Evaluation of enterococci for potential probiotic utilization in dogs

Gut Probiotics and Health of Dogs and Cats: Benefits, Applications, and Underlying Mechanisms

Pets (mostly domestic dogs and cats) play an important role in the daily lives of humans and their health has attracted growing attention from pet owners. The intestinal microbiota, a complex microbial community with barrier-protective, nutritional, metabolic, and immunological functions, is integral to host health. Dysbiosis has been related to a variety of diseases in humans and animals. Probiotics have been used in functional foods and dietary supplements to modulate intestinal microbiota and promote host health, which has been introduced in pet dogs and cats in recent years. Various canine- and feline-derived probiotic strains have been isolated and characterized. The administration of probiotics has shown positive effects on the gut health and can alleviate some intestinal diseases and disorders in dogs and cats, although the underlying mechanisms are largely unresolved. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on the benefits of probiotics and discuss their possible mechanisms in dogs and cats in order to provide new insights for the further development and application of probiotics in pets.

Application of Canine-Derived Enterococcus faecium DSM 32820 in Dogs with Acute Idiopathic Diarrhoea

Modulation of the intestinal microbiota through the application of probiotic bacteria is currently one possible way to improve gastrointestinal health in dogs. Knowledge on the efficacy of lactic acid bacteria in a diarrhoeic disorder of dogs is still spreading; however, the used or commercialized strains are often not of canine origin. In this study, E. faecium DSM 32820 strain (a canine isolate selected in our laboratory based on safety and probiotic criteria) was fed to nine dogs suffering from acute non-haemorrhagic diarrhoea at a dose of 1×109 CFU/ml for 7 days. Samples of feces and blood were taken on day 0 and 7. Evaluation of the CIBDAI (Canine Intestinal Bowel Disease activity index) score showed significantly lower vomiting frequency, stool frequency, stool consistency and weight loss at day 7 compared to day 0 (P<0.05). The 16S rRNA gene analysis revealed Firmicutes as the predominant phylum on both sampling days (72.0% vs. 67.9%, day 0 and 7) followed by Proteobacteria (13.4% vs. 6.0%), Actinobacteria (10.0% vs 13.5%), Fusobacteria (4.2% vs. 2.3%) and Bacteroidetes (0.4% vs. 10.4%). The abundance of family Erysipelotrichiaceae was higher on day 7 compared to the initial levels (P<0.05). Among 19 detected fecal enzymatic activities, five (α-chymotrypsin, β-glucuronidase, α-fucosidase, β-galactosidase, N-acetyl-glucosaminidase) were changed (P<0.05). After the application of the DSM 32820 strain, mean fecal dry matter was significantly higher on day 7 compared to baseline (P< 0.05). Although hematological and biochemical parameters in the blood were not significantly different on average, individual values of certain parameters in several dogs were improved.

Influence of Probiotic Supplementation on Health Status of the Dogs: A Review

Most commonly, pet dogs suffer from gastrointestinal (GI) diseases due to careless eating behaviors, such as eating food other than dog food; excess or insufficient nutrient intake of food leading to malnutrition, which could be harmful to dogs; a lack of digestive enzymes; food intolerance or allergies; infections; and/or breed-related hypersensitivities. Probiotics are live microorganisms that deliver health benefits to the host when administrated in an adequate amount. The possible mechanism behind probiotics’ beneficial effects could be their positive regulation of the host’s intestinal microbiota. Probiotics are reported to have therapeutic properties against canine GI and other diseases. The most suitable dosages and applications of probiotics have not been evaluated extensively. The present review summarizes current knowledge regarding the benefits of probiotics and the changes in canine microbiota during probiotic interventions. This literature review provides clinical evidence for probiotics’ beneficial effects in preventing or treating canine ill-health conditions. Based on current knowledge, subsequent researchers could develop or improve probiotics-based canine pharmacological products.

Characterization and Comparison of Enterococcus spp. Isolates from Feces of Healthy Dogs and Urine of Dogs with UTIs

Simple Summary

Infections caused by Enterococcus spp. represent a serious threat to human and animal health due to difficulties in treatment. Indeed, these bacteria are a very able “trafficker” of antimicrobial resistance genes and for this reason they are often resistant to many antimicrobials. In this study we explored the role of pet dogs as possible carriers and targets of antimicrobial resistant and virulent enterococci. Isolates collected from feces of healthy animals and urine of dogs suffering with UTIs were characterized and compared. Strains resulted as resistant to many of the antimicrobials tested and almost of them were multidrug-resistant. Diffuse resistance was recorded for compounds routinely employed in human and pet therapy. Genes responsible for antimicrobial resistance were widely detected. E. faecalis and E. faecium resulted as equally distributed in stool samples, while E. faecalis prevailed among UTI isolates; virulence genes were more often detected in bacteria belonging to this species. Our data confirm that enterococci inhabitant of the gut flora probably represent the main source of UTI in dogs. Furthermore, healthy and sick pet dogs could be spreaders of antimicrobial and virulent enterococci, representing a possible hazard for other animals and owners.

