| Literature DB >> 28004362 |
Ram Prosad Chakrabarty1,2, Munawar Sultana1, Saadlee Shehreen1,3, Selina Akter1,4, M Anwar Hossain5.
Abstract
The study aims at revealing the comprehensive contribution of target alteration, target protection and efflux pump to the development of high level of ciprofloxacin (CIP) resistance in Enterobacteriaceae bacteria of environmental, clinical and poultry origins. Antibiotic susceptibility test was used to detect CIP resistant (CIPR) isolates and MICCIP was determined by broth microdilution method. The presence of qnrS gene was identified by PCR and Southern blot hybridization (SBH) confirmed their location. Checkerboard titration demonstrated the effect of NMP on CIP action. PCR followed by sequencing and in silico analysis revealed the contribution of mutations in acrR, marR and gyrA to CIPR development. Out of 152 isolates, 101 were detected as CIPR. Randomly selected 53 isolates (MICCIP 4-512 µg/mL) were identified as Escherichia spp. (26), Enterobacter spp. (7), Klebsiella spp. (5) and Salmonella spp. (15) and of them 31 isolates carried qnrS. qnrS harboring 18 highly CIPR isolates (MICCIP: 256-512 µg/mL) were selected for further study. SBH confirmed 7 isolates harbored qnrS gene in plasmids. The acrA, acrB and tolC were present in all 18 isolates and NMP had an additive (12-isolates) or synergistic (6-isolates) effect on CIP action. Most isolates contained double amino acid (aa) substitutions (S83L and D87N) in QRDR of GyrA resulting in an altered conformation of putative CIP binding pocket. However, some isolates contained single (S83L or S83Y) or no aa substitution but showed high CIPR implicating that the concerted action of three mechanisms is responsible for high CIPR with the most significant role of efflux pump.Entities:
Keywords: Ciprofloxacin resistance; DNA gyrase; Efflux pump; Enterobacteriaceae; qnrS
Year: 2016 PMID: 28004362 PMCID: PMC5177599 DOI: 10.1186/s13568-016-0294-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: AMB Express ISSN: 2191-0855 Impact factor: 3.298
Identification of the isolates on the basis of conventional and molecular analysis
| Isolate ID | Growth characteristics on different differential and selective media | Microscopic characteristics | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Media | Appearance | Form | Elevation | Margin | Consistency | Gram-staining | Size | Shape | Arrangement | |
|
| MAC | DP | C | F | E | D | Gram-negative | S | SR | Single |
| EMB | BB, GMS | |||||||||
| XLD | Y | |||||||||
| MCX1, MCX2, MCX3, MCX4, MCX5, MCX6, NCX4 | MAC | P | C | R | E | G | M | Rd | ||
| EMB | B, DC | |||||||||
| XLD | Y | |||||||||
| NCX6, MCX10, C1, C67, E33 | MAC | LP | C | F | E | D | M | Rd | ||
| EMB | B, DC | C | F | E | G | |||||
| XLD | Y | C | F | E | D | |||||
| 18, 20, 36, 44, 45, 49, 54, 58, 60,68, 74, | MAC | Colorless | C | F | E | D | M | Rd | ||
| EMB | Color less | C | F | E | G | |||||
| XLD | Red, BC | C | F | E | D | |||||
Legends for conventional and molecular characteristics: C circular, F flat, R raised, E entire, D dry, G gummy, S short, M medium, SR short rod, Rd rod, GMS green metallic sheen, DP dark pink, BB blue black, Y yellow, P pink, B brown, R red, DC dark centered, LP light pink, Gl glucose, Su sucrose, La lactose, BC black centered
Italics isolates were previously identified in our laboratory
Fig. 1Phylogenetic analysis of isolates of Family Enterobacteriaceae using partial sequences of 16S rRNA gene. a Isolates were subjected to AluI digestion followed by amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA) revealed 4 genotypic groups. b Phylogenetic tree constructed with MEGA6 based on ARDRA. The optimal tree was built using Neighbor-Joining method (sum of branch length = 0.2448)
