One species, many faces: The underappreciated importance of strain diversity

Citation: Nysten J, Sofras D, Van Dijck P (2024) One species, many faces: The underappreciated importance of strain diversity. PLoS Pathog 20(1): e1011931. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1011931

Editor: Mary Ann Jabra-Rizk, University of Maryland, Baltimore, UNITED STATES

Published: January 25, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Nysten et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: J.N. was supported by a personal grant from the Fund for Scientific research Flanders (FWO grant # 1S18123N). D.S was supported by a personal grant from Fund for Scientific research Flanders (FWO grant # 11J8124N). This work was supported by the Fund for Scientific research Flanders (FWO grant # G0B1820N) to P.V.D. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Manuscript

Over the past century, extensive efforts have been made to isolate and categorize thousands of strains, resulting in the classification of species as a group of strains that form a coherent genomic cluster [1,2]. Although species delineation is a difficult task and taxonomic methodology can vary depending on taxa and scientists, specific quantitative thresholds have been established to delineate species [3]. Two bacteria are considered to be the same species when their whole-genome average nucleotide identity is at least 95% [46]. However, recent research has highlighted significant heterogeneity in genotypes and phenotypes across isolates of the same species despite meeting these genetic similarity thresholds. Take Escherichia coli as an example, strains can be host-associated or environmental, a harmless commensal, or even a versatile pathogen [7]. But also within the pathogenic E. coli strains, there is a lot of variety that hampers risk assessment and strain typing [7]. These strains are divided into intestinal and extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli which are both further categorized into different pathotypes that have distinct pathogenic traits [7]. The heterogeneity between strains results in differences in genetic circuitry and virulence, affecting the outcome of host infection [8,9]. Thus, exclusively studying reference or wild-type strains may prove inadequate for a comprehensive understanding [1,9,10]. Furthermore, the worrisome global emergence of multidrug-resistant isolates raises the question of the extent to which strain-tailored therapies are needed. In short, this pearl delves into microbial strain diversity, its genetic underpinnings, its impact on host health, its role in antimicrobial resistance, and the challenge of integrating research findings into clinical practice.

Unveiling the origins and extent of strain diversity

Within-species variability is the result of genomic mutations that arise continuously through errors in DNA replication, DNA repair, recombination mechanisms, and exposure to mutagens like radiation or chemicals [11]. It is important to note that mutations do not automatically translate into functional differences, especially when they occur in intergenic DNA or noncoding regions. For example, up to 98.5% of the human genome can undergo mutations without notable impact [11]. In contrast, microorganisms have more compact genomes with fewer noncoding regions, rendering them more susceptible to significant changes [11]. The extent of within-species variability hinges on factors such as generation time, mutation rate, population size, and the likelihood of inter-species horizontal gene transfer. Subsequently, these changes are shaped by selection and genetic drift, which are modulated by a wide array of biotic (e.g., competition for resources) and abiotic (e.g., antimicrobials) factors [1,12,13].

The extent of within-species variability is contingent upon the particular species under consideration. On one end of the spectrum are monotypic species characterized by populations exhibiting uniform genetic similarities such as Chlamydia trachomatis [14]. Typically, these species are specialists with limited host and geographic distributions [15]. Conversely, at the other extreme end, there are polytypic species that are highly diverse generalists, such as E. coli, showcasing multiple phylogroups [1,16,17]. Thanks to recent advancements in metagenomic sequencing and computational methodologies, researchers have been able to identify strain diversity within species, shedding light on how it can yield functional diversity and affect host outcomes [18].

The pros and cons of solely relying on reference strains

Microbiologists often use well-characterized laboratory strains known as reference strains or type strains, which are ubiquitous across a research community working with that particular organism. The widespread use of reference or type strains across labs has enhanced reproducibility and allowed researchers to standardize observations and methodologies. While this practice has yielded imperative insights into host–pathogen interactions, recent studies underscore that the substantial genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity between strains can significantly impact virulence, drug tolerance, and metabolic fitness [8,9,19,20]. For example, in the case of the human fungal pathogen Candida albicans, the frequently employed SC5314 reference strain isolated from a bloodstream infection is often used. However, research shows that this strain is rather atypical as it is one of the most filamentous and invasive strains characterized [21]. Consequently, relying solely on a reference strain and generalizing the results can constrain our understanding of a species and its diversity [9].

