| Literature DB >> 32207876 |
Ronghua Wu1,2, Junyu Shen1, Dandan Tian2, Jiaqian Yu2, Tao He1,2, Jianhua Yi3, Yun Li1,2.
Abstract
In aquaculture, antibiotics are commonly used to provide protection against pathogens; however, this practice has become controversial due to increased occurrences of microbial resistance, and alternatives are needed. This study aimed to investigate the antimicrobial activity of yeast glycoprotein (YG) against Aeromonas caviae. Pathogens were isolated from liver of diseased Carassius auratus gibelio. Based on morphological and biochemical analysis, together with 16S rRNA gene sequencing, the isolated strains were identified as A. caviae and concluded as clones of a single strain and named L2. Further pathogenicity analysis revealed that A. caviae possessed β-haemolysis, and its median lethal dose for C. gibelio was 1.33 × 106 CFU/ml. Hepatic adenylate kinase and pyruvate kinase activities of C. gibelio were inhibited post-A. caviae infection. Antimicrobial drug test suggested that A. caviae was a multidrug-resistant organism but could be inhibited by YG in vitro. Minimum inhibitory and bactericidal concentration of YG was 83.3 mg/ml and 166.7 mg/ml, respectively. Microbiota sequencing results showed that YG supplement could obviously decrease the relative abundance of Aeromonas and increase the microbial diversity. Our study revealed that A. caviae from C. gibelio was a multidrug-resistant bacteria strain, and could be significantly inhibited by YG in vivo and in vitro, thus providing important insights into ecological control and pathogenesis of A. caviae in aquaculture.Entities:
Keywords: zzm321990Aeromonas caviaezzm321990; zzm321990Carassius auratus gibeliozzm321990; antimicrobial drugs; yeast glycoprotein
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32207876 PMCID: PMC7397907 DOI: 10.1002/vms3.253
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet Med Sci ISSN: 2053-1095
Figure 1Identification of Aeromonas caviae based on Gram staining and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. (a) Gram staining of the strain L2. The black arrows showed rod‐shaped bacterium which were stained red, bar = 10 μm. (b) Agarose gel showing the amplification of 16S rRNA gene of strain L2. Lane M: DNA marker; Lane 1, negative control (without DNA template); Lane 2, 16S rRNA gene of strain L2. (c) Phylogenetic tree based on 16S rRNA sequences of strain L2 with other strains. Numbers in parentheses represent the sequences accession number in GenBank. The number at each branch points is the percentage supported by bootstrap. The scale bar represents 0. 01 nucleotide changes per position
Physiological and biochemical characteristics of strain L2
| Test item | L2 | A | Test item | L2 | A | Test item | L2 | A | Test item | L2 | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oxidase | + | + | Citrate | − | − | Dulcitol | + | + | Voges Proskauer | − | − |
| Sorbose | − | − | Xylose | − | − | Lactose | − | − | Nitrate reduction | + | + |
| Sucrose | + | + | Sorbitol | − | − | KCN growth | + | + | Esculin hydrolysis | + | + |
| Mannitol | + | + | Melibiose | − | − | Trehalose | + | + | Lysine decarboxylase | − | − |
| 1%NaCl | + | + | Rhamnose | − | − | Salicin | + | + | Arginine dihydrolase | + | + |
| 0%NaCl | + | + | Maltose | + | + | D‐cellobiose | + | + | Ornithine decarboxylase | − | − |
| ONPG | + | + | Mannose | − | − | Arabinose | + | + | Gelatin hydrolysis | + | + |
| M‐R | + | + | Urease | + | + | Indol production | + | + | Gas production of glucose | − | − |
Abbreviations: +, positive; −, negative; A, Aeromonas caviae standard strain; L2: strain L2.
