| Literature DB >> 30110918 |
Akebe Luther King Abia1, Eunice Ubomba-Jaswa2,3, Chantelle Schmidt4, Matthys Alois Dippenaar5.
Abstract
Human burial in cemeteries facilitates the decomposition of corpses without posing a public health danger. However, the role of cemeteries as potential environmental reservoirs of drug-resistant pathogens has not been studied. Thus, we investigated cemeteries as potential environmental reservoirs of multi-drug resistant (MDR) pathogenic Escherichia coli. E. coli isolates were obtained from water samples (collected from surface water bodies and boreholes in three cemeteries) after isolation using the Colilert® 18 system. Pathogenic potentials of the isolates were investigated using real-time polymerase chain reactions targeting seven virulence genes (VGs) pertaining to six E. coli pathotypes. The resistance of isolates to eight antibiotics was tested using the Kirby⁻Bauer disc diffusion method. The mean E. coli concentrations varied from <1 most probable number (MPN)/100 mL to 2419.6 MPN/100 mL with 48% of 100 isolates being positive for at least one of the VGs tested. Furthermore, 87% of the isolates were resistant to at least one of the antibiotics tested, while 72% of the isolates displayed multi-drug resistance. Half of the MDR isolates harboured a VG. These results suggest that cemeteries are potential reservoirs of MDR pathogenic E. coli, originating from surrounding informal settlements, which could contaminate groundwater if the cemeteries are in areas with shallow aquifers.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotic resistance; cemetery; environmental reservoirs; multi-drug resistance; pathogenic E. coli; public health
Year: 2018 PMID: 30110918 PMCID: PMC6164573 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics7030073
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
Mean Escherichia coli count for water samples collected at three Cape Town cemeteries.
| Cemetery | Sample Site * | Depth (m) ** | Replicate Samples (MPN/100 mL) | Geometric Mean (MPN/100 mL) | Standard Deviation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |||||
| Delft | D2 | 3.1 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| D3 | na | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Maitland | MDam1 | na | 1 | 1 | 4.1 | 1.6 | 1.8 |
| MDam2 | na | 1 | 4.1 | 1 | 1.6 | 1.8 | |
| MRiver1 | na | 2419.6 | 2419.6 | 2419.6 | 2419.6 | 0.0 | |
| MRiver2 | na | 2419.6 | 2419.6 | 2419.6 | 2419.6 | 0.0 | |
| M1 | 1.6 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| M2 | 2.8 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| M4 | 4 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| M5 | 2.5 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| M6 | 2 | 9.7 | 18.7 | 8.4 | 11.5 | 5.6 | |
| M7 | 2.7 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| M8 | 2.3 | 8.6 | 3.1 | 5.2 | 5.2 | 2.8 | |
| Welmoed | Wetland | na | 65.7 | 86.5 | 42 | 62.0 | 22.3 |
| W2 | 1.8 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| W3 | 2.4 | <1 | <1 | <1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
* D: Delft; M: Maitland; W: Welmoed. ** na: not applicable (samples were collected from the surface water bodies, i.e., streams and wetlands).
Figure 1Percentage detection of the various E. coli pathotypes. * NNEC/APEC: positive for the ibeA gene, which is present in both Avian Pathogenic E. coli (APEC) and NMEC (Neonatal Meningitis-Associated E. coli). ** EPEC/EHEC (Enteropathogenic E. coli/Enterohaemorrhagic E. coli): positive for the eaeA gene, which is present in both pathotypes. *** E. coli denotes all isolates that were not positive for any of the Virulence Genes tested.
Distribution of isolates with respect to resistance to each antibiotic tested *.
| Profile | Number of Isolates | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C (25 µg) | S (10 µg) | T (25 µg) | CFX (30 µg) | TM (5 µg) | CIP (5 µg) | NI (300 µg) | C/T (40 µg) | |
| Susceptible | 71 | 26 | 38 | 65 | 29 | 53 | 66 | 48 |
| Intermediate | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 0 |
| Resistant | 26 | 71 | 62 | 35 | 71 | 45 | 28 | 52 |
* C: Chloramphenicol; S: Streptomycin. T: Tetracycline; CFX: Cephalexin; TM: Trimethoprim; CIP: Ciprofloxacin; NI: Nitrofurantoin; C/T: Ceftolozane/Tazobactam.
Phenotypic profiles of antibiotic-resistant isolates.
| Number of Antibiotic Resistance | Antibiotic Resistance Profile | Number of Isolates |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | C/T | 1 |
| 2 | S-C/T | 3 |
| S-T | 5 | |
| TM-C/T | 1 | |
| TM-CIP | 1 | |
| 3 | S-CFX-C/T | 1 |
| S-T-C/T | 2 | |
| S-T-CFX | 1 | |
| S-TM-C/T | 4 | |
| T-TM-C/T | 1 | |
| T-TM-CIP | 3 | |
| 4 | C-CFX-TM-NI | 2 |
| C-S-T-C/T | 2 | |
| S-CFX-TM-C/T | 1 | |
| S-TM-CIP-C/T | 1 | |
| S-TM-CIP-NI | 1 | |
| S-T-TM-C/T | 1 | |
| S-T-TM-CIP | 13 | |
| T-CFX-TM-CIP | 1 | |
| 5 | C-CFX-TM-CIP-NI | 1 |
| C-S-CFX-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| C-S-T-TM-C/T | 1 | |
| C-T-CFX-CIP-C/T | 1 | |
| S-CFX-TM-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| S-T-CFX-TM-CIP | 2 | |
| S-T-CFX-TM-C/T | 2 | |
| S-T-TM-CIP-C/T | 8 | |
| 6 | C-S-CFX-TM-CIP-C/T | 1 |
| C-S-CFX-TM-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| C-S-T-CFX-TM-C/T | 1 | |
| C-S-T-TM-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| C-T-CFX-TM-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| S-T-CFX-TM-NI-C/T | 2 | |
| S-T-TM-CIP-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| T-CFX-TM-CIP-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| 7 | C-S-CFX-TM-CIP-NI-C/T | 1 |
| C-S-T-CFX-TM-CIP-C/T | 2 | |
| C-S-T-CFX-TM-CIP-NI | 4 | |
| C-S-T-CFX-TM-NI-C/T | 4 | |
| C-S-T-TM-CIP-NI-C/T | 1 | |
| 8 | C-S-T-CFX-TM-CIP-NI-C/T | 4 |
Figure 2Location of the three cemeteries with the sample points (Google Earth).
Virulence genes investigated and associated Escherichia coli pathotypes.
| Designation | Genes Targeted | |
|---|---|---|
| EPEC | Enteropathogenic |
|
| EHEC | Enterohaemorrhagic | |
| EAEC | Enteroaggregative |
|
| EIEC | Enteroinvasive |
|
| ETEC | Enterotoxigenic |
|
| NMEC | Neonatal Meningitis |
|