Median minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of ciprofloxacin for the 53 Enterobacteriaceae isolates and the presence of qnrS gene in the isolates
| Isolates | Source | ID |
| MIC (μg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| UTI | E8, | + | 512 |
| E29, E42 | + | 32 | ||
| E36, E37, E40 | − | 128 | ||
| E41, G3 | + | 128 | ||
| E56 | + | 8 | ||
| E58 | + | 4 | ||
| G2 | + | 128 | ||
|
| + | 256 | ||
| DMCH |
| + | 256 | |
|
| + | 512 | ||
| SSMCH |
| + | 512 | |
| CR6 | + | 64 | ||
|
| + | 256 | ||
| C6, C84 | − | 64 | ||
| C79 | − | 32 | ||
| C49 | − | 512 | ||
|
| SSMCH |
| + | 512 |
|
| + | 256 | ||
| C1 | − | 128 | ||
| C67 | − | 512 | ||
|
| SSMCH | MCX4 | + | 4 |
|
| + | 512 | ||
| MCX2 | + | 32 | ||
| MCX3 | + | 8 | ||
| MCX1, | + | 256 | ||
|
| Poultry | 36, 44, 45, 49, 54, 81, 84, 94, 60 | − | 16 |
| 58, 68 | − | 32 | ||
|
| + | 256 | ||
|
| + | 512 | ||
| 18 | − | 64 | ||
| 20 | − | 128 |
Italics isolates were selected for revealing CIP resistance mechanisms
Fig. 2Confirming the location of qrnS gene in selected isolates. a Plasmid profiling of Escherichia spp. (i), Enterobacter spp. (ii) and Klebsiella spp. (iii) analyzed against V517 molecular mass markers followed by (b). Southern blot hybridization analysis for qnrS gene (i, ii and iii respectively) shows plasmids of different sizes containing qnrS gene
Overview of combined mechanism of ciprofloxacin resistance within qnrS, acrAB-tolC positive Enterobacteriaceae
| Organism | ID | MIC (µg/mL) | Plasmid mediated | Efflux pump mediated resistance | Amino acid substitution in QRDR of DNA gyrase subunit A | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of plasmids extracted (approximate size in kb) | Size (in kb) of plasmid harboring | Effect of NMP on the action of CIP | Amino acid substitution in regulatory gene products | |||||
| AcrR | MarR | |||||||
|
| E23 | 512 | No plasmid | – | Additive | H115Y | G103S, Y137H, A53E | S83L, D87N |
| E34 | 512 | No plasmid | – | Additive | H115Y | G103S, Y137H, A53E | S83L, D87N | |
| 26N | 256 | 5 (<2.1, 2.7, 3.0, 4.6, >54.2) | 1 (<2.0) | Additive | H115Y | G103S, Y137H, A53E | S83L, D87N | |
| 28N | 256 | 6 (<2.1, <2.1, 2.5, 2.8, 3.1, 3.9) | None | Additive | T213I, N214T | G103S, Y137H, K62R | S83L, D87N | |
| CR1 | 512 | 1 (>54.2) | 1 (>54.2) | Synergistic | No substitution | G103S, Y137H | S83L | |
| CR2 | 512 | 7 (~2.3, 2.5, 3.7, 3.9, 5.2, 54.2, >54.2) | 1 (>54.2) | Synergistic | No substitution | G103S, Y137H | S83L, D87N | |
| CR4 | 512 | 5 (<2.1, 2.9, 3.0, 3.5, >54.2) | None | Synergistic | ND | ND | S83L, D87N | |
| MCX14 | 256 | 2 (3.1, >54.2) | 1 (>54.2) | Additive | ND | ND | S83L, D87N | |
| NCX9 | 256 | 2 (~54.2, >54.2) | None | Additive | No substitution | G103S, Y137H | No substitution | |
| G4 | 256 | 4 (~2.4, 2.7, 3.9, >54.2) | None | Additive | T213I, N214T | G103S, Y137H, K62R | S83L, D87N | |
|
| MCX5 | 512 | 5 (2.0, 2.2, 2.8, 3.9, >54.2) | None | Synergistic | ND | ND | S83L, D87N |
| MCX6 | 256 | 3 (2.0, 2.2, >54.2) | 1 (2.2) | Additive | ND | ND | S83Y | |
| NCX14 | 256 | 1 (3.9, 7.0) | 2 (3.9, 7.0) | Additive | ND | ND | S83L, D87N | |
|
| E33 | 256 | No plasmid | – | Additive | ND | ND | Not done |
| NCX6 | 512 | 9 (<2.0, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, 4.8, 5.0, 54.2, >54.2) | None | Synergistic | ND | ND | Not done | |
| MCX10 | 512 | 8 (<2.0, 2.5, 2.7, 3.9, 4.0, 5.0, 54.2, >54.2) | 3 (2.5, 2.7, >54.2) | Synergistic | ND | ND | S83L | |
|
| 74 | 256 | No plasmid | – | Additive | ND | ND | S83L, D87N |
| 77 | 512 | No plasmid | – | Additive | ND | ND | S83L, D87N | |
ND not determined
Fig. 3Interaction of ciprofloxacin in ciprofloxacin-DNA gyrase-DNA ternary complexes. The conformation of putative ciprofloxacin binding pocket appeared to alter in mutant gyrase A (b) as compared with the reference wild type gyrase A (a)