| Literature DB >> 24937705 |
Hongwen Su1, Jessica McKelvey1, Dale Rollins2, Michael Zhang1, Donald J Brightsmith1, James Derr1, Shuping Zhang1.
Abstract
The northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) is an ecologically and economically important avian species. At the present time, little is known about the microbial communities associated with these birds. As the first step to create a quail microbiology knowledge base, the current study conducted an inventory of cultivable quail tracheal, crop, cecal, and cloacal microbiota and associated antimicrobial resistance using a combined bacteriology and DNA sequencing approach. A total of 414 morphologically unique bacterial colonies were selected from nonselective aerobic and anaerobic cultures, as well as selective and enrichment cultures. Analysis of the first 500-bp 16S rRNA gene sequences in conjunction with biochemical identifications revealed 190 non-redundant species-level taxonomic units, representing 160 known bacterial species and 30 novel species. The bacterial species were classified into 4 phyla, 14 orders, 37 families, and 59 or more genera. Firmicutes was the most commonly encountered phylum (57%) followed by Actinobacteria (24%), Proteobacteria (17%) and Bacteroidetes (0.02%). Extensive diversity in the species composition of quail microbiota was observed among individual birds and anatomical locations. Quail microbiota harbored several opportunistic pathogens, such as E. coli and Ps. aeruginosa, as well as human commensal organisms, including Neisseria species. Phenotypic characterization of selected bacterial species demonstrated a high prevalence of resistance to the following classes of antimicrobials: phenicol, macrolide, lincosamide, quinolone, and sulphate. Data from the current investigation warrant further investigation on the source, transmission, pathology, and control of antimicrobial resistance in wild quail populations.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24937705 PMCID: PMC4061065 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099826
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
The composition of quail cultivable bacterial microbiota*.
| Phylum | Order | Family | Genus # | Species # |
|
|
|
| 5 | 41 |
|
| 2 | 20 | ||
|
| 1 | 4 | ||
|
|
| 2 | 11 | |
|
| 3 | 11 | ||
|
| 1 | 8 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 3 | |
|
| 1 | 3 | ||
|
| 1 | 2 | ||
|
| 2 | 2 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 1 | |
|
|
|
| 4 | 13 |
|
| 1 | 10 | ||
|
| 3 | 7 | ||
|
| 1 | 3 | ||
|
| 1 | 3 | ||
|
| 2 | 2 | ||
|
| 1 | 2 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 1 | |
|
|
|
| 9 | 20 |
|
|
| 1 | 4 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 1 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 3 | |
|
|
| 1 | 1 | |
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 1 | |
|
|
|
| 1 | 1 |
|
| 1 | 1 | ||
|
|
| 1 | 1 | |
| Total | 14 | 38 | 61 | 190 |
*Shown are the numbers (percentages) of order, family, genus, and species. A total of 49 bobwhites were used in this study. Bacteria were isolated from trachea, crops, ceca, and cloaca. Species or genus-level identifications were achieves using 16S rRNA gene sequencing and biochemistry. Highest Blast hits were from cultured bacteria.
Tissue-specific composition of quail microbiota*.
| Phylum | Family | Number of Species | |||
| Trachea | Crop | Ceca | Cloaca | ||
|
|
| 2 (9.52%) | 19 (21.11%) | 20 (28.99%) | 20 (28.17%) |
|
| 3 (4.35%) | 2 (2.82%) | |||
|
| 1 (4.76%) | 2 (2.22%) | 7 (10.14%) | 5 (7.04%) | |
|
| 3 (4.35%) | ||||
|
| 2 (2.90%) | ||||
|
| 4 (19.05%) | 8 (8.89%) | 3 (4.35%) | 1 (1.41%) | |
|
| 1 (1.11%) | ||||
|
| 2 (9.52%) | 10 (11.11%) | 7 (10.14%) | 4 (5.63%) | |
|
| 2 (2.82%) | ||||
|
| 3 (3.33%) | 1 (1.45%) | 3 (4.23%) | ||
|
| 2 (2.22%) | 4 (5.80%) | 9 (12.68%) | ||
|
| 1 (1.41%) | ||||
|
|
| 1 (1.45%) | 1 (1.41%) | ||
|
| 1 (1.45%) | 1 (1.41%) | |||
|
| 1 (1.11%) | 2 (2.82%) | |||
|
| 1 (1.11%) | ||||
|
| 3 (14.29%) | 6 (6.67%) | 1 (1.45%) | 6 (8.45%) | |
|
| 2 (2.22%) | 2 (2.90%) | 5 (7.04%) | ||
|
| 1 (1.11%) | ||||
|
| 1 (4.76%) | ||||
|
| 3 (3.33%) | ||||
|
| 2 (2.22%) | ||||
|
| 1 (1.41%) | ||||
|
| 1 (1.41%) | ||||
|
| 2 (9.52%) | 6 (6.67%) | 1 (1.45%) | 2 (2.82%) | |
|
|
| 1 (1.11%) | |||
|
| 1 (1.41%) | ||||
|
| 1 (4.76%) | ||||
|
| 2 (9.52%) | 16 (17.78%) | 5 (7.25%) | 1 (1.41%) | |
|
| 1 (4.76%) | 4 (4.44%) | 2 (2.90%) | ||
|
| 1 (1.45%) | 3 (4.23%) | |||
|
| 1 (4.76%) | 1 (1.11%) | 1 (1.45%) | ||
|
| 1 (4.76%) | ||||
|
| 1 (1.45%) | ||||
|
| 1 (1.45%) | ||||
|
|
| 1 (1.45%) | |||
|
| 1 (1.11%) | ||||
|
| 1 (1.45%) | ||||
| Total | 21 (100%) | 90 (100%) | 69 (100%) | 71 (100%) | |
*Shown are the numbers (percentages) of bacterial species in each family. Bacterial isolates from 49 bobwhites were identified to species or genus level by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and biochemistry.