Figure 2Pathogenicity analysis of Aeromonas caviae. (a) Haemolytic test of A. caviae ECPs. The black arrow showed β‐haemolytic circle on rabbit whole blood agar plate. (b–d) Hepatic AK, PK and ATP activities in liver of Carassius auratus gibelio. Error bars represented standard deviation (SD). Means with different letters were significantly different using two‐tailed Student's t test (p < .05). (b) Data represented pmol ATP formed/min/mg of protein (mean ± SD; n = 3). (c) Data represented and μmol pyruvate formed/min/mg of protein. (d) Data represented pmol/mg of protein. AK, adenylate kinase; ATP, adenosine triphosphate; ECP, extracellular product; PK, pyruvate kinase
Sensitivity of Aeromonas caviae to antibiotics
| Antibacterials | Dose, μg | Re, mm | Su, mm | IZS, mm | D | Antibacterials | Dose, μg | Re, mm | Su, mm | IZS, mm | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aztreonam | 30 | ≤15 | ≥22 | 42 | S | Minocycline | 30 | ≤14 | ≥19 | 0 | R |
| Sinomin | 250 | ≤15 | ≥23 | 12 | R | Cefoperazone | 75 | ≤15 | ≥21 | 0 | R |
| Claforan | 30 | ≤14 | ≥23 | 36 | S | Piperacillin sodium | 100 | ≤17 | ≥21 | 0 | R |
| Ampicillin | 10 | ≤14 | ≥20 | 0 | R | Chloramphenicol | 30 | ≤12 | ≥18 | 0 | R |
| Rifampicin | 5 | ≤16 | ≥20 | 28 | S | Sulfamethoxazole | 3.73 | ≤24 | ≥24 | 0 | R |
| Ofloxacin | 5 | ≤12 | ≥16 | 0 | R | Erythromycin | 15 | ≤13 | ≥23 | 0 | R |
| Cefalexin | 30 | ≤14 | ≥18 | 0 | R | Deoxycycline | 30 | ≤12 | ≥16 | 0 | R |
| Cefazolin | 30 | ≤14 | ≥18 | 0 | R | Clindamycin | 2 | ≤14 | ≥21 | 0 | R |
| Cefradine | 30 | ≤14 | ≥18 | 0 | R | Furazolidone | 300 | ≤14 | ≥17 | 0 | R |
| Amikacin | 30 | ≤14 | ≥17 | 25 | S | Neomycin | 30 | ≤12 | ≥17 | 0 | R |
| Kanamycin | 30 | ≤13 | ≥18 | 0 | R | Polymixin B | 300 | ≤8 | ≥12 | 0 | R |
| Cefuroxime | 30 | ≤14 | ≥23 | 0 | R | Norfloxacin | 10 | ≤12 | ≥17 | 0 | R |
| Macrodantin | 300 | ≤14 | ≥17 | 29 | S | Ceftazidime | 30 | ≤14 | ≥18 | 41 | S |
| Medemycin | 30 | ≤13 | ≥18 | 0 | R | Gentamycin | 10 | ≤12 | ≥15 | 12 | R |
| Tetracycline | 30 | ≤14 | ≥19 | 0 | R | Vancomycin | 30 | ≤9 | ≥13 | 13 | S |
Abbreviations: D, resistance determination; IZS, inhibition zone size; R, resistance; Re, resistance; S, susceptibility; Su, sensitivity.
Figure 3Antibacterial activity of YG in vitro was evaluated using Oxford cup method. (a) Determination of the inhibiting loop of YG. Black arrow indicated bacteria inhibiting loop. The negative controls were added equal volume of sterile DW. (b) Error bars represented SD. Data represented the diameter of inhibiting loop of YG (mean ± SD; n = 3). DW, distilled water; YG, yeast glycoprotein
Figure 4MIC and MBC of YG. (a) MIC of YG was determined by broth dilution methods. Tubes 1–9 was added serially dilutions of YG, respectively. Tube 10 without adding YG served as the positive control. (b) MBC detection. −: no bacteria; +: presence of bacterium; +++: actively growing bacterium. YG, yeast glycoprotein
Figure 5The influence of YG on the composition of intestinal microbiota at the genus level. BC: fish group feeding with the basal diet and injecting with sterilized saline water; NC, YG and PC group were injected with viable Aeromonas caviae. NC: artificial infected fish group feeding with the basal diet; YG: fish were fed with a basal diet containing 800 mg/kg YG. PC: fish were fed with a basal diet containing 200 mg/kg Rifampicin. Sequences that could not be classified into any known group were designated as “Unclassified”. Statistical comparisons were performed by the Mann–Whitney test. YG, yeast glycoprotein