| Literature DB >> 34944331 |
Rasha M M Abou Elez1, Ibrahim Elsohaby2,3,4, Nashwa El-Gazzar5, Hala M N Tolba6, Eman N Abdelfatah7, Samah S Abdellatif7, Ahmed Atef Mesalam8, Asmaa B M B Tahoun7.
Abstract
Salmonella enterica is one of the most common causes of foodborne illness worldwide. Contaminated poultry products, especially meat and eggs are the main sources of human salmonellosis. Thus, the aim of the present study was to determine prevalence, antimicrobial resistance profiles, virulence, and resistance genes of Salmonella Enteritidis (S. enteritidis) and Salmonella Typhimurium (S. Typhimurium) isolated from laying hens, table eggs, and humans, in Sharkia Governorate, Egypt. The antimicrobial activity of Biosynthesized Silver Nanoparticles (AgNPs) was also evaluated. Salmonella spp. were found in 19.3% of tested samples with laying hens having the highest isolation rate (33.1%). S. Enteritidis) (5.8%), and S. Typhimurium (2.8%) were the dominant serotypes. All isolates were ampicillin resistant (100%); however, none of the isolates were meropenem resistant. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) was detected in 83.8% of the isolates with a multiple antibiotic resistance index of 0.21 to 0.57. Most isolates (81.1%) had at least three virulence genes (sopB, stn, and hilA) and none of the isolates harbored the pefA gene; four resistance genes (blaTEM, tetA, nfsA, and nfsB) were detected in 56.8% of the examined isolates. The AgNPs biosynthesized by Aspergillus niveus exhibit an absorption peak at 420 nm with an average size of 27 nm. AgNPs had a minimum inhibitory concentration of 5 µg/mL against S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolates and a minimum bactericidal concentration of 6 and 8 µg/mL against S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolates, respectively. The bacterial growth and gene expression of S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolates treated with AgNPs were gradually decreased as storage time was increased. In conclusion, this study indicates that S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolated from laying hens, table eggs, and humans exhibits resistance to multiple antimicrobial classes. The biosynthesized AgNPs showed potential antimicrobial activity against MDR S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolates. However, studies to assess the antimicrobial effectiveness of the biosynthesized AgNPs in laying hen farms are warranted.Entities:
Keywords: Salmonella; antimicrobial agents; expression; resistance genes; silver nanoparticles; virulence genes
Year: 2021 PMID: 34944331 PMCID: PMC8698057 DOI: 10.3390/ani11123554
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Serotypes and pathotypes of Salmonella spp. isolated from laying hens, table eggs and humans.
| Serotypes | Pathotypes | No. (%) of Isolates | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laying Hens ( | Table Eggs ( | Humans ( | |||
|
| D1; O:1, 9, 12; H:g, m:− | 12 (7.2) | 5 (3.0) | 8 (8.0) | 25 (5.8) |
|
| B; O:1, 4, 5, 12; H:i:1, 2 | 7 (4.2) | 1 (0.6) | 4 (4.0) | 12 (2.8) |
|
| C3; O:8, 20; H:i:z6 | 5 (3.01) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (3.0) | 8 (1.9) |
|
| C1; O:6, 7, 14; H:r:1, 2 | 5 (3.01) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (2.0) | 7 (1.6) |
|
| C3; O:8, 20; H:Z29:e, n, Z15 | 4 (2.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) | 5 (1.2) |
|
| C1; O:6, 7; H:Z10:1, 5 | 4 (2.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) | 5 (1.2) |
|
| C2; O:6, 8; H:c:1, 2 | 4(2.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) | 5 (1.2) |
|
| C3; O:8, 20; H:i:1, 5 | 4 (2.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) | 5 (1.2) |
|
| E1; O:3, 10; H:e, h:1, 6 | 4 (2.4) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (0.9) |
|
| B; O:4,5; H:i:e, n, z15 | 3 (1.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (0.7) |
|
| C1; O:6, 7; H:e, h:1, 2 | 3 (1.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (0.7) |
|
| C3; O:8, 20; H:Z38:− | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) | 1 (0.2) |
| Total | 55 (33.1) | 6 (3.6) | 22 (22) | 83 (19.3) | |
The antimicrobial resistance profile of S. enteritidis (n = 25) and S. typhimurium (n = 12) isolated from laying hens, table eggs, and humans.
