SCCmecTyping in Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureusStrains of Animal Origin

We thank Jansen et al. for their comments about the SCCmec types of sequence type (ST) 398 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates (1). For SCCmec typing of MRSA, several different PCR methods have been published. We originally chose the SCCmec PCR developed by Zhang et al. (2) because at that time it was the method of choice in many published papers. Fluit et al. questioned whether the SCCmec type III isolates were correctly typed (1). To prove that the results of typing these 4 isolates were incorrect, these researchers performed several different SCCmec PCRs, including a PCR with primers they developed themselves. In addition, Southern hybridization was done. The results showed that SCCmec III ST398 MRSA isolates should be typed as SCCmec type V. In this conclusion we agree with the authors. It seems clear that Zhang’s method incorrectly identified 4 of the animal-related ST398 isolates as SCCmec type III instead of SCCmec type V. Whether all ST398 MRSA are SCCmec type IV or V remains unclear. Recently, an article by Nemati et al. was published in which ST398 MRSA was also typed as SCCmec III (3). However, in that study the SCCmec typing method of Zhang was also used. In conclusion, the choice of SCCmec typing method is directly related to obtaining accurate SCCmec results for ST398 isolates. To date, almost all animal-related ST398 MRSA isolates are SCCmec types IV and V.