| Literature DB >> 35805768 |
Ye Ji Kim1, Lyu Jin Jun1, Da Won Lee1, Young Juhn Lee1, Ye Jin Ko1, Yeong Eun Oh1, Soo Ji Woo2, Myoung Sug Kim2, Seung Min Kim3, Joon Bum Jeong1.
Abstract
Paralichthys olivaceus (olive flounder) is widely cultivated in Korea. However, data on the antibiotic susceptibility of bacterial pathogens that infect olive flounders in Korea are limited. The susceptibility of 84 strains of 3 pathogenic bacteria (Streptococcus spp., Vibrio spp., and Edwardsiella piscicida) to 18 antibiotics was tested using the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) panels, and the distribution of the MIC values for each species was confirmed. Among the panel antibiotics, nine commonly used antibiotics were selected, and the multiple antibiotic resistance (MAR) index and antibiotic resistance pattern were indicated using the disk diffusion method. It was confirmed that most of the isolates had a MAR index greater than 0.2, indicating a high-risk source. The distribution patterns of the MIC values and resistance pattern between gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria showed slightly different results. Ampicillin, erythromycin, and clindamycin were more effective against gram-positive bacteria than gram-negative bacteria. However, the MIC values of flumequine for gram-positive bacteria were higher than those of gram-negative bacteria. Through the distribution patterns of the MIC values and resistance patterns presented in this study, the need for monitoring the multidrug-resistant bacteria in aquaculture is emphasised.Entities:
Keywords: MAR index; MIC panel; Paralichthys olivaceus; antibiotic resistance; aquaculture
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35805768 PMCID: PMC9265876 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19138110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Primer sets used for the detection of bacterial isolates in this study.
| Target Pathogen | Oligonucleotide Sequences | Product Size (bp) | Annealing Temp. (°C) | Cycles | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5′-AAGAGACGCAGTGTCAAAAG | 107 | 55 | 33 | [ |
|
| 5′-TCCAGTCTTTCGACCTTCTT | 220 | |||
|
| 5′-CAGTGATAAAAAGGGGTGGA | 114 | 58 | 30 | [ |
|
| 5′-CTTTGATCATGGTTGCGGAA | 130 | |||
| 5′-GTCARATTGAAAARCARTTYGGTAAAGG | 689 | 60 | 30 | [ | |
|
| 5′-ACGGCATTGGAAATTGCGACTG | 199 | |||
|
| 5′-AGCTTATTGGCGGTTTCTGTCGG | 297 | |||
|
| 5′-GTTCATAGCATCAATGAGGAG | 519 | [ | ||
|
| 5′-GTGATGAAGAAGCTTATCGCGATT | 601 | [ | ||
|
| 5′-ATGCAATCATGCCTCAAGATCTA | 434 | |||
|
| 5′-CAAGACATCATCGATGTGATGCGT | 533 |
List of bacteria isolated from olive flounder in Jeju.
| Species | Year | No. of Isolates |
|---|---|---|
|
| 2019 | 28 |
|
| 2015 | 1 |
|
| 2013–2017 | 19 |
|
| 2016–2020 | 3 |
|
| 2018–2020 | 3 |
|
| 2013 | 1 |
|
| 2015 | 1 |
|
| 2020 | 1 |
|
| 2010 | 4 |
|
| 2013 | 1 |
|
| 2014 | 2 |
|
| 2015 | 3 |
|
| 2019 | 16 |
|
| 2020 | 1 |
| Total | 84 |
Figure 1The MIC value distribution of 18 antibiotics against 29 strains of Streptococcus spp. isolated from olive flounders. The X and Y axes of the graph represent the number of isolates and the MIC (μg/mL), respectively. The results of the experiment repeated in triplicate are shown in colour on the graph (1st: green, 2nd: dark gray, 3rd: light gray). Oxytetracycline: OXY; ceftiofur: XNL; flumequine: FLUQ; enrofloxacin: ENRO; neomycin: NEO; ampicillin: AMP; amoxicillin/clavulanic acid: AUG2; doxycycline: DOX; trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole: SXT; sulfisoxazole: FIS; azithromycin: AZI; ciprofloxacin: CIP; clindamycin: CLI; erythromycin: ERY; florfenicol: FFN; gentamicin: GEN; nalidixic acid: NAL; tetracycline: TET.
Figure 2The MIC value distribution of 18 antibiotics against 28 strains of Vibrio spp. isolated from olive flounder. The X and Y axes of the graph represent the number of isolates and the MIC (μg/mL), respectively. The results of the experiment repeated in triplicate are shown in colour on the graph (1st: blue, 2nd: dark gray, 3rd: light gray). Oxytetracycline: OXY; ceftiofur: XNL; flumequine: FLUQ; enrofloxacin: ENRO; neomycin: NEO; ampicillin: AMP; amoxicillin/clavulanic acid: AUG2; doxycycline: DOX; trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole: SXT; sulfisoxazole: FIS; azithromycin: AZI; ciprofloxacin: CIP; clindamycin: CLI; erythromycin: ERY; florfenicol: FFN; gentamicin: GEN; nalidixic acid: NAL; tetracycline: TET.
