| Literature DB >> 36009027 |
Aleksandra Błażejewska1, Magdalena Zalewska1, Anna Grudniak2, Magdalena Popowska1.
Abstract
The application of chicken waste to farmland could be detrimental to public health. It may contribute to the dissemination of antibiotic-resistance genes (ARGs) and antibiotic-resistant bacteria (ARB) from feces and their subsequent entry into the food chain. The present study analyzes the metagenome and resistome of chicken manure and litter obtained from a commercial chicken farm in Poland. ARB were isolated, identified, and screened for antibiogram fingerprints using standard microbiological and molecular methods. The physicochemical properties of the chicken waste were also determined. ARGs, integrons, and mobile genetic elements (MGE) in chicken waste were analyzed using high-throughput SmartChip qPCR. The results confirm the presence of many ARGs, probably located in MGE, which can be transferred to other bacteria. Potentially pathogenic or opportunistic microorganisms and phytopathogens were isolated. More than 50% of the isolated strains were classified as being multi-drug resistant, and the remainder were resistant to at least one antibiotic class; these pose a real risk of entering the groundwater and contaminating the surrounding environment. Our results indicate that while chicken manure can be sufficient sources of the nutrients essential for plant growth, its microbiological aspects make this material highly dangerous to the environment.Entities:
Keywords: Poland; antibiotic-resistance genes; chicken waste; intensive farming
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36009027 PMCID: PMC9406075 DOI: 10.3390/biom12081132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
Selective agar screening for AMR pathogens.
| Bacteria Species | Screening Selective Agar + Antibiotic (Concentration) Using the EUCAST Breakpoints | Selecting for |
|---|---|---|
|
| Simmons Citrate Agar + inositol | Carbapenem resistance |
|
| Simmons Citrate Agar + inositol | Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase |
|
| Eosin Methylene Blue Agar | Carbapenem resistance |
| MacConkey Agar | ||
|
| Eosin Methylene Blue Agar | Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase |
| MacConkey Agar | ||
| Brilliance VRE Agar | Vancomycin resistance | |
|
| CHROMagar Acinetobacter | Carbapenem resistance |
|
| Cetrimide Agar | Carbapenem resistance |
|
| Mannitol salt Agar | Methicillin resistance |
|
| Mannitol Salt Agar | Vancomycin resistance |
Physicochemical properties of the two kinds of chicken manure from Polish commercial farm and non-manured soil.
| Parameter | Soil | Chicken Manure (CM) | Chicken Litter (CL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 6–6.5 | 8 | 6.5 | |
| heavy metals [mg/kg] | mercury (Hg) | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 |
| chrome (Cr) | 5.56 | <2.00 | <2.00 | |
| zinc (Zn) | 19.7 | 616 | 430 | |
| cadmium (Cd) | <0.4 | 0.687 | 0.478 | |
| copper (Cu) | 3.41 | 86.7 | 66.3 | |
| nickel (Ni) | <3.00 | 6.27 | 9.2 | |
| lead (Pb) | 7.74 | <5.00 | <5.00 | |
| macronutrients [mg/kg] | calcium (Ca) | 110 | 1140.0 | 6670 |
| magnesium (Mg) | 57.7 | 945 | 613 | |
| total phosphorus (P) | 205 | 2430 | 1510 | |
| ammoniacal nitrogen (NH4-N) [mg/kg] | <0.00233 | 3200 | 2400 | |
| total nitrogen (N) [%wt] | 0.0926 | 1.22 | 2.78 | |
| dry organic matter (OM) [%] | 2.2 | 18.4 | 60.2 | |
Amount of bacteria isolated from each medium type, calculated as cfu/mL.
