| Literature DB >> 28135327 |
Aneta Nowakiewicz1, Grażyna Ziółkowska1, Przemysław Zięba2, Sebastian Gnat1, Aleksandra Trościańczyk1, Łukasz Adaszek3.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to characterize multidrug resistant E. faecalis strains from pigs of local origin and to analyse the relationship between resistance and genotypic and proteomic profiles by amplification of DNA fragments surrounding rare restriction sites (ADSRRS-fingerprinting) and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI -TOF MS). From the total pool of Enterococcus spp. isolated from 90 pigs, we selected 36 multidrug resistant E. faecalis strains, which represented three different phenotypic resistance profiles. Phenotypic resistance to tetracycline, macrolides, phenicols, and lincomycin and high-level resistance to aminoglycosides were confirmed by the occurrence of at least one corresponding resistance gene in each strain. Based on the analysis of the genotypic and phenotypic resistance of the strains tested, five distinct resistance profiles were generated. As a complement of this analysis, profiles of virulence genes were determined and these profiles corresponded to the phenotypic resistance profiles. The demonstration of resistance to a wide panel of antimicrobials by the strains tested in this study indicates the need of typing to determine the spread of resistance also at the local level. It seems that in the case of E. faecalis, type and scope of resistance strongly determines the genotypic pattern obtained with the ADSRRS-fingerprinting method. The ADSRRS-fingerprinting analysis showed consistency of the genetic profiles with the resistance profiles, while analysis of data with the use of the MALDI- TOF MS method did not demonstrate direct reproduction of the clustering pattern obtained with this method. Our observations were confirmed by statistical analysis (Simpson's index of diversity, Rand and Wallace coefficients). Even though the MALDI -TOF MS method showed slightly higher discrimination power than ADSRRS-fingerprinting, only the latter method allowed reproduction of the clustering pattern of isolates based on phenotypic resistance and analysis of resistance and virulence genes (Wallace coefficient 1.0). This feature seems to be the most useful for epidemiological purposes and short-term analysis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28135327 PMCID: PMC5279778 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171160
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Occurrence of resistance and virulence genes in three selected phenotypic resistance profiles of E. faecalis.
| phenotypic resistance profiles /No of strains | resistance gene profile/No of strains | resistance and transposon genes | virulence genes |
|---|---|---|---|
| profile A/9 CFMGKLQDST | I/5 | ||
| II/4 | |||
| profile B/13 CFMKLQDST | III/13 | ||
| profile C/14 CMGKLQDRST | IV/8 | ||
| V/6 |
aboldface indicates differentially expressed genes within each phenotypic resistance profiles.
Fig 1Dendrogram of genetic relatedness among E. faecalis strains obtained with the ADSRRS-fingerprinting method.
a reference strains of E. faecalis: ATCC29212 and ATCC51299 b resistance gene profile.
Fig 2Pseudo gel view representation obtained from the average mass spectra of E. faecalis.
Fig 3Dendrogram obtained after NTSYSpc analysis of MALDI-TOF MS data.
Statistic comparison of the typing methods used in this study.
| Technique | Simpson’s index of diversity (95% CI) | Rand coefficient (95% CI) | Wallace coefficient (95% CI) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MALDI TOF MS | Phenotype | Genotype | MALDI TOF MS | Phenotype | Genotype | ADSSRS | ||
| MALDI TOF MS | 0.941 (0.899–0.983) | 0.595 (0.434–0.755) | 0.243 (0.049–0.437) | 0.162 (0.00–0.263) | ||||
| Phenotype | 0.386 (0.241–0.530) | 0.397 (0.256–0.538) | 0.057 (0.011–0.103) | 0.354 (0.263–0.445) | 0.082 (0.008–0.157) | |||
| Genotype | 0.783 (0.717–0.848) | 0.752 (0.673–0.832) | 0.603 (0.483–0.723) | 0.066 (0.00–0.140) | 1.0 | 0.472 (0.371–0.572) | ||
| ADSSRS- fingerprinting | 0.884 (0.848–0.920) | 0.844 (0.790–0.899) | 0.502 (0.359–0.645) | 0.898 (0.822–0.975) | 0.082 (0.00–0.196) | 1.0 | 1.0 | |
a phenotype indicates the phenotypic resistance profile.
b genotype indicates the profiles of resistance and virulence genes.