| Literature DB >> 31329622 |
Redmar R van den Berg1, Serge Dissel1, Michel L B A Rapallini1, Coen C van der Weijden1, Ben Wit1, Raymond Heymans1.
Abstract
Multidrug-resistant Salmonella enterica serovar Heidelberg isolates are frequently recovered in the Netherlands from poultry meat imported from South America. Our aim was to retrospectively assess the characteristics of the antimicrobial determinants, gene content and the clonal relatedness of 122 unique S. Heidelberg isolates from chicken meat from Brazil (n = 119) and Argentina (n = 3) that were imported between 2010 and 2015. These isolates were subjected to antimicrobial susceptibility testing, PCR and Illumina HiSeq2500 whole genome sequencing. Draft genomes were assembled to assess the gene content, and the phylogenetic relationships between isolates were determined using single nucleotide polymorphisms. Ciprofloxacin-resistance was identified in 98.4% of the isolates and 83.7% isolates showed resistance to the extended-spectrum cephalosporins cefotaxime and ceftazidime (83.6% and 82.8% respectively). Of the latter, 97.1% exhibited an AmpC phenotype and contained blaCMY-2, whereas the remaining three isolates contained an extended spectrum beta-lactamase. Of the 99 extended-spectrum cephalosporins-resistant isolates harboring CMY-2 plasmids, 56.6% contained the incompatibility group I1 replicon. Phylogenetic cluster analysis showed that all isolates from Brazil clustered together, with 49% occurring in clusters larger than 5 isolates that revealed intra-cluster similarities based on geographical location and/or resistance profiles. The remaining isolates were classified in smaller clusters or as singletons, highlighting the large diversity of S. Heidelberg in the poultry chain in Brazil that was revealed by this study. Considering the potential public health risk associated with multidrug-resistant S. Heidelberg in imported poultry, collaborative whole genome sequencing-based surveillance is needed to monitor the spread, pathogenic properties and epidemiological distribution of these isolates.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31329622 PMCID: PMC6645675 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219795
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Overview of the different S. Heidelberg isolates, unique isolates and SNP profiles from chicken meat imported from Brazil and Argentina included in this study.
| Country | Isolates | Unique isolates | SNP profiles in RAxML tree | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 114 | 114 | 114 | |
| Argentina | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
| Batch A | Brazil | 5 | 1 (isolate was randomly selected) | 5 |
| Batch B | Brazil | 5 | 1 (isolate was randomly selected) | 5 |
| Batch C | Brazil | 5 | 1 (isolate was randomly selected) | 5 |
| Duplicate A | Brazil | 1 | 1 | 2 (the isolate was sequenced twice) |
| Duplicate B | Argentina | 1 | 1 | 2 (the isolate was sequenced twice) |
| Triplicate | Brazil | 1 | 1 | 3 (the isolate was sequenced three times) |
| 19 (SNP profiles from public databases) | ||||
| 2 (outgroup | ||||
| 1 (reference NC_011083) | ||||
Characterization of the antibiotic resistance phenotypes of 122 S. Heidelberg isolates from imported poultry meat collected between 2010 and 2015.
