Decreasing the abundance of tetracycline-resistant
Conjugational transfer
Escherichia coli
Flavophospholipol
Pig
Tetracycline resistance
Journal
Veterinary and animal science
ISSN: 2451-943X
Titre abrégé: Vet Anim Sci
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101694897
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2022
Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
02
12
2021
revised:
27
01
2022
accepted:
28
01
2022
entrez:
11
2
2022
pubmed:
12
2
2022
medline:
12
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Tetracyclines (TCs) are widely used for livestock, and the high prevalence of TC-resistant Escherichia coli in livestock has become a serious concern worldwide. In Japan, the National Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance in 2016 aimed to reduce the TC resistance rate in E. coli derived from livestock. Flavophospholipol (FPL), used as a feed additive, has an inhibitory effect on the spread of plasmid-mediated antimicrobial resistance. The number of TC-resistant E. coli was determined in pigs administered TCs and/or FPL to clarify the effect of FPL on reducing the number of TC-resistant E. coli in pigs. TC-resistant E. coli and their plasmids were then analyzed. The pigs were divided into four groups: control, doxycycline (DOXY; a TC), FPL, and a DOXY-FPL combination. Their feces were collected from the nursing period to the day before being transported to the slaughterhouse, followed by estimation of TC-resistant E. coli (colony-forming units [CFU]/g). The number of TC-resistant E. coli increased with the use of DOXY, suggesting that DOXY administration provides a selective pressure for TC-resistant E. coli. Supplementation with FPL as a feed additive significantly suppressed the increase in the number of TC-resistant E. coli, especially during the DOXY administration period. Transfer and growth inhibition analyses were performed for TC-resistant isolates. FPL inhibited the conjugational transfer and growth of a few TC-resistant E. coli isolates. These results suggest that FPL is effective against the spread of TC-resistant E. coli.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35146180
doi: 10.1016/j.vas.2022.100236
pii: S2451-943X(22)00007-2
pmc: PMC8818586
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100236Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Front Microbiol. 2016 Feb 19;7:173
pubmed: 26925045
FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2005 Apr 15;245(2):195-203
pubmed: 15837373
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 28;9(1):5305
pubmed: 30923328
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003 Apr;16(2):175-88
pubmed: 12692092
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002 Jan;46(1):110-8
pubmed: 11751120
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2006 Aug;58(2):359-66
pubmed: 16847028
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016 Nov 21;82(24):7197-7204
pubmed: 27736789
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 May;37(5):540-546
pubmed: 30936562
Microb Drug Resist. 2015 Oct;21(5):562-9
pubmed: 26061440
J Antibiot (Tokyo). 2019 Feb;72(2):79-85
pubmed: 30361635
Postdoc J. 2017 May;5(5):3-9
pubmed: 28781980
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2006 Oct;56(2):115-21
pubmed: 16698216
Int J Food Microbiol. 2011 Feb 28;145(2-3):407-13
pubmed: 21324543
Ups J Med Sci. 2014 May;119(2):96-102
pubmed: 24678738
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Mar;73(6):1976-83
pubmed: 17277222
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 May;53(5):629-636
pubmed: 30685311
Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2017 Sep 2;57(13):2857-2876
pubmed: 26464037
J Bacteriol. 1981 Mar;145(3):1365-73
pubmed: 7009583
Microbiol Spectr. 2016 Apr;4(2):
pubmed: 27227291
Essays Biochem. 2017 Mar 3;61(1):37-48
pubmed: 28258228
Can Vet J. 2018 Jan;59(1):59-65
pubmed: 29302104
Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 2016;398:3-33
pubmed: 27406189