| Literature DB >> 30768641 |
Getahun E Agga1, Kimberly L Cook1, Annesly M P Netthisinghe2, Rebecca A Gilfillen2, Paul B Woosley2, Karamat R Sistani1.
Abstract
Confined animal feeding operations can facilitate the spread of genes associated with antibiotic resistance. It is not known how cattle removal from beef cattle backgrounding operation affects the persistence of antibiotic resistance genes (ARGs) in the environment. We investigated the effect of cessation of beef cattle backgrounding operation on the persistence and distribution of ARGs in the beef cattle backgrounding environment. The study was conducted at a pasture-feedlot type beef cattle backgrounding operation which consisted of feeding and grazing areas that were separated by a fence with an access gate. Backgrounding occurred for seven years before cattle were removed from the facility. Soil samples (n = 78) from 26 georeferenced locations were collected at the baseline before cattle were removed, and then one year and two years after cattle were removed. Metagenomic DNA was extracted from the soil samples and total bacterial population (16S rRNA), total Enterococcus species and class 1 integrons (intI1), and erythromycin (ermB and ermF), sulfonamide (sul1 and sul2) and tetracycline (tetO, tetW and tetQ) resistance genes were quantified. Concentrations of total bacteria, Enterococcus spp., class 1 integrons, and ARGs were higher in the feeding area and its immediate vicinity (around the fence and the gate) followed by a gradient decline along the grazing area. Although the concentrations of total bacteria, Enterococcus spp., class 1 integrons and ARGs in the feeding area significantly decreased two years after cattle removal, their concentrations were still higher than that observed in the grazing area. Higher concentrations over two years in the feeding area when compared to the grazing area suggest a lasting effect of confined beef cattle production system on the persistence of bacteria and ARGs in the soil.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30768641 PMCID: PMC6377141 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212510
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Georeferenced soil sampling locations at beef cattle backgrounding environment monitored for the persistence of antibiotic resistance genes for two years after cessation of operation.
The facility was divided into feeding (FD) and grazing (GR) areas separated by a fence.
Sequences, target size and melting temperature of primers used.
| Organism or group | Target gene | Primer | Primer sequence (5’-3’) | Tm. (°C) | Product size (bp) | Assay type | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16S rRNA | 1055-F | 58 | 337 | TaqMan | [ | ||
| 1392-R | |||||||
| B16s-Taq115-F | |||||||
| 23S rRNA | ECF-748F | 60 | 106 | TaqMan | [ | ||
| ENR-854R | |||||||
| Enterococci-Gl813tQ | |||||||
| intI1 | intI1-F | 60 | 280 | SYBR | [ | ||
| intI1-R | |||||||
| ermB | ermB-91F | 58 | 364 | TaqMan | [ | ||
| ermB-454R | |||||||
| ermB-P | |||||||
| ermF | ermF-189F | 58 | 309 | SYBR | [ | ||
| ermF-497R | |||||||
| sul1 | sul1-F | 56 | 163 | SYBR | [ | ||
| sul1-R | |||||||
| sul2 | sul2-F | 61 | 190 | SYBR | [ | ||
| sul2-R | |||||||
| tetO | tetO-F | 58 | 170 | SYBR | [ | ||
| tetO-R | |||||||
| tetQ | tetQ-F | 59 | 166 | SYBR | [ | ||
| tetQ-R | |||||||
| tetW | tetW-F | 59 | 168 | SYBR | [ | ||
| tetW-R |
†Probe sequences contained a 5' FAM fluorophore and 3' black hole quencher combination, probe concentration of 100nM, primer concentration of 600nM;
‡Tm. (°C) is the annealing temperature of the PCR reaction;
§Product size refers to the expected amplification product size in nucleotide base-pairs (bp);
¶Refers to type of PCR assay used: TaqMan and SYBR are quantitative real-time PCR assays
Fig 2Spatial distributions of total bacteria, total Enterococcus species and integrase gene of class 1 integrons in beef cattle backgrounding environment over two years period after cattle removal.