Recent research has highlighted the importance of strain diversity, revealing that even within a certain host niche, strains can show a rich genetic diversity. Notably, certain C. albicans isolates were found to lack the most important virulence trait of this species namely hyphae formation which directly influences its cell-damaging capacity and proinflammatory immunity [22,23]. Therefore, carefully considering strain selection becomes pivotal when designing experiments that aim to assess the behavior of pathogens. Isolates are often specialized for a certain host niche and are likely specifically adapted to the immunological and nutritional status of that niche. Such strains might thrive in their original niche but appear defective in other niches or artificial conditions [24]. Acknowledging the high heterogenicity in strains during host–pathogen interactions can bridge the gap between data obtained in controlled laboratory settings and the actual patient outcome [24].

Strain diversity and its impact on host health

Microbes are often categorized as either pathogenic or commensal [25]. However, it is usually not that straightforward as certain species act as commensals in one host and as pathogens in another, adding complexity to the significance of isolating specific microorganisms in a human host [26,27]. The behavior of a particular species is not solely dependent on the species itself but also on the patient. For example, individuals with compromised immune systems are more susceptible to various diseases. Additionally, genetic, behavioral, cultural, and various other factors may impact the patient’s outcome [2830]. But to what extent can a different strain influence the patient’s outcome? Within-species variation has been demonstrated to significantly affect virulence in numerous species including E. coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, C. albicans, Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella enterica [10,22,31]. The latter bacterial species, a common cause of gastroenteritis, encompasses over 2,500 distinct serotypes that can result in different clinical outcomes [32]. Moreover, even within a serotype, significant differences in virulence-associated genes have been identified [33]. Virulence genes are often situated on distinct pathogenicity islands in the genome or on transmissible genetic elements such as plasmids which facilitate the transmission of genes involved in virulence and pathogenesis. This contributes to the diverse virulence phenotypes exhibited by various isolates [10,32]. Within-species variability can have several effects on the host. Firstly, different isolates inside a host can create antigenic diversity to help evade the host’s immune response [34]. Secondly, benign strains in the gut can protect the host from a secondary infection by training the innate immune response. This phenomenon is referred to as trained immunity or innate immune memory [35,36]. For example, it has been shown that mice that are colonized with benign C. albicans in the gut are protected from a subsequent intravenously injected lethal C. albicans challenge [37]. Furthermore, commensal C. albicans colonization can also confer increased resistance to a variety of systemic infections from other species such as S. aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Aspergillus fumigatus [35,38]. Interestingly, non-pathogenic microbes can also protect the host against various pathogens [39]. Thirdly, studies in E. coli have revealed that fitness costs associated with resistance acquisition may be diminished through epistasis between resistance genes of different pathogenic isolates [34,40]. Comprehending and considering these variations is essential for customizing effective medical interventions and strategies in public health [18].

