Open Access

Toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans isolated from a wild bird (ural owl) and its feed (shrew-moles): comparison of molecular types with human isolates

  • Chihiro Katsukawa1,
  • Kaoru Umeda2,
  • Ikuko Inamori3,
  • Yuka Kosono4,
  • Tomokazu Tanigawa5,
  • Takako Komiya6,
  • Masaaki Iwaki6Email author,
  • Akihiko Yamamoto6, 8 and
  • Susumu Nakatsu7
BMC Research Notes20169:181

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-1979-5

Received: 31 October 2015

Accepted: 7 March 2016

Published: 22 March 2016

Abstract

Background

Corynebacterium ulcerans is a pathogen causing diphtheria-like illness to humans. In contrast to diphtheria by Corynebacterium diphtheriae circulating mostly among humans, C. ulcerans infection is zoonotic. The present study aimed to clarify how a zoonotic pathogen C. ulcerans circulates among wild birds and animals.

Results

By screening 380 birds, a single strain of toxigenic C. ulcerans was isolated from a carnivorous bird, ural owl (Strix uralensis). The bacterium was also isolated from two individuals of Japanese shrew-mole (Urotrichus talpoides), a food preference of the owl. Analysis by ribotyping showed that the owl and mole isolates were classified in a group, suggesting that C. ulcerans can be transmissible among wild birds and their prey animals. Moreover, our isolates were found to belong to a group of previously reported C. ulcerans isolates from dogs and a cat, which are known to serve as sources for human infection.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that the shrew-mole may be a potential reservoir of a zoonotic pathogen C. ulcerans.

Keywords

Zoonosis Diphtheria Food chain Wildlife Infection source

Background

The toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans is a causative agent of diphtheria-like illness in humans. Diphtheria has long been recognized to be exclusively caused by Corynebacterium diphtheriae which circulates mostly among humans [1, 2]. Recently, along with the emergence of toxigenic C. ulcerans infection, the latter has been incorporated into the category of “diphtheria” in regions including European Union [3]. The cases caused by the organism is becoming the majority of diphtheria-related diseases in industrialized countries [4]. Compared with the host range of C. diphtheriae that is limited to humans, C. ulcerans exploits a wide range of mammalian hosts.

Companion animals such as dogs [59] and cats [1013], as well as pigs [14, 15] have been shown to harbor C. ulcerans and may play a role as sources of infection for human. However, whether cats or dogs are the natural hosts for the bacterium is still unknown. In fact, the host range of the bacterium is not limited to these companion animals. Cattle [16, 17], roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) [18], wild boar (Sus scrofa) [19], goat [20], killer whale (Orcinus orca) [21], lion (Panthera leo) [21], ferret (Mustela putorius furo) [22] and dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) [23], have been reported to be affected by the bacterium. Despite the wide host range, so far the transmission of the bacterium from wild animal to humans has not been reported, or may be extremely rare. Wild animals have not been reported to serve as reservoir for infection of humans or companion animals so far. However, due to possible close contact between companion and wild animals including stray or freely roaming ones, information on how the bacterium is maintained and circulated among wild animals may greatly contribute to the prevention of C. ulcerans infection in companion and domestic animals. In addition, information is lacking about the presence and infection of C. ulcerans in non-mammalian vertebrates, including birds that comprise a diverse range of wildlife and often in close contact with prey wild mammalian hosts.

In this study, we performed a survey of C. ulcerans among wild birds and animals in Japan. The results of the survey and findings concerning the feeding behavior are described.

Results

Isolation of C. ulcerans

We investigated the presence of toxigenic C. ulcerans in 380 wild birds (Table 1) and obtained one isolate (Owl1205) from only one young (4 weeks of age) Ural owl (Strix uralensis) captured from a nest (Fig. 1a). The sex of the owl was not established. It looked healthy and did not exhibit any clinical signs of illness. In the nest, investigation revealed that there were leftovers which comprised 18 mice of unknown species, 7 Japanese shrew-moles (Urotrichus talpoides), one Japanese mole (Mogera wogura) and birds and frogs of unknown species. In view of the possibility that the bacterium derived from the diet of the owl, we then tried to screen several small animals inhabiting the area surrounding the nest. Thirty-six small animals were captured, including 33 large Japanese field mice (Apodemus speciosus, 18 males and 15 females), 1 house mouse (Mus musculus, male), and 2 Japanese shrew-moles (one female and one male) (Fig. 1b). C. ulcerans was isolated from both the Japanese shrew-moles (strains Mole1212-1 and Mole1212-2) but was not detected in the other 34 animals (2 species of mice). The two shrew-moles did not exhibit any clinical signs of illness.
Table 1