| Antimicrobial resistance phenotypes | Resistance genes on plasmids | Country | No. of resistant isolates (%) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CTX | CAZ | CIP | AMP | NAL | SMX | TET | CMY-2 | Brazil | 92 (75.4) | |||||
| 3 (2.5) | ||||||||||||||
| CTX | CAZ | CIP | AMP | NAL | SMX | TET | GEN | CMY-2 | Brazil | 1 (0.8) | ||||
| CTX | CAZ | CIP | AMP | NAL | SMX | TET | CST | CTX-M-8 | Brazil | 1 (0.8) | ||||
| CTX | CAZ | CIP | AMP | NAL | SMX | TET | CHL | TMP | CMY-2 | Brazil | 1 (0.8) | |||
| CTX | CAZ | CIP | AMP | NAL | CMY-2 | Argentina | 1 (0.8) | |||||||
| CTX | CAZ | AMP | SMX | TET | CTX-M-2 | Brazil | 1 (0.8) | |||||||
| CTX | CAZ | AMP | CMY-2 | Argentina | 1 (0.8) | |||||||||
| CTX | CIP | AMP | NAL | SMX | TET | GEN | CTX-M-8, TEM-1B | Brazil | 1 (0.8) | |||||
| CIP | AMP | NAL | TET | CHL | TEM-1B | Argentina | 1 (0.8) | |||||||
| CIP | NAL | SMX | TET | GEN | - | Brazil | 5 (4.1) | |||||||
| 1(0.8) | ||||||||||||||
| CIP | NAL | SMX | TET | - | Brazil | 13 (10.7) | ||||||||
| 122 (100) | ||||||||||||||
a CTX: Cefotaxime; CAZ: Ceftazidime; CIP: Ciprofloxacin; AMP: Ampicillin; NAL: Nalidixic Acid; SMX: Sulfamethoxazole; TET: Tetracycline; CHL: Chloramphenicol; CST: Colistin; GEN: Gentamycin; TMP: Trimethoprim
Percentages of resistance against the other antimicrobial agents tested: AMP (84.4%; 103/122), NAL (98.4%; 120/122), SMX (97,5%; 119/122), TET (98.4%; 120/122), CHL (1.6%; 2/122), CST (0.8%; 1/122), GEN (6.6%; 7/122) and TMP (0.8%; 1/122)
Plasmid profiles among 122 S. Heidelberg isolates used in this study.
| Plasmids | Antimicrobial resistance phenotypes (n) | IncI1 pMLST | No. of isolates | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incompatibility groups | Small plasmids | ||||
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1 | ColpVC | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (43) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 43 (35.2) |
| CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET, CHL, TMP (1) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 1 (0.8) | ||
| CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET, CST (1) | CTX-M-8 | ST113 | 1 (0.8) | ||
| CIP, NAL, SMX, TET, GEN (4) | - | ST178 | 4 (3.3) | ||
| CIP, NAL, SMX, TET (1) | - | ST113 | 1 (0.8) | ||
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1 | ColpVC, ColRNAI | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (7) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 7 (5.7) |
| CIP, NAL, SMX, TET, GEN (1) | - | ST12 | 1 (0.8) | ||
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1 | ColpVC, Col156 | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET, GEN (1) | CMY-2 | ST26 | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1, IncFII | ColpVC | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (1) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1, IncX4 | ColpVC | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (1) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncA/C | ColpVC | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (28) | CMY-2 | - | 28 (23.0) |
| CIP, NAL, SMX, TET (11) | - | - | 11 (9.0) | ||
| IncX1, IncA/C | ColpVC, Col(BS512) | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (1) | CMY-2 | - | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncA/C | ColpVC, ColRNAI | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (13) | CMY-2 | - | 13 (10.7) |
| CIP, NAL, SMX, TET (1) | - | - | 1 (0.8) | ||
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncFII | ColpVC, ColRNAI | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (1) | CMY-2 | - | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncHI2 | ColpVC | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET, GEN (1) | - | - | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1, IncHI2, IncQ | ColRNAI | CTX, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET, GEN (1) | CTX-M-8, TEM-1B | ST113 | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncI1 | - | CIP, AMP, NAL, TET, CHL (1) | TEM-1B | unknown type | 1 (0.8) |
| IncX1, IncHI2 | - | CTX, CAZ, AMP, SMX, TET (1) | CTX-M-2 | - | 1 (0.8) |
| IncI1 | ColpVC, Col156 | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL (1) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 1 (0.8) |
| IncI1 | Col156 | CTX, CAZ, AMP (1) | CMY-2 | ST12 | 1 (0.8) |
Characteristics of the resistance determinants and the distance between the SNP profile of each control sample included in this study.
