Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 28, 2026

Generating Whole Bacterial Genomes from Clinical Samples using a Target Enrichment Workflow
Published on: August 15, 2025
Whole-Genome Sequencing Re-Identifies Clinical "Peptoniphilus harei" Isolates as "Peptoniphilus genitalis"
Liyan Mao1, Chao Xu1, Yuanxiang Zhao2
1Department of Laboratory Medicine, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China.
Abstract:
Accurate species-level identification within the genus Peptoniphilus is challenging, yet routine methods, including biochemical identification, MALDI-TOF MS, and 16S rRNA gene sequencing, have not been systematically evaluated. We re-identified seven clinical isolates recovered between 2019 and 2025 from blood, ovarian abscess, diabetic foot, and skin and soft tissue, using VITEK-2 ANC, two MALDI-TOF MS platforms (Autof ms1000 and Bruker Biotyper), 16S rRNA gene sequencing, and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) combined with average nucleotide identity (ANI) analysis. VITEK-2 reported all seven isolates as P. asaccharolyticus; both MALDI-TOF platforms reported all as P. harei with high confidence (Autof ms1000 scores 9.299-9.638; Bruker Biotyper scores 2.008-2.227); and 16S rRNA sequencing could not reliably distinguish between P. vaginalis (98.60-99.23%) and P. harei (98.03-98.31%), as both identity ranges were close to the 98.65% species-level threshold and neither consistently exceeded it. WGS/ANI identified all seven isolates as P. genitalis (ANI 96.44-97.05% against the reference genome). All clinical isolates remained susceptible to β-lactams and vancomycin. Clindamycin resistance was common (6/7), and erythromycin showed a concordant pattern; the fluoroquinolones showed small inhibition zones in 5/7 isolates. However, erythromycin and the fluoroquinolones lacked a method-appropriate breakpoint and could not be formally categorized. The clinical distribution of P. genitalis is not limited by its name; conventional methods underrepresent this recently described species, and WGS/ANI should serve as the confirmatory method when identification conflicts with phenotypic observations.

