Identification of Staphylococcus Species Micrococcus PDF
Identification of Staphylococcus Species Micrococcus PDF
Identification of Staphylococcus Species Micrococcus PDF
Acknowledgments
UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (SMIs) are developed under the
auspices of Public Health England (PHE) working in partnership with the National
Health Service (NHS), Public Health Wales and with the professional organisations
whose logos are displayed below and listed on the website https://www.gov.uk/uk-
standards-for-microbiology-investigations-smi-quality-and-consistency-in-clinical-
laboratories. SMIs are developed, reviewed and revised by various working groups
which are overseen by a steering committee (see
https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/standards-for-microbiology-investigations-
steering-committee).
The contributions of many individuals in clinical, specialist and reference laboratories
who have provided information and comments during the development of this
document are acknowledged. We are grateful to the Medical Editors for editing the
medical content.
For further information please contact us at:
Standards Unit
Microbiology Services
Public Health England
61 Colindale Avenue
London NW9 5EQ
E-mail: standards@phe.gov.uk
Website: https://www.gov.uk/uk-standards-for-microbiology-investigations-smi-quality-
and-consistency-in-clinical-laboratories
UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations are produced in association with:
Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 9
3 IDENTIFICATION ....................................................................................................... 18
5 REPORTING .............................................................................................................. 24
6 REFERRALS.............................................................................................................. 25
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 27
Amendment Table
Each SMI method has an individual record of amendments. The current amendments
are listed on this page. The amendment history is available from
standards@phe.gov.uk.
New or revised documents should be controlled within the laboratory in accordance
with the local quality management system.
Background to SMIs
SMIs comprise a collection of recommended algorithms and procedures covering all
stages of the investigative process in microbiology from the pre-analytical (clinical
syndrome) stage to the analytical (laboratory testing) and post analytical (result
interpretation and reporting) stages.
Syndromic algorithms are supported by more detailed documents containing advice
on the investigation of specific diseases and infections. Guidance notes cover the
clinical background, differential diagnosis, and appropriate investigation of particular
clinical conditions. Quality guidance notes describe laboratory processes which
underpin quality, for example assay validation.
Standardisation of the diagnostic process through the application of SMIs helps to
assure the equivalence of investigation strategies in different laboratories across the
UK and is essential for public health surveillance, research and development activities.
#
Microbiology is used as a generic term to include the two GMC-recognised specialties of Medical Microbiology (which includes
Bacteriology, Mycology and Parasitology) and Medical Virology.
Quality Assurance
NICE has accredited the process used by the SMI Working Groups to produce SMIs.
The accreditation is applicable to all guidance produced since October 2009. The
process for the development of SMIs is certified to ISO 9001:2008.
SMIs represent a good standard of practice to which all clinical and public health
microbiology laboratories in the UK are expected to work. SMIs are NICE accredited
and represent neither minimum standards of practice nor the highest level of complex
laboratory investigation possible. In using SMIs, laboratories should take account of
local requirements and undertake additional investigations where appropriate. SMIs
help laboratories to meet accreditation requirements by promoting high quality
practices which are auditable. SMIs also provide a reference point for method
development.
The performance of SMIs depends on competent staff and appropriate quality
reagents and equipment. Laboratories should ensure that all commercial and in-house
tests have been validated and shown to be fit for purpose. Laboratories should
participate in external quality assessment schemes and undertake relevant internal
quality control procedures.
Legal Statement
Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation of SMIs, PHE and any supporting
organisation, shall, to the greatest extent possible under any applicable law, exclude
liability for all losses, costs, claims, damages or expenses arising out of or connected
with the use of an SMI or any information contained therein. If alterations are made to
an SMI, it must be made clear where and by whom such changes have been made.
The evidence base and microbial taxonomy for the SMI is as complete as possible at
the time of issue. Any omissions and new material will be considered at the next
review. These standards can only be superseded by revisions of the standard,
legislative action, or by NICE accredited guidance.
SMIs are Crown copyright which should be acknowledged where appropriate.
Scope of Document
This SMI describes the identification of Staphylococcus species, Micrococcus species
and Rothia species. Details on MRSA screening can be found in B 29 - Investigation
of Specimens for Screening MRSA.
For the identification of catalase negative Gram positive cocci, see ID 4 - Identification
of Streptococcus species, Enterococcus species and Morphologically Similar
Organisms.
This SMI should be used in conjunction with other SMIs.