| Medium | Antibiotic | Temperature [°C] | Chicken Waste | [cfu/mL] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mannitol Salt Agar | Vancomycin | 25 | CM | 3.1 × 106 |
| 25 | CL | 2.1 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CM | 1.8 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CL | 6.5 × 104 | ||
| Oxacillin | 25 | CM | ---- | |
| 25 | CL | 4.6 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CM | 5.1 × 106 | ||
| 37 | CL | 4.1 × 107 | ||
| Eosin Methylene Blue Agar | Cefotaxime | 25 | CM | 7.2 × 108 |
| 25 | CL | 5.1 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CM | 3.9 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CL | 1.9 × 104 | ||
| Imipenem | 25 | CM | 1.2 × 107 | |
| 25 | CL | 3.3 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CM | ---- | ||
| 37 | CL | 1.0 × 103 | ||
| MacConkey Agar | Cefotaxime | 25 | CM | 3.2 × 105 |
| 25 | CL | 4.1 × 104 | ||
| 37 | CM | 4.7 × 106 | ||
| 37 | CL | 3.8 × 105 | ||
| Imipenem | 25 | CM | 2.2 × 103 | |
| 25 | CL | 1.5 × 102 | ||
| 37 | CM | 4.1 × 104 | ||
| 37 | CL | 1.5 × 103 | ||
| Simmons Citrate Agar | Cefotaxime | 25 | CM | 3.3 × 106 |
| 25 | CL | 2.4 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CM | 1.4 × 102 | ||
| 37 | CL | --- | ||
| Imipenem | 25 | CM | 4.2 × 106 | |
| 25 | CL | ---- | ||
| 37 | CM | 6.2 × 106 | ||
| 37 | CL | ---- | ||
| Cetrimide Agar | Imipenem | 25 | CM | 1.2 × 104 |
| 25 | CL | 2.1 × 106 | ||
| 37 | CM | 1.1 × 105 | ||
| 37 | CL | 1.0 × 104 | ||
| CHROMagar™ Acinetobacter | Imipenem | 25 | CM | ---- |
| 25 | CL | ---- | ||
| 37 | CM | ---- | ||
| 37 | CL | ---- | ||
| Brilliance VRE Agar | Vancomycin | 25 | CM | ----- |
| 25 | CL | 2.4 × 103 | ||
| 37 | CM | 1.3 × 102 | ||
| 37 | CL | ---- |
CL—chicken litter; CM—chicken manure; cfu—colony forming unit.
Figure 1Venn diagram presenting the differences in bacteria species found in two analyzed types of chicken waste—CM and CL; nine bacteria species were detected in CL and seven in CM.
Antibiotic-resistance phenotypes of isolated strains from two types of chicken wastes—CL and CM.
| Species | No. of Strains/All Isolates | Source | Phenotype | MDR (Yes/No) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resistance | Intermediate Resistance | ||||
|
| 1/1 | CL | TZP | CIP(I), PRL(I) | No |
|
| 1/1 | CL, CM | AMC, CXM, CAZ, CN, TOB, CTX, CIP, CXM-AK | TZP(I) | Yes |
|
| 1/23 | CL | AMC, CXM, CAZ, CN, TOB, CTX, CIP, CXM-AK | IMP(I) | Yes |
| 4/23 | CL, CM | AMC, TZP, CXM, CAZ, CN, TOB, CTX, CIP, CXM-AK | Yes | ||
| 8/23 | CL | AMC, CXM, CAZ, CN, TOB, CTX, CIP, CXM-AK | TZP(I) | Yes | |
| 1/23 | CL | AMC, CXM, CAZ, CN, TOB, CTX, FEP, CXM-AK | TZP(I) | Yes | |
| 8/23 | CL, CM | AMC, CXM, CAZ, CN, TOB, CTX, CIP, CXM-AK | Yes | ||
| 1/23 | CL | AMC, CXM, CAZ, MEM, CN, TOB, CTX, CIP, CXM-AK | TZP(I) | Yes | |
| 1/3 | CL | AMC(I) | No | ||
| 2/3 | CL | AMC | CXM(I) | No | |
|
| 2/13 | CL, CM | TZP, CN, AK, TOB, CIP, SXT, ATM, LEV | Yes | |
| 1/13 | CL, CM | CN, AK, TOB, CIP, SXT, PRL, ATM, LEV | TZP(I), IMP(I) | Yes | |
