Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug;100(8):101230.
doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2021.101230. Epub 2021 May 5.

Longitudinal study on antibiotic susceptibility in commensal E. coli from geese raised in free-range production systems

Affiliations

Longitudinal study on antibiotic susceptibility in commensal E. coli from geese raised in free-range production systems

Luisa Massaccesi et al. Poult Sci. 2021 Aug.

Abstract

The transmission of antimicrobial resistance bacteria from animals to humans has become an important concern. The extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) -AmpC- producing Escherichia coli (ESBL-AmpC EC) and quinolones resistant E. coli are of particular interest. The present study aimed to evaluate the load and prevalence of antibiotic-resistant commensal E. coli along the goose production cycle on 2 free-range farms in central Italy. On A farm, oxytetracycline was administered, while the B farm did not use antibiotics during the geese productive cycle. One hundred geese of 1-day-old from the same batch were divided into the two farms. At hatching, the animals showed an average of E. coli loads was 6.83 ± 0.48 log CFU/g, and 0.28 ± 0.28, 0, 5.12 ± 0.54 log CFU/g for E. coli resistant to nalidixic acid (E. colinal), to cefotaxime (E. colicef) and to tetracyclines (E. colitet), respectively. The loads of E. coli, E. colinal, E. colicef and E. colitet on 224 environmental faecal pools were determined at 8 time points. Antimicrobial susceptibility and molecular characterization of E. colicef isolates were performed. The ANOVA was used to assess the difference in bacterial loads between the two farms. We described more than 50% of resistances for tetracyclines in both farms, and sulphonamides and cephazolin in the A farm. The loads of E. coli and E. colinal in faeces were estimated at approximately 6-7 log (CFU/g) and 5-6 log (CFU/g) in the two farms, respectively. The average load of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Escherichia coli (ESBL EC) in goose faeces varied broadly along the production cycle: in the first weeks, a sharp increase was observed in both farms, while later on A farm, the burden of ESBL EC remained steady until the end of the production cycle and on B farm the load dramatically decreased from 6 wk of age onward. An increase in the proportion of E. colinal was observed on A farm shortly after the antibiotic administration. Our study shows that the dynamics of antibiotic-resistant E. coli in farmed geese are similar to the ones observed in broilers. However, the risk of the emergence of antibiotic-resistant commensal E. coli, might be mitigated by the adoption of good management practices, including prudent use of antibiotics.

Keywords: antibiotic susceptibility; commensal E. coli; free-range farm; goose.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1
Graphical representation of the A farm and B farm.
Figure 2:
Figure 2
Results of quantitative analysis. (A) Averages of E. coli loads (log UFC/g); (B) averages of E. colicef loads (log UFC/g), (C) average of E. colitet (log UFC/g), (D) average of E. colinal (log UFC/g), in the A and B farms. Within each curve, different letters indicate significant differences between means (P ≤ 0.05). Whereas * indicate significant differences between farms. Bars mean ± SE (n = 14).
Figure 3:
Figure 3
Averages proportion of E. colicef (A), E. colitet (B) and E. colinal (C) loads respect to the total E. coli population (%), in the A and B farms. Within each curve, different letters indicate significant differences between means (P≤ 0.05). Whereas * indicate significant differences between farms. Bars mean ± SE (n = 14).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Heatmap showing the molecular characterization and the antibiotic susceptibility profile of each E. colicef isolated on the two farms. Samples are coloured according to the antibiotic molecules results: resistant (red), intermediate (light red) and susceptible (pink). (Colored version of figure is available online.)
Figure 5
Figure 5
Distribution of isolates, divided according to the number of resistances, in each farm from T1 to T8. The number of isolates in the A and B farms, respectively, is shown.

References

    1. Aarestrup F.M. The livestock reservoir for antimicrobial resistance: a personal view on changing patterns of risks, effects of interventions and the way forward. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 2015;370:20140085. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Apostolakos I., Feudi C., Eichhorn I., Palmieri N., Fasolato L., Schwarz S., Piccirillo S. High‑resolution characterisation of ESBL/pAmpC‑producing Escherichia coli isolated from the broiler production pyramid. Sci. Rep. 2020;10:11123. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bennani H., Mateus A., Mays N., Eastmure E., Stärk K.D.C., Häsler B. Overview of evidence of antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance in the food chain. Antibiotics. 2020;9:49. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bertelloni F., Salvadori C., Moni A., Cerri D., Mani P., Ebani V.V. Antimicrobial resistance in Enterococcus spp. isolated from laying hens of backyard poultry flocks. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 2015;22:4. - PubMed
    1. Bortolaia V., Bisgaard M., Bojesen A.M. Distribution and possible transmission of ampicillin- and nalidixic acid-resistant Escherichia coli within the broiler industry. Vet. Microbiol. 2010;142:379–386. - PubMed