|
|
OJHAS: Vol. 4, Issue
3: (2005 Jul-Sep) |
|
|
Anti Microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli isolates From Tropical Free Range Chickens |
|
|
Okoli CI Tropical Animal Health and Production Research Lab., Department Of Animal Science
and Technology, Federal University Of Technology, Owerri, Nigeria Chah KF Depatment of Veterinary Pathology and Microbiology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka
Ozoh PTE Department Of Molecular Biology, Federal University Of Technology Owerri
Udedibie ABI Tropical Animal Health and Production Research Lab., Department Of Animal Science
and Technology, Federal University Of Technology, Owerri, Nigeria |
|
|
|
|
|
Address For Correspondence |
|
Dr. I. Charles Okoli
Tropical Animal Health and Production Research Lab., Department Of Animal Science
and Technology, Federal University Of Technology, Owerri, Nigeria
E-mail:
dr_charleso@yahoo.com |
|
|
Okoli CI, Chah KF, Ozoh PTE, Udedibie ABI. Anti Microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli isolates from Tropical Free Range Chickens.
Online J Health Allied Scs.2005;3:3 |
|
Submitted: Aug 22,
2005; Revised: Nov 30, 2005; Accepted: Nov 30, 2005; Published:
Dec 2, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract: |
Normal intestinal flora of humans and animals constitute enormous reservoir
of resistance genes for potentially pathogenic bacteria and may serve as major
indictors of selection pressure exerted by anti-microbial use in a given population.
A study was conducted in September 2003 at 3 purposively selected peri-urban
sites spread across 3 senatorial zones of Imo state, Nigeria to determines the
anti-microbial resistance profile of commensal E. coli isolated from free range
chickens. The isolates were screened for anti-microbial resistance profile against
10 antibiotics using the disc diffusion method. E. coli strains from local fowls,
recorded 100 and 78.9% resistances against ampicillin and cotrimoxazole respectively,
while resistance rates against ciprofloxacin, gentamycin and norfloxacin were
0.0, 5.3 and 5.3% respectively. Isolates from free-range cockerels recorded
100% resistance against norfloxacin, cotrimoxazole and ampicillin and 83.3%
against nitrofurantoin. Similarly, isolates from old layers, recorded 100% resistance
against nitrofurantoin, cotrimoxazole, tetracycline, chloramphenicol and ampicillin
and 80% against nalidixic acid. Similar resistance trends were observed in E.
coli isolates from free-range turkeys and broiler roosters against the inexpensive
broad-spectrum first line antibiotics (ampicillin, nalidixic acid, cotrimoxazole,
nitrofurantoin and chloramphenicol), although values varied slightly across
poultry types. Resistances against gentamycin were consistently low in isolates
from the different types of poultry. Twenty-nine resistance patterns were observed
in the E. coli isolates with predominant patterns being distributed widely across
poultry types indicating a striking diversity of resistance patterns in the
areas.
Key Words:
E. coli, Anti-microbial resistance, Local fowl, Turkey, Roosters,
Cockerels, Nigeria |
|
The level of anti-microbial resistance in bacteria belonging to the normal intestinal
flora of humans and animals may increase due to exposure to antibiotics.(1)
These bacteria which constitute an enormous reservoir of resistance genes for
potentially pathogenic bacteria may serve as major indictors for selection pressure
exerted by anti-microbial use in a given animal or human population.(1-3) Investigation
of prevalence of resistance in such bacteria, especially E. coli may reveal
the prevalence of resistance in different animal populations and detect possible
transfer of resistant bacteria from animals to humans and vice versa.(1)
For E. coli and other classes of enterobacteriaceae in which asypmtomatic colonization
of the intestine usually precedes infection, acquisition of one or several new
genes, rather than point mutation in existing genes has been shown to be the
common ant-microbial resistance mediation route.(4-5) For example, segments
of new genes could be replaced with alleles having entirely different sequences
from the new type at multiple positions. These new mechanisms thus arise and
spread in the bacterial population under conditions of anti-microbial selective
pressure.(5)
Again, it has been shown that exposure of most
E. coli strains to anti-microbial
agents usually occurs during treatment directed at infections caused by other
unrelated organisms. Anti-microbial treatment that alters the population of E. coli in a given host or environment, will usually affect bacterial contacts
of the host or environment.(6) Thus, use of a particular antibiotic in for
example human hosts, in an environment may increase the risk of colonization
by or infection with resistant organisms in other humans or even animals that
have not received that set of antibiotics but are sharing common environment
with the humans.(5) Anti-microbial use may also increase the density of resistant
organisms within a host that already harbor such organisms at a lower density
resulting in enhanced shedding of these organisms and increased risk to other
hosts.(7) There is emerging evidence that anti-microbial use in humans may be the major
selective force for multi-drug resistant clones in enterobacteriaceae in many
developing countries that has resulted in an increasingly high prevalence of
multi-drug resistance in these countries.(8-11) This is contrary to the information
from the developed countries where overwhelming evidence seems to suggest that
anti-microbial use in agriculture is the major driving force in the selection
and dissemination of bacterial resistance.(12-17) There is however the need
to investigate this further in order to generate sufficient data that could
advice on proper use of anti-microbial agents in agriculture in the developing
countries.