| 2/13 | CL, CM | CN, AK, TOB, CIP, SXT, PRL, ATM, LEV | TZP(I) | Yes | |
| 1/13 | CL, CM | CN, AK, TOB, SXT, PRL, ATM | TZP(I) | Yes | |
| 2/13 | CL, CM | CN, AK, TOB, CIP, SXT, PRL, ATM, LEV | Yes | ||
| 1/13 | CL, CM | TZP, CN, AK, TOB, SXT, PRL, ATM | IMP(I), CIP(I) | Yes | |
| 1/13 | CL, CM | CN, TOB, CIP, SXT, PRL, ATM, LEV | TZP(I), AK(I) | Yes | |
| 2/13 | CL, CM | CN, AK, TOB, SXT, PRL, ATM | TZP(I), CIP(I) | Yes | |
|
| 2/2 | CM | TZP, IMP, MEM, CN, AK, TOB, CIP, SXT, PRL, ATM, LEV | Yes | |
|
| 1/3 | CM | AMC, CIP, TGC, CT | CXM(I), IMP(I) | Yes |
| 1/3 | CM | AMC, TGC, CT, SXT | CXM(I), IMP(I), CTX(I) | Yes | |
| 1/3 | CM | AMC, TZP, CIP, TGC | IMP(I), FEP(I) | Yes | |
|
| 1/5 | CL | AMC, CXM, CIP, CXM-AK, CT | TGC(I) | Yes |
| 3/5 | CL | AMC, CXM, CIP, CXM-AK, CT | Yes | ||
| 1/5 | CL | AMC, CXM, CXM-AK | Yes | ||
|
| 2/19 | CL | CIP, LEV, E, TE, DA | STX(I) | Yes |
| 2/19 | CL | CN, CIP, STX, LEV, E, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 3/19 | CL | CIP, LEV, OB, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 2/19 | CL | CN, CIP, STX, LEV, LZD, E, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 2/19 | CL | TE | CIP(I), LEV(I), DA(I) | Yes | |
| 2/19 | CL | TE | CIP(I), LEV(I) | Yes | |
| 1/19 | CL | CN, CIP, SXT, LEV, OB, E, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 1/19 | CL | CIP, TGC, LEV, LZD, E, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 1/19 | CL | CN, CIP, SXT, LEV, E, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 1/19 | CL | CIP, TGC, LEV, LZD, TE, DA | Yes | ||
| 1/19 | CL | CIP, LEV, ER, TET, DA | Yes | ||
| 1/19 | CL | CIP, SXT, LEV, ER, TET, DA | Yes | ||
AMC—amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, AK—amikacin, ATM—aztreonam, CXM—cefuroxime, CN—gentamicin, CIP—ciprofloxacin, E—erythromycin, TE—tetracycline, TGC—tigecycline, TZP—piperacillin/tazobactam, LEV—levofloxacin, CAZ—ceftazidime, IMP—imipenem, MEM—meropenem, TOB—tobramycin, CTX—cefotaxime, FEP—cefepime, CXM-AK—cefuroxime-axetil, LZD—linezolid, DA—clindamycin, CT—colistin, STX—trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, PRL—piperacillin; (I) intermediate susceptibility according to EUCAST.
Figure 2Microbial composition of collected feces samples at the phylum level. The visualization represents the mean value for three replicates.
Figure 3(A) Shannon indexes of microbial community diversity p ≤ 0.1; statistical analyses were performed with the Mann–Whitney test (B). Chao 1 indexes of microbial community richness, p ≤ 0.1; statistical analysis was performed with the Mann–Whitney test in collected chicken waste samples (chicken manure: CM_1, CM_2, CM_3 (orange dots) and chicken litter: CL_1, CL_2, CL_3 (blue dots)).
Figure 4Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of microbial community compositions based on the Bray–Curtis dissimilarity matrices (ANOSIM) in collected chicken waste samples (chicken manure: CM_1, CM_2, CM_3 (orange dots) and chicken litter: CL_1, CL_2, CL_3 (blue dots)).
