{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03305322128851541, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018487394957983194, 'mean_word_length': 5.054237288135593, '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}}
Differentiation of Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus via genotypic and phenotypic profiles from three different populations.

Routine identification of Streptococcus mutans and Streptococcus sobrinus is generally based upon growth on various selective media, colony morphology and biochemical characteristics. We examined various approaches of differentiating these two species through a combination of the conventional phenotypic methodology with chromosomal DNA fingerprint (CDF) and arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction (AP-PCR) methods. Initially, ten ATCC type strains and 20 randomly selected clinical isolates of mutans streptococci (MS) were characterized and grouped into two major types based on patterns generated by the CDF using HaeIII digestion. The CDF's patterns with restriction fragments equal to or greater than 6.6 kb were defined as the CDF-1 group. The CDF's patterns with restriction fragments less than 6.6 kb were defined as the CDF-2 group. Both groups were then examined for biotype, serotype, and composition of DNA via thermal denaturation. AP-PCR was applied and evaluated for the capability of delineating S. mutans from S. sobrinus strains. Results of this study showed that all CDF-1 strains fit within a G+C range of 36.2% to 42.2%, whereas the CDF-2 strains had a G+C range of 45.8% to 47.0%. The serotyping assay exhibited 100% sensitivity, 90% specificity and 86.7% agreement with the CDF. The biotyping assay presented the poorest specificity (38.5%), indicating the highest variability. The capability of AP-PCR in differentiation of S. mutans from S. sobrinus was comparable to the CDF method, suggesting that either of these two approaches can and may serve as a viable alternative method to serotyping or biotyping of MS.