| Antimicrobials Class | Antimicrobials | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | I | S | R | I | S | ||
| Penicillin | Ampicillin (AMP) | 25 (100) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 12 (100) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Ampicillin/Sulbactam (SAM) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (16.0) | 21 (84.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (16.7) | 10 (83.3) | |
| Amoxicillin-Clavulanate (AMC) | 15 (60.0) | 0 (0.0) | 10 (40.0) | 6 (50.0) | 3 (25.0) | 3 (25.0) | |
| Cephalosporine | Cefataxime (CTX) | 9 (36.0) | 0 (0.0) | 16 (64.0) | 3 (25.0) | 0 (0.0) | 9 (75.0) |
| Carbapenems | Imipenem (IPM) | 11 (44.0) | 0 (0.0) | 14 (56.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (16.7) | 10 (83.3) |
| Aminoglycosides | Gentamicin (GEN) | 2 (8.0) | 0 (0.0) | 23 (92.0) | 2 (16.7) | 0 (0.0) | 10 (83.3) |
| Tetracyclines | Tetracycline (TET) | 22 (88.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (12.0) | 8 (66.7) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (33.3) |
| Quinolones | Ciprofloxacin (CIP) | 3 (12.0) | 6 (24.0) | 16 (64.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (25.0) | 9 (75.0) |
| Nalidixic acid (NAL) | 5 (20.0) | 2 (8.0) | 18 (72.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (8.3) | 11 (91.7) | |
| Sulphonamides | Trimethoprim-Sulfamethoxazole (SXT) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (20.0) | 20 (80.0) | 1 (8.3) | 2 (16.7) | 9 (75.0) |
| Phenicols | Chloramphenicol (CHL) | 4 (16.0) | 3 (12.0) | 18 (72.0) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (25.0) | 9 (75.0) |
| Macrolides | Azithromycin (AZM) | 5 (20.0) | 0 (0.0) | 20 (80.0) | 4 (33.3) | 0 (0.0) | 8 (66.7) |
| Nitrofurans | Nitrofurantoin (NIT) | 20 (80.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (20.0) | 8 (66.7) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (33.3) |
| Carbapenem | Meropenem (MEM) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 25 (100) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 12 (100) |
R = resistant, I = intermediate resistance, S = sensitive.
Figure 1Heat map representation of the virulence and resistance genes and antimicrobial resistance profiles of S. enteritidis (n = 25) and S. typhimurium (n = 12) isolated from laying hens, table eggs, and humans.
Figure 2Non-metric multidimensional scaling ordination (NMDS) of antimicrobial-resistant of S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolated from laying hens, table eggs and humans.
Virulence and resistance genes and antimicrobial resistance patterns of S. enteritidis (n = 25) and S. typhimurium (n = 12) isolated from laying hens, table eggs and humans.
| Source | No. of Isolates | Virulence Genes | Resistance Genes | No. of Ab | Resistance Patterns | MARIndex | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
| ( | ||||||||||||||
| Human | 2 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 8 | AMP, AMC, CTX, IPM, TET, CIP, NA, NIT | 0.57 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 8 | AMP, AMC, CTX, IPM, TET, CIP, NA, NIT | 0.57 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | − | 7 | AMP, AMC, CTX, IPM, TET, NA, NIT | 0.50 |
| Egg | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | − | 7 | AMP, AMC, CTX, IPM, TET, NA, NIT | 0.50 |
| Egg | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | + | + | + | 6 | AMP, AMC, CTX, IPM, TET, NIT | 0.43 |
| Human | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | + | + | + | 6 | AMP, AMC, CTX, IPM, TET, NIT | 0.43 |
| Egg | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 6 | AMP, CTX, IPM, TET, NAL, NIT | 0.43 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 6 | AMP, CTX, IPM, TET, NAL, NIT | 0.43 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | − | − | 5 | AMP, IPM, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.36 |
| Human | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | − | − | 5 | AMP, IPM, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.36 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, AMC, TET, NIT | 0.29 |
