| Literature DB >> 23522652 |
Pu Liang1, Xiaoying Cui, Xiaoli Du, Biao Kan, Weili Liang.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vibrio fluvialis is considered to be an emerging foodborne pathogen and has been becoming a high human public health hazard all over the world, especially in coastal areas of developing countries and regions with poor sanitation. The distribution of virulence factors, microbiological and molecular epidemiological features of V. fluvialis isolates in China remains to be examined. METHODS ANDEntities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23522652 PMCID: PMC3636005 DOI: 10.1186/1757-4749-5-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gut Pathog ISSN: 1757-4749 Impact factor: 4.181
Primers and amplification conditions used in this study
| GACCAGGGCTTTGAGGTGGACGAC | 217 | 65 | [ | |
| AGGATACGGCACTTGAGTAAGACTC | | | | |
| VFLU-F | ATAAAGTGAAGAGATTCGTACC | 278 | 60 | [ |
| VFLU-R | GTATTCCTGAATGGAATACAC | | | |
| AACACCGCTTGCACCTCTAT | 525 | 53 | [ | |
| TGTATGCGCTTGAGAGTCC | | | | |
| GGTGCAACATAATAAACAGTCAACAA | 375 | 53 | [ | |
| TAGTGGTATGCGTTGCCAGC | | | | |
| AGGGGGCAGATGTGATCGAC | 606 | 55 | [ | |
| TGTGCGGATGAAGTCAGCTCC | | | | |
| GCGCGTCAGTGGTGGTGAAG | 800 | 61 | This study | |
| TCGGTCGAACCGCTCTCGCTT | | | | |
| ATTACGCACAACGAGTCGAAC | 600 | 56 | This study | |
| ATTGAGATGGT AAACAGCGCC | | | | |
| TACAACGTCAAGTTAAAGGC | 1790 | 55 | This study | |
| GTAGGCGCTGTAGCCTTTCA | | | | |
| AGTTTATGCGTCTGGCTTG | 3427 | 56 | This study | |
| ATGAGTAAGTTATACGTAGG | | | | |
| GCTTCGGCCCACATAATAA (paired with | 2170 | 56 | This study | |
| TTACCACCTAATGCGACGA (paired with | 1235 | 56 | This study |
Figure 1The virulence phenotypes of including VFP protease production, cytotoxic activity and biofilm formation.
Antibiotic susceptibility patterns ofstrains
| Ampicillin | S<=8 I=16 R>=32a | 12 (27.3) | 8 (18.2) | 24 (54.5) |
| Amoxicillin/Clavulanic acid | S<=8/4 I=16/8 R>=32/16b | 10 (22.7) | 7 (15.9) | 27 (61.4) |
| Cefotaxime | S<=1 I=2 R>=4b | 1 (2.3) | 6 (13.6) | 37 (84.1) |
| Ceftriaxone | S<=1 I=2 R>=4b | 1 (2.3) | 6 (13.6) | 37 (84.1) |
| Ceftazidime | S<=4 I=8 R>=16b | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 44 (100) |
| Chloramphenicol | S<=8 I=16 R>=32a | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 44 (100) |
| Ciprofloxacin | S<=1 I=2 R>=4b | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 44 (100) |
| Gentamicin | S<=4 I=8 R>=16b | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 44 (100) |
| Nalidixic acid | S<=16 R>=32b | 0 (0) | - | 44 (100) |
| Streptomycin | S<16 R>=16d | 1 (2.3) | - | 43 (97.7) |
| Sulfamethoxazole | S<=256 R>=512a | 11 (25.0) | - | 33 (75.0) |
| Trimethoprim | S<=8 R>=16b | 0 (0) | - | 44 (100) |
| Co-trimoxazole | S<=2/38 R>=4/76a | 0 (0) | - | 44 (100) |
| Tetracycline | S<=4 I=8 R>=16a | 1 (2.3) | 0 (0) | 43 (97.7) |
| Azithromycin | S<=2 I=4 R>=8c | 12 (27.3) | 5 (11.4) | 27 (61.3) |
aBreakpoints are based on the CLSI standards for V. cholerae.
bBreakpoints refer to the CLSI criteria for Enterobacteriaceae.
cBreakpoint is based on the CLSI standards for C. jejuni.
dBreakpoint refer to the reference [61].
R, resistance; I, intermediate; S, sensitivity.
Figure 2The results of the PFGE analysis using I digestion of strains and the MDR patterns. The dendrogram was produced using the Dice coefficient and the unweighted-pair group method with an arithmetic mean algorithm (UPGMA) with a position tolerance of 1.5%. Abbreviation: AMP, ampicillin; AMC/CLAV, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; CTX, cefotaxime; CRO, ceftriaxone; STR, streptomycin; SMZ, sulfamethoxazole; TET, tetracycline; AZM, azithromycin.