| Literature DB >> 31923238 |
Jocelyn Bernier-Lachance1,2, Julie Arsenault1,3, Valentine Usongo1,2, Éric Parent1,2, Josée Labrie1,2, Mario Jacques2, François Malouin1,4, Marie Archambault1,2.
Abstract
This study was conducted to estimate the prevalence of Livestock-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LA-MRSA) in retail chicken meat and broiler chickens from the Province of Quebec, Canada, and to characterize LA-MRSA isolates. A total of 309 chicken drumsticks and thighs were randomly selected in 2013 from 43 retail stores in the Monteregie. In addition, nasal swabs and caeca samples were collected in 2013-2014 from 200 broiler chickens of 38 different flocks. LA-MRSA was not detected in broiler chickens. Fifteen LA-MRSA isolates were recovered from four (1.3%) of the 309 chicken meat samples. Multi-Locus Sequence Typing (MLST) and SCCmec typing revealed two profiles (ST398-MRSA-V and ST8-MRSA-IVa), which were distinct using pulse-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and microarray (antimicrobial resistance and virulence genes) analyses. In addition to beta-lactam resistance, tetracycline and spectinomycin resistance was detected in all isolates from the 3 positive samples of the ST398 profile. Southern blot hybridization revealed that the resistance genes aad(D) and lnu(A), encoding resistances to aminoglycosides and lincosamides respectively, were located on plasmid. All isolates were able to produce biofilms, but biofilm production was not correlated with hld gene expression. Our results show the presence of two separate lineages of MRSA in retail chicken meat in Quebec, one of which is likely of human origin.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31923238 PMCID: PMC6953868 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227183
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Retail chicken meat MRSA isolates (n = 15) profiles based on antimicrobial resistance, pulsotypes, antimicrobial resistance genotypes, virulence genotypes and biofilm formation.
| Sample identification | E154 | E272 | E372 | E452 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isolate identification | a | a | b | c | d | e | a | b | c | d | a | b | c | d | e | ||
| MLST-SCC | |||||||||||||||||
| ST398-V | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | |||||||
| ST8-IVa | ● | ● | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||
| PFGE profile | A | A | A | A | A | A | A | A | A | A | B | B | B | B | B | ||
| Phenotypic resistance by class and agent | |||||||||||||||||
| Beta-lactams | |||||||||||||||||
| Amoxicillin | |||||||||||||||||
| Ampicillin | |||||||||||||||||
| Ceftriaxone | |||||||||||||||||
| Oxacillin | |||||||||||||||||
| Penicillin | |||||||||||||||||
| Ceftiofur | |||||||||||||||||
| Tetracyclines | |||||||||||||||||
| Oxytetracycline | |||||||||||||||||
| Tetracycline | |||||||||||||||||
| Aminocyclitol | |||||||||||||||||
| Spectinomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Aminoglycosides | |||||||||||||||||
| Amikacin | |||||||||||||||||
| Gentamicin | |||||||||||||||||
| Kanamycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Neomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Streptomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Tobramycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Lincosamides | |||||||||||||||||
| Clindamycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Lipopeptide | |||||||||||||||||
| Daptomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Macrolides | |||||||||||||||||
| Erythromycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Tylosin tartrate | |||||||||||||||||
| Fluoroquinolones | |||||||||||||||||
| Ciprofloxacin | |||||||||||||||||
| Enrofloxacin | |||||||||||||||||
| Gatifloxacin | |||||||||||||||||
| Levofloxacin | |||||||||||||||||
| Phenicols | |||||||||||||||||
| Florfenicol | |||||||||||||||||
| Linezolid | |||||||||||||||||
| Streptogramins | |||||||||||||||||
| Quinupristin/dalfopristin | |||||||||||||||||
| Rifamycins | |||||||||||||||||
| Rifampin | |||||||||||||||||
| Novobiocin | |||||||||||||||||
| Potentiated sulfas | |||||||||||||||||
| Sulphadimethoxine | |||||||||||||||||
| Sulphathiazole | |||||||||||||||||
| Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole | |||||||||||||||||
| Glycopeptides | |||||||||||||||||
| Vancomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Fosfomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| AMR genes by expected resistance | |||||||||||||||||
| Beta-lactams | |||||||||||||||||
| Fosfomycin, bleomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Macrolides, lincosa-mides, streptogramins | |||||||||||||||||
| Tetracyclines | |||||||||||||||||
| Lincosamides, pleuro-mutilins, streptogramin | |||||||||||||||||
| Quaternary ammonium | |||||||||||||||||
| Spectinomycin | |||||||||||||||||
| Aminoglycosides (tobramycin, neomycin) | |||||||||||||||||
| Virulence gene by virulence factors | |||||||||||||||||
| Leukocidin/ hemolysins/aureolysins | |||||||||||||||||
| Enterotoxins | |||||||||||||||||
| Immunoevasion | |||||||||||||||||
| Arginine catabolic mobile element locus | |||||||||||||||||
| Regulatory gene | |||||||||||||||||
| Adherence/biofilm | |||||||||||||||||
| Superantigen-like proteins | |||||||||||||||||
| Microbial surface components recognizing adhesive matrix molecules/Adhesion | |||||||||||||||||
| Biofilm formation | |||||||||||||||||
a The MIC values of trimethoprim/sulfametoxazole (0.5/9.5) are given as trimethoprim MIC values.
b StaphyType array (Alere technologies, Germany); Microarray identifies an overall hybridization pattern that is in accordance to a CC or ST and carries probes for the discrimination of selected SCCmec types.
Fig 1Geographical distribution of retail markets and farms sampled according to the presence of MRSA-positive samples, province of Quebec, Canada, 2013–2014.
Fig 2Pulse-field gel electrophoresis following Cfr9I digestion.
M: lambda DNA marker, Type “A”: Pulse-field gel type A, Type “B”: Pulse-field gel type B.
Fig 3Plasmid location of aad(D) and lnu(A).
Southernblot hybridization of plasmid DNA with DIG labelled probes for aad(D) top panel and lnu(A) bottom panel. Kb represents kilobase pairs.
Fig 4Biofilm production in retail chicken meat MRSA isolates and reference strains.
Dots represent mean A490 nm of the three technical replicates for each biological replicate; line is the mean A490 nm of the three biological replicates. a Statistical difference between E154-a and MRSA COL (p < 0.05). b Statistical differences between E154-a and 100N (p < 0.05). c Statistical difference between E452-a and MRSA COL (p < 0.05). d Statistical difference between E452-a and 100N (p < 0.05). Red dot, strong biofilm production; green dot, moderate biofilm production; blue dot, weak biofilm production; gray dot, no biofilm production.