The mosaic of antimicrobial resistance

The use of antimicrobial agents is inextricably intertwined with the emergence of resistance which poses undoubtedly one of the biggest threats to global health [41]. Strain diversity can perplex matters even further by rendering species identification insufficient for the acquisition of meaningful insight towards isolate susceptibility. It has been shown that genetic diversity among bacterial strains cause variation in resistance patterns among different strains of non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing E. coli against 3 classes of antibiotics [42]. Also, strains of atypical enteropathogenic E. coli from South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa showed a geographically clustered pattern of resistance, likely due to past usage of antibiotics in those areas [43]. In a large-scale retrospective study including more than 7,000 E. coli isolates, resistance diversity against 10 antibiotic classes not only differed significantly between strains, but also across different isolation sites, indicating the potential role of niche adaptation in resistance emergence [44]. Similar trends were shown for Klebsiella pneumoniae which showed the highest antibiotic resistance, biofilm formation, and beta-lactamase production in strains isolated from the urine compared to those isolated from blood or the respiratory tract [45]. Furthermore, exogenous DNA has been shown to lead to differences in antimicrobial resistance in group A Streptococcus isolates [46]. It is also interesting to consider the situation of one host carrying multiple strains. Caballero and colleagues [47] showed that in patients with multiple strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, resistance developed rapidly, whereas in those with single strains, resistance developed sporadically. Interestingly, resistance may be lost in patients with mixed populations due to fitness trade-offs in the absence of treatment [47]. Shifting the focus to fungi, intraspecies diversity also translates into differential isolate susceptibility, although in a less pronounced manner than in bacteria. In the case of Cryptococcus neoformans, the lead cause of deaths for fungal infections, the susceptibility profiles of approximately 300 clinical isolates from the Netherlands showed variation especially for flucytosine and fluconazole [48]. Fluconazole susceptibility also differed for distinct Candida glabrata strains isolated from the same patient, while the resistant isolates demonstrated impaired growth compared to the susceptible ones [49]. Differential azole and echinocandin susceptibility was also observed in C. albicans, the most frequent cause of candidiasis [50]. The emerging fungus Candida auris showcases the possibilities of resistance discrepancies due to strain diversity. C. auris isolates fall into 5 genetically and geographically distinct clades [51,52]. Resistance to fluconazole is common among strains of Clades I and III, whereas amphotericin B resistance is frequent solely for Clade I, and echinocandin resistance is often found within Clade IV isolates [5355]. Overall, strain diversity is likely crucial in shaping antimicrobial resistance patterns. Understanding this impact is vital for the development of effective strategies to combat it, potentially through targeted interventions and therapies.

Bridging the gap between research and clinical reality

Finally, it is crucial to critically address the balance between the feasibility and the usefulness of implementing what strain diversity has taught us into everyday clinical practices. As discussed earlier, for research purposes, scientists are advised to select a broad panel of strains to make robust claims, ensuring the diversity within that set adequately represents the diversity within the target microbial species. However, the scenario in clinical settings often demands swift decisions, with treatments often initiated based on medical data, personal preferences, and emotions, even before species identification [56]. The importance of strain diversity in clinical outcomes is unclear as for example in M. tuberculosis [57], although Gagneux and colleagues have proposed the existence of geographical human–pathogen incompatibility for this pathogen [58]. In certain cases, different strains of the same species may exhibit varying levels of antimicrobial resistance, indicating a need for tailored treatment. Among fungal infections for example, invasive candidiasis is often treated firstly with an echinocandin, and if unsuccessful, a switch to an azole or amphotericin B is made [59]. Noteworthily, treatment with a combination of drug classes would intuitively seem like a good alternative to monotherapy to combat strain-specific resistance, but one has to account for the possible adverse effects and antagonism between drugs [60], as well as the associated higher cost of this approach which is a major hurdle for low-income countries [60,61]. For species with differential susceptibilities between strains, like C. auris, clade identification prior to the treatment onset, could provide vital information for selecting the first-line therapeutic agent. Cost- and time-efficient clade identification techniques, e.g., PCR-based, have been developed and could be implemented in clinics worldwide [62,63]. However, such in-depth characterization is often beyond the scope and the guidelines of clinicians, particularly for non-specialized infectiologists. Unless future research reveals a necessity for distinct treatments for specific microbial isolates, the delicate balance between strain diversity and practical clinical decision-making will remain a subject of ongoing discussion and adaptation.

