Online first
Current issue
Archive
Special Issues
About the Journal
Publication Ethics
Anti-Plagiarism system
Instructions for Authors
Instructions for Reviewers
Editorial Board
Editorial Office
Contact
Reviewers
All Reviewers
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
General Data Protection Regulation (RODO)
RESEARCH PAPER
Antimicrobial resistance in Enterococcus spp. isolated from laying hens of backyard poultry floks
1
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pisa, Italy
2
Dipartimento di Prevenzione, UOC Sanità Animale, Azienda USL Massa Carrara, Italy
Corresponding author
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2015;22(4):665-669
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Introduction and objective:
Enterococci belonging to human and animal gastrointestinal flora are widely-distributed in the environment. They are opportunistic bacteria that can cause severe infections, with the ability to acquire, express and transfer antimicrobial resistance. The aim of the present study was to investigate antimicrobial resistance profiles of Enterococcus spp. strains isolated from cloacal swabs of laying hens of small backyard flocks.
Material and Methods:
Susceptibility to 21 antimicrobial agents was tested by the disc diffusion method in 115 Enterococcus spp. strains. Vancomycin and ampicillin minimum inhibitory concentrations and high-level aminoglycoside resistance tests were also performed.
Results:
Isolates showed resistance mainly to aminoglycosides, eritromycin, fluoroquinoles, tetracycline and nitrofurantoin. 19 (16.5%) isolates showed a high level of resistance to streptomycin, but no high level resistance to gentamycin. No significant resistance was detected for vancomycin. Several strains (45; 39.1%) showed combined resistance to macrolides, lincosamides and streptogramin B. 61 (53%) isolates were classified as multidrug-resistant (MDR) and 6 (5.2%) strains as possibly extensively drug-resistant (XDR). E. faecium was the most prevalent antimicrobial resistant species, followed by E. faecalis and E. durans.
Conclusions:
The results show that the risk of dissemination of antimicrobial resistant enterococci is related not only to the birds of large commercial flocks, but also to the birds of small backyard flocks. Thus, laying hens of hobby flocks, which share the outside environment with people, could represent a hazard for public health by providing a conduit for the entrance of resistance genes into the community.
Enterococci belonging to human and animal gastrointestinal flora are widely-distributed in the environment. They are opportunistic bacteria that can cause severe infections, with the ability to acquire, express and transfer antimicrobial resistance. The aim of the present study was to investigate antimicrobial resistance profiles of Enterococcus spp. strains isolated from cloacal swabs of laying hens of small backyard flocks.
Material and Methods:
Susceptibility to 21 antimicrobial agents was tested by the disc diffusion method in 115 Enterococcus spp. strains. Vancomycin and ampicillin minimum inhibitory concentrations and high-level aminoglycoside resistance tests were also performed.
Results:
Isolates showed resistance mainly to aminoglycosides, eritromycin, fluoroquinoles, tetracycline and nitrofurantoin. 19 (16.5%) isolates showed a high level of resistance to streptomycin, but no high level resistance to gentamycin. No significant resistance was detected for vancomycin. Several strains (45; 39.1%) showed combined resistance to macrolides, lincosamides and streptogramin B. 61 (53%) isolates were classified as multidrug-resistant (MDR) and 6 (5.2%) strains as possibly extensively drug-resistant (XDR). E. faecium was the most prevalent antimicrobial resistant species, followed by E. faecalis and E. durans.
Conclusions:
The results show that the risk of dissemination of antimicrobial resistant enterococci is related not only to the birds of large commercial flocks, but also to the birds of small backyard flocks. Thus, laying hens of hobby flocks, which share the outside environment with people, could represent a hazard for public health by providing a conduit for the entrance of resistance genes into the community.
REFERENCES (26)
1.
Byappanahalli MN, Nevers MB, Korajkic A, Staley ZR, Harwood VJ. Enterococci in the environment. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2012; 4: 685–706.
2.
Domig KJ, Mayer HK, Kneifel W. Methods used for the isolation, enumeration, characterization and identification of Enterococcus spp. 1. Media for isolation and enumeration. Int J Food Microbiol. 2003; 88: 147–164.
3.
Hegstad K, Mikalsen T, Coque TM, Werner G, Sundsfjord A. Mobile genetics elements and their contribution to the emergence of antimicrobial resistant Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16: 541–554.
4.
Hammerum AM. Enterococci of animal origin and their significance for public health. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012; 18: 619–625.
5.
