JEDilworth wrote:
> Hate to say I told you so........but it just didn't sound like a gram negative to
> me.
Nah, don't feel bad about it. I'm just glad I learnt how to do 16s
sequencing. Now I'm going to look for new bacteria, I just need to find
some place where other people haven't been looking before.
Btw, I'm still working with the Ganges bacteria (Paenibacillus alvei).
It seem to have a plasmid of less than 30kb, so I'm going to see if I
can establish it in some other bacteria and see if some of the phenotype
from the Paenibacillus is transferred to the new one, for instance
antibiotics production. I need some practical work to do inbetween
reading to exam :)
Trond Erik
>> Bacillus will only sporulate under adverse conditions. If you're providing it with
> breakfast, lunch, and dinner on a great plate, it has no need to form spores.
>> Judy Dilworth, M.T. (ASCP)
> Microbiology (Clinical) 28 years
>> Trond Erik Vee Aune wrote:
>>>>Yes, it was highly motile and swarmed in a very fascinating way. That's
>>why I decided to identify it. I looked for spores in the microscope, but
>>couldn't see any, so maybe the cells were in the wrong growth phase.
>>>>Trond Erik
>>>>>>>>>Anyway, I got very good match against Paenibacillus alvei. According to
>>>>>>>>web-resources this genus do produce different types of antibiotics as
>>>>well as being able to swarm in different ways
>>>>(http://ijs.sgmjournals.org/cgi/reprint/49/1/239.pdf). The strange thing
>>>>is that it is not a gram negative bug as I thought after staining, but
>>>>one of you microbiologists suggested that I was a Bacillus strain, so I
>>>>guess we geneticists are much better at sequencing than staining ;)
>>>>Anyway, I'm pretty pleased that I finally got an identification, but of
>>>>course a little disappointed that it wasn't a new bacterium
>>>>
