Talk:Escherichia coli

Role in digestion?

In its current form the article mentions very little about the most common thing Escherichia coli does, helping in food digestion. It is mentioned that it is a necessary bacteria strain to have for proper digestion, but neglects to mention what it is that the bacteria actually does. Later on, it is mentioned that E. coli ferments lactose, but I think that's merely suggestive as I don't think they're the only thing that processes lactose in the human digestive system. I'd add to it myself, but microbiology is really not my area of expertise. --80.221.135.214 20:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Changes

Just made a minor change. From what I understand, E. Coli toxins prevent absorption of water by the intestine, not the other way around. Worty

Old talk

Below is the text from three electronic flashcards I made from lecuture notes from two different microbiology classes. If nobody else is able to do so, I will translate this data into coherent English sentences as I find time. maveric149
Escherichia coli

1) Gram reaction? Gram -

2) Catalase reaction? Catalase +

3) Microscopic appearance? Rod

4) Colony characteristics? Colilert Test+ : yellow & fluoresce

5) Isolation? Fecal coliforms can grow @44.5°C,

inoculum?
media?
conditions?

Colilert Test: -ase = E. Coli enzyme

ONPG + ß-galactosidase ––> ONP(bright yellow) + G  
MUG + ß-D-glucuronidase ––> MU(fluoresces @340nm) + G

incubate 24 hrs @ 35°C

Colilert Test
ONPG Ortho-nitro-phenol-ß D-Galactopyronoside ß galactosidase is an enzyme of E. Coli that can cleave the bond between ONP & G in ONPG (this bond is similiar to the bond between Glucose & Galactose) MUG 4-methyl-umbelliferone-ß D-Glucuronide

Escherichia coli 1

1) Natural environment is ... large intestine of mammals

2) Dominant types are.... non pathogenic

3) Serology (# of Serogroups) = O (174), & H (flagellar, 56)

4) How many types are pathogenic.= 5 (3 are of most concern)

5) Ones that are of most concern
Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) ¹
Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) ²
Enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC)

¹ Major cause of death in 3rd world. Travelers & child diarrhea. Heat labile toxin & heat stable toxin.
² Cause of severe diarrhea in children & travelers.

Escherichia coli 2

1) How is O157:H7 different?
does not ferment sorbitol in 24hrs, MUG negative, doesn't grow well at 44-45°C, acid tolerant

2) Properties of EHEC?
>100 known serotypes (O157:H7), hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS -- 3-5% deathrate), low dose, onset 3-8 days, sm intestine infector

3) Symptoms of O157:H7? Severe abdominal pain, bloody diarrhea, vomiting, low to no fever. Last 6-8 days. Produces shiga-like toxins (aka verotoxins)

Why was "Escherichia coli" moved here? We don't generally abbreviate genus/species names here; why do it in this case? --LDC

Because "Escherichia" is hardly ever used -- even by microbiologists (let alone everyone else). --mav

While it's certainly true that E. coli is an indicator species for fecal contamination of water, when we do surface water or treated wastewater sampling we are actually looking for total coliforms -- many species; occasionally also for fecal strep. There is some indication, though it's controversial, that the ratio of fecal coliforms to streptococci present can indicate whether the source is likely to be human (e.g., failing septic systems) vs. animal (e.g., agricultural runoff). When a drinking water utility reports a positive sample to us (e.g., contamination due to line break, etc.), presence or absence of E. coli is noted. Uyanga 14:44, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Changes to text on E.coli and UTI

Just to explain the changes I've made to the para on UTI and E.coli. I've downgraded the importance of honeymoon cystitis a little. While intercourse can be a precipitating factor in UTI I don't think it's a major cause and may be largely aprocryphal. In practice there always 'seems' to be a large sex imbalance in the incidence of UTI (biased heavily to females) but as I understand it, over a lifetime the risk is about even. Male and female are equal up to age 10 or so, females then lead up to about 55/60 years (short urethra, pregnancy) then males suffer more (prostate, general aging, hospitalisation etc). I'll try to back this up with some figures if I can.

I'll try and add something about what makes E.coli (or at least some strains of E.coli) such good uropathogens as well, when I can.

Didn't sign that last contribution.Tim 21:12, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

from Journal of Gender Specific Medicine. 2000 Nov-Dec;3(8):27-34. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11253265&dopt=Abstract) "Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are more common among women than men, although the prevalence in elderly men and women is similar." Matt 17:21, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably anal sex is a risk factor for females as well? Benwilson528

When you think about anatomy it makes sense that females will get more UTIs. UTIs are usually caused by bowel flora and it would be very easy for bugs to migrate from the anus to and up the very short urethra of females (~3 cm as opposed to ~20 cm in males), especially if hygiene is bad. Males don’t really get UTIs unless they’re infants (usually due to bad hygiene) or elderly (usually due to prostate hypertrophy preventing normal urine flow). Catheters also increase the risk of UTIs, and catheterization happens more in older people… UTI in a male who is not an infant or over 60 is so uncommon that in Australia if that’s what is diagnosed you have to check for structural abnormalities in the urinary system. --Queenvik 06:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Removal of reference

Recently an anonymous user has removed both the trivia and reference sections from this article. I was wondering what some people's reactions to this was/is. I was indifferent about the trivia section but believe strong references should be the corner stone to a great science section... anyone else have thought? Adenosine | Talk 03:40, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

I found a reference for the trivia, but I agree that its encyclopedicity is very limited. JFW | T@lk 09:28, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Question: is someone willing to update the 'scientific classification' section? Describing bacteria as a 'kingdom' is outdated and misleading. I don't consider myself sufficiently qualified to correct it ... thanks

Pronunciation please?

Preferably IPA? —Keenan Pepper 21:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to ask the same thing. I found esh´´urik´Eu kO´lI, and know it's like "eh-shuh-RI-kee-uh CO-lie" or "eh-shur-I-kee-uh CO-lie" but can't translate it into the standard pronunciation.Dominicanpapi82 02:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links

The link to http://3dscience.com/e_coli_ecoli_bateria.asp seems like kind of an advertisment.

how is it necessary for digestion?

The article gives lots of examples of what E coli can do, but doesn't actually say why E coli is needed in the digestive process. Anyone up for adding a 'E coli and digestion' section? --moof 11:30, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware of (and I can be incredibly wrong here) E.coli's effect on digestion reminds unknown. As of now it's certainly not considered as a "vital" part of the digestion anyway.