{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03536977491961415, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01157556270096463, 'mean_word_length': 4.938931297709924, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Investigation of hospital-acquired infections due to Alcaligenes denitrificans subsp. xylosoxidans by DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism

In a letter to the editor (6), P. C. Schreckenberger emphasized that the correct name for the organism that Yabuuchi and Yano (9) called Achromobacter xylosoxidans is Alcaligenes xylosoxidans subsp. xylosoxidans, when the subspecies concept of Kersters and De Ley (2) as modified by Kiredjian et al. (3) is followed instead of the combination used by Cheron et al. (1). M. Simonet (7) maintained in his reply that this combination has never been validated. This is not so; the paper by Kiredjian et al. (3) was published in the International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology. Kersters and De Ley (2) combined two species as subspecies under one species, because the rRNA cistrons were indistinguishable by hybridization techniques despite DNA-DNA homology values of 30 to 35% (4). There are few phenotypic features that can be used to separate A. xylosoxidans subsp. xylosoxidans from A. xylosoxidans subsp. denitrificans, with the oxidation of xylose and glucose being the main ones. The two taxa can still be considered separate species with the names Achromobacter xylosoxidans (9) and Alcaligenes denitrificans (5). These validly published names did not become invalid when the subspecies combinations appeared. The rather low level of 26% DNA homology between the two type strains was confirmed by Vandamme et al. (8). This argues against regarding the two taxa as subspecies within a common species.