IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v14y2017i11p1400-d119227.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Antibiotic Susceptibility, Genetic Diversity, and the Presence of Toxin Producing Genes in Campylobacter Isolates from Poultry

Author

Listed:
  • Jeeyeon Lee

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea
    Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Jiyeon Jeong

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Heeyoung Lee

    (Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Jimyeong Ha

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea
    Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Sejeong Kim

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea
    Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Yukyung Choi

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea
    Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Hyemin Oh

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea
    Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Kunho Seo

    (Department of Veterinary Medicine, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Korea)

  • Yohan Yoon

    (Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea
    Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

  • Soomin Lee

    (Risk Analysis Research Center, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea)

Abstract

This study examined antibiotic susceptibility, genetic diversity, and characteristics of virulence genes in Campylobacter isolates from poultry. Chicken ( n = 152) and duck ( n = 154) samples were collected from 18 wet markets in Korea. Campylobacter spp. isolated from the carcasses were identified by PCR. The isolated colonies were analyzed for antibiotic susceptibility to chloramphenicol, amikacin, erythromycin, tetracycline, ciprofloxacin, nalidixic acid, and enrofloxacin. The isolates were also used to analyze genetic diversity using the DiversiLab TM system and were tested for the presence of cytolethal distending toxin ( cdt ) genes. Campylobacter spp. were isolated from 45 poultry samples out of 306 poultry samples (14.7%) and the average levels of Campylobacter contamination were 22.0 CFU/g and 366.1 CFU/g in chicken and duck samples, respectively. Moreover, more than 90% of the isolates showed resistance to nalidixic acid and ciprofloxacin. Genetic correlation analysis showed greater than 95% similarity between 84.4% of the isolates, and three cdt genes ( cdtA , cdtB , and cdtC ) were present in 71.1% of Campylobacter isolates. These results indicate that Campylobacter contamination should be decreased to prevent and treat Campylobacter foodborne illness.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeeyeon Lee & Jiyeon Jeong & Heeyoung Lee & Jimyeong Ha & Sejeong Kim & Yukyung Choi & Hyemin Oh & Kunho Seo & Yohan Yoon & Soomin Lee, 2017. "Antibiotic Susceptibility, Genetic Diversity, and the Presence of Toxin Producing Genes in Campylobacter Isolates from Poultry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-11, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:11:p:1400-:d:119227
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/11/1400/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/11/1400/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ashok J. Tamhankar & Cecilia Stålsby Lundborg, 2019. "Antimicrobials and Antimicrobial Resistance in the Environment and Its Remediation: A Global One Health Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-7, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:11:p:1400-:d:119227. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.