Campylobacter Spp. and Bacteriophages from Broiler Chickens: Characterization of Antibiotic Susceptibility Profiles and Lytic Bacteriophages

Overview

Journal Microbiologyopen

Specialty Microbiology

Date 2019 Jan 19

PMID 30656847

Citations 13

Authors

Anna Nowaczek

Renata Urban-Chmiel

Marta Dec

Andrzej Puchalski

Dagmara Stepien-Pysniak

Agnieszka Marek

Ewelina Pyzik

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Bacteria of the genus Campylobacter are the most common pathogens causing zoonotic diseases in humans. Therefore, the aim of the study was to isolate Campylobacter bacteria from broiler chickens and evaluate their susceptibility to selected antibiotics by determining minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC), followed by isolation and characterization of bacteriophages specific for Campylobacter spp. The material for the study consisted of field isolates of Campylobacter spp. obtained from the gut (cecum) of broiler chickens directly after slaughter in slaughterhouses, and bacteriophages specific for these strains. We isolated 48 strains from poultry (140 broiler chickens): 31 strains of Campylobacter jejuni and 17 of Campylobacter coli. Identification of the strains was confirmed by multiplex PCR and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Over 83% of Campylobacter strains were resistant to ciprofloxacin, and over half the isolates were resistant to erythromycin, gentamicin, and tetracycline. Resistance to three or more antibiotics was observed in 91.6% of all strains. Four bacteriophages were obtained, and on the basis of their morphological structure, they were assigned to two families of the order Caudovirales: Myoviridae and Siphoviridae. A high percentage of the Campylobacter strains were resistant to at least three of the antibiotic groups tested. All of the phages exhibited lytic activity against the Campylobacter spp. isolates, but the antibacterial effect of the phages was not observed for all strains.

Citing Articles

Broiler farming practices using new or re-used bedding, inclusive of free-range, have no impact on levels, species diversity, community profiles and bacteriophages.

Chinivasagam H, Estella W, Finn D, Mayer D, Rodrigues H, Diallo I AIMS Microbiol. 2024; 10(1):12-40.

PMID: 38525040 PMC: 10955168. DOI: 10.3934/microbiol.2024002.

A broad host phage, CP6, for combating multidrug-resistant Campylobacter prevalent in poultry meat.

Zhang X, Tang M, Zhou Q, Lu J, Zhang H, Tang X Poult Sci. 2024; 103(4):103548.

PMID: 38442560 PMC: 10964072. DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2024.103548.

The Role of Bacteriophages in the Gut Microbiota: Implications for Human Health.

Emencheta S, Olovo C, Eze O, Kalu C, Berebon D, Onuigbo E Pharmaceutics. 2023; 15(10).

PMID: 37896176 PMC: 10609668. DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15102416.

Antimicrobial Drug Resistance in Poultry Production: Current Status and Innovative Strategies for Bacterial Control.

Abreu R, Semedo-Lemsaddek T, Cunha E, Tavares L, Oliveira M Microorganisms. 2023; 11(4).

PMID: 37110376 PMC: 10141167. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms11040953.

An overview of the use of bacteriophages in the poultry industry: Successes, challenges, and possibilities for overcoming breakdowns.

Abd-El Wahab A, Basiouni S, El-Seedi H, Ahmed M, Bielke L, Hargis B Front Microbiol. 2023; 14:1136638.

PMID: 37025628 PMC: 10071031. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1136638.

References

Prachantasena S, Charununtakorn P, Muangnoicharoen S, Hankla L, Techawal N, Chaveerach P . Distribution and Genetic Profiles of Campylobacter in Commercial Broiler Production from Breeder to Slaughter in Thailand. PLoS One. 2016; 11(2):e0149585. PMC: 4757449. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149585. View

Carlton R, Noordman W, Biswas B, de Meester E, Loessner M . Bacteriophage P100 for control of Listeria monocytogenes in foods: genome sequence, bioinformatic analyses, oral toxicity study, and application. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2005; 43(3):301-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2005.08.005. View

Carvalho C, Gannon B, Halfhide D, Santos S, Hayes C, Roe J . The in vivo efficacy of two administration routes of a phage cocktail to reduce numbers of Campylobacter coli and Campylobacter jejuni in chickens. BMC Microbiol. 2010; 10:232. PMC: 2940857. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-10-232. View

