| Literature DB >> 33195695 |
Marie Ebob Agbortabot Bissong1, Brandon Fonyuy Tahnteng2, Collins Njie Ateba3, Jane-Francis Tatah Kihla Akoachere2.
Abstract
Staphylococcus aureus is a major foodborne pathogen and commensal of the skin and mucous membranes of animals and humans. Its virulence relies on the production of a variety of toxins resistant to denaturing conditions. Increasing reports of S. aureus food poisoning and contamination of foods of animal origin elsewhere necessitates the investigation of these foods in Cameroon, to implement safety measures. This cross-sectional study evaluated S. aureus contamination in milk and beef in the Northwest and Southwest Regions of Cameroon, where cow milk is usually not pasteurized before consumption, and beef is the main source of protein. The distribution of antibiotic-resistant isolates and those with enterotoxin-producing potential was also investigated to provide data of public health and food safety benefit. S. aureus was isolated from 39 raw milk and 250 beef samples by standard methods. Confirmation of isolates was by PCR to detect the nuc gene. S. aureus was investigated for classical staphylococcal enterotoxin (SE) genes (sea, seb, sec, sed, and see) by PCR. Their susceptibility to 9 antibiotics was tested by the disk diffusion method. The chi-square test was used to compare the contamination of samples, antibiotic resistance, and the distribution of SE genes. S. aureus was isolated from 11.1% of samples. Contamination was higher in milk (48%) than in beef (5.2%) (P < 0.001). The sea was the most frequently (90%) harboured gene. A large proportion of isolates (88%) harboured more than one virulence gene. Isolates were generally resistant to erythromycin (82%), vancomycin (80%), tetracycline (76%), and oxacillin (74%). Multidrug resistance (MDR) was common (92%). Milk and beef samples in study area were contaminated with MDR enterotoxigenic S. aureus strains and may constitute a potential hazard to consumers. Thus, the need for implementation of proper hygienic measures when handling these products and pasteurization of milk cannot be overemphasized.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33195695 PMCID: PMC7641691 DOI: 10.1155/2020/6015283
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Regional and divisional maps of Cameroon showing the study location (adapted from Google Maps).
Oligonucleotide primers used for molecular identification of S. aureus and detection of enterotoxin genes.
| Primer | Sequence | Target gene | Amplicon size (bp) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nuc F | GCGATTGATGGTGGATACGGT |
| 279 | [ |
| Nuc R | AGCCAAGCCTTGACGAACTAAAGC | |||
| Sea F | GGTTATCAATGTGCGGGTGG |
| 102 | [ |
| Sea R | CGGCACTTTTTTCTCTTCGG | |||
| Seb F | GTATGGTGGTGTAACTGAGC |
| 164 | [ |
| Seb R | CCAAATAGTGACGAGTTAGG | |||
| Sec F | AGATGAAGTAGTTGATGTGTATGG |
| 451 | [ |
| Sec R | CACACTTTTAGAATCAACCG | |||
| Sed F | CCAATAATAGGAGAAAATAAAAG |
| 278 | [ |
| Sed R | ATTGGTATTTTTTTTCGTTC | |||
| See F | AGGTTTTTTCACAGGTCATCC |
| 209 | [ |
| See R | CTTTTTTTTCTTCGGTCAATC |
Distribution of S. aureus enterotoxin genes with respect to sample type.
| Gene | Milk isolates ( | Meat isolates ( | Total ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 31 (88.6) | 14 (93.3) | 45 (90) | 0.607 |
|
| 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
|
| 19 (54.3) | 7 (46.7) | 26 (52) | 0.621 |
|
| 3 (8.6) | 1 (6.7) | 4 (8) | 0.820 |
|
| 27 (77.1) | 11 (73.3) | 38 (76) | 0.773 |
N: number of isolates from type of sample; n: number of isolates positive for gene.
Enterotoxin genotype among the isolates.
| Genotype | Source of isolate (number of samples) | Number of isolates with genotype (%) | Number with single, dual, triple, and quadruple genotype (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Milk (1), beef (2) | 3 (6%) | |
|
| Milk (2) | 2 (4%) | 7 (14%) |
|
| Milk (1) | 1 (2%) | |
|
| Milk (1) | 1 (2%) | |
|
| Beef (1) | 1 (2%) | |
|
| Milk (3), beef (2) | 5 (10%) | |
|
| Milk (12), beef (7) | 19 (38) | 25 (50%) |
|
| Milk (1), milk (1) | 1 (2%) | 17 (34%) |
|
| Milk (13), beef (3) | 16 (32%) | |
|
| Beef (1) | 1 (2%) | 1 (2%) |
| Total | 50 (100) | 50 (100) |
Figure 2Overall resistance of S. aureus isolates to antibiotics.