Figure 3The MIC value distribution of 18 antibiotics against 27 strains of Edwardsiella piscicida isolated from olive flounders. The X and Y axes of the graph represent the number of isolates and the MIC (μg/mL), respectively. The results of the experiment repeated in triplicate are shown in colour on the graph (1st: orange, 2nd: dark gray, 3rd: light gray). Oxytetracycline: OXY; ceftiofur: XNL; flumequine: FLUQ; enrofloxacin: ENRO; neomycin: NEO; ampicillin: AMP; amoxicillin/clavulanic acid: AUG2; doxycycline: DOX; trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole: SXT; sulfisoxazole: FIS; azithromycin: AZI; ciprofloxacin: CIP; clindamycin: CLI; erythromycin: ERY; florfenicol: FFN; gentamicin: GEN; nalidixic acid: NAL; tetracycline: TET.
Figure 4Classification of isolates by MAR index. High risk (red area) means that the isolate has a MAR index greater than 0.2 derived from a high-risk source of antibiotic contamination [23]: (a) Streptococcus spp.; (b) Vibrio spp.; (c) Edwardsiella piscicida.
Multiple antibiotic resistance index (MAR) and resistance pattern of bacterial isolates.
| No. | Antibiotic Resistant Pattern | MAR Index | % of Isolates | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | V | E | |||
| 1 | NAL | 0.11 (1) | 24.14 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | ERY/NAL | 0.22 (2) | 3.45 | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | GEN/NAL | 24.14 | 0 | 0 | |
| 4 | DXT/TET/NAL | 0.33 (3) | 3.45 | 0 | 0 |
| 5 | ERY/TET/NAL | 3.45 | 0 | 0 | |
| 6 |
| 3.45 | 0 | 14.81 | |
| 7 | GEN/NAL/ENRO | 6.90 | 0 | 0 | |
| 8 | GEN/ERY/NAL | 3.45 | 0 | 0 | |
| 9 | AMP/CLI/ERY | 0 | 28.57 | 0 | |
| 10 | ERY/DXT/TET/NAL | 0.44 (4) | 3.45 | 0 | 0 |
| 11 | CLI/ERY/TET/NAL | 10.34 | 0 | 0 | |
| 12 | CLI/ERY/DXT/NAL | 3.45 | 0 | 0 | |
| 13 | GEN/ERY/NAL/ENRO | 3.45 | 0 | 0 | |
| 14 | CLI/ERY/DXT/TET | 0 | 3.57 | 0 | |
| 15 | AMP/CLI/ERY/ENRO | 0 | 7.14 | 0 | |
| 16 | AMP/CLI/ERY/TET | 0 | 17.86 | 0 | |
| 17 | CLI/ERY/TET/NAL | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 18 | AMP/CLI/ERY/ENR | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 19 | AMP/ERY/TET/NAL/ENR | 0.56 (5) | 3.45 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | AMP/CLI/ERY/NAL/ENR | 0 | 10.71 | 0 | |
| 21 | AMP/CLI/ERY/TET/NAL | 0 | 3.57 | 0 | |
| 22 | AMP/CLI/ERY/DXT/TET | 0 | 10.71 | 0 | |
| 23 | AMP/GEN/CLI/ERY/ENRO | 0 | 3.57 | 0 | |
| 24 | CLI/ERY/DXT/TET/NAL | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 25 | GEN/ERY/TET/NAL/ENRO | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 26 | AMP/CLI/ERY/NAL/ENRO | 0 | 0 | 11.11 | |
| 27 | GEN/CLI/ERY/DXT/TET/NAL | 0.67 (6) | 3.45 | 0 | 0 |
| 28 | AMP/CLI/ERY/DXT/TET/ENRO | 0 | 7.14 | 0 | |
| 29 | CLI/ERY/DXT/TET/NAL/ENRO | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 30 | AMP/CLI/ERY/TET/NAL/ENRO | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 31 | AMP/GEN/CLI/ERY/NAL/ENRO | 0 | 0 | 3.70 | |
| 32 | AMP/GEN/CLI/ERY/DXT/TET/ENRO | 0.78 (7) | 0 | 3.57 | 0 |
| 33 | AMP/CLI/ERY/DXT/TET/NAL/ENRO | 0 | 0 | 44.44 | |
| 34 |
| 0.89 (8) | 0 | 3.57 | 3.70 |
Bold text indicates overlapping resistance patterns. Streptococcus spp.: S; Vibrio spp.: V; Edwardsiella piscicida: E; ampicillin: AMP; gentamicin: GEN; clindamycin: CLI; erythromycin: ERY; doxycycline: DOX; tetracycline: TET; nalidixic acid: NAL; enrofloxacin: ENRO; florfenicol: FFN.