Introduction
Taxonomy
Taxonomically, the genus Staphylococcus is in the bacterial family
Staphylococcaceae, which includes five lesser known genera, Gemella,
Jeotgalicoccus, Macrococcus, Nosocomiicoccus and Salinicoccus. There are currently
47 recognised species of staphylococci and 21 subspecies most of which are found
only in lower mammals1. The staphylococci most frequently associated with human
infection are S. aureus, S. epidermidis and S. saprophyticus. Other Staphylococcus
species may also be associated with human infection2.
The genus Micrococcus belongs to the bacterial family Micrococcaceae which
currently contains 16 species. These have been isolated from human skin, animal and
dairy products as well as environment (water, dust and soil)3. Some of these species
have been re-classified to other genera. Former members of the genus Micrococcus,
now assigned to other genera, include Arthrobacter agilis, Nesterenkonia halobia,
Kocuria kristinae, K. rosea, K. varians, Kytococcus sedentarius, and Dermacoccus
nishinomiyaensis. The Micrococcus species that are associated with infections are
Micrococcus luteus and Micrococcus lylae.
The genus Rothia belonged to the bacterial family Actinomycetaceae as described by
Georg and Brown in 1967 but more recent molecular studies placed the genus in the
family Micrococcaceae, suborder Micrococcineae, order Actinomycetales, subclass
Actinobacteridae and class Actinobacteria. It is therefore in the same family as the
genera Micrococcus, Arthrobacter, Kocuria, Nesterenkonia, Renibacterium and
Stomatococcus, all of which show characteristic signature nucleotides in their 16S
rDNA sequences4. There are currently 6 species, Rothia dentocariosa and Rothia
mucilaginosa are the only two which have been known to cause infections in humans5.
Characteristics
Staphylococcus species are Gram positive, non-motile, non-sporing cocci of varying
size occurring singly, in pairs and in irregular clusters. Colonies are opaque and may
be white or cream and occasionally yellow or orange. The optimum growth
temperature is 30C-37C. They are facultative anaerobes and have a fermentative
metabolism. Staphylococcus species are usually catalase positive and are also
oxidase negative with the exception of the S. sciuri group (S. sciuri, S. lentus and
S. vitulinus), S. fleuretti and the Macrococcus group to which S. caseolyticus has been
assigned2,6,7. This is also a distinguishing factor from the genus streptococci, which
are catalase negative, and have a different cell wall composition to staphylococci.
Nitrate is often reduced to nitrite. Some species are susceptible to lysis by lysostaphin
but not lysozyme and are able to grow in 6.5% sodium chloride. Some species
produce extracellular toxins. Staphylococci may be identified by the production of
deoxyribonuclease (DNase) and/or a heat-stable DNase (thermostable nuclease)8.
Multi resistance to antibiotics also occurs in some strains of S. epidermidis which are
thermostable nuclease negative. S. saprophyticus, S. cohnii and S. sciuri groups are
generally novobiocin resistant as is S. hominis subsp. novobiosepticus22.
Staphylococcus pasteuri can be phenotypically distinguished from all of the other
novobiocin-susceptible staphylococci except S. warneri, from which it can only be
differentiated by genotyping23.
Staphylococcus epidermidis
S. epidermidis are approximately 0.5 to 1.5m in diameter and arranged in grape-like
clusters. They are facultative anaerobes that can grow by aerobic respiration or by
fermentation. Some strains may not ferment.
It forms greyish-white, raised, circular, smooth, glistening, and translucent to slightly
opaque, cohesive colonies approximately 12mm in diameter after overnight
incubation, and is non-haemolytic on blood agar. They grow well at NaCl
concentrations up to 7.5%, poorly at 10% and fail to grow at 15%. They are positive
for catalase, urease and exhibit a weak positive reaction for the nitrate reduction test.
They are negative for coagulase, oxidase and gelatin hydrolysis tests. They utilize
glucose, fructose, sucrose, and lactose to form acid products aerobically. In the
presence of lactose, they will also produce gas.
They are either susceptible or slightly resistant to lysostaphin and are resistant to
lysozyme.
S. epidermidis is sensitive to novobiocin, and this test distinguishes it from
Staphylococcus saprophyticus, which is coagulase negative, as well, but novobiocin
resistant24.