The present study determines the anti-microbial resistance profile of commensal
E. coli isolated from free range chickens in Imo state, Nigeria.
Study Area:
The study was carried out in Imo State, Nigeria. Imo State is situated
in the central part of the southeastern region of Nigeria. The State is divided
into 27 Local Government Areas (LGA) for administrative purposes. These LGAs
are further grouped into 3 senatorial zones namely, Owerri, Orlu and Okigwe.
The agro-ecological characteristics and poultry production systems in the area
have been reported.(18)
Identification and selection of sampling sites:
The study was conducted in September 2003 at 3 purposively selected peri-urban
sites spread across the 3 senatorial zones of the state. The sites included
Nekede (Owerri senatorial zone), Amaraku (Okigwe senatorial zone) and Umuaka
(Orlu senatorial zone). A preliminary field investigation was made by the researchers
to identify the study sites and to make themselves known to the selected farm
operators, and discuss the detailed nature of the work with them.
At each site, the families that own the chicken and the number of chicken to
be sampled were determined according to the method previously described by Okoli.(19) Each sampling site was visited twice over a period of three weeks. It
was determined that the birds have not received any antibiotic medication in
the previous two months, since antibiotic treatment has been shown to compromise
resistance results.(20) Altogether, samples were collected from local chicken,
free-range exotic cockerels, old layers, turkeys and broiler roosters.
Collection of samples, cultivation and isolation of organisms:
Cloacae swabs were collected from at least 5 birds randomly selected from the
free-range flock at each study site, using sterile swab sticks (AntecR). MacConkey
agar (MCA) (Fluka BioChemicaR) was used for selective growth and elucidation
of colony characteristics of E. coli.(21) The agar was prepared according to
manufacturer's instruction and each cloacae swab sample streaked directly on
MCA and incubated overnight at 37°C. In all cases, the streaking technique
described by Cruickshank et al. (22) was adopted.
After overnight incubation, growths on the MCA plates suggestive of E. coli
colonies 2-4mm in diameter, opaque and convex with entire edge and rose pink
on account of lactose fermentation were further streaked onto eosin methylene
blue (EMB) and incubated overnight at 37°C again. Green metallic sheen colonies
indicative of E. coli were then subjected to biochemical tests, which included indole, methyl red and Simmons citrate tests for
E. coli identification as described
by Edwards and Ewing.(23)
Susceptibility testing:
The isolated
E. coli were screened for anti-microbial resistance profile using
the disc diffusion method (24) according to the methods recommended by the National
Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards Guidelines.(25) This was done by
streaking the surface of nutrient agar plates uniformly with the organisms and
thereafter exposing them to discs (Poly-Tes LabR) impregnated with known concentrations
of anti-microbial substances.
Commercial antibiotics discs used in the study were 10 and included AM, ampicillin
(25ug); CO, cotrimoxazole (50ug); NI, nitrofurantoin (100ug); GN, gentamycin
(10ug); NA, nalidixic acid (30ug); TE, tetracycline (30ug); CH, chloramphenicol
(10Ug); CF, cefuroxime (20ug); NB, norfloxacin (10ug); CP, ciprofloxacin (5ug).
Interpretations and data treatment:
Susceptibility data were recorded quantitatively by measuring the diameters
to the nearest whole millimeter using a meter rule. Following the interpretative
chat of the Kirby-Bauer Sensitivity Test Method (26), the zones were interpreted
as resistant or sensitive. For the purpose of the present study, isolates with
intermediate sensitivity were categorized as sensitive. Furthermore, proportions
of isolates resistant to individual drugs and having each anti-microbial resistance
patterns were computed as averages and percentages across the different poultry
types.