References1. Van Rossum T, Ferretti P, Maistrenko OM, Bork P. Diversity within species: interpreting strains in microbiomes. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2020;18(9):491–506. pmid:32499497 2. Wayne LG, Brenner DJ, Colwell RR, Grimont PAD, Kandler O, Krichevsky MI, et al. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Reconciliation of Approaches to Bacterial Systematics. Int J Syst Bacteriol. 1987;37:463–464. 3. Galtier N. Delineating species in the speciation continuum: A proposal. Evol Appl. 2019;12(4):657–663. pmid:30976300 4. Tang L, Li Y, Deng X, Johnston RN, Liu GR, Liu SL. Defining natural species of bacteria: clear-cut genomic boundaries revealed by a turning point in nucleotide sequence divergence. BMC Genomics. 2013;14:489. pmid:23865772 5. Konstantinidis KT, Tiedje JM. Genomic insights that advance the species definition for prokaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102(7):2567–2572. pmid:15701695 6. Jain C, Rodriguez RL, Phillippy AM, Konstantinidis KT, Aluru S. High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):5114. pmid:30504855 7. Leimbach A, Hacker J, Dobrindt U. E. coli as an all-rounder: the thin line between commensalism and pathogenicity. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2013;358:3–32. 8. Huang MY, Woolford CA, May G, McManus CJ, Mitchell AP. Circuit diversification in a biofilm regulatory network. PLoS Pathog. 2019;15(5):e1007787. pmid:31116789 9. Usher J, Ribeiro GF, Childers DS. The Candida glabrata Parent Strain Trap: How Phenotypic Diversity Affects Metabolic Fitness and Host Interactions. Microbiol Spectr. 2023;11(1):e0372422. 10. Lianou A, Koutsoumanis KP. Strain variability of the behavior of foodborne bacterial pathogens: a review. Int J Food Microbiol. 2013;167(3):310–321. pmid:24184609 11. Brown TA. Genomes 2nd edn. Oxford; 2002. 12. Fish DN, Piscitelli SC, Danziger LH. Development of resistance during antimicrobial therapy: a review of antibiotic classes and patient characteristics in 173 studies. Pharmacotherapy. 1995;15(3):279–291. pmid:7667163 13. Murray GGR, Balmer AJ, Herbert J, Hadjirin NF, Kemp CL, Matuszewska M, et al. Mutation rate dynamics reflect ecological change in an emerging zoonotic pathogen. PLoS Genet. 2021;17(11):e1009864. pmid:34748531 14. Smelov V, Vrbanac A, van Ess EF, Noz MP, Wan R, Eklund C, et al. Chlamydia trachomatis Strain Types Have Diversified Regionally and Globally with Evidence for Recombination across Geographic Divides. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:2195. 15. Sheppard SK, Guttman DS, Fitzgerald JR. Population genomics of bacterial host adaptation. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19(9):549–565. pmid:29973680 16. Bobay LM, Ochman H. Factors driving effective population size and pan-genome evolution in bacteria. BMC Evol Biol. 2018;18(1):153. pmid:30314447 17. Tenaillon O, Skurnik D, Picard B, Denamur E. The population genetics of commensal Escherichia coli. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2010;8(3):207–217. 18. Carrow HC, Batachari LE, Chu H. Strain diversity in the microbiome: Lessons from Bacteroides fragilis. PLoS Pathog. 2020;16(12):e1009056. 19. MacCallum DM, Castillo L, Nather K, Munro CA, Brown AJ, Gow NA, et al. Property differences among the four major Candida albicans strain clades. Eukaryot Cell. 2009;8(3):373–387. 20. Rosenberg A, Ene IV, Bibi M, Zakin S, Segal ES, Ziv N, et al. Antifungal tolerance is a subpopulation effect distinct from resistance and is associated with persistent candidemia. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):2470. pmid:29941885 21. Glazier VE, Kramara J, Ollinger T, Solis NV, Zarnowski R, Wakade RS, et al. The Candida albicans reference strain SC5314 contains a rare, dominant allele of the transcription factor Rob1 that modulates filamentation, biofilm formation, and oral commensalism. MBio. 2023:e0152123. pmid:37737633 22. Li XV, Leonardi I, Putzel GG, Semon A, Fiers WD, Kusakabe T, et al. Immune regulation by fungal strain diversity in inflammatory bowel disease. Nature. 2022;603(7902):672–678. pmid:35296857 23. Hirakawa MP, Martinez DA, Sakthikumar S, Anderson MZ, Berlin A, Gujja S, et al. Genetic and phenotypic intra-species variation in Candida albicans. Genome Res. 2015;25(3):413–425. 