Staphylococcus saprophyticus
They are positive for catalase and urease tests while they are negative for motility,
coagulase, nitrate reduction and oxidase tests. They utilize fructose, maltose, sucrose
and trehalose to form acid products. They grow well on 10% NaCl agar, but only 11-
89% strains tolerate 15% NaCl. Colonies appear as raised to slightly convex, circular,
usually entire, 4.0 to 9.0mm in diameter, smooth, glistening, and usually opaque.
Colony pigment is variable; however, most strains are not pigmented or might have a
slight yellow tint which increases in intensity with age.
Two subspecies for S. saprophyticus exist: S. saprophyticus subsp. bovis and
S. saprophyticus subsp. saprophyticus, the latter is more commonly found in human
UTIs. S. saprophyticus subsp. saprophyticus is distinguished by its being nitrate
reductase and pyrrolidonyl arylamidase negative while S. saprophyticus subsp. bovis
is nitrate reductase and pyrolidonyl arymamidase positive25.
S. saprophyticus is resistant to the antibiotic novobiocin, a characteristic that is used in
laboratory identification to distinguish it from S. epidermidis, which is also coagulase
negative but novobiocin sensitive22.
Micrococcus species
Micrococcus species are strictly aerobic Gram positive cocci arranged in tetrads or
irregular clusters, not in chains and cells range from 0.5 to 3m in diameter. They are
seldom motile and are non-sporing. They are also catalase positive and often oxidase
positive, although weakly. Micrococci may be distinguished from staphylococci by a
modified oxidase test26,27. Their colonies are usually pigmented in shades of yellow or
red and grow on simple media. The optimum growth temperature is 25-37C. They
Bacteriology Identification | ID 7 | Issue no: 3 | Issue date: 12.11.14 | Page: 12 of 32
UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations | Issued by the Standards Unit, Public Health England
Identification of Staphylococcus species, Micrococcus species and Rothia species
Principles of Identification
Presumptive staphylococci need to be quickly differentiated into two groups:
Probable S. aureus - a potential pathogen when isolated from most sites
Other staphylococci - usually not significant in skin and superficial wound swab
sites, but a possible pathogen in some circumstances
Staphylococcus aureus has traditionally been identified by tube coagulase tests that
detect staphylocoagulase or "free coagulase". However, detection of surface proteins
such as clumping factor (slide coagulase test) and/or protein A (commercial latex
tests) may be used for rapid identification. Inclusion of latex particles sensitized with
antibodies against specific capsular antigens has enabled commercial manufacturers
to improve the sensitivity of latex tests to detect atypical strains of S. aureus and
MRSA that fail to express the major characteristics listed above35. Positive results or
suspected erroneous slide tests may be confirmed by a tube coagulase test.
Full molecular identification using for example, MALDI-TOF MS can be used to identify
CoNS isolates to species level.
Typing and differentiation between strains of S. aureus can be achieved using a range
of molecular techniques eg spa typing, Pulsed Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE),
Multiple-Locus Variable Number Tandem Repeat Analysis (MLVA), Multi-locus
sequence typing (MLST), Microarrays, Next Generation Sequencing, etc36.
Technical Information/Limitations
Agar Media
The use of conventional media such as blood agar has the advantage that they may
also be useful for the simultaneous isolation of other pathogens such as streptococci.
The disadvantage of such media is that confirmatory tests are necessary to
differentiate S. aureus from other staphylococci35. Performing such tests on all
colonies resembling staphylococci can be time-consuming and labour intensive.
The use of chromogenic media, if sufficiently sensitive and specific, can potentially
reduce the number of confirmatory tests and achieve isolation and presumptive
identification in a single step. Another advantage is that they require fewer reagents
for confirmation of suspect colonies of S. aureus and hence may be cost effective37,38.
Chromogenic media for S. aureus may be supplemented with appropriate
antimicrobials (eg oxacillin or cefoxitin) for the detection of MRSA39.
Note: Chromogenic media are affected by direct light and plates should be stored in
the dark and not left in the light long before or after inoculation.
Coagulase test
S. aureus is differentiated from other staphylococci by the coagulase test. However it
is now known that not all S. aureus are coagulase positive and not all coagulase
positive staphylococci are S. aureus40.
S. lugdunensis is coagulase negative but some strains may be slide coagulase or
clumping factor positive.
For the tube coagulase test, citrate-utilizing organisms such as Enterococcus faecalis,
Pseudomonas species, Serratia marcescens, and strains of Streptococcus will clot
citrated plasma41.
S. hyicus, S. intermedius, S. pseudintermedius and S. schleiferi may be tube
coagulase positive.
