THE GENUS PEDIOCOCCUS
THE GENUS PEDIOCOCCUS
复制标题
片球菌属
DOI：
10.1128/br.13.4.225-232.1949
复制
发表时间：
1949
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
C. S. Pederson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. S. Pederson
自从巴斯德（1876）首次描述这种情况以来，一种产生乳酸的类肌酸生物就与啤酒中的一种腐败有关。他发现，这些生物体成对成对地出现，有时与长杆细菌有关，是所谓的“啤酒病”的原因。它们与乳酸菌属和链球菌属的真正乳酸菌的关系直到多年后才被发现。汉森（1879年）首先将变质啤酒中的微生物称为肌肉菌。Balcke （1884a）研究了腐败；在Balcke （1884b）的第二篇论文中，他承认了Kurth博士在确定这种有机体不是真正的肌肉虫方面的帮助。Balcke将二项式的酿酒Pediococcus cerevisiae应用于该物种。Lindner（1887, 1888, 1889）在一系列的论文中更完整地描述了与“啤酒病”有关的微生物，并为产生与他认为是脑Pediococcus cereviae的菌株有所不同的反应的类型提出了新的特定名称。直到数年后，才将pediococcus与其他发酵联系起来，而且除了Henneberg（1926）之外，是否还有人将其与理想的发酵联系起来，例如由密切相关的链球菌和乳杆菌属中的某些物种所带来的发酵，这是值得怀疑的。在这方面，它们可以与白菌属比较。直到Hammer（1923）、Orla-Jensen（1919）和Pederson（1929、1930）发现Leuconostoc在某些发酵过程中起重要作用后，人们才认识到它们带来理想变化的能力。当人们对pediococcus在自然界中的真正作用了解得更多时，就会发现它在一些营养性发酵中起着非常重要的作用。酿造技术人员可能会继续将这些生物称为“Sarcina”，但细菌学家应该将它们与其他生物进行适当的分类。由于Pediococus这个名字最初是由Balcke使用的，因此Lindner（1887年、1927年、1928年）、De Toni和Trevisan（1889年）、Reichard（1894年）、Fischer（1897年）、Claussen（1903年）、sollie（1903年）、Henneberg（1926年）、Pribram（1933年）、Mees（1934年）等人都接受并将其作为一个通用名称与其他特定名称联系起来。Buchanan（1925）指出：“如果以四分体排列的球菌获得通用识别，那么Pediococcus这个名称似乎是有效的。”模式种为酿酒Pediococcus cerevisiae balke。在Bergey’s Manual （Breed et al., 1948）的第6版中，该属被包括在微球菌科的附录中，与类型种Pediococcus一起
A lactic acid producing sarcinalike organism has been associated with a type of spoilage in beer since the condition was first described by Pasteur (1876). He found that these organisms, which occur in pairs and fours and were sometimes associated with long rod bacteria, are the cause of the socalled "beer sickness." Their relationship to the true lactic acid bacteria of the genera Lactobacillus and Streptococcus was not realized until years later. The organism in spoiled beer was first referred to as a sarcina by Hansen (1879). The spoilage was studied by Balcke (1884a); and in Balcke's (1884b) second paper he recognized the assistance of Dr. Kurth in determining that the organism was not a true sarcina. Balcke applied the binomial Pediococcus cerevisiae to this species. In a series of papers, Lindner (1887, 1888, 1889) described the organisms involved in "beer sickness" more completely and proposed new specific names for types producing somewhat different reactions from that of the strain which he believed was Pediococcus cereviae. The pediococci were not associated with other fermentations until years afterward, and it is doubtful whether anyone except Henneberg (1926) associated them with desirable fermentations such as those brought about by some species in the closely related genera Streptococcus and Lactobacillus. In this respect they might be compared with the genus Leuconostoc. The ability of species of Leuconostoc to bring about desirable changes was not recognized until Hammer (1923), Orla-Jensen (1919), and Pederson (1929, 1930) found that they were important in certain fermentations. The pediococci may be found to be very important in some vegetative fermentations when more is learned about their true role in nature. The name "Sarcina" may continue to be attached to these organisms by brewing technologists but they should be classified properly by bacteriologists in relation to other organisms. Since the name Pediococus was first used by Balcke, this has been accepted and used as a generic name in connection with other specific names by Lindner (1887, 1927, 1928), De Toni and Trevisan (1889), Reichard (1894), Fischer (1897), Claussen (1903), Sollied (1903), Henneberg (1926), Pribram (1933), Mees (1934), and others. Buchanan (1925) states: "If the cocci which are arranged in tetrads are to receive generic recognition, the name Pediococcus would appear to be valid. The type species is Pediococcus cerevisiae Balcke." In the 6th edition of Bergey's Manual (Breed et al., 1948) the genus is included in an appendix to the family Micrococcaceae, with the type species Pediococcus