9 0.0 2.8 0.0 Haemophilus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Peptoniphilus 0.0 2.9 6.3 0.0 0.0 38.6 7.1 11.5 50.4 0.0 9.1 0.0 Streptococcus 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 84.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Serratia 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Percentages of each genera are indicated along with their location (A-L) based upon the map Selleckchem Inhibitor Library indicated in Figure 2B. Subject 3 A B C E G D F   E E E E E C C Peptoniphilus 32.1 62.5 49.4 54.2 13.9 44.0 9.6 Corynebacterium 10.7 3.8 2.8 0.0 15.6 0.0 13.1 Stenotrophomonas 14.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Peptostreptococcus 7.1 6.2 7.7 6.1 6.5 0.0 1.1 Pseudomonas 17.8 7.5 17.1 0.0 21.3 12.0 11.8 Staphylococcus 7.1 2.5 2.3 0.0 31.0 20.0 41.0 Streptococcus 3.6 3.8 1.5 0.0 3.8 4.0 1.7

Acinetobacter 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 3.3 0.0 4.4 clostridia 0.0 7.5 3.8 5.5 1.6 8.0 1.5 Porphyromonas 0.0 1.3 0.0 23.7 1.6 0.0 4.3 Prevotella 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 Propionibacterium 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 Xanthomonas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 Percentages of each genera are indicated along with their location (A-G) based upon the map indicated in Figure 2C. The location designations (edge or center) are also provided. Utilizing the new bTEFAP titanium technology a second topology evaluation was also conducted on 4 of the VLU patients. The new bTEFAP methods Acalabrutinib concentration utilize the new Titanium chemistry for pyrosequencing, which increases the read length of individual sequences

from an average of 250 bp to over 400 bp, utilize a single PCR step, and incorporate error reading polymerases. This new approach provides much better resolution at the individual species level and dramatically enhances our ability to characterize wound bacterial ecology. Four additional subjects were evaluated (See additional file 2). The results were similar to what we observed using the original bTEFAP method with the exception that we had more confidence in our ability to resolve certain populations at the species level. Subject 5 showed a high prevalence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa among the Exoribonuclease majority of the subsamples with notable populations of Burkholdaria spp (tentatively cenocepacia), an unknown Bacteroidales, and Clostridium spp (tentatively hathewayi). Subject 6 showed definite ubiquitous detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa with notable populations of Streptococcus parasanguinis across the wound.