| Literature DB >> 34980113 |
Xiaorong Zhang1, Mengjiao Guo1, Di Xie1, Yang Chen1, Chengcheng Zhang1, Yongzhong Cao2, Yantao Wu3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the past decade, Mycoplasma synoviae (M. synoviae) infection has become widely prevalent in China, has caused serious economic losses and has become one of the most important diseases in the chicken industry. Medication is a general approach for the control of M. synoviae infection, but antibiotics are sometimes ineffective in clinical practice. To investigate the sensitivity of M. synoviae to antimicrobials commonly used in the treatment of M. synoviae infection, the antibiotic susceptibility of 32 M. synoviae strains isolated from China from 2016 to 2019 were determined using the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) method.Entities:
Keywords: Antimicrobial susceptibility; Enrofloxacin resistance; Minimum inhibitory concentrations; Mycoplasma synoviae; Resistance genes
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 34980113 PMCID: PMC8722301 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-021-03104-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Distribution of MIC values of the tested antimicrobials against the 32 M. synoviae isolates
| Antimicrobials | MIC Values (μg/mL) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.063 | 0.125 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 16 | 32 | 64 | |
| LS | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1550 | 890 | 1 | |||||||
| VA | 3150–90 | 1 | |||||||||||
| TIF | 1650 | 10 | 690 | ||||||||||
| TY | 4 | 3 | 8 | 550 | 6 | 490 | 2 | ||||||
| TIL | 7 | 7 | 750 | 3 | 590 | 3 | |||||||
| DO | 1 | 3 | 10 | 750 | 890 | 3 | |||||||
| OT | 7 | 6 | 1050 | 890 | 1 | ||||||||
| ENR | 4 | 1350 | 1290 | 3 | |||||||||
The MIC values are expressed in μg/mL. Superscript numbers indicate the MIC50 and MIC90 values
Primer sequences used in this study
| Primer name | Sequences (5′ → 3′) | Position (bp) |
|---|---|---|
| GAAGATCAGCCTGAATTAGTT | 58–78 | |
| GCCATTCTAGCTTCGGTATAA | 531–551 | |
| CAAGGTGAGAAATTCTCAAGA | 964–984 | |
| TGTGCTTCGTTATAAGCG | 1677–1694 | |
| CCAACCGTGCAATTCCTGAT | 95–114 | |
| TTATGCGGCGGCATTTCG | 546–563 | |
| GGCATATCGTCGAGGAAATAGC | 1034–1055 | |
| AGTGGTTTCCCAAAGTTG | 1741–1758 |
MICs of M. synoviae isolates
| Isolates | MIC (μg/mL) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LS | VA | TIF | TY | TIL | DO | OT | ENR | |
| Ningxia/2019–1 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | < 0.016 | 4 | 1 | 4 |
| Ningxia/2019–2 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | < 0.016 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| Hebei/2016–1 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.25 | 0.063 | 4 | 4 | 16 |
| Hebei/2016–2 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.031 | 1 | 2 | 8 |
| Hebei/2016–3 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.031 | 4 | 2 | 8 |
| Shandong/2016–1 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.25 | 0.063 | 8 | 4 | 16 |
| Shandong/2017–1 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 4 | 4 | 16 |
| Shandong/2017–2 | 0.25 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.063 | 0.063 | 2 | 4 | 8 |
| Shandong/2018–1 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Hubei/2016–1 | 2 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.031 | 2 | 4 | 8 |
| Jiangsu/2018–1 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| Jiangsu/2018–2 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 16 |
| Jiangsu/2018–3 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 32 |
| Jiangsu/2018–4 | 0.25 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 8 |
| Jiangsu/2018–5 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.125 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 4 |
| Jiangsu/2018–6 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 16 |
| Anhui/2019–1 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.125 | 0.031 | 4 | 4 | 16 |
| Anhui/2019–2 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.5 | 0.125 | 1 | 1 | 32 |
| Jiangsu/2019–1 | 0.063 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 1 | 2 | 8 |
| Shandong/2019–2 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.063 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 16 |
| Shandong/2019–3 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.125 | 0.5 | 1 | 2 | 32 |
| Shandong/2019–4 | 0.125 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 2 | 4 | 8 |
| Ningxia/2019–3 | 0.125 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.125 | < 0.016 | 2 | 2 | 8 |
| Henan/2019–1 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.063 | 0.125 | 2 | 2 | 16 |
| Jiangsu/2019–2 | 0.25 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 8 |
| Jiangsu/2019–3 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 16 |
| Ningxia/2019–4 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.25 | 0.063 | 8 | 2 | 8 |
| Ningxia/2019–5 | 0.5 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.25 | 0.063 | 4 | 4 | 16 |
| Heilongjiang/2019–1 | 0.5 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 0.125 | 0.063 | 4 | 2 | 8 |
| Hebei/2018–1 | 0.125 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.031 | 0.031 | 2 | 2 | 8 |
| Hebei/2018–2 | 1 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | 0.125 | 0.031 | 8 | 8 | 16 |
| Shandong/2019–5 | 0.125 | < 0.016 | < 0.016 | 0.063 | < 0.016 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
Molecular characterization of quinolone resistance-determining regions of M. synoviae isolates
| Strains | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SNP | AA | SNP | AA | SNP | AA | SNP | AA | SNP | AA | SNP | AA | |
| 2442 | 814 | 2410–2411 | 804 | 2058 | 686 | 1250 | 417 | 254 | 85 | 591 | 197 | |
| MS-H | C | Gln | AA | Glu | A | Thr | G | Ser | C | Thr | C | Pro |
| ATCC25204 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Hebei/2016–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Hebei/2016–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Hebei/2016–3 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Hebei/2018–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Hebei/2018–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2018–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2018–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2018–3 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2018–4 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2018–5 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2018–6 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2019–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2019–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Jiangsu/2019–3 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Ningxia/2019–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Ningxia/2019–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Ningxia/2019–3 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Ningxia/2019–4 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Ningxia/2019–5 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Shandong/2016–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Shandong/2017–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Shandong/2017–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | C | Pro |
| Shandong/2018–1 | A | Lys | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Shandong/2019–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Shandong/2019–3 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | C | Pro |
| Shandong/2019–4 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Shandong/2019–5 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Anhui/2019–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | C | Pro |
| Anhui/2019–2 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | A | Asn | T | Ile | T | Ser |
| Henan/2019–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | C | Pro |
| Hubei/2016–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | C | Pro |
| Heilongjiang/2019–1 | C | Gln | GG | Gly | G | Ala | G | Ser | T | Ile | T | Ser |