List of captured birds

Family

Species

Number of inspections

Podicipedidae

Tachybaptus ruficollis

2

Podiceps cristatus

1

Ardeidae

Egretta garzetta

2

Ardea cinerea

2

Anatidae

Cygnus olor

1

Procellariidae

Calonectris leucomelas

3

Accipitridae

Accipiter gentilis

1

Accipiter nisus

3

Butastur indicus

1

Buteo japonicus

2

Falconidae

Falco peregrinus

1

Falco tinnunculus

2

Charadriidae

Charadrius alexandrinus

2

Vanellus cinereus

2

Laridae

Larus crassirostris

1

Sterna albifrons

20

Sterna dougallii

7

Columbidae

Columba livia

35

Streptopelia orientalis

8

Cuculidae

Cuculus poliocephalus

1

Cuculus saturatus

1

Strigidae

Strix uralensis

13

Caprimulgidae

Caprimulgus indicus

3

Picidae

Dendrocopos kizuki

11

Passeridae

Passer montanus

17

Hirundinidae

Hirundo rustica

11

Pycnonotidae

Hypsipetes amaurotis

18

Turdidae

Tarsiger cyanurus

22

Turdus pallidus

14

Turdus cardis

4

Turdus chrysolaus

1

Cettiidae

Horornis diphone

12

Urosphena squameiceps

2

Phylloscopus borealoides

2

Phylloscopus borealis

5

Muscicapidae

Cyanoptila cyanomelana

2

Ficedula narcissina

20

Muscicapa dauurica

3

Paridae

Parus varius

15

Parus minor

14

Zosteropidae

Zosterops japonicus

67

Emberizidae

Emberiza cioides

2

Emberiza spodocephala

10

Fringillidae

Carduelis sinica

2

Uragus sibiricus

1

Sturnidae

Sturnus cineraceus

2

Campephagidae

Pericrocotus divaricatus

2

Aegithalidae

Aegithalos caudatus

1

Corvidae

Corvus corone

3

Corvus macrorhynchos

3

Total

380

Fig. 1

Ural owl and shrew-mole. a 4-week-old Ural owl (Strix uralensis) from which C. ulcerans was detected, found in its nest. b Male Japanese shrew-mole (Urotrichus talpoides) from which C. ulcerans was isolated, captured in a trap

Characterization of isolates

The three C. ulcerans isolates obtained from the bird and animals showed the same API code (0111326,  % id 99.7, T = 1.0). The isolates were tested for toxigenicity and genetically analyzed. Using the Elek test (in-gel immunodiffusion test) and PCR for the toxin gene indicated that the three isolates were toxigenic.

So far, C. ulcerans isolated in Japan have been categorized into 4 types by ribotyping (Fig. 2b) [24]. The owl and shrew-mole isolates showed identical ribotypes (Fig. 2a). Other ribotypes (R1, R3 and R4) represented human and companion animal isolates. Together with PFGE and toxin gene sequence the isolates have been categorized into three groups [24]. Owl, shlew-mole, killer whale and outdoor-bred dog were categorized together in one group (Group II) that did not contain human isloates.
Fig. 2

Ribotyping. a Ribotyping patterns of the owl and shrew-mole isolates. b Schematic view of ribotype patterns of the owl and shrew-mole isolates, displayed together with the patterns of other C. ulcerans isolate. The classifications of the isolates [24] are indicated on the right side of the figure

The owl and shrew-mole isolates were susceptible to the antibiotics PCG, ABPC, CEX, CFPM, CTX, CTRX, IPM, VCM, GM, EM, CPFX, TC, ST, RFP, QPR/DPR, and LZD. The minimal inhibitory concentration of CLDM was 2 µg/ml in these strains and were considered intermediate. These results were consistent with the results of susceptibility tests on Canadian C. ulcerans isolates [25].

Discussion

Corynebacterium ulcerans infection has been recognized as a zoonotic disease [26] and several kinds of wild animals, in addition to companion animals and livestock [524], are reported to be affected by the bacterium. However, information on the prevalence of the species among wild birds has been lacking.

