| Literature DB >> 31697761 |
Salvatore Catania1, Marco Bottinelli1, Alice Fincato1, Michele Gastaldelli1, Antonio Barberio1, Federica Gobbo1, Gaddo Vicenzoni1.
Abstract
Mycoplasma synoviae (MS) is a highly prevalent bacterial species in poultry causing disease and severe economic losses. Antibiotic treatment is one of the control strategies that can be applied to contain clinical outbreaks in MS-free flocks, especially because this bacterium can be transmitted in ovo. It becomes, then, very important for veterinarians to know the antibiotic susceptibility of the circulating strains in order to choose the most appropriate first-line antibiotic molecule as a proactive role in fighting antibiotic resistance. We evaluated the Minimum Inhibitory Concentrations (MICs) of enrofloxacin, oxytetracycline, doxycycline, erythromycin, tylosin, tilmicosin, spiramycin, tiamulin, florfenicol and lincomycin for MS isolates collected between 2012 and 2017 in Italy. A total of 154 MS isolates from different poultry commercial categories (broiler, layer, and turkey sectors) was tested using commercial MIC plates. All MS isolates showed very high MIC values of erythromycin (MIC90 ≥8 μg/mL) and enrofloxacin (MIC90 ≥16 μg/mL). MIC values of doxycycline and oxytetracycline obtained were superimposable to each other with only a one-fold dilution difference. Discrepancies between MIC values of tylosin and tilmicosin were observed. Interestingly, seven isolates showed very high MIC values of lincomycin and tilmicosin, but not all of them showed very high MIC values of tylosin. Most of the MS isolates showed low MIC values of spiramycin, but seven strains showed a MIC ≥16 μg/mL. In the observation period, the frequency of the different MIC classes varied dependently on the tested antibiotic. Interestingly, tilmicosin MICs clearly showed a time-dependent progressive shift towards high-concentration classes, indicative of an on-going selection process among MS isolates. Until standardized breakpoints become available to facilitate data interpretation, it will be fundamental to continue studying MIC value fluctuations in the meantime in order to create a significant database that would facilitate veterinarians in selecting the proper drug for treating this impactful Mycoplasma.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31697761 PMCID: PMC6837496 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224903
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Number of isolates, year of isolation and poultry sector.
| Year of isolation | Broiler | Layer | Turkey | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 | 3 | 10 | - | 13 |
| 2013 | 15 | 4 | 6 | 25 |
| 2014 | 16 | 6 | 10 | 32 |
| 2015 | 28 | 5 | 2 | 35 |
| 2016 | 25 | 4 | 6 | 35 |
| 2017 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 14 |
| Total | 95 | 33 | 26 | 154 |
Antimicrobial susceptibilities patterns of the 154 Mycoplasma synoviae isolates tested.
| Antibiotic | Dilution range (μg/mL) | Minimum MIC value (μg/mL) | Maximum MIC value (μg/mL) | MIC 50 (μg/mL) | MIC 90 (μg/mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Doxycycline | 0.125–16 | ≤ 0.125 | 2 | 0.5 | 1 |
| Enrofloxacin | 0.125–16 | 1 | >16 | >16 | >16 |
| Erythromycin | 0.5–8 | 8 | >8 | >8 | >8 |
| Florfenicol | 0.5–16 | ≤ 0.5 | 4 | 1 | 2 |
| Lincomycin | 0.5–32 | ≤ 0.5 | >32 | ≤ 0.5 | 2 |
| Oxytetracycline | 0.5–32 | ≤ 0.5 | 4 | 1 | 2 |
| Spiramycin | 0.5–16 | ≤ 0.5 | >16 | ≤ 0.5 | 4 |
| Tiamulin | 0.0078125–16 | 0.0625 | 2 | 0.5 | 1 |
| Tilmicosin | 0.015625–32 | 0.0625 | >32 | 1 | >32 |
| Tylosin | 0.0078125–32 | ≤ 0.0078125 | >32 | 0.0625 | 1 |
For each antibiotic, the dilution range, MIC minimum value detected, MIC maximum value detected, MIC50 and MIC90 are listed. All the values are expressed in μg/mL. MIC50 and MIC90 that were below or above the dilution range are marked with the sign “>”.
Fig 1Minimum inhibitory concentration distribution (μg/mL) of enrofloxacin, oxytetracycline, doxycycline, erythromycin, tylosin, tilmicosin, spiramycin, tiamulin, florfenicol, and lincomycin.
The number of isolates is present on the vertical axis of the ordinates and the antibiotic concentrations in μg per mL are displayed on the horizontal axis of the abscissas. Grey bars indicate the concentration that inhibits 50% of the isolates (MIC50 values). Black bars indicate the concentration that inhibits 90% of the isolates (MIC90 values). White bars indicate the other MIC values.
