Different methodologies have been developed throughout the years to identify environmental microorganisms to improve bioremediation techniques, determine susceptibility profiles of bacteria in contaminated environments, and reduce the impact of microorganisms in ecosystems. Two methods of bacterial biochemical identification are compared and the susceptibility profile of bacteria, isolated from residential and industrial wastewater, is determined. Twenty-four bacteria were retrieved from the bacteria bank of the Environmental Microbiology Laboratory at the Institute of Biology (IB) of the Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil. Bacteria were identified by conventional biochemical tests and by the VITEK®2 automated system. Further, the susceptibility profile to antibiotics was also determined by the automated system. Six species of bacteria (Raoutella planticola, K. pneumoniae ssp. pneumoniae, Serratia marcescens, Raoutella sp., E. cloacae and Klebsiella oxytoca) were identified by conventional biochemical tests, while three species of bacteria (K. pneumoniae ssp. pneumoniae, S. marcescens and K. oxytoca) were identified by VITEK®2 automated system. VITEK®2 indicated agreement in 19 (79.17%) isolates and difference in five (20.83%) isolates when compared to results from conventional biochemical tests. Further, antibiotic susceptibility profile results showed that all isolates (100%) were resistant to at least one out of the 18 antibiotics tested by VITEK®2. Thus, no multi-resistant bacteria that may be used in effluent treatment systems or in bioremediation processes have been reported. Results indicate VITEK ® 2 automated system as a potential methodology in the determination of susceptibility profile and identification of environmental bacteria.
Ravea, A. F. G., Kussb, A. V., Peila, G. H. S., Ladeirac, S. R., Villarreald, J. P. V., & Nascentee, P. S. (2019). Biochemical identification techniques and antibiotic susceptibility profile of lipolytic ambiental bacteria from effluents. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 79(4), 555–565. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.05616