In this study, we investigated 380 wild birds and isolated toxigenic C. ulcerans from a young owl probably fed by its parents. Then we continued our investigation on wild small rodents potentially serving as prey for owls and other animals.

A toxigenic bacterium of the same ribotype was isolated from two shrew-moles that constitute a major diet for the ural owl. This finding suggests that C. ulcerans could be transmitted from animals to birds through the food chain. Interestingly, in this study, C. ulcerans was not detected in mice, many more individuals of which were captured during the study. C. ulcerans was not detected from other bird species investigated. This may be explained by the feeding behavior of the birds. The owl is classified as raptors and is carnivorous, while the majority of other birds (i.e. except 22 raptors) eat plants, insects, larvae, fish, or aquatic organisms. If shrew-moles are natural hosts for C. ulcerans, the possibility of transmitting the bacteria from shrew-moles to non-carnivorous birds would be low.

By ribotyping (Fig. 2b; R2), PFGE and the sequence of the tox gene [24], the owl and mole isolates were found to form a group along with isolates from some other wild and free-roaming animals. The group consists of a killer whale isolate (Ran) [21], an isolate from a hunting dog [24] an isolate from a dog bred in a riverbed by a homeless person (dog0803) [6] and an isolate from a free-roaming cat (Cat2009-81) [24].

The other isolates were categorized into two groups (Fig. 2, Groups I and III), both of which contained human and companion animal isolates. All analytical methods employed in this study resulted in the same grouping, except that the group I was divided into two ribotypes (Fig. 2b, R1 and R4) [24].

So far, the present data suggest that the major part of circulating group II isolates is limited within wildlife and that the group is not likely to be an immediate threat to humans. However, the isolation of group II bacteria from a hunting dog (dog0907) [24], an outdoor-bred dog (dog0803) and a free-roaming cat suggests that cross infection between the wildlife and domestic animals may occur. Once a dog acquires C. ulcerans, the bacterium can be spread to other dogs [6]. Dogs are reportedly shown or suspected to be able to serve as sources for human infection, when placed in close contact with humans [7, 27, 28].

In this context, further investigation into the prevalence of C. ulcerans among wild animals will provide useful information on the source of C. ulcerans, track the potential source for human exposure, or at least, on revealing how the bacterium circulates in the natural environment.

Conclusions

We isolated toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans, a zoonotic pathogen, from ural owl and two Japanese shrew-moles, their prey animals. The isolates formed a single (group II) cluster with isolates from a hunting dog, an outdoor-bred dog and a free-roaming cat. Prey animals potentially serve as source of C. ulcerans infection in carnivorous birds, dogs and cats, possibly leading to human infection.

Methods

Sample collection from birds

Between May 2011 and March 2013, throat swabs were collected from 380 wild birds (Table 1). The birds were captured for protecting them from illness or injury, for bird banding using mist net, or by hand. The captured birds were released after minimal handling and sample collection. Subjects also included birds temporarily captured for several reasons. Throat swabs were stored in modified Amies preservation medium [SEEDSWAB γ (gamma) 2; “Eiken” (Eiken Chemical, Tokyo, Japan)] at room temperature. Sample collection from birds was carried out under permission of national administration in charge of wild life and environment (Kinki Regional Office of the Ministry of Environment of Japan). The bird part of this study included only sampling from birds captured in the wild environment and was not subject for institutional ethics committee. The handling of birds corresponded to SCAW category B (experiments on vertebrate animal species that are expected to produce little or no discomfort) [29]. All of the birds were released after sampling.

Sample collection from small animals

Between December 2012 and March 2013, throat swabs were collected from 36 small wild animals captured by a trap (H. B. Sherman Traps, Inc., Tallahassee, Florida, USA). Swabs were stored in the same way as those from birds. The animals were identified to the species level by observing their external anatomical morphology and by determining the DNA sequence of the D-loop non-coding region of mitochondrial DNA isolated from their hair [30]. Primers used for sequence determination were 5′-TCCCCACCATCAGCACCCAAAGC (forward) and 5′-TGGGCGGGTTGTTGGTTTCACGG (reverse). Sample collection from small animals was carried out under permission of prefectural administration in charge of wild life and environment (Chubu Office for Agriculture and Green of Osaka Prefectural Government). The animal part of this study included only sampling from animals captured in the wild environment and was not subject for institutional ethics committee. The handling of small animals corresponded to SCAW category B (experiments on vertebrate animal species that are expected to produce little or no discomfort) [29]. All of the animals were released after sampling.

