Literature DB >> 29091182

Quinolone-resistant gyrase mutants demonstrate decreased susceptibility to triclosan.

Mark A Webber1,2, Michelle M C Buckner1, Liam S Redgrave1, Gyles Ifill3, Lesley A Mitchenall3, Carly Webb1, Robyn Iddles1, Anthony Maxwell3, Laura J V Piddock1.   

Abstract

Objectives: Cross-resistance between antibiotics and biocides is a potentially important driver of MDR. A relationship between susceptibility of Salmonella to quinolones and triclosan has been observed. This study aimed to: (i) investigate the mechanism underpinning this; (ii) determine whether the phenotype is conserved in Escherichia coli; and (iii) evaluate the potential for triclosan to select for quinolone resistance.
Methods: WT E. coli, Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium and gyrA mutants were used. These were characterized by determining antimicrobial susceptibility, DNA gyrase activity and sensitivity to inhibition. Expression of stress response pathways (SOS, RpoS, RpoN and RpoH) was measured, as was the fitness of mutants. The potential for triclosan to select for quinolone resistance was determined.
Results: All gyrase mutants showed increased triclosan MICs and altered supercoiling activity. There was no evidence for direct interaction between triclosan and gyrase. Identical substitutions in GyrA had different impacts on supercoiling in the two species. For both, there was a correlation between altered supercoiling and expression of stress responses. This was more marked in E. coli, where an Asp87Gly GyrA mutant demonstrated greatly increased fitness in the presence of triclosan. Exposure of parental strains to low concentrations of triclosan did not select for quinolone resistance. Conclusions: Our data suggest gyrA mutants are less susceptible to triclosan due to up-regulation of stress responses. The impact of gyrA mutation differs between E. coli and Salmonella. The impacts of gyrA mutation beyond quinolone resistance have implications for the fitness and selection of gyrA mutants in the presence of non-quinolone antimicrobials.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29091182     DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkx201

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother        ISSN: 0305-7453            Impact factor:   5.790


  5 in total

1.  Para-Substituted Functionalised Ferrocene Esters with Novel Antibacterial Properties.

Authors:  Kevin Muñoz Forti; Faviola Bernard; Gustavo Santiago-Collazo; Waldemar Garcia; Jose L Vera; Enrique Meléndez; Edu B Suarez-Martinez
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2018-02

2.  Antimicrobial Chemicals Associate with Microbial Function and Antibiotic Resistance Indoors.

Authors:  Ashkaan K Fahimipour; Sarah Ben Mamaar; Alexander G McFarland; Ryan A Blaustein; Jing Chen; Adam J Glawe; Jeff Kline; Jessica L Green; Rolf U Halden; Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg; Curtis Huttenhower; Erica M Hartmann
Journal:  mSystems       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 6.496

3.  Disinfectant and antimicrobial susceptibility studies of the foodborne pathogen Campylobacter jejuni isolated from the litter of broiler chicken houses.

Authors:  Ross C Beier; J Allen Byrd; Kathleen Andrews; Denise Caldwell; Tawni L Crippen; Robin C Anderson; David J Nisbet
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2020-11-04       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 4.  Strategies to combat antimicrobial resistance: anti-plasmid and plasmid curing.

Authors:  Michelle M C Buckner; Maria Laura Ciusa; Laura J V Piddock
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Rev       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 16.408

5.  DNA supercoiling differences in bacteria result from disparate DNA gyrase activation by polyamines.

Authors:  Alexandre Duprey; Eduardo A Groisman
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 5.917

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.