Chapter 8.9 : Mould Identification

Table 8.9-1

Definitions of terms used to describe morphological structures

Table 8.9-2

Phenotypic characteristics useful for identification of Zygomycota a

a In 2007, Hibbett et al. ( 8 ) revised the Zygomycota, and the medically important species were placed in the Mucormycotina, order Mucorales, and Conidiobolus ranaram was placed in the Entomophthoromycotina, order Entomophthorales.

b In 2007, Hoffman et al. ( 9 ) revised the genus Absidia, and the medically important species, including A. corymbifera, have been grouped into a new genus, Mycocladus.

Table 8.9-3a

Description of terms for conidial ontogeny and reproductive structures of the Ascomycota

Table 8.9-3b

Description of terms for conidial ontogeny and reproductive structures of the Ascomycota

Table 8.9-4

Common media used for moulds

Table 8.9–5a

Temperature tests commonly used in identification of clinically important moulds

Table 8.9–5b

Temperature tests commonly used in identification of clinically important moulds

Table 8.9-6

Cycloheximide responses of common or critical clinical laboratory moulds (including abundant contaminants)

a Semitolerant, restricted in colony growth rate but not killed at 100 mg of cycloheximide liter−1; usually killed or strongly restricted at 500 mg liter−1.

b Normally nonpathogenic, usually insignificant when isolated but rare opportunistic infection is possible.

Table 8.9-7

Distinguishing features for preliminary identification of mould phases of dimorphic systemic pathogens

a See reference 20 for detailed descriptions of important mimic fungi.

Table 8.9-8

Particulate phases of dimorphic fungi as seen in in vitro conversion and their differentiating characteristics

Table 8.9-9

Dermatophyte micromorphological structures

Table 8.9-10a

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-10b

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-10c

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-10d

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-10e

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-10f

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-10g

Phenotypic identification characteristics of common and occasionally seen dermatophytes, as well as rare species potentially used in QC trials

a Common.

b Uncommon, but likely to be seen in large laboratories in the Americas and Europe.

c Unlikely ever to be seen except in proficiency test or region of endemicity.

d Technical taxonomic note. This ecological category includes anthropophilic but not zoophilic forms both of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. ( 7 ) and of T. mentagrophytes anamorphs phylogenetically clustered with Arthroderma benhamiae. These forms were previously collectively called by the nomenclaturally invalid name “T. mentagrophytes var. interdigitale” by some workers. Although this name was conceived as encompassing all anthropophilic T. mentagrophytes-like isolates, this heterogeneous group cannot be placed under any single name except T. mentagrophytes sensu lato (species aggregate concept of T. mentagrophytes as used in the present work). Recent phylogenetic work has not been clear on this point, because the existence of rat and chinchilla strains, as well as anthropophilic strains, within the concept of T. interdigitale sensu Gräser et al. was not explicitly mentioned.

e Mod., moderately.

f Pos, positive; Neg, negative.

Table 8.9-11

Most common fungi other than dermatophytes and Scytalidium repeatedly and rigorously implicated as causal agents of onychomycosis