Nilsson O. Vancomycin resistant enterococci in farm animals-occurrence and importance. Infect Ecol Epidemiol. 2012; 2: doi10.3402/iee.v2i0.16959..
6.
Hollenbeck BL, Rice LB. Intrinsic and acquired resistance mechanisms in enterococcus. Virulence 2012; 5: 421–433.
7.
Robbins KM, Suyemoto MM, Lyman RL, Martin MP, Barnes HJ, Borst LB. An outbreak and source investigation of enterococcal spondylitis in broiler caused by Enterococcus cecorum. Avian Dis. 2012; 56: 768–773.
8.
Šeputienė V, Bogdaitė A, Ružauskas M, Sužiedėlienė E. Antibiotic resistance genes and virulence factors in Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis from diseased farm animals: pigs, cattle and poultry. Pol J Vet Sci. 2012; 3: 431–438.
9.
Sørensen TL, Blom M, Monnet DL, Frimodt-Møller N, Poulsen RL, Espersen F. Transient intestinal carriage after ingestion of antibiotic-resistant Enterococcus faecium from chicken and pork. N Engl J Med. 2001; 16: 1161–1166.
10.
Marshall BM, Levy SB. Food animals and antimicrobials: impacts on human health. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2011; 4: 718–733.
11.
Obeng AS, Rickard H, Ndi O, Sexton M, Barton M. Comparison of antimicrobial resistance patterns in enterococci from intensive and free range chickens in Australia. Avian Pathol. 2013; 1: 45–54.
12.
Diarra MS, Rempel H, Champagne J, Masson L, Pritchard J, Topp E. Distribution of antimicrobial resistance and virulence genes in Enterococcus spp. and characterization of isolates from broiler chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2010; 24: 8033–8043.
13.
Furtula V, Jackson CR, Farrell EG, Barrett JB, Hiott LM, Chambers PA. Antimicrobial resistance in Enterococcus spp. isolated from environmental samples in an area of intensive poultry production. Int J Environ Public Health. 2013; 10: 1020–1036.
14.
Getachew Y, Hassan L, Zakaria Z, Abdul Aziz S. Genetic variability of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis isolates from humans, chickens, and pigs in Malaysia. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013; 79: 4528–4533.
15.
Nilsson O, Greko C, Bengtsson B. Environmental contamination by vancomycin resistant enterococci (VRE) in Swedish broiler production. Acta Vet Scand. 2009; 51: 49.
16.
Aarestrup FM, Agerso Y, Gerner-Smidt P, Madsen M, Jensen LB. Comparison of antimicrobial resistance phenotypes and resistance genes in Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium from humans in the community, broilers, and pigs in Denmark. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2000; 37: 127–137.
17.
Petsaris O, Miszczak F, Gicquel-Bruneau M, Perrin-Guyomard A, Humbert F, Sanders P, Leclercq R. Combined antimicrobial resistance in Enterococcus faecium isolated from chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005; 5: 2796–2799.
18.
Jaglic Z, Vlkova H, Bardon J, Michu E, Cervinkova D, Babak V. Distribution, characterization and genetic bases of erythromycin resistance in staphylococci and enterococci originating from livestock. Zoonoses Pub Health. 2012; 59: 202–211.
19.
Garcia-Migura L, Hendriksen RS, Fraile L, Aarestrup FM. Antimicrobial resistance of zoonotic and commensal bacteria in Europe: the missing link between consumption and resistance in veterinary medicine. Vet Microbiol. 2014; 170: 1–9.
20.
Bauer A, Kirby WMN, Sherris JC, Turk M. Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disc method. Am J Pathol. 1966; 45: 493–496.
21.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, Seventeenth Informational Supplement. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute document M100-S17 [ISBN 1–56238–625–5]. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087–1898 USA, 2007.
22.
EUCAST. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 3.1, 2013. http://www.eucast.org.
23.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria That Grow Aerobically; Approved Standard—Seventh Edition. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute document M7-A7 [ISBN 1-56238-587-9]. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087–1898 USA, 2006.
24.
Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, Carmeli Y, Falagas ME, Giske CG, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012; 18: 268–281.
25.
Andrews JM. Determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001; 48 Suppl 1: 5–16.
26.
Hammerum AM, Lester CH, Heuer OE. Antimicrobial-resistant enterococci in animals and meat: a human health hazard? Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2010; 10: 1137–1146.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1898-2263 |
| ISSN: | 1232-1966 |
Improvement of visual identification of the journal - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher Education allocated to the activities of disseminating science.
Generation of the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