| Egg | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, AMC, TET, NIT | 0.29 |
| Human | 2 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, AMC, TET, NIT | 0.29 |
| Egg | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.29 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.29 |
| Human | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.29 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | − | + | − | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, AMC, IPM, GEN | 0.29 |
| Human | 1 | + | + | − | − | − | + | − | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, AMC, IPM, GEN | 0.29 |
| Chicken | 2 | + | + | − | − | + | + | − | − | + | + | 3 | AMP, AMC, NIT | 0.21 |
| Chicken | 3 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 2 | AMP, AMC | 0.14 |
| ( | ||||||||||||||
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | − | 7 | AMP, AMC, CTX, GEN, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.50 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | − | 6 | AMP, AMC, GEN, TET, AZM, NIT | 0.43 |
| Human | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 5 | AMP, AMC, TET, SXT, NIT | 0.36 |
| Chicken | 2 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 4 | AMP, CTX, TET, NIT | 0.29 |
| Human | 1 | + | + | − | + | + | + | + | − | + | + | 3 | AMP, TET, NIT | 0.21 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | + | + | + | + | − | + | + | 3 | AMP, TET, NIT | 0.21 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | − | − | + | + | 3 | AMP, AZM, NIT | 0.21 |
| Chicken | 1 | + | + | − | − | + | + | + | − | + | + | 3 | AMP, AMC, TET | 0.21 |
| Human | 1 | + | − | − | − | − | + | − | − | + | + | 2 | AMP, AMC | 0.14 |
| Egg | 1 | + | − | − | − | − | + | − | − | + | + | 2 | AMP, AMC | 0.14 |
| Human | 1 | + | − | − | − | − | + | − | − | + | + | 2 | AMP, AZM | 0.14 |
Figure 3Correlation matrix showing the correlation between resistance phenotypes and genotypes among the examined S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium isolates recovered from laying hens, table eggs, and humans. The blue colour indicates a positive correlation and red shows a negative correlation. The asterisk (*) indicates significant at p < 0.001.
Figure 4Characterization of AgNPs. (A) Phylogenetic analysis of the Aspergillus niveus (MT319815) used in the biosynthesis of AgNPs; (B) TEM micrographs and size distribution for silver (scale bar: 100 nm); (C) UV–Visible spectrum of AgNPs; (D) Fourier transform infrared spectrum showing the functional groups on the surface of AgNPs; (E) Dynamic light scattering analysis showing the highest peak at 27 nm and (F) Zeta-potential of AgNPs.
Figure 5Bacterial growth of multidrug-resistant S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium treated with AgNPs. Bacterial counts were recorded at 0, 12, 24, 36, and 48 h post-treatment.
Virulence and resistance genes expression of multidrug-resistant S. enteritidis and S. typhimurium treated with AgNPs.
| Storage Time (Hours) | Virulence Genes Expression | Resistance Genes Expression | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ( | ||||||
|
| 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 |
|
| 0.71 ± 0.015 | 0.73 ± 0.025 | 0.69 ± 0.015 | 0.85 ± 0.02 | 0.78 ± 0.01 | 0.83 ± 0.006 |
|
| 0.45 ± 0.015 | 0.44 ± 0.015 | 0.41 ± 0.015 | 0.69 ± 0.01 | 0.61 ± 0.01 | 0.66 ± 0.015 |
|
| 0.11 ± 0.001 | 0.26 ± 0.02 | 0.15 ± 0.025 | 0.46 ± 0.01 | 0.42 ± 0.006 | 0.47 ± 0.006 |
|
| 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.16 ± 0.006 | 0.11 ± 0.01 | 0.14 ± 0.006 |
| ( | ||||||
|
| 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 | 1.0 ± 0.0 |
|
| 0.77 ± 0.02 | 0.79 ± 0.01 | 0.76 ± 0.01 | 0.92 ±0.015 | 0.87 ± 0.02 | 0.94 ± 0.015 |
|
| 0.49 ± 0.02 | 0.47 ± 0.025 | 0.42 ± 0.01 | 0.82 ± 0.02 | 0.56 ± 0.01 | 0.79 ± 0.01 |
|
| 0.23 ± 0.025 | 0.26 ± 0.025 | 0.15 ± 0.025 | 0.59 ± 0.01 | 0.34 ± 0.015 | 0.57 ± 0.01 |
|
| 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.38 ± 0.015 | 0.18 ± 0.015 | 0.36 ± 0.015 |