Standardization of a broth microdilution susceptibility testing method to determine minimum inhibitory concentrations of aquatic bacteria

54Citations
Citations of this article
105Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

A multiple laboratory study was conducted in accordance with the standards established by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), formerly the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS), for the development of quality control (QC) ranges using dilution antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods for bacterial isolates from aquatic animal species. QC ranges were established for Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 and Aeromonas salmonicida subsp. salmonicida ATCC 33658 when testing at 22, 28 and 35°C (E. coli only) for 10 different antimicrobial agents (ampicillin, enrofloxacin, erythromycin, florfenicol, flumequine, gentamicin, ormetoprim/sulfadimethoxine, oxolinic acid, oxytetracycline and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole). Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) QC ranges were determined using dry- and frozen-form 96-well plates and cation-adjusted Mueller-Hinton broth. These QC ranges were accepted by the CLSI/NCCLS Subcommittee on Veterinary Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in January 2004. This broth microdilution testing method represents the first standardized method for determining MICs of bacterial isolates whose preferred growth temperatures are below 35°C. Methods and QC ranges defined in this study will enable aquatic animal disease researchers to reliably compare quantitative susceptibility testing data between laboratories, and will be used to ensure both precision and inter-laboratory harmonization. © Inter-Research 2005.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Miller, R. A., Walker, R. D., Carson, J., Coles, M., Coyne, R., Dalsgaard, I., … Reimschuessel, R. (2005). Standardization of a broth microdilution susceptibility testing method to determine minimum inhibitory concentrations of aquatic bacteria. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 64(3), 211–222. https://doi.org/10.3354/dao064211

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free