Anti-microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli Isolates from Local
Chicken:
The overall mean percentage resistance figures of
E. coli strains isolated from
local fowls is shown in Figure 1. Among these, ampicillin and co-trimoxazole
were resisted 100 and 78.9% of the time respectively while ciprofloxacin, gentamicin
and norfloxacin recorded 0.0, 5.3 and 5.3% resistance respectively.
|
Figure 1: Anti-microbial resistance frequencies
of E. coli isolates from local fowls reared at different rural
locations. N, nitrofurantoin; Cf, cefuroxime; Nb, norfloxacin; Co,
cotrimoxazole; Gn, gentamicin; Te, tetracycline; Cp, ciprofloxacin;
Na, nalidixic acid; Ch, chloramphenicol; Am, ampicillin. |
Anti-microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli Isolates from Free-Range Cockerels: Among the free-range-cockerels (Figure 2),
E. coli isolates recorded 100% resistance
against norfloxacin, cotrimoxazole and ampicillin, while for nitrofurantoin
it was 83.3% resistance. Gentamicin, tetracycline and ciprofloxacin on the other
hand recorded zero resistance.
|
Figure
2: Anti-microbial resistance frequencies of E. coli from
free range cockerel. N, nitrofurantoin; Cf, cefuroxime; Nb,
norfloxacin; Co, cotrimoxazole; Gn, gentamicin; Te, tetracycline; Cp,
ciprofloxacin; Na, nalidixic acid; Ch, chloramphenicol; Am,
ampicillin. |
Anti-microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli Isolates Old Layers:
E. coli isolates from the old layers, (Figure 3), recorded 100% resistance against nitrofurantoin, cotrimoxazole, tetracycline, chloramphenicol and ampicillin,
while 80% resistance was recorded against nalidixic acid. Zero resistance was
on the other hand recorded against gentamicin.
|
Figure
3: Anti-microbial resistance frequencies of E. coli from
old layers. N, nitrofurantoin; Cf, cefuroxime; Nb, norfloxacin; Co,
cotrimoxazole; Gn, gentamicin; Te, tetracycline; Cp, ciprofloxacin;
Na, nalidixic acid; Ch, chloramphenicol; Am, ampicillin. |
Anti-microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli Isolates from Free-Range
Turkey:
Figure 4 shows that free-range turkeys yielded
E. coli organism that were highly
resistant to co-trimoxazole, nalidixic acid and ampicillin (100%), and nitrofurantoin
and chloramphenicol (66.7%). These organisms however recorded 0% resistance
to gentamicin and ciprofloxacin.
|
Figure
4: Anti-microbial resistance frequencies of E coli isolates from
turkey. N, nitrofurantoin; Cf, cefuroxime; Nb, norfloxacin; Co,
cotrimoxazole; Gn, gentamicin; Te, tetracycline; Cp, ciprofloxacin;
Na, nalidixic acid; Ch, chloramphenicol; Am, ampicillin. |
Anti-microbial Resistance Profile of E. coli Isolates from Broiler
Roosters:
E. coli isolates from broiler roosters (Figure 5) recorded 100% resistance against cotrimoxazole and ampicillin, 85.7% to nalidixic acid and chloramphenicol and
78.6% to nitrofurantoin. Furthermore, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin and cefuroxime
recorded 0, 7.1 and 7.1% resistance respectively.
|
Figure
5: Anti-microbial resistance frequencies of E. coli isolates from
broiler roosters. N, nitrofurantoin; Cf, cefuroxime; Nb, norfloxacin;
Co, cotrimoxazole; Gn, gentamicin; Te, tetracycline;
Cp, ciprofloxacin; Na, nalidixic acid; Ch, chloramphenicol; Am,
ampicillin. |
Anti-microbial Resistance Patterns:
E. coli
strains isolated from the various free-range poultry types, demonstrated
29 resistance patterns with NI-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM being the most predominant (Table
1). This pattern occurred six times and was elucidated from local fowl, old
layers, turkeys and broiler roosters. This was followed by the NI-CO-NA-CH-AM
pattern that occurred five times and in local fowls, free-range cockerels and
turkeys. Another pattern, NI-NB-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM appeared four times and was observed
in old layers and broiler roosters. It was also noted that most of the resistance
patterns contained from 5 to 8 antibiotics indicating multi-drug resistance
among the organisms.