Change in log10 copies of antibiotic resistance genes over two years after cessation of the beef cattle backgrounding operation compared to 2010 level.
| Gene target | Year | Feeding area | Grazing area | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contrast | 95% confidence interval | Contrast | 95% confidence interval | ||||||
| 2011 | 0.02 | -0.17 | 0.21 | 0.835 | -0.08 | -0.27 | 0.10 | 0.391 | |
| 2012 | -0.21 | -0.40 | -0.03 | -0.21 | -0.39 | -0.02 | |||
| 2011 | 0.11 | -0.39 | 0.61 | 0.679 | 0.30 | -0.19 | 0.79 | 0.233 | |
| 2012 | -2.06 | -2.55 | -1.57 | 0.02 | -0.47 | 0.51 | 0.936 | ||
| 2011 | -0.23 | -0.69 | 0.23 | 0.334 | -0.16 | -0.62 | 0.29 | 0.47 | |
| 2012 | -1.13 | -1.58 | -0.68 | -0.76 | -1.21 | -0.31 | |||
| 2011 | 0.32 | -0.23 | 0.87 | 0.251 | 0.57 | 0.04 | 1.11 | ||
| 2012 | -1.01 | -1.55 | -0.48 | 0.79 | 0.25 | 1.32 | |||
| 2011 | -0.09 | -0.61 | 0.42 | 0.721 | -0.25 | -0.77 | 0.26 | 0.339 | |
| 2012 | -1.46 | -1.97 | -0.96 | -0.59 | -1.12 | -0.07 | |||
| 2011 | -0.18 | -0.59 | 0.22 | 0.374 | -0.11 | -0.50 | 0.29 | 0.593 | |
| 2012 | -1.00 | -1.40 | -0.61 | -0.63 | -1.02 | -0.23 | |||
| 2011 | -0.04 | -0.52 | 0.43 | 0.851 | -0.39 | -0.85 | 0.07 | 0.097 | |
| 2012 | -1.01 | -1.5 | -0.55 | -0.25 | -0.71 | 0.21 | 0.288 | ||
| 2011 | -0.13 | -0.48 | 0.22 | 0.473 | 0.46 | 0.12 | 0.80 | 0.009 | |
| 2012 | -1.16 | -1.51 | -0.82 | -0.18 | -0.53 | 0.16 | 0.301 | ||
| 2011 | 0.11 | -0.48 | 0.70 | 0.720 | 0.28 | -0.85 | 0.30 | 0.348 | |
| 2012 | -1.31 | -1.88 | -0.73 | -0.67 | -1.25 | -0.09 | |||
| 2011 | 0.20 | -0.26 | 0.67 | 0.387 | -0.01 | -0.46 | 0.45 | 0.976 | |
| 2012 | -1.00 | -1.45 | -0.55 | -0.23 | -0.68 | 0.23 | 0.324 | ||
P-values for statistically significant differences in the mean concentrations of the genes measured in 2011 and 2012 compared to 2010 are shown in bold.
Fig 3Spatial distributions of erythromycin resistance gene (ermB and ermF) concentrations in beef cattle backgrounding environment over a period of two years after cattle removal.
Fig 4Spatial distributions of two sulfonamide resistance genes (sul1 and sul2) concentrations in beef cattle backgrounding environment over two years after cattle removal.
Fig 5Spatial distributions of three tetracycline resistance genes (tetO, tetW and tetQ) concentrations in beef cattle backgrounding environment over a two years period after cattle removal.
Effect of soil chemical measurements on the concentration of bacteria and antibiotic resistance genes in beef cattle backgrounding operation.