1 Safety Considerations42-58
Refer to current guidance on the safe handling of all organisms documented in this
SMI.
Laboratory procedures that give rise to infectious aerosols must be conducted in a
microbiological safety cabinet50.
The above guidance should be supplemented with local COSHH and risk
assessments.
Compliance with postal and transport regulations is essential.
2 Target Organisms
Staphylococcus species reported to have caused human infections13,21,22,59-64
S. aureus group - Staphylococcus aureus subsp aureus, Staphylococcus aureus
subsp anaerobius
S. epidermidis group - Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus capitis subsp
capitis, Staphylococcus capitis subsp urealyticus, Staphylococcus caprae,
Staphylococcus saccharolyticus
S. saprophyticus group - Staphylococcus saprophyticus subsp saprophyticus,
Staphylococcus cohnii subsp cohnii, Staphylococcus cohnii subsp urealyticus,
Staphylococcus xylosus
S. hyicus-intermedius group - Staphylococcus hyicus, Staphylococcus intermedius,
Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, Staphylococcus schleiferi subsp coagulans,
Staphylococcus schleiferi subsp schleiferi
S. simulans group - Staphylococcus simulans
S. haemolyticus group - Staphylococcus hominis subsp hominis, Staphylococcus
hominis subsp novobiosepticus, Staphylococcus haemolyticus
S. lugdunensis group - Staphylococcus lugdunensis
S. warneri group - Staphylococcus warneri, Staphylococcus pasteuri
S. auricularis group - Staphylococcus auricularis
S. carnosus group - Staphylococcus massiliensis, Staphylococcus pettenkoferi
S. sciuri group - Staphylococcus sciuri subsp sciuri, Staphylococcus sciuri subsp
rodentium,
Staphylococcus sciuri subsp carnaticus, Staphylococcus lentus, Staphylococcus
vitulinus
Other species reported to have caused human infections- Micrococcus luteus,
Micrococcus lylae, Micrococcus mortus (not officially recognised), Rothia
mucilaginosa, Rothia dentocariosa
3 Identification
3.1 Microscopic Appearance
Gram stain (TP 39 - Staining Procedures)
Gram positive cocci occurring singly, in pairs, tetrads or in irregular clusters.
provides a valuable tool for the rapid and accurate characterization of staphylococci
which is essential in modern hospital practice73. This approach would also be valuable
for surveys.
Rapid Methods
A variety of current rapid typing methods have been developed for isolates from
clinical samples; these include molecular techniques such as Pulsed- Field Gel
Electrophoresis (PFGE), 16S rRNA gene sequencing, PCR- restriction fragment
length Polymorphism (PCR-RFLP), spa typing, Multiple-Locus Variable Number
Tandem Repeat Analysis (MLVA) and Multi-locus sequence typing (MLST). All of
these approaches enable subtyping of strains, but do so with different accuracy,
discriminatory power, and reproducibility.
For further molecular investigation, Microarray analysis, single nucleotide
polymorphism (SNPs) these are looking to replace PFGE and MLVA) and even
whole-genome sequencing (WGS) may be options, as new technology (eg Ion Torrent
Sequencing) allows WGS results within a few days36.
However, some of these methods remain accessible to reference laboratories only
and are difficult to implement for routine bacterial identification in a clinical laboratory.
16S rRNA gene sequencing
16S rRNA gene sequences has been useful in phylogenetic studies at the genus
level, its use has been questioned in studies at the Staphylococcus species level18.
This stems from the fact that closely related species may have identical 16S rRNA
sequences or, alternatively, that divergent 16S rRNA sequences may exist within a
single organism74.
S. caprae and S. capitis cannot be distinguished by their 16S rRNA gene sequences.
Similarly, some Staphylococcus taxa have the same 16S rRNA gene sequences in
variable regions V1, V3, V7, and V9, with identical sequences occurring in, eg
S. vitulinus, S. saccharolyticus, S. capitis subsp urealyticus, S. caprae, the two
subspecies of S. aureus, and the two subspecies of S. cohnii75.
PCR- restriction fragment length Polymorphism (PCR-RFLP)
Due to the limited number of stable features that can be used for species
discrimination, many taxa remain difficult to distinguish from one another and are
misidentified by phenotypic tests.
However, restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis of the dnaJ gene
of PCR products has been reported for use for the identification of staphylococci. This
has proved to be an adequate tool for the correct identification of almost all prevalent
species and subspecies of Staphylococcus, irrespective of their phenotypic
characterization. This method requires only PCR and one or two enzymes and thus is
Bacteriology Identification | ID 7 | Issue no: 3 | Issue date: 12.11.14 | Page: 20 of 32
UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations | Issued by the Standards Unit, Public Health England
Identification of Staphylococcus species, Micrococcus species and Rothia species
Gram stain
Gram positive cocci in clusters Suspected
If there is a different Gram stain S. aureus
appearance refer to the appropriate UKSMI
Catalase
Negative Positive
Catalase negative
S. aureus subsp anaerobius S.capitis Catalase positive
S. saccharolyticus All Staphylococcus,
(grows anaerobically) Micrococcus and Rothia
Rothia dentocariosa* species
Consider other organisms
Novobiocin
sensitivity test
Resistant
S. saprophyticus,
S. sciuri and
Sensitive
S. cohnii groups
All Staphylococcus species
S. hominis subsp.
novobiosepticus
S. cohnii group
Negative Positive
S. aureus
Coagulase-negative S. hyicus*
Staphylococcus species S. intermedius*
S. schleiferi subsp coagulans*
5 Reporting
5.1 Presumptive Identification
If appropriate growth characteristics, colonial appearance, Gram stain of the culture,
catalase and slide coagulase or latex agglutination results are demonstrated.
5.4 CCDC
Refer to local Memorandum of Understanding.
6 Referrals
6.1 Reference Laboratory
Contact appropriate devolved national reference laboratory for information on the tests
available, turnaround times, transport procedure and any other requirements for
sample submission:
Staphylococcus Reference Service
Antimicrobial Resistance and Healthcare Associated Infections Reference Unit
Microbiology Services
Public Health England
61 Colindale Avenue
London
NW9 5EQ
Contact PHEs main switchboard: Tel. +44 (0) 20 8200 4400
England and Wales
https://www.gov.uk/specialist-and-reference-microbiology-laboratory-tests-and-
services
Scotland
http://www.hps.scot.nhs.uk/reflab/index.aspx
Northern Ireland
http://www.belfasttrust.hscni.net/Laboratory-MortuaryServices.htm
References
1. Prax M, Lee CY, Bertram R. An update on the molecular genetics toolbox for staphylococci.
Microbiology 2013;159:421-35.
3. Euzeby,JP. List of Prokaryotic names with standing in Nomenclature- Genus Micrococcus. 2013.
4. von GA. Rothia dentocariosa: taxonomy and differential diagnosis. Clin Microbiol Infect
2004;10:399-402.
5. Euzeby,JP. List of prokaryotic names with standing in Nomenclature- Genus Rothia. 2013.
6. Webster JA, Bannerman TL, Hubner RJ, Ballard DN, Cole EM, Bruce JL, et al. Identification of
the Staphylococcus sciuri species group with EcoRI fragments containing rRNA sequences and
description of Staphylococcus vitulus sp. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1994;44:454-60.
8. Holt JG. Gram-Positive cocci. In: Holt JG, Krieg NR, Sneath PHA, Staley JT, Williams ST, editors.
Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. 9th ed. Baltimore; 1994. p. 527-37.
9. Fontana C, Cellini L, Dainelli B. Twelve aberrant strains of Staphylococcus aureus subsp. aureus
from clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol 1993;31:2105-9.
10. Fuente De LA R, Suarez G, Schleifer KH. Staphylococcus aureus subsp. anaerobius subsp. nov.,
the causal agent of abscess disease of sheep. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology
1985;35:99-102.
11. Vandenesch F, Lebeau C, Bes M, McDevitt D, Greenland T, Novick RP, et al. Coagulase
deficiency in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus involves both transcriptional and post-
transcriptional defects. J Med Microbiol 1994;40:344-9.
13. Ben Zakour NL, Beatson SA, van den Broek AH, Thoday KL, Fitzgerald JR. Comparative
genomics of the Staphylococcus intermedius group of animal pathogens. Front Cell Infect
Microbiol 2012;2:44.
14. HALE JH. Studies on staphylococcus mutation: a naturally occurring "G" gonidial variant and its
carbon dioxide requirements. Br J Exp Pathol 1951;32:307-13.
15. Proctor RA, von Eiff C, Kahl BC, Becker K, McNamara P, Herrmann M, et al. Small colony
variants: a pathogenic form of bacteria that facilitates persistent and recurrent infections. Nat Rev
Microbiol 2006;4:295-305.
