Cargando…

Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus

BACKGROUND: The practice of counting bacterial colony forming units on agar plates has long been used as a method to estimate the concentration of live bacteria in culture. However, due to the laborious and potentially error prone nature of this measurement technique, an alternative method is desira...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Frost, H. R., Tsoi, S. K., Baker, C. A., Laho, D., Sanderson-Smith, M. L., Steer, A. C., Smeesters, P. R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4745170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26856815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-1875-z
_version_ 1782414591639158784
author Frost, H. R.
Tsoi, S. K.
Baker, C. A.
Laho, D.
Sanderson-Smith, M. L.
Steer, A. C.
Smeesters, P. R.
author_facet Frost, H. R.
Tsoi, S. K.
Baker, C. A.
Laho, D.
Sanderson-Smith, M. L.
Steer, A. C.
Smeesters, P. R.
author_sort Frost, H. R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The practice of counting bacterial colony forming units on agar plates has long been used as a method to estimate the concentration of live bacteria in culture. However, due to the laborious and potentially error prone nature of this measurement technique, an alternative method is desirable. Recent technologic advancements have facilitated the development of automated colony counting systems, which reduce errors introduced during the manual counting process and recording of information. An additional benefit is the significant reduction in time taken to analyse colony counting data. Whilst automated counting procedures have been validated for a number of microorganisms, the process has not been successful for all bacteria due to the requirement for a relatively high contrast between bacterial colonies and growth medium. The purpose of this study was to validate an automated counting system for use with group A Streptococcus (GAS). RESULTS: Methods: Twenty-one different GAS strains, representative of major emm-types, were selected for assessment. In order to introduce the required contrast for automated counting, 2,3,5-triphenyl-2H-tetrazolium chloride (TTC) dye was added to Todd–Hewitt broth with yeast extract (THY) agar. Growth on THY agar with TTC was compared with growth on blood agar and THY agar to ensure the dye was not detrimental to bacterial growth. Automated colony counts using a ProtoCOL 3 instrument were compared with manual counting to confirm accuracy over the stages of the growth cycle (latent, mid-log and stationary phases) and in a number of different assays. The average percentage differences between plating and counting methods were analysed using the Bland–Altman method. CONCLUSIONS: Results: A percentage difference of ±10 % was determined as the cut-off for a critical difference between plating and counting methods. All strains measured had an average difference of less than 10 % when plated on THY agar with TTC. This consistency was also observed over all phases of the growth cycle and when plated in blood following bactericidal assays. Agreement between these methods suggest the use of an automated colony counting technique for GAS will significantly reduce time spent counting bacteria to enable a more efficient and accurate measurement of bacteria concentration in culture. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-016-1875-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4745170
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47451702016-02-09 Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus Frost, H. R. Tsoi, S. K. Baker, C. A. Laho, D. Sanderson-Smith, M. L. Steer, A. C. Smeesters, P. R. BMC Res Notes Technical Note BACKGROUND: The practice of counting bacterial colony forming units on agar plates has long been used as a method to estimate the concentration of live bacteria in culture. However, due to the laborious and potentially error prone nature of this measurement technique, an alternative method is desirable. Recent technologic advancements have facilitated the development of automated colony counting systems, which reduce errors introduced during the manual counting process and recording of information. An additional benefit is the significant reduction in time taken to analyse colony counting data. Whilst automated counting procedures have been validated for a number of microorganisms, the process has not been successful for all bacteria due to the requirement for a relatively high contrast between bacterial colonies and growth medium. The purpose of this study was to validate an automated counting system for use with group A Streptococcus (GAS). RESULTS: Methods: Twenty-one different GAS strains, representative of major emm-types, were selected for assessment. In order to introduce the required contrast for automated counting, 2,3,5-triphenyl-2H-tetrazolium chloride (TTC) dye was added to Todd–Hewitt broth with yeast extract (THY) agar. Growth on THY agar with TTC was compared with growth on blood agar and THY agar to ensure the dye was not detrimental to bacterial growth. Automated colony counts using a ProtoCOL 3 instrument were compared with manual counting to confirm accuracy over the stages of the growth cycle (latent, mid-log and stationary phases) and in a number of different assays. The average percentage differences between plating and counting methods were analysed using the Bland–Altman method. CONCLUSIONS: Results: A percentage difference of ±10 % was determined as the cut-off for a critical difference between plating and counting methods. All strains measured had an average difference of less than 10 % when plated on THY agar with TTC. This consistency was also observed over all phases of the growth cycle and when plated in blood following bactericidal assays. Agreement between these methods suggest the use of an automated colony counting technique for GAS will significantly reduce time spent counting bacteria to enable a more efficient and accurate measurement of bacteria concentration in culture. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13104-016-1875-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4745170/ /pubmed/26856815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-1875-z Text en © Frost et al. 2016 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.
spellingShingle Technical Note
Frost, H. R.
Tsoi, S. K.
Baker, C. A.
Laho, D.
Sanderson-Smith, M. L.
Steer, A. C.
Smeesters, P. R.
Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus
title Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus
title_full Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus
title_fullStr Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus
title_full_unstemmed Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus
title_short Validation of an automated colony counting system for group A Streptococcus
title_sort validation of an automated colony counting system for group a streptococcus
topic Technical Note
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4745170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26856815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-1875-z
work_keys_str_mv AT frosthr validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus
AT tsoisk validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus
AT bakerca validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus
AT lahod validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus
AT sandersonsmithml validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus
AT steerac validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus
AT smeesterspr validationofanautomatedcolonycountingsystemforgroupastreptococcus