Bacterial isolation and identification

Each specimen was inoculated onto sheep blood agar and Katsukawa medium [charcoal–tellurite blood agar containing heart infusion agar, 0.03 % (w/v) potassium tellurite, 10 % (v/v) sheep blood and 0.05 % activated charcoal, hereafter referred as K medium] [5, 6] and was incubated at 35 °C. Colonies suspected to represent C. ulcerans that appeared after 18–24 h on sheep blood agar and 24, 30 and 48 h on K medium were transferred to dextrose-stärke-saccharose agar medium [31] to evaluate glucose and sucrose fermentation. The isolates that were positive for glucose but negative for sucrose fermentation were then characterized by Gram staining, catalase and urease tests. Gram-positive as well as catalase- and urease-positive organisms were suspected to be C. ulcerans and subjected to further identification using API Coryne (SYSMEX bioMérieux, Tokyo, Japan) kit, followed by the determination of partial RNA polymerase β-subunit (rpoB) gene sequences [32].

Bacterial isolates and strains

Corynebacterium ulcerans isolates Owl1205, Mole1212-1 and Mole1212-2 were obtained in this study. Other strains are listed elsewhere [24]. These include novel isolates from wild animals, strains isolated from human and killer whale and from dogs during a survey in Osaka Prefecture.

Toxigenicity testing and nucleotide sequencing of tox gene

Toxigenicity testing was performed by modified Elek test, Vero cell cytotoxicity and neutralization tests [6]. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) targeting the gene for the A subunit of the diphtheria toxin (tox) [33] was used for screening the tox gene. For PCR-positive isolates, the entire tox gene was amplified with the primers toxFw and toxRv [21], and the nucleotide sequence of the amplified fragment was determined with primers placed at appropriate intervals. Tox gene sequences have been deposited to GenBank [Acc. No. AB926012.1 (Owl1205), AB926013.1 (Mole1212-1) and AB926014.1 (Mole1212-2)].

Ribotyping

Ribotyping of bacterial strains was performed as described by De Zoysa et al. [34] and Regnault et al. [35]. Genomic DNA from C. ulcerans was digested with BstEII (Roche Diagnostics), electrophoresed in an agarose gel, and transferred to HyBond Plus nylon membrane (Amersham Biosciences (GE Healthcare), Tokyo, Japan). The transferred DNA was then hybridized with a DIG-labeled OligoMix 5 probe mixture [36], and signals were detected with an alkaline phosphatase-conjugated anti-DIG antibody (Roche Diagnostics).

Antibiotic susceptibility

Antibiotic susceptibility tests were performed by the broth microdilution method using Dry Plate (Eiken Chemical) for benzylpenicillin (PCG), ampicillin (ABPC), cephalexin (CEX), cefepime (CFPM), cefotaxime (CTX), cefriaxione (CTRX), imipenem (IPM), vancomycin (VCM), gentamicin (GM), erythromycin (EM), ciprofloxacin (CPFX), tetracycline (TC), clindamycin (CLDM), sulfamethoxazole–trimethoprim (ST), rifampicin (RFP), quinupristin–dalfopristin (QPR/DPR), and linezolid (LZD). Sensitivities were assessed according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) standard criteria (M45-A) for Corynebacterium species. For two drugs, for which criteria are lacking, standards for similar drugs were applied (ABPC for PCG and CEX for CTX).

Declarations

Authors’ contributions

CK isolated the strains from the bird and animals. He also contributed in characterization and molecular analyses of the isolates. KU performed ribotyping and molecular analyses of the isolates. II, YK, TT and SN organized and carried out sample correction from birds and animals. TK and AY participated in characterization of the isolates. MI interpreted the data, drafted and finalized the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Eri Asai and Michiyo Fujisawa (Nakatsu Animal Hospital), Ryo Murakami (Bird Bander) and all other members contributing to capturing and sample collection from birds and animals. We are grateful to Tsuda Kyouyurin Kumiai (Association for Tsuda Common Forest) for permitting us to carry out sample collection in its property. This work was supported partly by Grants of Research on Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases (H25 -Shinko-Ippan-008), from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Infectious Diseases, Osaka Prefectural Institute of Public Health
(2)
Department of Microbiology, Osaka City Institute of Public Health and Environmental Sciences
(3)
Nature Conservation Club of Soenji
(4)
Bird Bander
(5)
Wild Living Thing Society of Hirakata
(6)
Department of Bacteriology II, National Institute of Infectious Diseases
(7)
Nakatsu Animal Hospital
(8)
Division of Biosafety Control and Research, National Institute of Infectious Diseases

