{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020792079207920793, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009900990099009901, 'mean_word_length': 4.777142857142858, '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': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Development, position and trends in the taxonomy of the genus Salmonella].

The development of taxonomy of Salmonella genus interpretation was outlined in 1900 by Lignieres. The idea that any Salmonella defined by the Kauffmann-White scheme should be rated as a species in its own right has become under criticism for some time. It was suggested that S. cholerae suis should be seen as the only valid species name in the early 80's. This was ever misunderstood because this name had long ago been attributed to a pig-adapted serovar. Le Minor and Popoff (1987) suggested that S. enterica should be used as the species name. Confusion will thus be ruled out, since enterica has not been associated with any serovar. All salmonella names contained in Kauffmann-White scheme are serovars. It was suggested that all interpretations after consultation with human and veterinary medicine should be accepted in order to avoid the misunderstanding of the terminology and to achieve rational interpretation of results.