24. Gerwien F, Dunker C, Brandt P, Garbe E, Jacobsen ID, Vylkova S. Clinical Candida albicans Vaginal Isolates and a Laboratory Strain Show Divergent Behaviors during Macrophage Interactions. mSphere. 2020;5(4). 25. Rizzetto L, Giovannini G, Bromley M, Bowyer P, Romani L, Cavalieri D. Strain dependent variation of immune responses to A. fumigatus: definition of pathogenic species. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(2):e56651. 26. Ahmed A, Earl J, Retchless A, Hillier SL, Rabe LK, Cherpes TL, et al. Comparative genomic analyses of 17 clinical isolates of Gardnerella vaginalis provide evidence of multiple genetically isolated clades consistent with subspeciation into genovars. J Bacteriol. 2012;194(15):3922–3937. 27. Armistead B, Oler E, Adams Waldorf K, Rajagopal L. The Double Life of Group B Streptococcus: Asymptomatic Colonizer and Potent Pathogen. J Mol Biol. 2019;431(16):2914–2931. 28. Kalia N, Singh J, Kaur M. Microbiota in vaginal health and pathogenesis of recurrent vulvovaginal infections: a critical review. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2020;19(1):5. pmid:31992328 29. Cadena J, Thompson GR 3rd, Patterson TF. Aspergillosis: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2021;35(2):415–434. pmid:34016284 30. Dropulic LK, Lederman HM. Overview of Infections in the Immunocompromised Host. Microbiol Spectr. 2016;4(4). pmid:27726779 31. Heunis T, Dippenaar A, Warren RM, van Helden PD, van der Merwe RG, Gey van Pittius NC, et al. Proteogenomic Investigation of Strain Variation in Clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis Isolates. J Proteome Res. 2017;16(10):3841–3851. 32. Fierer J, Guiney DG. Diverse virulence traits underlying different clinical outcomes of Salmonella infection. J Clin Invest. 2001;107(7):775–780. pmid:11285291 33. Zou W, Al-Khaldi SF, Branham WS, Han T, Fuscoe JC, Han J, et al. Microarray analysis of virulence gene profiles in Salmonella serovars from food/food animal environment. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2011;5(2):94–105. 34. Woolhouse ME, Webster JP, Domingo E, Charlesworth B, Levin BR. Biological and biomedical implications of the co-evolution of pathogens and their hosts. Nat Genet. 2002;32(4):569–577. pmid:12457190 35. Tso GHW, Reales-Calderon JA, Tan ASM, Sem X, Le GTT, Tan TG, et al. Experimental evolution of a fungal pathogen into a gut symbiont. Science. 2018;362(6414):589–595. pmid:30385579 36. Netea MG, Joosten LA, Latz E, Mills KH, Natoli G, Stunnenberg HG, et al. Trained immunity: A program of innate immune memory in health and disease. Science. 2016;352(6284):aaf1098. pmid:27102489 37. Huertas B, Prieto D, Pitarch A, Gil C, Pla J, Diez-Orejas R. Serum Antibody Profile during Colonization of the Mouse Gut by Candida albicans: Relevance for Protection during Systemic Infection. J Proteome Res. 2017;16(1):335–345. pmid:27539120 38. Alonso-Monge R, Gresnigt MS, Roman E, Hube B, Pla J. Candida albicans colonization of the gastrointestinal tract: A double-edged sword. PLoS Pathog. 2021;17(7):e1009710. pmid:34293071 39. Rizzetto L, Ifrim DC, Moretti S, Tocci N, Cheng SC, Quintin J, et al. Fungal Chitin Induces Trained Immunity in Human Monocytes during Cross-talk of the Host with Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biol Chem. 2016;291(15):7961–7972. pmid:26887946 40. Bohannan BJM, Travisano M, Lenski RE. Epistatic Interactions Can Lower the Cost of Resistance to Multiple Consumers. Evolution. 1999;53(1):292–295. pmid:28565201 41. Antimicrobial Resistance Collaborators. Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in 2019: a systematic analysis. Lancet. 2022;399(10325):629–655. pmid:35065702 42. Pan YY, Yang X, Cao LJ, Liu Q, Xiong YW. Antimicrobial resistance in 33 non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli isolated from human cases from 2011 to 2019. Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2021;55(3):365–370. 43. Ingle DJ, Levine MM, Kotloff KL, Holt KE, Robins-Browne RM. Dynamics of antimicrobial resistance in intestinal Escherichia coli from children in community settings in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3(9):1063–1073. pmid:30127495 44. Wang S, Zhao S, Zhou Y, Jin S, Ye T, Pan X. Antibiotic resistance spectrum of E. coli strains from different samples and age-grouped patients: a 10-year retrospective study. BMJ Open. 2023;13(4):e067490. 