Influence of age, sex and tissue type on the distribution of microbial taxa*.
|
| # of Taxa | P | R2 | M | F | Sex-P | A | J | Age-P | Tr | Cr | Ce | Cl | Tissue-p |
|
| 234 | <0.0001 | 0.12 | 142 | 92 | 179 | 55 | 107 | 49 | 77 | 1 | <0.0001 | ||
|
| 14 | <0.0001 | 0.41 | 9 | 5 | 12 | 2 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 0 | <0.0001 | ||
|
| 24 | <0.0001 | 0.53 | 17 | 7 | 18 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 0 | <0.0001 | ||
|
| 60 | <0.0001 | 0.22 | 26 | 34 | 0.013 | 46 | 14 | 42 | 12 | 5 | 1 | <0.0001 | |
|
| 14 | <0.0001 | 0.41 | 8 | 6 | 12 | 2 | 13 | 0 | 1 | 0 | <0.0001 | ||
|
| 51 | <0.0001 | 0.14 | 28 | 23 | 37 | 14 | 17 | 0 | 29 | 5 | <0.0001 | ||
|
| 53 | <0.0001 | 0.16 | 27 | 26 | 33 | 20 | 0.02 | 27 | 3 | 23 | 0 | <0.0001 | |
|
| 17 | <0.0001 | 0.40 | 13 | 4 | 0.024 | 15 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 0 | <0.0001 | |
|
| 16 | 0.04 | 0.13 | 8 | 8 | 11 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 11 | 0 | 0.008 | ||
|
| 60 | 0.0005 | 0.11 | 41 | 19 | 0.036 | 51 | 9 | 20 | 18 | 22 | 0 | 0.0006 | |
|
| 24 | 0.0006 | 0.19 | 16 | 8 | 19 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 20 | 2 | <0.0001 |
*Data shown are total number of taxa found in the samples. P, p-value; M, Male; F, female. A, adult; J, juvenile; T, trachea; Cr, crop; Ce, cecum, Cl, cloacal. A p-value is not provided when it is greater than 0.05.
Figure 1The number of bacterial species and the species diversity of northern bobwhite cultivable bacterial microbiota.
1A. Species data from 28 individual quail for which all four tissue types are presented. Cultures of most quail yielded 16 to 20 bacterial species while the cultures of a moribund quail gave rise to 26 bacterial species. 1B. Data presented are percentage of unique bacterial species (total number = 190) found in individual quail. Vast majority of bacterial species were unique to individual quail.
Figure 2Tissue-specific species diversity of northern bobwhite cultivable bacterial microbiota.
Data shown are the percentages of unique bacterial species (total number = 190) found in individual quail. Vast majority of bacterial species were unique to individual tissue samples.
Figure 3Cross-tissue species diversity of northern bobwhite microbiota.
Data shown are the numbers (percentage) of species that are unique or shared by tissue-specific quail cultivable bacterial microbiota. About 47.62% tracheal bacterial were cultured from gastrointestinal tract, including Acinetobacter baumannii, Bacillus aryabhattai, Bacillus subtilis, Enterococcus faecium, Klebsiella oxytoca, Lactobacillus agilis, Lactobacillus salivarius, Lactobacillus gasseri, Microbacterium testaceum, and Pseudomonas aeruginos. Species diversity was detected throughout the gastrointestinal tract with only 8 (4.47%) common bacterial species including Bacillus cereus, Bacillus megaterium, Bacillus nealsonii, Bacillus pumilus, Bacillus simplex, Bacillus subtilis, Enterococcus faecium, and Staphylococcus gallinarum.