17. Rupp ME, Archer GL. Coagulase-negative staphylococci: pathogens associated with medical
progress. Clin Infect Dis 1994;19:231-43.
19. Christensen GD, Parisi JT, Bisno AL, Simpson WA, Beachey EH. Characterization of clinically
significant strains of coagulase-negative staphylococci. J Clin Microbiol 1983;18:258-69.
20. Jansen B, Schumacher-Perdreau F, Peters G, Pulverer G. New aspects in the pathogenesis and
prevention of polymer-associated foreign-body infections caused by coagulase-negative
staphylococci. J Invest Surg 1989;2:361-80.
21. Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM, et al. Gram-Positive Cocci Part 1: Staphylococci and
Related Gram-Positive Cocci. Koneman's Colour Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology.
6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006. p. 623-71.
22. Kloos W, Bannerman TL. Staphylococcus and Micrococcus. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Pfaller MA,
Tenover FC, Yolken RH, editors. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 7th ed. Washington DC:
American Society for Microbiology; 1999. p. 264-82.
24. Schleifer KH, Kloos WE. Isolation and Characterization of Staphylococci from Human Skin.
International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 1975;25:50-61.
25. Hajek V, Meugnier H, Bes M, Brun Y, Fiedler F, Chmela Z, et al. Staphylococcus saprophyticus
subsp. bovis subsp. nov., isolated from bovine nostrils. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1996;46:792-6.
26. Baker JS. Comparison of various methods for differentiation of staphylococci and micrococci. J
Clin Microbiol 1984;19:875-9.
27. Faller A, Schleifer KH. Modified oxidase and benzidine tests for separation of staphylococci from
micrococci. J Clin Microbiol 1981;13:1031-5.
28. Wieser M, Denner EB, Kampfer P, Schumann P, Tindall B, Steiner U, et al. Emended
descriptions of the genus Micrococcus, Micrococcus luteus (Cohn 1872) and Micrococcus lylae
(Kloos et al. 1974). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2002;52:629-37.
29. Kloos WE, Tornabene TG, Schleifer KH. Isolation and characterization of Micrococci from human
skin, including two new species: Micrococus lylae and Micrococcus kristinae. International
Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 1974;24:79-101.
30. Georg LK, Brown JM. Rothia, Gen. Nov. an aerobic genus of the family actinomycetaceae.
International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology 1967;17:79-88.
31. Funke G, von Graevenitz A, Clarridge JE, III, Bernard KA. Clinical microbiology of coryneform
bacteria. Clin Microbiol Rev 1997;10:125-59.
32. van Tiel FH, Slangen BF, Schouten HC, Jacobs JA. Study of Stomatococcus mucilaginosus
isolated in a hospital ward using phenotypic characterization. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis
1995;14:193-8.
33. Collins MD, Hutson RA, Baverud V, Falsen E. Characterization of a Rothia-like organism from a
mouse: description of Rothia nasimurium sp. nov. and reclassification of Stomatococcus
mucilaginosus as Rothia mucilaginosa comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000;50 Pt 3:1247-51.
34. Ruoff KL. Miscellaneous catalase-negative, gram-positive cocci: emerging opportunists. J Clin
Microbiol 2002;40:1129-33.
35. Personne P, Bes M, Lina G, Vandenesch F, Brun Y, Etienne J. Comparative performances of six
agglutination kits assessed by using typical and atypical strains of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin
Microbiol 1997;35:1138-40.
36. Stefani S, Chung DR, Lindsay JA, Friedrich AW, Kearns AM, Westh H, et al. Meticillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): global epidemiology and harmonisation of typing methods. Int J
Antimicrob Agents 2012;39:273-82.
37. Perry JD, Rennison C, Butterworth LA, Hopley AL, Gould FK. Evaluation of S. aureus ID, a new
chromogenic agar medium for detection of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol
2003;41:5695-8.
38. Carricajo A, Treny A, Fonsale N, Bes M, Reverdy ME, Gille Y, et al. Performance of the
chromogenic medium CHROMagar Staph Aureus and the Staphychrom coagulase test in the
detection and identification of Staphylococcus aureus in clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol
2001;39:2581-3.
39. Kluytmans J, Van GA, Willemse P, Van KP. Performance of CHROMagar selective medium and
oxacillin resistance screening agar base for identifying Staphylococcus aureus and detecting
methicillin resistance. J Clin Microbiol 2002;40:2480-2.