References

  1. Henricson B, Segarra M, Garvin J, Burns J, Jenkins S, Kim C, Popovic T, Golaz A, Akey B. Toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae associated with an equine wound infection. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2000;12(3):253–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Leggett BA, De Zoysa A, Abbott YE, Leonard N, Markey B, Efstratiou A. Toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae isolated from a wound in a horse. Vet Rec. 2010;166(21):656–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control: Diphtheria. In. Edited by Surveillance Report: Annual epidemiological report on communicable diseases in Europe 2010. Stockholm: ECDC. 2010:133-135.Google Scholar
  4. Both L, Collins S, de Zoysa A, White J, Mandal S, Efstratiou A. Molecular and epidemiological review of toxigenic diphtheria infections in England between 2007 and 2013. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;53(2):567–72.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Katsukawa C, Kawahara R, Inoue K, Ishii A, Yamagishi H, Kida K, Nishino S, Nagahama S, Komiya T, Iwaki M, et al. Toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans Isolated from the domestic dog for the first time in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2009;62(2):171–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Katsukawa C, Komiya T, Yamagishi H, Ishii A, Nishino S, Nagahama S, Iwaki M, Yamamoto A, Takahashi M. Prevalence of Corynebacterium ulcerans in dogs in Osaka, Japan. J Med Microbiol. 2012;61:266–73.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Lartigue M-F, Monnet X, Le Flèche A, Grimont PAD, Benet J-J, Durrbach A, Fabre M, Nordmann P. Corynebacterium ulcerans in an immunocompromised patient with diphtheria and her dog. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43(2):999–1001.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Meinel DM, Konrad R, Berger A, König C, Schmidt-Wieland T, Hogardt M, Bischoff H, Ackermann N, Hörmansdorfer S, Krebs S, et al. Zoonotic transmission of toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans strain, Germany, 2012. Emerg Infect Dis. 2015;21(2):356–8.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Dias AASO, Silva FC, Pereira GA, Souza MC, Camello TCF, Damasceno JALD, Pacheco LGC, Miyoshi A, Azevedo VA, Hirata R, et al. Corynebacterium ulcerans isolated from an asymptomatic dog kept in an animal shelter in the metropolitan area of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2010;10(8):743–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. De Zoysa A, Hawkey PM, Engler K, George R, Mann G, Reilly W, Taylor D, Efstratiou A. Characterization of toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans strains isolated from humans and domestic cats in the United Kingdom. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43(9):4377.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Noguchi Y, Tsunoda A, Ken K, Komiya T, Yamamoto A, Takahashi M. A case of acute pharyngitis caused by Corynebacterium ulcerans, January 2009—Tokyo (in Japanese). Infect Agents Surveillance Rep. 2009;2009(30):188–9.Google Scholar
  12. Saeki J, Katsukawa C, Matsubayashi M, Nakanishi H, Furuya M, Tani H, Sasai K. The detection of toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans from cats with nasal inflammation in Japan. Epidemiol Infect. 2015;121:1–6.Google Scholar
  13. Vandentorren S, Guiso N, Badell E, Boisrenoult P, Micaelo M, Troché G, Lecouls P, Moquet MJ, Patey O, Belchior E. Toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans in a fatal human case and her feline contacts, France, March 2014. Euro Surveillance. 2014;19(38):20910.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Boschert V, Berger A, Konrad R, Huber I, Hörmansdorfer S, Zöls S, Eddiks M, Ritzmann M, Sing A. Corynebacterium species nasal carriage in pigs and their farmers in Bavaria, Germany: implications for public health. Vet Rec. 2014;175(10):248.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Schuhegger R, Schoerner C, Dlugaiczyk J, Lichtenfeld I, Trouillier A, Zeller-Peronnet V, Busch U, Berger A, Kugler R, Hörmansdorfer S, et al. Pigs as source for toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15(8):1314–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Hommez J, Devriese LA, Vaneechoutte M, Riegel P, Butaye P, Haesebrouck F. Identification of nonlipophilic corynebacteria isolated from dairy cows with mastitis. J Clin Microbiol. 1999;37(4):954–7.