Analysis of antibiotic susceptibility and extrachromosomal DNA content of Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens.

K. M. Champion, C. T. Helaszek, B. A. White

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Seventeen Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens strains have been screened for naturally occurring antibiotic resistance, as determined by zones of inhibition from antibiotic disks. These strains were also examined for extrachromosomal DNA content. All strains screened are resistant to low levels (10-200 micrograms/mL) of streptomycin. In contrast to the previously reported data, we have found that R. flavefaciens C-94 is now susceptible to both kanamycin and tetracycline. However, R. flavefaciens FD-1 is not susceptible to kanamycin (minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) = 40 micrograms/mL). Furthermore, R. albus 8 is resistant to tetracycline (MIC = 40 micrograms/mL), and erythromycin (MIC = 100 micrograms/mL). Six freshly isolated strains showed resistance to tetracycline (35-70 micrograms/mL), and all tetracycline-resistant strains also showed resistance to minocycline. None of these Ruminococcus determinants share homology with the streptococcal tetL, tetM, or tetN determinants. All 17 strains were screened for extrachromosomal DNA content. Nine different techniques for the detection and isolation of extrachromosomal DNA were tested. However, owing to difficulties in demonstrating or isolating plasmid DNA, it has not been possible to determine if these antibiotic resistance genes are plasmid borne. Evidence is presented to suggest that the presence of oxygen may affect the quality of the DNA obtained from Ruminococcus.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1109-1115
Number of pages7
JournalCanadian journal of microbiology
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 1988

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology
  • Immunology
  • Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
  • Molecular Biology
  • Genetics


Dive into the research topics of 'Analysis of antibiotic susceptibility and extrachromosomal DNA content of Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this