40. Brown DF, Edwards Di, Hawkey PM, Morrison D, Ridgway GL, Towner KJ, et al. Guidelines for
the laboratory diagnosis and susceptibility testing of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
(MRSA). J Antimicrob Chemother 2005;56:1000-18.
41. Yrios JW. Comparison of rabbit and pig plasma in the tube coagulase test. J Clin Microbiol
1977;5:221-4.
42. European Parliament. UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (SMIs) use the term "CE
marked leak proof container" to describe containers bearing the CE marking used for the
collection and transport of clinical specimens. The requirements for specimen containers are
given in the EU in vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive (98/79/EC Annex 1 B 2.1) which
states: "The design must allow easy handling and, where necessary, reduce as far as possible
contamination of, and leakage from, the device during use and, in the case of specimen
receptacles, the risk of contamination of the specimen. The manufacturing processes must be
appropriate for these purposes".
43. Official Journal of the European Communities. Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. 7-12-1998. p. 1-37.
44. Health and Safety Executive. Safe use of pneumatic air tube transport systems for pathology
specimens. 9/99.
45. Department for transport. Transport of Infectious Substances, 2011 Revision 5. 2011.
46. World Health Organization. Guidance on regulations for the Transport of Infectious Substances
2013-2014. 2012.
47. Home Office. Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act. 2001 (as amended).
48. Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. The Approved List of Biological Agents. Health
and Safety Executive. 2013. p. 1-32
49. Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. Infections at work: Controlling the risks. Her
Majesty's Stationery Office. 2003.
50. Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. Biological agents: Managing the risks in
laboratories and healthcare premises. Health and Safety Executive. 2005.
51. Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens. Biological Agents: Managing the Risks in
Laboratories and Healthcare Premises. Appendix 1.2 Transport of Infectious Substances -
Revision. Health and Safety Executive. 2008.
52. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for Safe Work Practices in Human and
Animal Medical Diagnostic Laboratories. MMWR Surveill Summ 2012;61:1-102.
53. Health and Safety Executive. Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations. The
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002. 5th ed. HSE Books; 2002.
54. Health and Safety Executive. Five Steps to Risk Assessment: A Step by Step Guide to a Safer
and Healthier Workplace. HSE Books. 2002.
55. Health and Safety Executive. A Guide to Risk Assessment Requirements: Common Provisions in
Health and Safety Law. HSE Books. 2002.
56. Health Services Advisory Committee. Safe Working and the Prevention of Infection in Clinical
Laboratories and Similar Facilities. HSE Books. 2003.
57. British Standards Institution (BSI). BS EN12469 - Biotechnology - performance criteria for
microbiological safety cabinets. 2000.
58. British Standards Institution (BSI). BS 5726:2005 - Microbiological safety cabinets. Information to
be supplied by the purchaser and to the vendor and to the installer, and siting and use of
cabinets. Recommendations and guidance. 24-3-2005. p. 1-14
60. Al MM, Raoult D, Roux V. Staphylococcus massiliensis sp. nov., isolated from a human brain
abscess. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2010;60:1066-72.
61. Stepanovic S, Jezek P, Dakic I, Vukovic D, Seifert L. Staphylococcus sciuri: an unusual cause of
pelvic inflammatory disease. Int J STD AIDS 2005;16:452-3.
62. Dakic I, Morrison D, Vukovic D, Savic B, Shittu A, Jezek P, et al. Isolation and molecular
characterization of Staphylococcus sciuri in the hospital environment. J Clin Microbiol
2005;43:2782-5.
63. Stepanovic S, Dakic I, Morrison D, Hauschild T, Jezek P, Petras P, et al. Identification and
characterization of clinical isolates of members of the Staphylococcus sciuri group. J Clin
Microbiol 2005;43:956-8.
64. Vandenesch F, Lebeau C, Bes M, Lina G, Lina B, Greenland T, et al. Clotting activity in
Staphylococcus schleiferi subspecies from human patients. J Clin Microbiol 1994;32:388-92.
65. Bocher S, Tonning B, Skov RL, Prag J. Staphylococcus lugdunensis, a common cause of skin
and soft tissue infections in the community. J Clin Microbiol 2009;47:946-50.
66. Barbuddhe SB, Maier T, Schwarz G, Kostrzewa M, Hof H, Domann E, et al. Rapid identification
and typing of listeria species by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass
spectrometry. Appl Environ Microbiol 2008;74:5402-7.