The ARGs found in the two studied types of chicken waste (CL and CM), expressed as relative abundance; values for CM and CL are presented as mean values; relative gene abundance is calculated per 16S rRNA gene copies. The data are sorted from most to least abundant.
| Gene Group | CL (Mean) | CM (Mean) | Chicken Waste (Mean) |
|---|---|---|---|
| MGE | 1.2556307984 | 0.3211213793 | 0.7883760889 |
| Tetracycline | 0.5144201057 | 1.0377003019 | 0.7760602038 |
| Aminoglycoside | 0.6050128022 | 0.6581070783 | 0.6315599403 |
| MLSB | 1.1137056246 | 0.1455982502 | 0.6296519374 |
| Sulfonamide | 0.2256385199 | 0.5193078503 | 0.3724731851 |
| Other | 0.2076692490 | 0.4556390180 | 0.3316541335 |
| Integrons | 0.3429847709 | 0.2639967037 | 0.3034907373 |
| Phenicol | 0.0691178113 | 0.2602892051 | 0.1647035082 |
| MDR | 0.1157465734 | 0.0317774276 | 0.0737620005 |
| Trimethoprim | 0.0476679473 | 0.0578028990 | 0.0527354232 |
| Beta Lactam | 0.0909582761 | 0.0055880528 | 0.0482731645 |
| Vancomycin | 0.0196980994 | 0.0006651844 | 0.0101816419 |
| Quinolone | 0.0006499213 | 0.0000000000 | 0.0003249607 |
The most prevalent ARGs found in CM; relative gene abundance calculated per 16S rRNA gene copies.
| Gene | CM (Mean) |
|---|---|
| 0.2751246220 | |
| 0.2459280497 | |
| 0.2216566087 | |
| 0.2021822017 | |
| 0.1993868087 | |
| 0.1452556967 | |
| 0.1434562960 | |
| 0.1427971303 | |
| 0.1301656963 | |
| 0.1214871360 |
Figure 5Relative abundance of the detected antibiotic-resistance gene groups, multi-drug resistance mechanisms, mobile genetic elements, integrase and transposase, visualized as gene copy number normalized per 16S rRNA gene copies. The visualization represents the mean value for three replicates.
The most prevalent ARGs found in CL; relative gene abundance calculated per 16S rRNA gene copies.
| Gene | CL (Mean) |
|---|---|
| 0.6792154677 | |
| 0.4736300717 | |
| ISE | 0.3201372400 |
| 0.2429636293 | |
| 0.1942361840 | |
| 0.1446150687 | |
| 0.1364071333 | |
| 0.1259366313 | |
| 0.1186746973 | |
| 0.1135728363 |
Figure 6Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) of ARG and MGE compositions in collected chicken waste samples based on Bray–Curtis dissimilarity matrices (chicken manure: CM_1, CM_2, CM_3 (orange dots), and chicken litter: CL_1, CL_2, CL_3 (blue dots)).
Figure 7Distribution of ARGs, presented as mean values for all chicken waste samples, categorized as the following: (A). gene classes, (B). mechanisms of resistance, (C). mechanisms related to MGE, (D). mechanisms related to MDR identified in the analyzed chicken waste samples.
Figure 8Comparison between CL and CM resistomes.
Figure 9ARG and MGE interaction network analysis presented in ’organic layout’. A connection shows a strong and significant correlation based on Spearman’s rank analysis (|r|/.0.9, p < 0.01). The red and green edges indicated the indexes of positive and negative correlations between ARGs and MGEs, respectively. The size of the nodes show the degree of the interactions.
Figure 10Microbial taxon and gene class interaction network analysis as a ’circular layout‘ based on the co-occurrence of ARG groups and microbial taxa at phylum level. A connection shows a significant correlation based on Spearman’s rank analysis (|r|/.0.7, p < 0.05). The green and red edges indicate positive and negative correlations between ARGs and taxa, respectively.