| Control samples | Isolate No. | Country | State/province | Resistance phenotype | De novo Plasmids | MLST | Max.SNP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duplicate A | I | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, AMP, SMX, TET | CTX-M-2 | IncX1, IncHI2 | 4632 | 0 |
| II | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, AMP, SMX, TET | CTX-M-2 | IncX1, IncHI2 | 4632 | ||
| Duplicate B | I | Argentina | Entre Ríos | CTX, CAZ, AMP | CMY-2 | IncI1, Col156 | 15 | 0 |
| II | Argentina | Entre Ríos | CTX, CAZ, AMP | CMY-2 | IncI1, Col156 | 15 | ||
| Triplicate | I | Brazil | Paraná | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1, ColpVC, ColRNAI | 15 | 1 |
| II | Brazil | Paraná | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1, ColpVC, ColRNAI | 15 | ||
| III | Brazil | Paraná | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, IncI1, ColpVC, ColRNAI | 15 | ||
| Batch A | I | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | 1 |
| II | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| III | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| IV | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| V | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| Batch B | I | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | 2 |
| II | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| III | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| IV | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| V | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET | CMY-2 | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC | 15 | ||
| Batch C | I | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET | - | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 | 15 | 2 |
| II | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET | - | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 | 15 | ||
| III | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET | - | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 | 15 | ||
| IV | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET | - | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 | 15 | ||
| V | Brazil | Santa Catarina | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET | - | IncX1, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 | 15 |
Fig 1The upper half of the RAxML tree.
This illustration contains 124 (110 unique isolates from Brazil) of the 138 S. Heidelberg SNP profiles (122 unique isolates) included in this study. Cluster analysis was performed to display the genetic relationship between the SNP profiles of the S. Heidelberg variants. Only clusters with bootstrap support values ≥80 were indicated. The SNP profiles and clusters in the RAxML tree are color coded according to the legend.
Fig 2The lower half of the RAxML tree.
This illustration contains 14 (12 unique isolates from Brazil and Argentina) of the 138 Cluster analysis was performed to display the genetic relationship between the S. Heidelberg variants from Brazil and Argentina, as well as the 19 SNP profiles from publicly available genomes (Canada, Colombia and Thailand). Only clusters with bootstrap support values ≥80 were indicated. S. Senftenberg was included as an outgroup. The SNP profiles and clusters in the RAxML tree are color coded according to the legend. In isolates 102637-001-067 and 102637-001-090 (illustrated by an green asterisk *) gentamycin resistance was also identified but the resistance profiles differed from Antimicrobial resistance phenotype CIP, NAL, SMX, TET, GEN as these two isolates showed additional resistance to AMP, CTX and AMP, CTX, CAZ, respectively.
Characteristics of 58 unique isolates that were classified in six substantial clusters (n≥5 isolates) with similar isolates (11–30 SNPs).
| Clusters | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | V | VI | |
| No. isolates | 7 | 13 | 13 | 7 | 6 | 12 |
| State/province (n) | Santa Catarina (6) | Santa Catarina (13) | Paraná (13) | Paraná (7) | Santa Catarina (1) | Santa Catarina (9) |
| Paraná (1) | Paraná (5) | Paraná (3) | ||||
| Maximal SNP distance | 25 | 16 | 26 | 20 | 28 | 14 |
| Location poultry processing plant (n) | Chapecó (3) | Chapecó (13) | Toledo (13) | Toledo (7) | Concórdia (1) | Chapecó (9) |
| Concórdia (3) | Toledo (5) | Toledo (3) | ||||
| Toledo (1) | ||||||
| Approx. sampling period in months | 13 | 9 | 6 | 2.5 | 3.5 | 27.5 |
| Years (n) | 2013 (1) | 2013 (8) | 2012 (1) | 2013 (7) | 2013 (6) | 2013 (9) |
| 2014 (6) | 2014 (5) | 2013 (12) | 2014 (2) | |||
| 2015 (1) | ||||||
| antimicrobial resistance phenotypes (n) | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (7) | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (13) | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (13) | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (7) | CTX, CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET (6) | CIP, NAL, SMX, TET (11) |
| CTX,CAZ, CIP, AMP, NAL, SMX, TET, CST (1) | ||||||
| Plasmid replicons (n) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC (6) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC (6) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC (1) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 (6) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 (2) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC (9) |
| IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, ColRNAI (1) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 (7) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 (5) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, ColRNAI (1) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, ColRNAI (2) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 (2) | |
| IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, ColRNAI (4) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1, ColRNAI (1) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, ColRNAI (1) | ||||
| IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1, ColRNAI (2) | IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1, IncFII (1) | |||||
| IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1, IncX4 (1) | ||||||
a Isolates tested in duplicate or triplicate and isolates in batches were counted as one isolate to prevent calculation bias.
b including two batches
c including one batch
d blaCTX-M-8
e isolates with plasmid profile IncX, IncA/C, ColpVC, IncI1 all belong to a cluster with identical isolates which is a subcluster of cluster II