Wieczorek K, Osek J . A five-year study on prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Campylobacter from poultry carcasses in Poland. Food Microbiol. 2015; 49:161-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.fm.2015.02.006. View

Carvalho C, Susano M, Fernandes E, Santos S, Gannon B, Nicolau A . Method for bacteriophage isolation against target Campylobacter strains. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2009; 50(2):192-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2009.02774.x. View

Weinbauer M . Ecology of prokaryotic viruses. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2004; 28(2):127-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.femsre.2003.08.001. View

Ingresa-Capaccioni S, Gonzalez-Bodi S, Jimenez-Trigos E, Marco-Jimenez F, Catala P, Vega S . Comparison of different sampling types across the rearing period in broiler flocks for isolation of Campylobacter spp. Poult Sci. 2015; 94(4):766-71. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pev023. View

Han J, Kim J, Hwang S, Choresca Jr C, Shin S, Jun J . Isolation and characterization of a Myoviridae bacteriophage against Staphylococcus aureus isolated from dairy cows with mastitis. Res Vet Sci. 2013; 95(2):758-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2013.06.001. View

Nowaczek A, Urban-Chmiel R, Dec M, Puchalski A, Stepien-Pysniak D, Marek A . Campylobacter spp. and bacteriophages from broiler chickens: Characterization of antibiotic susceptibility profiles and lytic bacteriophages. Microbiologyopen. 2019; 8(7):e00784. PMC: 6612548. DOI: 10.1002/mbo3.784. View

10.

Andrews J . Determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001; 48 Suppl 1:5-16. DOI: 10.1093/jac/48.suppl_1.5. View

11.

Loc Carrillo C, Connerton P, Pearson T, Connerton I . Free-range layer chickens as a source of Campylobacter bacteriophage. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2007; 92(3):275-84. DOI: 10.1007/s10482-007-9156-4. View

12.

Hansen V, Rosenquist H, Baggesen D, Brown S, Christensen B . Characterization of Campylobacter phages including analysis of host range by selected Campylobacter Penner serotypes. BMC Microbiol. 2007; 7:90. PMC: 2194700. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2180-7-90. View

13.

Stepien-Pysniak D, Hauschild T, Rozanski P, Marek A . MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry as a Useful Tool for Identification of spp. from Wild Birds and Differentiation of Closely Related Species. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2017; 27(6):1128-1137. DOI: 10.4014/jmb.1612.12036. View

14.

Owens J, Barton M, Heuzenroeder M . The isolation and characterization of Campylobacter jejuni bacteriophages from free range and indoor poultry. Vet Microbiol. 2012; 162(1):144-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.08.017. View

15.

Bardon J, Kolar M, Cekanova L, Hejnar P, Koukalova D . Prevalence of Campylobacter jejuni and its resistance to antibiotics in poultry in the Czech Republic. Zoonoses Public Health. 2008; 56(3):111-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.1863-2378.2008.01176.x. View

16.

Sails A, Wareing D, Bolton F, Fox A, Curry A . Characterisation of 16 Campylobacter jejuni and C. coli typing bacteriophages. J Med Microbiol. 1999; 47(2):123-8. DOI: 10.1099/00222615-47-2-123. View

17.

Furuta M, Nasu T, Umeki K, Hoang Minh D, Honjoh K, Miyamoto T . Characterization and Application of Lytic Bacteriophages against Campylobacter jejuni Isolated from Poultry in Japan. Biocontrol Sci. 2017; 22(4):213-221. DOI: 10.4265/bio.22.213. View

18.

Hagens S, Loessner M . Bacteriophage for biocontrol of foodborne pathogens: calculations and considerations. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2010; 11(1):58-68. DOI: 10.2174/138920110790725429. View

19.

Sorensen M, Gencay Y, Birk T, Baldvinsson S, Jackel C, Hammerl J . Primary isolation strain determines both phage type and receptors recognised by Campylobacter jejuni bacteriophages. PLoS One. 2015; 10(1):e0116287. PMC: 4293142. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116287. View

20.

Atterbury R, Connerton P, Dodd C, Rees C, Connerton I . Application of host-specific bacteriophages to the surface of chicken skin leads to a reduction in recovery of Campylobacter jejuni. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003; 69(10):6302-6. PMC: 201188. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.69.10.6302-6306.2003. View