Abstract

Enterococcus spp. are opportunistic pathogens of both humans and animals characterized by high resistance to antimicrobials. Dogs could be intestinal carriers or suffer from Enterococcus infections, mainly urinary tract infections (UTIs). This study aimed to analyze and compare Enterococcus spp. isolated from healthy dog stools and sick dog urine. Overall, 51 isolates (29 from stools and 22 from UTI) were characterized at species level and tested for antimicrobial resistance, biofilm production and presence of resistance and virulence genes. E. faecium and E. faecalis resulted as equally distributed in stools samples, while E. faecalis predominated among UTI isolates. HLAR phenotype was detected in 47.1% isolates; 64.7% isolates were resistant to ampicillin (47.1% with a MIC ≥ 64 µg/mL). High levels of resistance were recorded for fluoroquinolones (enrofloxacin 74.5%, ciprofloxacin 66.7%), clindamycin (84.3%), tetracycline (78.4%) and quinupristin–dalfopristin (78.4%). No vancomycin resistant strains were detected. All but one isolate were multidrug-resistant. Most detected resistance genes were tetM (70.5%), pbp4 (52.9%) and aph(3′)-IIIa (39.2%). All isolates were able to produce biofilm, but isolates from UTIs and belonging to E. faecalis more frequently resulted in strong biofilm producers. Most detected virulence genes were asa1 (52.9%), gelE (41.2%), cylA (37.3%) and esp (35.3%); all of them resulted as more frequently associated to E. faecalis. No particular differences emerged between isolates from feces and UTI, considering all evaluated aspects. Our results confirm pet dogs as carriers of multidrug-resistant enterococci; stool microflora could be considered as the most probable source of enterococcal UTI and E. faecalis carried by dogs seems to be more virulent than E. faecium, justifying its more frequent involvement in urinary tract infections.

Bacteriocin production and distribution of bacteriocin-encoding genes in enterococci from dogs

Many enterococcal strains produce bacteriocins, which could be useful as natural food preservatives through inhibition of pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms. There is little knowledge of the distribution and spectrum of bacteriocin activity and the distribution of bacteriocin-encoding genes in enterococci isolated from dogs. Therefore, we subjected 160 enterococcal isolates (E. faecium n=92, E. faecalis n=35, E. hirae n=28, E. casseliflavus n=3, E. mundtii n=2) from 105 samples of dog faeces to polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of genes for enterocin A, P, B, L50A, L50B, AS-48, and bac31 and to screening for bacteriocin activity. The results showed the presence of at least one of the tested genes in 54/160 isolates, with E. faecium the most common gene-possessing species. The most frequently occurring gene for production of enterocin A was observed in combination with enterocin P and B. Bacteriocin activity was observed in 76/160 isolates against at least one of 5 indicator bacteria from the genus Listeria, Enterococcus, Streptococcus and Staphylococcus. Four selected strains (IK25, Bri, I/Dz, P10) were active mostly against different species of Enterococcus (in the range 400-25 600 AU/mL) and Listeria sp. (800-12 800 AU/mL) but no Gram-negative bacteria were inhibited. Protein character, thermostability (up to 121°C) and stability at different pH values (3.0-10.0) were confirmed for crude bacteriocins of these four strains. The antimicrobial substance of E. faecium IK25 strain was identified as enterocin B using molecular weight detection and the presence of genes.

Oral administration of bacteriocin-producing and non-producing strains of Enterococcus faecium in dogs

The current effort to incorporate microbial cultures in canine nutrition and thus intake of them on daily base increases our interest in careful and more complex study of their effects in dogs. Many of the commercially used strains have not been tested in dogs and are incorporated only on the base of beneficial effects observed in humans with specific disorders. Moreover, no information on the effects of bacteriocin-producing strains in dogs is available. Therefore, we decided to test and to compare overall effect of bacteriocin non-producing Enterococcus faecium DSM 32820 and enterocin B-producing E. faecium LMG 30881 strain (both of canine origin). Dogs were divided into three treatment groups of ten dogs each: control; DSM 32820 group; and LMG 30881 group, dosing 10⁹ CFU/day/dog. The experiment lasted 35 days with a 14-day treatment period (sample collection at days 0, 7, 14, 35). Despite bacteriocin production is believed that may provide a competitive advantage over neighbouring sensitive strains within shared environment, results indicated somewhat better survival for the DSM 32820 compared to the LMG 30881 group. Furthermore, dogs of DSM 32820 group had optimal faecal consistency throughout the experiment, significantly stimulated phagocytic activity (days 7 and 14) and metabolic burst activity of leukocytes (days 14 and 35) and lower serum glucose concentration (day 35). In contrast, dogs of LMG 30881 group showed higher faecal count of Gram-negative bacteria (day 35), lower haemoglobin and glucose concentration (day 35), and higher metabolic burst activity (days 14 and 35). These results are further evidence of the existence of inter-strain differences in efficacy despite the same origin.