Table 1: Antimicrobial resistance patterns of
E. coli isolates from free range
poultry in Imo state.
Resistance patterns |
Frequency of Dissemination |
Occurrence patterns |
1 AM |
|
|
2 NI-AM |
|
|
3 CO-AM |
|
|
4 CF-CO-AM
|
2 |
LF, FRC |
5 CO-NA-AM
|
2 |
LF |
6 NI-CO-AM
|
|
|
7 CO-CH-AM
|
2 |
LF, RO |
8 CO-NA-CH-AM
|
3 |
LF, RO |
9 NI-CF-CH-AM
|
|
|
10 NI-CO-NA-AM
|
|
|
11 CO-GN-NA-CH-AM
|
|
|
12 NI-CF-CO-TE-AM
|
|
|
13 NI-CO-NA-CH-AM
|
5 |
LF,FRC, TK |
14 NI-CF-NA-CH-AM
|
|
|
15 NI-CF-CO-NA-AM
|
|
|
16 NI-CO-TE-CH-AM
|
|
|
17 NI-NB-CO-NA-AM
|
|
|
18 NI-CO-CP-NA-AM
|
|
|
19 CF-CO-NA-CH-AM
|
|
|
20 CF-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM
|
|
|
21 NI-CF-CO-NA-CH-AM
|
|
|
22 NI-NB-CO-NA-CH-AM
|
3 |
LF, TK, RO |
23 NI-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM
|
6 |
LF,OL,TK, RO |
24 NI-CF-CO-TE-CH-AM
|
|
|
25 NI-NB-CO-TE-CH-AM
|
|
|
26 NI-CF-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM
|
2 |
OL, TK |
27 NI-NB-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM
|
4 |
OL, RO, |
28 NI-CF-CO-TE-CP-NA-CH-AM
|
|
|
29 NI-CF-NB-CO-TE-NA-CH-AM
|
2 |
TK, RO |
E. coli isolates from local fowls that rarely receive antibiotics recorded very
high resistance against ampicillin and cotrimoxazole, and moderate rates to
nalidixic acid and nitrofurantoin. These figures are at variance with the much
lower figures reported for ampicillin and cotrimoxazole in local chicken at
Nsukka, Enugu state, Nigeria.(27) The high figures presented here may not be
out of place but a reflection of resistance events in other hosts sharing the
same environment with the local fowls. Although local fowls hardly receive any
modern veterinary attention, they may maintain close contact through a myriad
of routes with organisms originating from other important hosts in their environment
such as humans and exotic chicken that had been previously exposed to various
antibiotics. For example, in many rural communities in southeastern Nigeria,
it is common for people to defecate in and around surrounding compound bushes
or to urinate just at the corner of the house. Such poor and unhygienic disposal
methods of human excrements definitely expose local fowls that feed on such
excrement to normal human enteric flora that may harbor novel resistant factors.
Furthermore, an enhancement of risk for acquisition of resistant organisms by
animal hosts, because of selective use of antibiotics in other hosts in the
same environment has recently been described by Lipsitch and Samore.(5)
Resistance events in
E. coli isolates from free-range cockerels exceeded that
of local fowls. It would seem that their exposure to resistance trends in the
commercial farms where they were started continued to influence events in colonizing
organisms even at their definitive locations. Thus, ampicillin, cotrimoxazole,
nitrofurantoin, norfloxacin and nalidixic acid were highly resistant in this
group. The 100% resistance returned by the E. coli isolates to norfloxacin is
of public health importance. This probably the first documented evidence of
such a very high resistance figure against any fluoroquinolone in bacterial
isolates from farm animals in Nigeria. In fact, Chah et al. (27) reported the
highest resistance rate of 27.7% to norfloxacin in E. coli from broilers. Ciprofloxacin,
which is the only other fluoroquinolone tested in this group however, recorded
0% resistances in the E. coli isolates.
It is probable that even though norfloxacin and ciprofloxacin belong to the
first generation fluoroquinolones, the latter may have been introduced first
into clinical practice in the country. Both medicines however remain unavailable
for veterinary prescription in Nigeria. Current information indicates that quinolone
resistance can also be plasmid mediated, involving the qnr gene, which is quite
distinct from the known quinolone resistance genes. The gene has been isolated
from E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae and has been identified in USA and China.(28) It is probable that this plasmid-mediated gene may be contributing to
the wide distribution of high bacterial resistance to quinolones in the study
area.
