My laboratory has the same problem of identification.
We are trying a new method combining standard method and computer but we
need help at different steps.
If you have time, we can discuss about it.
My e-mail is : reala at videotron.ca
Barry Lifland <blifland at leland.stanford.edu> a écrit dans l'article
<5nsfmq$6ev$1 at nntp.Stanford.EDU>...
> Greetings Jim Campanella,
>> I have been using Biolog for 5 or so years and am quite pleased with it.
I
> also use API, Minitek, conventional ID schemes, and other ID methods.
> Before one blames the equipment - I would first look at "pilot" error or
> insufficient training, or in Biolog's case - using a GN plate for a gram
> positive, etc. If one is looking for a universal ID system that
> contains all know or relevant organisms (whatever those may be?) they
would
> be very disappointed. No one system will ID everything yet. There is a
small
> learning curve in using Biolog. If one does not have sufficient
experience
> or understanding of bacterial ID methodologies - they will not know
> when a computer based system is not performing well.
> So, what were the bugs supposed to be?
> What was the Biolog pattern or number?
> Give me as many parameters as you can (organism ID, media, saline (
> commercial - homemade?) incubation
> parameters, inoculation turbidity, etc.) and I will try to make helpful
> suggestions.
>> Good luck,
> BL
> Barry Lifland - Stanford Univ., Dept. Comparative Medicine
> Diagnostic lab - Microbiology section
> RAF 1, Bld. 330, QUAD 7 Stanford, CA 94305-5410
>blifland at leland.stanford.edu ph-415-725-0942, FAX-0940
>> *
> *I teach a laboratory class in bacteriology for undergraduates. Near the
> *end of the class, I have them doing identifications of bacterial
unknowns
> *using the standard "traditional" methods that we all learned. After they
> *were done with their initial identifications last year, I had them use
the
> *Biolog plate system to do quick re-identifications using modern
laboratory
> *methods along with computer analysis. My problem is that I was very
unhappy
> *with the Biolog system; it was unable to clearly identify some bacterial
> *strains that the students named easily using the older
morpho/physiological
> *methods. My question is: does anyone have any recommendations for more
> *accurate test systems that I can have my students perform for bacterial
> *identification?
> *Does any company make anything more accurate then Biolog plates or is
that
> *the height of technology?
> *
> *Thanks for the help,
> *
> *Jim Campanella
> *Lehigh University
> *Dept. of Biological Sciences
> *Bethlehem, PA 18015
>>
