BackgroundAccurate screening of new alternative antimicrobial compounds is essential for their use to control pathogens in swine production due to the replacement of antibiotics and zinc oxide. Most in vitro studies have separately reported the antimicrobial activity of organic acids and essential oils (EOs) using diverse methods for susceptibility testing. In addition, in vitro outcomes can help in the selection of the suitable antimicrobial compound and effective combinations of these compounds in the control of pathogens of interest in pork production. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determinate the antibacterial activity of six organic acids and six EOs against Escherichia coli, Salmonella spp. and Clostridium perfringens isolates, some of them multi-resistant to antibiotics, from swine origin. The synergistic effects between the products with higher activity for each bacteria were also calculated.ResultsAll products tested showed activity against at least one bacterial species, except for black pepper EO. The results showed that formic acid with the shortest chain length was the most effective against E. coli and Salmonella spp., while the sodium salt of coconut fatty acid distillates with long chain acids was the most effective against C. perfringens. The susceptibility of isolates tested to EOs was similar, a result that demonstrates a similar activity of these products against phylogenetically unrelated pathogens. In addition, an additive effect was shown for carvacrol-oregano EO for E. coli, formic acid-carvacrol and formic acid-thymol for Salmonella spp. and carvacrol-cinamaldehyde for C. perfringens.ConclusionsThe susceptibility of isolates to EOs was similar, a result that demonstrates a similar activity of these products against phylogenetically unrelated pathogens in contrast to organic acids. In addition, an additive effect was shown for several combinations of these compounds.
Coronaviruses (CoVs) cause severe respiratory, enteric, and systemic infections in a wide range of hosts, including humans and animals. Porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV), a member of the Coronaviridae family, is the etiological agent of porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED), a highly contagious intestinal disease affecting pigs of all ages. In this study, we optimized a viability real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) for the selective detection of infectious and heat-inactivated PEDV. PEMAX ™ , EMA ™ , and PMAxx ™ photoactivable dyes along with PtCl 4 and CDDP platinum compounds were screened as viability markers using two RT-qPCR assays: firstly, on PEDV purified RNA, and secondly on infectious and thermally inactivated virus suspensions. Furthermore, PMAxx ™ pretreatment matched the thermal inactivation pattern obtained by cell culture better than other viability markers. Finally, we further optimized the pretreatment by coupling viability markers with Triton X-100 in inoculated serum resulting in a better estimation of PEDV infectivity than RT-qPCR alone. Our study has provided a rapid analytical tool based on viability RT-qPCR to infer PEDV infectivity with potential application for feed and feed ingredients monitoring in swine industry. This development would allow for greater accuracy in epidemiological surveys and outbreak investigations.
Background The global threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a One Health problem impacted by antimicrobial use (AMU) for human and livestock applications. Extensive Iberian swine production is based on a more sustainable and eco-friendly management system, providing an excellent opportunity to evaluate how sustained differences in AMU impact the resistome, not only in the animals but also on the farm environment. Here, we evaluate the resistome footprint of an extensive pig farming system, maintained for decades, as compared to that of industrialized intensive pig farming by analyzing 105 fecal, environmental and slurry metagenomes from 38 farms. Results Our results evidence a significantly higher abundance of antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs) on intensive farms and a link between AMU and AMR to certain antimicrobial classes. We observed differences in the resistome across sample types, with a higher richness and dispersion of ARGs within environmental samples than on those from feces or slurry. Indeed, a deeper analysis revealed that differences among the three sample types were defined by taxa-ARGs associations. Interestingly, mobilome analyses revealed that the observed AMR differences between intensive and extensive farms could be linked to differences in the abundance of mobile genetic elements (MGEs). Thus, while there were no differences in the abundance of chromosomal-associated ARGs between intensive and extensive herds, a significantly higher abundance of integrons in the environment and plasmids, regardless of the sample type, was detected on intensive farms. Conclusions Overall, this study shows how AMU, production system, and sample type influence, mainly through MGEs, the profile and dispersion of ARGs in pig production.
Coronaviruses (CoVs) belong to the Nidovirales order, the Coronaviridae family and the Orthocoronavirinae subfamily. Four genera are recognized based on phylogenetic clustering: Alphacoronavirus, Betacoronavirus, Gammacoronavirus and Deltacoronavirus. The CoVs are enveloped viruses, and their genome is composed of a non-segmented positive sense RNA with a size of approximately 30 kb (Fehr & Perlman, 2015). From the 5′-end to the 3′-end, their genomic structure comprises six open reading frames (ORFs) named ORF1a, ORF1b, spike (S), envelope (E), membrane (M) and nucleocapsid (N). The ORF1a and ORF1b encode non-structural polyproteins, whereas the remaining genes encoded structural proteins. In addition, at least one accessory
Background Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global public health threat consequence of antimicrobial use (AMU) in human and animal medicine. In food-producing animals factors such as management, husbandry or biosecurity may impact AMU. Organic and extensive Iberian swine productions are based on a more sustainable and eco-friendly management system, providing an excellent opportunity to evaluate how sustained differences in AMU impact the AMR in indicator bacteria. Here, we evaluate the usefulness of commensal Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp. isolates as AMR bioindicators when comparing 37 Spanish pig farms from both intensive and organic-extensive production systems, considering the effect of AMU and biosecurity measures, the last only on intensive farms. Results The production system was the main factor contributing to explain the AMR differences in E. coli and Enterococcus spp. In both bacteria, the pansusceptible phenotype was more common (p < 0.001) on organic-extensive farms when compared to intensive herds. The microbiological resistance in commensal E. coli was, for most of the antimicrobials evaluated, significantly higher (p < 0.05) on intensive farms. In enterococci, the lincosamides usage revealed the association between AMR and AMU, with an increase in the AMR for erythromycin (p < 0.01), quinupristin-dalfopristin (p < 0.01) and the multidrug-resistant (MDR) phenotype (p < 0.05). The biosecurity measures implemented on intensive farms influenced the AMR of these bioindicators, with a slightly lower resistance to sulfamethoxazole (p < 0.01) and the MDR phenotype (p < 0.05) in E. coli isolated from farms with better cleaning and disinfection protocols. On these intensive farms, we also observed that larger herds had a higher biosecurity when compared to smaller farms (p < 0.01), with no significant associations between AMU and the biosecurity scores. Conclusions Overall, this study evidences that the production system and, to a lesser extent, the biosecurity measures, contribute to the AMR development in commensal E. coli and Enterococcus spp., with antimicrobial usage as the main differential factor, and demonstrates the potential value of these bacteria as bioindicators on pig farms in AMR surveillance programs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.