Isolation of Arcobacter spp. from Retail Meats and Cytotoxic Effects of Isolates against Vero Cells

Abstract

A survey of Arcobacter spp. was conducted over a 12-month period in Guadalajara, Mexico. A total of 135 samples (45 lean ground beef samples, 45 lean ground pork samples, and 45 chicken samples, including drumsticks, gizzards, and ground or chopped breast) were collected from local butcheries. The samples were enriched in Johnson-Murano enrichment medium and then streaked onto Johnson-Murano agar plates. Typical colonies were subjected to microscopic and biochemical identification followed by polymerase chain reaction confirmation of the genus Arcobacter. All isolates confirmed to be Arcobacter isolates were then inoculated into Eagle's minimum essential medium to determine their cytotoxicity against Vero cells. Arcobacter spp. were detected in 28.8, 51.1, and 40.0% of beef, pork, and chicken samples, respectively. From these samples, 101 isolates were confirmed to be Arcobacter spp. by polymerase chain reaction. Overall, the species most frequently identified was A. butzleri, followed by A. skirrowii. A. cryaerophilus was isolated only from pork meat. Ninety-five (95%) of the Arcobacter isolates produced a virulence mechanism against Vero cells, and 38 of them induced cell elongation, indicating enterotoxin production. Eighteen isolates produced the formation of vacuoles, and 39 produced both vacuolization and elongation. The vacuolization effect may be related to a vacuolizing toxin. The production of a vacuolizing toxin by Arcobacter spp. has not previously been reported. Results obtained in this study indicate that Arcobacter spp. may show cytotoxic effects other than the recognized enterotoxin production.

Arcobacter: an emerging food-borne zoonotic pathogen, its public health concerns and advances in diagnosis and control – a comprehensive review

“…Zur Bruegge et al (2014) reported that Arcobacter has less potential for intracellular survival and also documented strain specific differences in invasion and survival capacities of the organism inside the host. Arcobacter isolates when cultured in Vero cells produced cell elongation, which showed their ability to produce enterotoxin and some isolates along with this ability produced vacuoles in cells showing that these produce vacuolizing toxin (Villarruel-L opez et al 2003). Putative role played by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and the composition of LPS have not been elucidated properly in Arcobacter infection.…”

Taxonomy, Epidemiology, and Clinical Relevance of the Genus Arcobacter

“…Collectively, in those studies 56% (55/59), 20% (9/44), and 85% (164/194) of the strains tested showed adhesion, invasion, and cytotoxicity, respectively (Table 3), with toxicity and adherence therefore being the most commonly observed effects (17,60,66,76,87,114,153,158). The differences observed among the different studies may be due to the origin of the strains (environmental versus clinical) as well as to different cell lines used in those studies (162).…”

“…The pathogenicity and virulence mechanisms of Arcobacter species are still poorly understood, despite several studies having investigated their adhesion capacity (17,60,66,76,114,153), invasiveness (47,66,114,153), and cytotoxicity (17,60,87,114,153,158) in several cell lines (Table 3). Collectively, in those studies 56% (55/59), 20% (9/44), and 85% (164/194) of the strains tested showed adhesion, invasion, and cytotoxicity, respectively (Table 3), with toxicity and adherence therefore being the most commonly observed effects (17,60,66,76,87,114,153,158).…”

Comparison of Arcobacter Isolation Methods, and Diversity of Arcobacter spp. in Cheshire, United Kingdom

“…Arcobacter spp. have also been isolated from healthy cattle in Belgium (37), Japan (20), Turkey (2,23), the United States (8,42), and New Zealand (25) and from beef and/or beef products from Thailand (39), Northern Ireland (32), Turkey (2,28), Australia (30), Japan (21), Mexico (38), Czech Republic (40), the United States (8), and Netherlands (4). These strains show that the organism can be present in healthy animals and their products, illustrating the importance of cattle and beef as potential sources of Arcobacter infection of humans.…”