67. Dubois D, Leyssene D, Chacornac JP, Kostrzewa M, Schmit PO, Talon R, et al. Identification of a
variety of Staphylococcus species by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight
mass spectrometry. J Clin Microbiol 2010;48:941-5.
68. Gribaldo S, Cookson B, Saunders N, Marples R, Stanley J. Rapid identification by specific PCR
of coagulase-negative staphylococcal species important in hospital infection. J Med Microbiol
1997;46:45-53.
69. Edwards KJ, Kaufmann ME, Saunders NA. Rapid and accurate identification of coagulase-
negative staphylococci by real-time PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:3047-51.
70. Stepan J, Pantucek R, Doskar J. Molecular diagnostics of clinically important staphylococci. Folia
Microbiol (Praha) 2004;49:353-86.
72. Hirotaki S, Sasaki T, Kuwahara-Arai K, Hiramatsu K. Rapid and accurate identification of human-
associated staphylococci by use of multiplex PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:3627-31.
73. Pichon B, Hill R, Laurent F, Larsen AR, Skov RL, Holmes M, et al. Development of a real-time
quadruplex PCR assay for simultaneous detection of nuc, Panton-Valentine leucocidin (PVL),
mecA and homologue mecALGA251. J Antimicrob Chemother 2012;67:2338-41.
76. Tenover FC, Arbeit R, Archer G, Biddle J, Byrne S, Goering R, et al. Comparison of traditional
and molecular methods of typing isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol
1994;32:407-15.
78. Murchan S, Kaufmann ME, Deplano A, de RR, Struelens M, Zinn CE, et al. Harmonization of
pulsed-field gel electrophoresis protocols for epidemiological typing of strains of methicillin-
resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a single approach developed by consensus in 10 European
laboratories and its application for tracing the spread of related strains. J Clin Microbiol
2003;41:1574-85.
79. Shopsin B, Gomez M, Montgomery SO, Smith DH, Waddington M, Dodge DE, et al. Evaluation of
protein A gene polymorphic region DNA sequencing for typing of Staphylococcus aureus strains.
J Clin Microbiol 1999;37:3556-63.
80. Harmsen D, Claus H, Witte W, Rothganger J, Claus H, Turnwald D, et al. Typing of methicillin-
resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a university hospital setting by using novel software for spa
repeat determination and database management. J Clin Microbiol 2003;41:5442-8.
81. Koreen L, Ramaswamy SV, Graviss EA, Naidich S, Musser JM, Kreiswirth BN. spa typing method
for discriminating among Staphylococcus aureus isolates: implications for use of a single marker
to detect genetic micro- and macrovariation. J Clin Microbiol 2004;42:792-9.
82. Chassain B, Lemee L, Didi J, Thiberge JM, Brisse S, Pons JL, et al. Multilocus sequence typing
analysis of Staphylococcus lugdunensis implies a clonal population structure. J Clin Microbiol
2012;50:3003-9.
83. Spence RP, Wright V, Ala-Aldeen DA, Turner DP, Wooldridge KG, James R. Validation of
virulence and epidemiology DNA microarray for identification and characterization of
Staphylococcus aureus isolates. J Clin Microbiol 2008;46:1620-7.
84. Koser CU, Ellington MJ, Cartwright EJ, Gillespie SH, Brown NM, Farrington M, et al. Routine use
of microbial whole genome sequencing in diagnostic and public health microbiology. PLoS
Pathog 2012;8:e1002824.
85. Harris SR, Cartwright EJ, Torok ME, Holden MT, Brown NM, Ogilvy-Stuart AL, et al. Whole-
genome sequencing for analysis of an outbreak of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a
descriptive study. Lancet Infect Dis 2013;13:130-6.
86. Public Health England. Laboratory Reporting to Public Health England: A Guide for Diagnostic
Laboratories. 2013. p. 1-37.
87. Department of Health. Health Protection Legislation (England) Guidance. 2010. p. 1-112.
88. Scottish Government. Public Health (Scotland) Act. 2008 (as amended).
89. Scottish Government. Public Health etc. (Scotland) Act 2008. Implementation of Part 2: Notifiable
Diseases, Organisms and Health Risk States. 2009.
90. The Welsh Assembly Government. Health Protection Legislation (Wales) Guidance. 2010.
91. Home Office. Public Health Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 Chapter 36. 1967 (as amended).