
4.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Endocrinology › Enterobacteriaceae and Cronobacter Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Medicine › Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
Enterococcus, forage grasses, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, Enterococcus mundtii, Enterococcus casseliflavus, bacterial taxonomy, antibiotic resistance, gentamicin resistance, streptomycin resistance, vancomycin susceptibility, restriction fragment length polymorphism, whole-cell protein profiles
MeSH terms
DNA, Bacterial, Electrophoresis, Polyacrylamide Gel, Poaceae, Phylogeny, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Bacterial Typing Techniques, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Enterococcus, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Drug Resistance, Bacterial

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review