45. Ballen V, Gabasa Y, Ratia C, Ortega R, Tejero M, Soto S. Antibiotic Resistance and Virulence Profiles of Klebsiella pneumoniae Strains Isolated From Different Clinical Sources. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2021;11:738223. 46. Beres SB, Musser JM. Contribution of exogenous genetic elements to the group A Streptococcus metagenome. PLoS ONE. 2007;2(8):e800. pmid:17726530 47. Diaz Caballero J, Wheatley RM, Kapel N, Lopez-Causape C, Van der Schalk T, Quinn A, et al. Mixed strain pathogen populations accelerate the evolution of antibiotic resistance in patients. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):4083. pmid:37438338 48. Hagen F, Illnait-Zaragozi MT, Meis JF, Chew WH, Curfs-Breuker I, Mouton JW, et al. Extensive genetic diversity within the Dutch clinical Cryptococcus neoformans population. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(6):1918–1926. 49. Badrane H, Cheng S, Dupont CL, Hao B, Driscoll E, Morder K, et al. Genotypic diversity and unrecognized antifungal resistance among populations of Candida glabrata from positive blood cultures. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):5918. 50. Sharifynia S, Rezaie S, Mohamadnia A, Mortezaee V, Hadian A, Seyedmousavi S. Genetic diversity and antifungal susceptibility of Candida albicans isolated from Iranian patients. Med Mycol. 2019;57(1):127–131. 51. Lockhart SR, Etienne KA, Vallabhaneni S, Farooqi J, Chowdhary A, Govender NP, et al. Simultaneous Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant Candida auris on 3 Continents Confirmed by Whole-Genome Sequencing and Epidemiological Analyses. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64(2):134–140. 52. Chow NA, de Groot T, Badali H, Abastabar M, Chiller TM, Meis JF. Potential Fifth Clade of Candida auris, Iran, 2018. Emerg Infect Dis. 2019;25(9):1780–1781. 53. Chowdhary A, Prakash A, Sharma C, Kordalewska M, Kumar A, Sarma S, et al. A multicentre study of antifungal susceptibility patterns among 350 Candida auris isolates (2009–17) in India: role of the ERG11 and FKS1 genes in azole and echinocandin resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(4):891–899. 54. Chow NA, Munoz JF, Gade L, Berkow EL, Li X, Welsh RM, et al. Tracing the Evolutionary History and Global Expansion of Candida auris Using Population Genomic Analyses. MBio. 2020;11(2). pmid:32345637 55. Maphanga TG, Naicker SD, Kwenda S, Munoz JF, van Schalkwyk E, Wadula J, et al. In Vitro Antifungal Resistance of Candida auris Isolates from Bloodstream Infections, South Africa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2021;65(9):e0051721. 56. Krishnakumar J, Tsopra R. What rationale do GPs use to choose a particular antibiotic for a specific clinical situation? BMC Fam Pract. 2019;20(1):178. pmid:31862003 57. Nicol MP, Wilkinson RJ. The clinical consequences of strain diversity in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008;102(10):955–965. 58. Gagneux S, DeRiemer K, Van T, Kato-Maeda M, de Jong BC, Narayanan S, et al. Variable host-pathogen compatibility in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;103(8):2869–2873. 59. Barantsevich N, Barantsevich E. Diagnosis and Treatment of Invasive Candidiasis. Antibiotics (Basel). 2022;11(6). pmid:35740125 60. Rybak MJ, McGrath BJ. Combination antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infections. Guidelines for the clinician. Drugs. 1996;52(3):390–405. 61. Stone NR, Rhodes J, Fisher MC, Mfinanga S, Kivuyo S, Rugemalila J, et al. Dynamic ploidy changes drive fluconazole resistance in human cryptococcal meningitis. J Clin Invest. 2019;129(3):999–1014. pmid:30688656 62. Narayanan A, Selvakumar P, Siddharthan R, Sanyal K. ClaID: a Rapid Method of Clade-Level Identification of the Multidrug Resistant Human Fungal Pathogen Candida auris. Microbiol Spectr. 2022;10(2):e0063422. 63. Carolus H, Jacobs S, Lobo Romero C, Deparis Q, Cuomo CA, Meis JF, et al. Diagnostic Allele-Specific PCR for the Identification of Candida auris Clades. J Fungi (Basel). 2021;7(9).

留言 (0)

沒有登入
gif