A re-evaluation of M. prototuberculosis

Abstract

I do not accept the concept of M. prototuberculosis because seven well-documented species and subspecies have been described before (see references in Brosch et al. [14]), and because adding an additional 37 strains with virtually identical 16s rRNAs and very similar gene sequences should not initiate a redefinition of the whole group. I reject the hypothesis that strains of the MTBC are members of the smooth group, because the measurements of diversity are skewed by the recombinant segments identified in the smooth strains; this criticism lends further support to the rejection of the M. prototuberculosis concept. I find the calculation of the age of three million years for this group of bacteria flawed and, more important, dominated by recombinant segments in the smooth group; I see no evidence to suggest that tubercle bacilli were contemporaneous with early hominids in East Africa. The suggestion that the tubercle bacilli emerged in Africa is, in my opinion, unsupported by Gutierrez et al. [1]. However, the observation of recombination among the smooth group of strains is undeniable. © 2006 Noel H. Smith.