Skip to main content
Log in

Phenotypic Characterization of Trichophyton rubrum isolates from two geographic locations in Brazil

  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To characterize possible Trichophyton rubrum phenotypes, which circulate in two Brazilian localities, we tested 53 isolates of this dermatophyte for their ability to assimilate several carbon sources, for keratinase, proteinase, phospholipase, lipase and desoxiribonuclease (DNase) secretions, and for their susceptibility to the antifungals fluconazole, ketoconazole and itraconazole. For each method, the isolates were submitted to similarity analysis and the methods were evaluated for their discriminatory indexes. None of the isolates were capable of assimilating arabinose, dulcitol, lactose, melibiose, ribose and xylose, while all of the isolates assimilated maltose, sucrose and sorbitol. However, adonitol, cellobiose, dextrin, erythritol, fructose, galactose, inulin, mannitol, mannose, raffinose, rhamnose and trehalose were assimilated by some isolates but not by others. All isolates secreted keratinase and DNase, while none secreted phospholipase. Proteinase and lipase were secreted only by some isolates. All but four isolates were resistant to fluconazole, most of them were sensitive to ketoconazole and all were sensitive to itraconazole. Carbohydrate assimilation was the method that presented the highest discriminatory index, and also the method that displayed the largest number of biotypes. Taken together, these data suggest that significant phenotypic variations exist among T. rubrum isolates. They seem to occur independently from their geographic origins.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rippon JW. The changing epidemiology and emerging patterns of dermatophyte species. Curr Top Med Mycol 1985; 1: 209–234.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rebell G, Taplin D. Dermatophytes – Their Recognition andId enti.cation, Miami: University of Miami Press, 1970, 123 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  3. English MP. Variation in Trichophyton rubrum as seen in a routine diagnostic service. Sabouraudia 1964; 3: 205–210.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Szilagyi G, Reiss F. Trichophyton rubrum (Castellani) var. flava and var. nova: a yellow pigment forming Trichophyton rubrum. Mycopathol Mycol Appl 1968; 36: 193–198.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Young CN. Range of variation among isolates of Trichophyton rubrum. Sabouraudia 1972; 10: 164–170.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Mehta JP, Deodhar KP, Chaphekar PM. Variation in Trichophyton rubrum. Mycologia 1978; 70: 847–849.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Philpot CM. The use of nutritional tests for di.erentiation of dermatophytes. Sabouraudia 1977; 15: 141–150.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nobre G, Viegas MP. Lipolytic activity of dermatophytes. Mycopathol Mycol Appl 1972; 46: 319–323.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hellgren L, Vincent J. Lipolytic activity of some dermatophytes. J MedMicrobiol 1980; 13: 155–157.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Skorepová M, Hauck H. Extracellular proteinases of Trichophyton rubrum andthe clinical pictures of tinea. Mykosen 1987; 30: 25–27.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lopez-Martinez R, Manzano GP, Mier T, Mendez TLJ, Hernandez HF. Exoenzymes of dermatophytes isolatedfrom acute and chronic tinea. Rev Latinoam Microbiol 1994; 36: 17–20.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Granade TC, Artis WM. Antimycotic susceptibility testing of dermatophytes in microcultures with a standardized fragmented mycelial inoculum. Antimicrobial Agents Chemother 1980; 17: 725–729.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Oyeka CA, Gugnani HC. In vitro activity of seven azole compounds against some clinical isolates of non-dermatophytic flamentous fungi and some dermatophytes. Mycopathologia 1990; 110: 157–161.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Korting HC, Ollert M, Abeck D, and the German Collaborative dermatophyte drug susceptibility study group. Results of German multicenter study of antimicrobial susceptibilities of Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes strains causing tinea unguium. Antimicrobial Agents Chemother 1995; 39: 1206–1208.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Niewerth M, Splanemann V, Korting HC, Ring J, Aeck D. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of dermatophytes comparison of the agar macrodilution and broth microdilution tests. Chemotherapy 1998; 44: 31–35.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Grüsek E, Abeck D, Ring J. Relapsing severe Trichophyton rubrum infections in an immunocompromised host: Evidence of onychomycosis as a source of reinfection basedon lectin typing. Mycoses 1993; 36: 275–278.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Siesenop U, Böhm KH. Comparative studies on keratinase production of Trichophyton mentagrophytes strains of animal origin. Mycoses 1995; 38: 205–209.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rüchel R, Tegeler R, Trost MA. A comparison of secretory proteinases from di.erent strains of Candida albicans. Sabouraudia 1982; 20: 233–234.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Price MF, Wilkinson ID, Gentry LO. Plate methodfor detection of phospholipase in Candida albicans. Sabouraudia 1982; 20: 7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Muhsin TM, Aubaid AH, Al-Duboon AH. Extracellular enzyme activities of dermatophytes and yeast isolates on solid media. Mycoses 1997; 40: 465–469.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Dos Santos JI, Paula CR, Viani FC, Gambale W. Susceptibility testing of Trichophyton rubrum and Microsporum canis to three azole antifungals by E-test. J Mycol Med 2001; 11: 42–43.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shepherd GJ. FITOPAC 1. Manual do usuário, Campinas: UNICAMP, 1994.

  23. Hunter PR, Gaston MA. Numerical index of the discriminatory ability of typing systems: An application of Simpson's index of diversity. J Clin Microbiol 1988; 26: 2465–2466.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Meevootisom V, Niederpruem DJ. Control of exocellular proteases in dermatophytes and specially Trichophyton rubrum. Sabouraudia 1979; 17: 91–106.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Apodaca G, Mckerrow, JH. Regulation of Trichophyton rubrum proteolytic activity. Infec Immun 1989; 57: 3081–3090.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Apodaca G, Mckerrow JH. Expression of proteolytic activity by cultures of Trichophyton rubrum. J MedVet Mycol 1990; 28: 159–171.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Samdami AJ, Dykes PJ, Marks R. The proteolytic activity of strains of Trichophyton mentagrophytes and Trichophyton rubrum isolatedfrom tinea pedis andtinea unguium infections. J MedVet Mycol 1995; 33: 167–170.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Warnock DW, Speller DCE, Day JK, Farrel AJ. Resistogram methodfor di.erentiation of strains of Candida albicans. J Appl Bacteriol 1979; 46: 571–578.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson EM, Davey KG, Szekeley A, Warnock DW. Itraconazole susceptibilities of fluconazole susceptible and resistant isolates of five Candida species. J Antimicrob Chemother 1995; 36: 787–793.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bradley MC, Leidich S, Isham N, Elewski BE, Ghannoum MA. Antifungal susceptibilities andgenetic relatedness of serial Trichophyton rubrum isolates from patients with onychomycosis of the toe nail. Mycoses 1999; 42(Suppl. 2): 105–110.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gräser Y, Kähnisc, J, Presber W. Molecular markers reveal exclusively clonal reproduction in Trichophyton rubrum. J Clin Microbiol 1999; 37: 3713–3717.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dos Santos, J., Vicente, E., Paula, C. et al. Phenotypic Characterization of Trichophyton rubrum isolates from two geographic locations in Brazil. Eur J Epidemiol 17, 729–735 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015675728486

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015675728486

Navigation