Abstract

AIMS--To compare the AUXACOLOR yeast identification system with the API 20C system. METHODS--Yeast isolates (n = 215), comprising 16 species, were identified using the AUXACOLOR system and the API 20C system. Isolates that could not be identified with the API 20C system or which produced discrepant results in the two systems were identified by assimilation and fermentation procedures. RESULTS--AUXACOLOR correctly identified 150 (85.7%) of 175 germ tube negative isolates while API 20C identified 155 (88.6%). Incorrect identifications were more common with API 20C (7.4%) than with AUXACOLOR (3.7%). Of 110 isolates of four common pathogens (Candida glabrata, C parapsilosis, C tropicalis, and Cryptococcus neoformans), 82.7% (91/110) were identified by AUXACOLOR while API 20C identified 74.5% (82/110). Of 65 less common germ tube negative isolates, 55.4% (36/65) were identified by AUXACOLOR while API 20C identified 63.1% (41/65). CONCLUSION--Although it has a limited database of 26 species, the AUXACOLOR system is a useful method for identification of germ tube negative clinical yeast isolates. Compared with the API 20C, the AUXACOLOR system is simpler and quicker to set up, easier to interpret, and comparable in cost.