The resistance rates observed in
E. coli isolates from the old layers are alarming.
One hundred percent resistance was recorded against nitrofurantoin, cotrimoxazole,
tetracycline, chloramphenicol and ampicillin, and 80% for nalidixic acid indicating
that these compounds have become seriously compromised and probably are currently
of little value in the treatment of E. coli infections in the area. These organisms
may also constitute enormous reservoirs for genes encoding resistance against
these antibiotics and foci for continual spread of these mechanisms.(29-30)
The present figures, although higher are similar to the 93.3, 90.0, 70.0, and
60% resistance to ampicillin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, nitrofurantoin
and cotrimoxazole respectively reported by Chah et al. (20) in colisepticeamic
E. coli strains at Enugu state and Okoli et al (31) in E. coli isolates from
a commercial layer poultry farm in Owerri, Imo state, Nigeria.
E. coli
isolates from turkeys and broiler roosters returned high figures for
the inexpensive broad-spectrum first line antibiotics (ampicillin, nalidixic
acid, cotrimoxazole, nitrofurantoin and chloramphenicol), although values varied
slightly across poultry types. These results once more tally with those of the
other poultry types especially free range cockerels and old layers earlier reported,
thus confirming high resistance profiles against these drug to be the order
in E. coli isolates from different types free-range poultry in Imo state.
Twenty-nine resistance patterns were observed in the E. coli isolates with predominant
patterns being distributed widely across poultry types indicating a striking
diversity of resistance patterns in the areas. Multi-drug resistance was a common
feature in these isolates, highlighting the fact that the resistance genes for
these drugs are linked on plasmids.(32) Moreover, the wide spread resistance
to cotrimoxazole may be implying the presence of class 1 integrons, which are
also important in conferring resistance to multiple anti-microbials.(33)
Norfloxacin was incorporated in many of the patterns observed in the present
study especially the predominant ones. This probably points to the fact that
the E. coli strains encountered in these free-range poultries might have originated
from human hosts where their resistances to fluoroquinolones were first selected
and subsequently disseminated to lower animals.(5) There is strong evidence
that anti-microbial use in humans has not only driven the emergence of multi-drug
resistant clones in the developing countries such as Nigeria that has resulted
in an increasingly high prevalence of multiple resistance.(8-11)
- Van den Bogaard AE, Stobberingh EE. Epidemiology of resistance to antibiotics.
Links between animals and humans. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents.
2000;14:327-335.
- Lester SC, del Pilar Pla M, Wang F. The carriage of Escherichia coli resistant
to anti-microbial agents by healthy children in Boston, in Caracas, Venezuela
and in Qin Pu, China. New England Journal Medicine 1990;323:285-289
- Murray BE. Problems and Dilemmas of anti-microbial resistance.
Pharmacotherapy
1992;12:865-935.
- Singleton P. Bacteria in biology, biotechnology and medicine, 4th Ed. John
Wiley and sons. Ltd, New York, Toronto; 1997.
- Lipsitch M, Samore MH. Anti-microbial use and anti-microbial resistance:
A population perspective. Emerging Infectious Diseases 2002;8:347-354.
- Halloran ME, Struchiner CJ. Study designs for dependent happenings.
Epidemiology
1991;2:331-338.
- Donskey CJ, Chowdhry TK, Hecker MT et al. Effect of antibiotic therapy on the
density of vancomycin-resistant enteroccoci in the stool of colonized patients.
N. Engl. J. Med., 2000; 343: 1925-32.
- Agarwa lKC, Garg RK, Panhotra BR et al. Drug resistance in salmonella isolated
at Chandigarh (India) during 1972-1978. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 1980;46:387-390.
- Ling J, Chau PY, Rowe B. Salmonella serotypes and incidence of multiple-
resistant salmonellae isolated from diarrhoeal patients in Hong Kong from 1973-1982.
Epidemiological of Infection 1987;99:295-306.
- Kariuki S, Gilks C, Corkill J et al. Multi-drug resistant non-typhoid salmonellae
in Kenya. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1996;38:425-34.
- Okoli IC, Okeudo NJ, Onwuchekwa CI. New trends in antibiotic resistance
among E. coli isolates from southern Nigeria. In book of abstracts for the 39th
annual national congress, Nigerian Veterinary Medical Association, 2002 October
27- 31; Sokoto, Nigeria. 2002, p. 16.
- Levy SB. Antibiotic resistance: an ecological imbalance. In
Chadwick DJ, Goode J, eds. Antibiotic resistance.