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Murakami K, Hata E, Hatama S, Wada Y, Ito M, Ishikawa Y, Kadota K. Eosinophilic granuloma with Splendore-Hoeppli material caused by toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans in a heifer. J Vet Med Sci. 2014;76(6):931–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Rau J, Blazey B, Contzen M, Sting R. Corynebacterium ulcerans infection in roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) (in German). Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2012;125(3–4):159–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Contzen M, Sting R, Blazey B, Rau J. Corynebacterium ulcerans from diseased wild boars. Zoonoses Public Health. 2011;58:479–88.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Morris WE, Uzal FA, Cipolla AL. Pyogranulomatous meningoencephalitis in a goat due to Corynebacterium ulcerans. Vet Rec. 2005;156(10):317–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Seto Y, Komiya T, Iwaki M, Kohda T, Mukamoto M, Takahashi M, Kozaki S. Properties of corynephage attachment site and molecular epidemiology of Corynebcterium ulcerans isolated from humans and animals in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2008;61(2):116–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Marini RP, Cassiday PK, Venezia J, Shen Z, Buckley EM, Peters Y, Taylor N, Dewhirst FE, Tondella ML, Fox JG. Corynebacterium ulcerans in ferrets. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;20(1):159–61.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Tejedor MT, Martin JL, Lupiola P, Gutierrez C. Caseous lymphadenitis caused by Corynebacterium ulcerans in the dromedary camel. Can Vet J. 2000;62:489–93.Google Scholar
  24. Katsukawa C, Komiya T, Umeda K, Goto M, Yanai T, Takahashi M, Yamamoto A, Iwaki M. Toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans isolated from a hunting dog and its diphtheria toxin antibody titer. Microbiol Immunol. 2016. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1348-0421.12364.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Bernard KA, Pacheco AL. In vitro activity of 22 antimicrobial agents against Corynebacterium and Microbacterium species referred to the Canadian National Microbiology Laboratory. Clin Microbiol Newslett. 2015;37(23):187–98.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Zakikhany K, Efstratiou A. Diphtheria in Europe: current problems and new challenges. Future Microbiol. 2012;7(5):595–607.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hogg RA, Wessels J, Hart J, Efstratiou A, De Zoysa A, Mann G, Allen T, Pritchard GC. Possible zoonotic transmission of toxigenic Corynebacterium ulcerans from companion animals in a human case of fatal diphtheria. Vet Rec. 2009;165(23):691–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Aaron L, Heurtebise F, Bachelier MN, Guimard Y. Pseudomembranous diphtheria caused by Corynebacterium ulcerans (in French). Rev Med Interne. 2006;27(4):333–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Anonymous. Consensus recommendations on effective institutional animal care and use committees. Lab Anim Sci. 1987;37:11–3.Google Scholar
  30. Stacy JE, Jorde PE, Steen H, Ims RA, Purvis A, Jakobsen KS. Lack of concordance between mtDNA gene flow and population density fluctuations in the bank vole. Mol Ecol. 1997;6(8):751–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Jacherts D. The DSS agar, a polyvalent culture medium for the differentiation of diphtherial and pseudodiphtherial bacteria. Zentralbl Bakteriol Orig. 1956;167(4):306–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Khamis A, Raoult D, La Scole B. rpoB gene sequencing for identification of Corynebacterium species. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42:3925–31.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Nakao H, Popovic T. Development of a direct PCR assay for detection of the diphtheria toxin gene. J Clin Microbiol. 1997;35(7):1651–5.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  34. De Zoysa A, Efstratiou A, George RC, Jahkola M, Vuopio-Varkila J, Deshevoi S, Tseneva GY, Rikushin Y. Molecular epidemiology of Corynebacterium diphtheriae from northwestern Russia and surrounding countries studied by using ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. J Clin Microbiol. 1995;33(5):1080–3.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Regnault B, Grimont F, Grimont PAD. Universal ribotyping method using a chemically labelled oligonucleotide probe mixture. Res Microbiol. 1997;148:649–59.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Grimont PAD, Grimont F, Efstratiou A, De Zoysa A, Mazurova IK, Ruckly C, Lejay-Collin M, Martin-Delautre S, Regnault B. members of the European Laboratory Working Group on Diphtheria: International nomenclature for Corynebacterium diphtheriae ribotypes. Res Microbiol. 2004;155:162–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Katsukawa et al. 2016

Advertisement