2012
DOI: 10.5455/vetworld.2012.556-559
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Study on occurrence and antibiogram pattern of Escherichia coli from raw milk samples in Anand, Gujarat, India

Abstract: Aim : The study was carried out with aim to isolate Escherichia coli from raw milk samples and determine antibiogram pattern of E. coli isolates. Materials and Methods: During 6 months duration of study a total of 100 raw milk samples were collected from different places in and around Anand city such as individual household, cattle farms, milk collection centres of Co-operative milk dairies and milk vendors. All raw milk samples were enriched in peptone water and inoculated on selective media and various bioc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
38
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
(5 reference statements)
3
38
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However higher prevalence rates of 57% (Amin and Borah, 2002), 76% (Gangil et al, 2011) and 100% (Chaubey et al, 2004) were reported by different investigators. In present study, 20.19% milk samples were found positive for E. coli, however higher prevalence rates of 33.96% (Rashid et al, 2013), 38% (Thaker et al, 2012) and 43.3% (Rasheed et al, 2014) were reported from different regions. On the contrary lower prevalence rate of 15.5% (Gundogan and Avci, 2013) was recorded in raw milk samples in previous reports.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 63%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However higher prevalence rates of 57% (Amin and Borah, 2002), 76% (Gangil et al, 2011) and 100% (Chaubey et al, 2004) were reported by different investigators. In present study, 20.19% milk samples were found positive for E. coli, however higher prevalence rates of 33.96% (Rashid et al, 2013), 38% (Thaker et al, 2012) and 43.3% (Rasheed et al, 2014) were reported from different regions. On the contrary lower prevalence rate of 15.5% (Gundogan and Avci, 2013) was recorded in raw milk samples in previous reports.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…Imipenem is an antibiotic which is recently introduced and possibly resistance against it is not developed among E. coli isolates. Several other researchers have also reported similar resistance/sensitivity patterns of E. coli isolates against these antibiotics (Sharma et al, 2010, Thaker et al, 2012. Among the E. coli isolates, the highest value of MAR index reported was 1 for one isolate and the lowest MAR index reported was 0.16 for four isolates, two each from meat and milk.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…This prevalence is lower when compared to reports of [10] from Mekelle town, [16] from Britain, [17] from South India, and [18] from Malaysia who reported prevalence of E. coli from raw milk of 44.4%, 63%, 70%, and 65%, respectively. On the other hand, [19] reported a 38.0% prevalence from India…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Escherichia coli is considered a faecal contamination indicator in foods because of its presence in the gut. The presence of E. coli in foods is a matter of concern because some strains may be pathogenic (Thaker et al 2012). Escherichia coli O157:H7 serotypes, identified as enterohaemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) and grouped as verotoxin-producing E. coli (VTEC), are recognised as the primary cause of haemorrhagic colitis (HC) and the diarrhoea-associated form of haemolytic-uremic syndrome (HUS) (Rahimi et al 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consumable animal products have been suggested as a possible source of both resistant bacteria and resistant genes that can be transferred to humans directly (Pereira et al 2009). The antibiotic-resistant strains of a number of pathogenic bacteria, including S. aureus, B. cereus and E. coli, in foods which threaten public health have been the subject of many publications (Ozcelik and Citak 2009;Pereira et al 2009;Thaker et al 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%