Origins, evolution, selection and spread. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 1997. p. 1-14.
- Wray C. Medical impact of anti-microbial use in food animal production. Scenarios
and risk assessment, salmonella and E coli in England and Wales. Proceeding of
the WHO Meeting on the Usage of Quinolones in Animals, Berlin. 1997. p. 45 -51.
- Khachatourians GG. Agricultural use of antibiotics and the evolution and transfer
of antibiotic resistant bacteria. CMAJ 1998;159:1129-1136.
- Apley M.D, Brown SA, Fedorka-Cray PJ et al. Role of veterinary therapeutics
in bacterial resistance development: animal and public health perspectives.
Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association 1998;212:1209-1213.
- Witte W. Medical consequences of antibiotic use in agriculture.
Science 1998;279:996-997.
- Witte W, Klare I, Werner G. The use of antibiotics as growth promoters in
animal husbandry and antibiotic resistance in bacterial pathogens of humans. Fleischwirfscharft,
1999;79:90-94.
- Okoli C Aerial gases
and temperature levels in selected poultry houses in Imo State -
Nigeria. In: Malu UC, Gottwald F (eds.) Studies of sustainable
agriculture and animal science in sub- Saharan Africa. Peter Lang, Europalscher
Verlag der Wissenschaften; 2004. p.
- Okoli IC. Studies on the anti-microbial resistance of
E. coli isolates from
feeds and poultry production units. Ph. D. Thesis, Federal University of Technology Owerri, Nigeria, 2003. p. 248.
- Chah KF, Bessong WO, Oboegbulem SI. Antibiotic resistance in avian colisepticeamic
E. Coli strains in Southeast, Nigeria. In, Proc. 25th Ann. Conf., Nig. Soc. For Anim. Prod. (NSAP), 2000 March, 19-23; Umudike, Nigeria: 2000. p. 303-305.
- Gillies, RR, Dodds TC. Bacteriology illustrated 4th edition.
Churchill Livingstone Edinburgh, London. 1976
- Cruickshank R, Duguid JP, Marmion BP et al. Medical microbiology. 12th edition,
Vol. 2, Edinburgh: Churchill Livingston; 1983.
- Edwards PRD, Ewing WR. Identification of Enterobacteriaceae, 3rd edition,
Minneapolis, Minnesota : Burgess Publishing Company; 1972.
- Bauer AW, Kirby WMM, Sherris JC, Turck M. Antibiotic susceptibility testing
by a standardized single disk method. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 1966;36:493-6.
- NCCLS Performance standard of anti-microbial disk and dilution susceptibility
tests for bacteria isolated from animals. Approved standards, M 31 - A, 1999;19 (11).
- Cheesbrough M Microbiological tests. In: District laboratory practice in tropical
countries. Part 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000.
- Chah KF, Okafor SC, Oboegbulem SI. Anti-microbial resistance of none clinical
E. coli strains from chicken in Nsukka, Southeastern Nigeria.
Nig. J. Anim. Prod.
2003;30(1):101-106.
- Wang M, Tran JH, Jacoby GH et al. Plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance in
clinical isolates of E. coli from Shanghai, China. Antimirobial Agents Chemotherapy,
2003;47(7):2242-2248.
- Stern NJ. Reservoirs for Campylobacter jejuni and approaches for intervention
in poultry. In: Nachamkin I, Blaser MJ, Tompkins LS. (editors) Campylobacter jejuni: current status and further trends, Washington, American Society for Microbiology,
1992; p. 40-60.
- On SLW, Nielsen EM, Engberg J, Madsen M. Validity of Scal defined genotypes
of Campylobacter jejuni examined by Scal I, Kp nl and Bam 1-11 polymorphisms:
evidence of identical clones infecting humans, poultry and cattle. Epidemology
of Infection 1998;120:231-237.
- Okoli IC, Chah KF, Herbert U et al. Anti-microbial resistance of non-clinical
E. coli isolates from a commercial layer poultry farm in Imo state, Nigeria. Annals
of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 2005; (In press).
- Schroeder CM, Meng J, Zhao S et al. Ant microbial resistance of Escherichia
coli 026, 0103, 0111, 0128 and 0145 from animals and humans. Emerging
Infectious Diseases 2002;8(12):1409-1414.
- Jones ME, Peters E, Weersink, AM et al. Widespread occurrence of integrons
causing multiple antibiotic resistances in bacteria. Lancet 1997;349:1742-1743.
|