Python bite: an unusual cause of hand injury

Antibiotic susceptibility of cultivable microbiota from the oral cavity of captive Bothrops atrox and Bothrops lanceolatus: Implications for the treatment of snakebite-associated infections in the French departments of America

INTRODUCTION

Secondary infection is a frequent complication after bites by Bothrops atroxin French Guiana or B. lanceolatus in Martinique. Knowledge of the bacteria present in snake mouths is a valuable aid for determining probabilistic antibiotherapy after Bothrops bite. The objectives of this study were to describe the cultivable bacteria of the oral microbiota of the specimens of B. atrox and B. lanceolatus kept in captivity, and to study their susceptibility to antibiotics.

METHODS

Fifteen B. atrox and 15 B. lanceolatus were sampled. Bacterial cultures were performed and each morphotype on plates was identified using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Antibiotic susceptibility was studied using the agar disk diffusion method, with possible determination of the MICs.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-two isolates were identified: 52 isolates and 13 species in B. atrox, 70 isolates and 23 species in B. lanceolatus. The main species were Providencia rettgeri, Morganella morganii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus xylosus, and Paeniclostridium sordellii (only in B. lanceolatus mouths). For B. atrox, 96% of isolates were susceptible to piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, imipenem and meropenem, 94% to ciprofloxacin and 76% to cefotaxime and ceftriaxone. For B. lanceolatus, 97% of isolates were susceptible to meropenem, 96% to cefepime, 93% to imipenem and piperacillin/tazobactam, 80% to ciprofloxacin, and 75% to cefotaxime and ceftriaxone. Many isolates were resistant towards amoxicillin/clavulanate.

CONCLUSION

Among currently recommended antibiotics, cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam seem more suitable than cefotaxime or ceftriaxone in the event of a Bothrops bite. Ciprofloxacin may also be considered for B. atrox.

Singapore's herpetofauna: updated and annotated checklist, history, conservation, and distribution

Given Singapore's location at the confluence of important maritime trading routes, and that it was established as a British East India Company trading post in 1819, it is unsurprising that Singapore has become one of the centres of natural history collecting and research in Southeast Asia. Despite its small size, Singapore is home to a diverse herpetofauna assemblage and boasts a rich herpetological history. The first systematic studies of Singapore's herpetofauna (within the Linnaean binomial framework) date back to Stamford Raffles and the naturalists hired by him who first came to the island in 1819. Specimens that were collected during and after this time were deposited in museums worldwide. Over time, 39 species from Singapore were described as new to science. Due to the entrepôt nature of Singapore with its associated purchasing and trading of specimens (both alive and dead), poor record-keeping, and human introductions, numerous extraneous species from outside of Singapore were reported to occur on the island. Such issues have left a complicated legacy of ambiguous records and taxonomic complications concerning the identity of Singapore's species-rich herpetofauna, many of which were only resolved in the past 30-40 years. By compiling a comprehensive collection of records and publications relating to the herpetofauna of Singapore, we construct an updated and more accurate listing of the herpetofauna of Singapore. Our investigation culminated in the evaluation of 309 species, in which we compiled a final species checklist recognising 166 species (149 native and 17 non-native established species). Among the 149 native species are two caecilians, 24 frogs, one crocodilian, 13 turtles (three visitors), 34 lizards, and 75 snakes. Of the 17 non-native species are five frogs, four turtles, six lizards, and two snakes. The remaining 143 species represent species to be excluded from Singapore's herpetofauna species checklist. For each of the 309 species examined, we provide species accounts and explanatory annotations. Furthermore, we discuss Singapore's herpetofauna from a historical and conservation perspective. Immediate deforestation and nationwide urbanisation following colonisation completely eliminated many species from throughout much of the country and restricted them to small, degraded forest patches. We hope this publication highlights the importance of publishing observations and serves as a valuable resource to future researchers, naturalists, biological consultants, and policy makers in initiating studies on species ecology, distribution, status, and promoting conservation efforts to safeguard Singapore's herpetofauna.

Snake Tooth in the Finger!

How to cite this article: Naik BS. Snake tooth in the finger! Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine, January 2019;23(1): 58.