Distribution of antimicrobial-resistant S. aureus isolates with respect to sample type.
| Antibiotic | Milk isolates ( | Meat isolates ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Oxacillin | 26 (74.3%) | 11 (73.3) | 0.944 |
| Cefoxitin | 26 (74.3%) | 8 (53.3%) | 0.146 |
| Ampicillin | 20 (57.2%) | 5 (33.3%) | 0.123 |
| Tetracycline | 27 (77.1%) | 11 (73.3%) | 0.773 |
| Neomycin | 3 (8.6%) | 1 (6.7%) | 0.820 |
| Sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim | 9 (25.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 0.123 |
| Amoxicillin | 31 (88.6%) | 7 (46.7%) | 0.001 |
| Vancomycin | 33 (94.3%) | 7 (46.7%) | ≤0.001 |
| Erythromycin | 33 (94.3%) | 8 (53.3) | 0.001 |
N: number of isolates tested; n: number of isolates positive.
Antimicrobial resistance of S. aureus based on sample source.
| Antibiotic | Farm T ( | Farm S ( | Abattoir A ( | Abattoir B ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ox | 15 (75%) | 11 (73%) | 5 (100%) | 6 (60%) | 0.425 |
| FOX | 13 (65%) | 13 (86.7%) | 2 (40%) | 6 (60%) | 0.205 |
| AM | 10 (50%) | 10 (66.6%) | 1 (20%) | 4 (40%) | 0.276 |
| TE | 13 (65%) | 14 (93.3%) | 3 (60%) | 8 (80%) | 0.205 |
| N | 3 (15%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (20%) | 0 (0%) | 0.214 |
| SXT | 8 (40%) | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (20%) | 0 (0%) | 0.270 |
| AML | 18 (90%) | 13 (86.7%) | 3 (60%) | 4 (40%) | 0.012 |
| VA | 18 (90%) | 15 (100%) | 3 (60%) | 4 (40%) | 0.001 |
| E | 18 (90%) | 15 (100%) | 3 (60%) | 5 (50%) | 0.005 |
TE: tetracycline; N: neomycin; SXT: sulfamethoxazole; OX: oxacillin; FOX: cefoxitin; AM: ampicillin; AML: amoxicillin; VA: vancomycin; E: erythromycin.
Resistance patterns of S. aureus isolates.
| Antibiotype | Resistance pattern | Sample type | No. of isolates with resistance pattern (%) | Frequency of multidrug-resistant isolates |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | TER | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| II | TER ER | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| III | OXR AMLR | Beef | 2 (4%) | |
| IV | OXR VAR ER | Beef | 1 (2%) | 46 (92%) |
| V | OXR FOXR TER | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| VI | AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 3 (6%) | |
| VII | FOXR TER ER | Beef | 2 (4%) | |
| VIII | FOXR AMR TER VAR | Milk | 1 (2%) | |
| IX | FOXR TER VAR ER | Milk | 1 (2%) | |
| X | OXR FOXR AMRTER | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| XI | OXR FOXRTER ER | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| XII | OXR AMR AMLR VAR | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| XIII | OXR TER AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 3 (6%) | |
| XIV | OXR FOXR TER AMLR VAR | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| XV | OXR FOXR AMR TER VAR | Milk | 2 (4%) | |
| XVI | OXR AMR TER AMLR VAR | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| XVII | OXR FOXRTER VAR ER | Milk | 2 (4%) | |
| XVIII | OXR SXTR AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 1 (2%) | |
| XIX | OXR FOXR TER AMLRVAR ER | Milk | 3 (6%) | |
| XX | FOXR AMR TER AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 3 (6%) | |
| XXI | FOXR AMR SXTR AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 1 (2%) | |
| XXII | OXR FOXR AMR AMLR VAR ER | Beef | 1 (2%) | |
| XXIII | OXR AMR TER SXTR AMLR VAR ER | Beef | 2 (4%) | |
| XXIV | OXRFOXR TER NR AMLR VAR ER | Beef, milk | 2 (4%) | |
| XXV | OXR FOXR AMR TER AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 6 (12%) | |
| XXVI | OXR FOXR AMR TER SXTR AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 4 (8%) | |
| XXVII | OXR FOXR AMR NR SXTR AMLR VAR ER | Milk | 1 (2%) | |
| Total | 50 (100%) | 46 (92%) |