Results are adjusted for sampling periods and areas (feeding and grazing areas) within the backgrounding operation.
| Coefficient | Standard error | t | P>|t| | 95% Confidence interval | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbon | -0.001 | 0.006 | -0.16 | 0.875 | -0.012 | 0.010 |
| Nitrogen | 0.025 | 0.073 | 0.35 | 0.729 | -0.120 | 0.170 |
| Ammonium | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.76 | 0.448 | -0.001 | 0.002 |
| Nitrate | 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.27 | 0.787 | -0.005 | 0.007 |
| Carbon | 0.026 | 0.012 | 2.13 | 0.002 | 0.051 | |
| Nitrogen | -0.150 | 0.163 | -0.92 | 0.361 | -0.474 | 0.175 |
| Ammonium | 0.006 | 0.002 | 3.42 | 0.003 | 0.010 | |
| Nitrate | 0.010 | 0.007 | 1.46 | 0.15 | -0.004 | 0.023 |
| Carbon | 0.004 | 0.013 | 0.27 | 0.789 | -0.023 | 0.030 |
| Nitrogen | -0.014 | 0.174 | -0.08 | 0.937 | -0.361 | 0.334 |
| Ammonium | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.24 | 0.812 | -0.004 | 0.005 |
| Nitrate | 0.004 | 0.007 | 0.55 | 0.587 | -0.011 | 0.018 |
| Carbon | -0.003 | 0.014 | -0.23 | 0.816 | -0.031 | 0.025 |
| Nitrogen | 0.180 | 0.185 | 0.98 | 0.332 | -0.188 | 0.549 |
| Ammonium | 0.007 | 0.002 | 3.19 | 0.003 | 0.011 | |
| Nitrate | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.82 | 0.414 | -0.009 | 0.022 |
| Carbon | -0.004 | 0.015 | -0.28 | 0.78 | -0.034 | 0.026 |
| Nitrogen | 0.111 | 0.198 | 0.56 | 0.576 | -0.284 | 0.506 |
| Ammonium | -0.0004 | 0.002 | -0.16 | 0.877 | -0.005 | 0.004 |
| Nitrate | 0.007 | 0.008 | 0.83 | 0.41 | -0.010 | 0.023 |
| Carbon | 0.005 | 0.012 | 0.43 | 0.666 | -0.018 | 0.028 |
| Nitrogen | -0.035 | 0.152 | -0.23 | 0.820 | -0.338 | 0.268 |
| Ammonium | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.29 | 0.772 | -0.003 | 0.004 |
| Nitrate | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.83 | 0.408 | -0.007 | 0.018 |
| Carbon | 0.007 | 0.014 | 0.5 | 0.617 | -0.021 | 0.035 |
| Nitrogen | 0.006 | 0.184 | 0.03 | 0.972 | -0.360 | 0.373 |
| Ammonium | 0.002 | 0.002 | 1.06 | 0.293 | -0.002 | 0.007 |
| Nitrate | -0.003 | 0.008 | -0.36 | 0.723 | -0.018 | 0.013 |
| Carbon | 0.017 | 0.009 | 1.83 | 0.072 | -0.002 | 0.036 |
| Nitrogen | -0.184 | 0.125 | -1.48 | 0.143 | -0.433 | 0.064 |
| Ammonium | 0.004 | 0.001 | 2.96 | 0.001 | 0.007 | |
| Nitrate | 0.010 | 0.005 | 1.87 | 0.067 | -0.001 | 0.020 |
| Carbon | -0.007 | 0.017 | -0.43 | 0.668 | -0.041 | 0.026 |
| Nitrogen | 0.149 | 0.221 | 0.68 | 0.502 | -0.292 | 0.591 |
| Ammonium | -0.004 | 0.003 | -1.49 | 0.141 | -0.009 | 0.001 |
| Nitrate | 0.005 | 0.009 | 0.54 | 0.588 | -0.013 | 0.024 |
| Carbon | 0.007 | 0.013 | 0.58 | 0.566 | -0.018 | 0.033 |
| Nitrogen | 0.002 | 0.169 | 0.01 | 0.989 | -0.335 | 0.339 |
| Ammonium | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.49 | 0.624 | -0.003 | 0.005 |
| Nitrate | 0.001 | 0.007 | 0.11 | 0.914 | -0.013 | 0.015 |