The numerical consistency of MS isolates sorted by drug and drug concentration in the MIC plate.
| Antibiotic | MIC values (μg/ML) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.003906 | 0.0078125 | 0.015625 | 0.03125 | 0.0625 | 0.125 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 16 | 32 | 64 | |
| Oxytetracycline | 26 | 78 | 45 | 5 | |||||||||||
| Doxycycline | 4 | 19 | 79 | 47 | 5 | ||||||||||
| Enrofloxacin | 3 | 11 | 11 | 1 | 4 | 124 | |||||||||
| Erythromycin | 3 | 151 | |||||||||||||
| Tilmicosin | 1 | 9 | 16 | 38 | 28 | 6 | 11 | 15 | 4 | 4 | 22 | ||||
| Tylosin | 3 | 10 | 40 | 40 | 13 | 13 | 13 | 8 | 9 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |||
| Spiramycin | 82 | 44 | 10 | 5 | 6 | 2 | 5 | ||||||||
| Tiamulin | 2 | 9 | 46 | 70 | 20 | 7 | |||||||||
| Lincomycin | 77 | 57 | 8 | 5 | 7 | ||||||||||
| Florfenicol | 22 | 81 | 47 | 4 | |||||||||||
The dilution range tested for each drug is indicated by the white cells in the table. Values located in the grey cells on the right indicate MIC values > the highest tested concentration. Values located in the grey cells on the left indicate MIC values ≤ the lowest tested concentration.
Detailed list of the seven isolates showing a very high MIC value of lincomycin and their MIC values of all tested drugs.
| ID | Year of isolation | Poultry category | ENR | DOX | OXY | ERY | TYL | TILM | SPI | TIA | FL | LIN | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IZSVE/2094 | 2013 | F | B | >16 | 1 | 2 | >8 | 0.5 | >32 | 8 | 1 | 1 | >32 |
| IZSVE/5914 | 2013 | F | B | >16 | 0.5 | 1 | >8 | >32 | >32 | 16 | 0.5 | 1 | >32 |
| IZSVE/1067 | 2015 | F | B | >16 | 0.25 | 1 | >8 | 1 | >32 | 8 | 0.5 | 1 | >32 |
| IZSVE/1116 | 2015 | F | B | >16 | 1 | 2 | >8 | 4 | >32 | >16 | 2 | 2 | >32 |
| IZSVE/2519 | 2015 | F | T | >16 | 0.5 | 2 | >8 | 8 | >32 | >16 | 2 | 2 | >32 |
| IZSVE/2518 | 2015 | C | B | >16 | 1 | 2 | >8 | >32 | >32 | >16 | 2 | 4 | >32 |
| IZSVE/1925 | 2016 | F | B | >16 | 0.5 | 1 | >8 | 4 | >32 | >16 | 1 | 1 | >32 |
ENR, enrofloxacin; DOX, doxycycline; OXY, oxytetracycline; ERY, erythromycin; TYL, tylosin; TILM, tilmicosin; SPI, spiramycin; TIA, tiamulin; FL, florfenicol; LIN, lincomycin; B, broiler; T, turkey.
Number of isolates tested, year of isolation and Mycoplasma synoviae vlhA genotype.
| Year of isolation | A | C | D | F | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 | - | 1 | 8 | 4 | 13 |
| 2013 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 13 | 25 |
| 2014 | - | 3 | 19 | 10 | 32 |
| 2015 | - | 3 | 23 | 9 | 35 |
| 2016 | - | 3 | 24 | 8 | 35 |
| 2017 | - | 2 | 6 | 6 | 14 |
| 2012–2017 | 1 | 14 | 89 | 50 | 154 |
Asymptotic Linear-by-Linear Association Test of antibiotic MIC-class frequencies versus years, stratified by genotype.
| Antibiotic | Z-value | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| Doxicycline | -0.09 | 0.9283 |
| Enrofloxacin | -2.22 | 0.02638 |
| Florfenicol | 0.10 | 0.92 |
| Lyncomycin | 1.20 | 0.2311 |
| Oxytetracycline | 1.98 | 0.04713 |
| Spiramycin | 1.00 | 0.3156 |
| Tiamulin | -0.71 | 0.4799 |
| Tylosin | 3.82 | 0.0001324 |
| Tilmicosin | 3.68 | 0.0002314 |
Proportional odds model parameter estimates with relative standard errors (Std.Error), Wald statistics (Z-value) and p-value.
| Estimate | Std. Error | Z-value | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 0.304 | 0.096 | 3.167 | 1.540 × 10−3 |
| 0.0625|0.125 | -4.316 | 1.026 | -4.205 | 2.610 × 10−5 |
| 0.125|0.25 | -2.055 | 0.408 | -5.032 | 4.854 × 10−7 |
| 0.25|0.5 | -0.963 | 0.315 | -3.056 | 2.243 × 10−3 |
| 0.5|1 | 0.350 | 0.286 | 1.220 | 0.222 |
| 1|2 | 1.139 | 0.304 | 3.751 | 1.761 × 10−4 |
| 2|4 | 1.354 | 0.313 | 4.327 | 1.511 × 10−5 |
| 4|8 | 1.738 | 0.328 | 5.299 | 1.164 × 10−7 |
| 8|16 | 2.296 | 0.350 | 6.560 | 5.381 × 10−11 |
| 16|32 | 2.475 | 0.358 | 6.912 | 4.779 × 10−12 |
Fig 2MIC classes frequency variations during the study time.
The coloured bar indicates the different MIC classes. The lines in the graphic indicate the trend of the single classes throughout the years.