" S. marcescens" <styunrh at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Y24U9.1840$fC4.1542 at newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
> > > "Microbacterium" isn't a taxonomically-recognized genus of
> microorganism,
> > > nor is it even a word with a generally agreed upon real-world
> definition.
>> Hi! Microbacterium actually is a recognised geneus of bacteria.
> According to the Wiley Dictionary of Microbiology and Microbiology it's a
> Gram positive, asporogenous, non-motile rods commonly found in milk.
Wiley's is dead wrong, if I can be as bold as to say so. They're talking
about "mycobacteria" in the same way as G.W. Bush talks about "newkyuler"
weapons.
Look it up... not in a dictionary, but in the actual taxomomy (and the
taxonomic history) of the planet's lifeforms.
((U))
M
> "auntie_biotic" <auntie_biotic at tbandu.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:avdbfk$7ud$1 at newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...> > Michael can I have that again BUT in layman's terms please?
> > "Michael" <muirhead at island.net> wrote in message
> > news:avd8c3012ig at enews2.newsguy.com...> > >
> > > "auntie_biotic" <auntie_biotic at tbandu.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:avd712$o0u$1 at news8.svr.pol.co.uk...> > > > What is the difference (if any) between microbacteria and
mycobacteria
> > as
> > > in
> > > > M. chelonei?
> > > > Thanks in advance
> > > > only asking because I have been told off for confusing the two
> > >
> > > Simple.
> > >
> > > "Microbacterium" isn't a taxonomically-recognized genus of
> microorganism,
> > > nor is it even a word with a generally agreed upon real-world
> definition.
> > >
> > > "Mycobacterium" is both a recognized genus and a real word.
> > >
> > > ((U))
> > > M
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>>