Prevalence of opportunistic pathogens in quail*.
| Species | # (%) ofquail | Tissue | Sex | Age | ||||||
| Trachea | Crop | Ceca | Cloaca | Male | Female | Adult | Juvenile | Unknown | ||
|
| 16 | 0 | 1 | 15 | 0 | 9 | 7 | 12 | 3 | 1 |
| (32%) | (2.08%) | (38.46%) | (56.25%) | (43.75%) | (75%) | (18.75%) | (6.25%) | |||
|
| 12 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 7 | 11 | 1 | 0 |
| (24%) | (16.32%) | (4.17%) | (7.69%) | (41.67%) | (58.33%) | (91.67%) | (8.33%) | |||
|
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| (6%) | (2.56%) | (5.26%) | (100%) | (66.67%) | (33.33%) | |||||
|
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| (6%) | (7.89%) | (33.33%) | (66.67%) | (100%) | ||||||
|
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 3 | 0 |
| (18%) | (2.56%) | (21.05%) | (77.78%) | (22.22%) | (66.67%) | (33.33%) | ||||
*Shown are the numbers (percentages) of quail and tissue tested positive.
Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Gram negative bacteria isolated from bobwhites*.
| Antimicrobial |
|
|
|
| |
| agents | (n = 16) | (n = 13) | (n = 5) | (n = 13) | |
| Beta-lactam | Amoxicillin | 4–8 (100) | 2–8 (31), | 0.25–0.5 (100) |
|
| Ceftiofur | 0.25–0.5 (100) | 0.25–1 (100) | ≤0.25 (100) |
| |
| Penicillin |
|
| 0.06 (17), |
| |
| Aminoglycoside | Gentamicin | 0.5–1 (100) | ≤0.5 (100) | ≤0.5 (100) | 1–2 (100) |
| Neomycin | ≤2 (100) | ≤2 (100) | ≤2 (100) | 2–8 (100) | |
| Spectinomycin |
| ≤8 (33), | ≤8 (60), |
| |
| Streptomycin | ≤8 (100) | 8–32 (100) | ≤8 (100) |
| |
| Tetracycline | Oxytetracycline | 1–2 (100) | 0.25–4 (100) | 0.5–1 (100) | 4 (56), |
| Tetracycline | 1–2 (100) | 0.5–4 (100) | 1–2 (100) |
| |
| Phenicol | Florfenicol |
|
| ≤1 (100) |
|
| Macrolide | Erythromycin |
|
|
|
|
| Tylosin |
|
|
|
| |
| Lincosamide | Clindamycin |
|
|
|
|
| Quinolone | Enrofloxacin | ≤0.12 (100) | ≤0.12 (100) | 0.12 (100) |
|
| Novobiocin |
|
|
|
| |
| Sulpha | Sulphadimethoxine |
| ≤32 (25), | ≤32 (100) |
|
| Sulphatiazole |
|
| ≤32 (100) |
| |
| Trimethoprim/Sulpha | ≤0.5 (100) | ≤0.5 (100) | 0.5–1 (100) |
|
*The ranges of MICs (% of isolates) are indicated as follows: regular font, susceptible; bold and italic, intermediate susceptible; and bold and underlined, resistant.
Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of Gram positive bacteria isolated from bobwhites*.
| Antimicrobial |
|
|
| |
| Agents | (n = 10) | (n = 10) | (n = 10) | |
| Beta-lactam | Amoxicillin | ≤0.25 (100) | 0.25–5 (100) | ≤0.25 (100) |
| Ceftiofur | ≤0.25 (100) |
| 0.5–1 (100) | |
| Penicillin | ≤0.06 (100) | 0.25–2 (100) | ≤0.06 (100) | |
| Aminoglycoside | Gentamicin | ≤0.5 (100) | 4 (70), | ≤0.5 (100) |
| Neomycin | ≤2 (100) | 8–8 (30), | ≤2 (100) | |
| Spectinomycin | 8 (80), |
|
| |
| Streptomycin | ≤8 (100) | 16–64 (100) | ≤8 (100) | |
| Tetracycline | Oxytetracycline | ≤0.25 (100) | 0.25–2 (100) | 0.25–0.5 (90), |
| Tetracycline | 0.25–1 (100) | 0.25–2 (100) | 0.25–8 (10), | |
| Phenicol | Florfenicol | ≤1 (100) | 1–2 (100) | 1–2 (90), |
| Macrolide | Erythromycin | ≤0.12 (100) | 0.12–0.5 (100) | 0.25 (0), |
| Tylosin | ≤2.5 (100) | ≤2.5 (100) | ≤2.5 (100) | |
| Lincosamide | Clindamycin | ≤0.5 (100) | ≤0.5 (20), | ≤0.5 (90), |
| Quinolone | Enrofloxacin | ≤0.12 (100) | 0.25–0.5 (80), | 0.15 (100) |
| Novobiocin | ≤0.5 (100) | 0.5–2 (90), |
| |
| Sulpha | Sulphadimethoxine | 32 (100) |
| 32 (100) |
| Sulphatiazole |
|
| 32 (100) | |
| Trimethoprim/Sulpha | ≤0.5 (100) | ≤0.5 (100) | ≤0.5 (100) |
*The ranges of MICs (% of isolates) are indicated as follows: regular font, susceptible; bold and italic, intermediate susceptible; and bold and underlined, resistant.