1
|
Lepczyński A, Herosimczyk A, Bucław M, Adaszyńska-Skwirzyńska M. Antibiotics in avian care and husbandry-status and alternative antimicrobials. PHYSICAL SCIENCES REVIEWS 2023. [DOI: 10.1515/psr-2021-0123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
Abstract
Undoubtedly, the discovery of antibiotics was one of the greatest milestones in the treatment of human and animal diseases. Due to their over-use mainly as antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) in livestock farming, antimicrobial resistance has been reported with increasing intensity, especially in the last decades. In order to reduce the scale of this phenomenon, initially in the Scandinavian countries and then throughout the entire European Union, a total ban on the use of AGP was introduced, moreover, a significant limitation in the use of these feed additives is now observed almost all over the world. The withdrawal of AGP from widespread use has prompted investigators to search for alternative strategies to maintain and stabilize the composition of the gut microbiota. These strategies include substances that are used in an attempt to stimulate the growth and activity of symbiotic bacteria living in the digestive tract of animals, as well as living microorganisms capable of colonizing the host’s gastrointestinal tract, which can positively affect the composition of the intestinal microbiota by exerting a number of pro-health effects, i.e., prebiotics and probiotics, respectively. In this review we also focused on plants/herbs derived products that are collectively known as phytobiotic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam Lepczyński
- Department of Physiology, Cytobiology and Proteomics , West Pomeranian University of Technology , Szczecin , Poland
| | - Agnieszka Herosimczyk
- Department of Physiology, Cytobiology and Proteomics , West Pomeranian University of Technology , Szczecin , Poland
| | - Mateusz Bucław
- Department of Monogastric Animal Sciences , West Pomeranian University of Technology , Szczecin , Poland
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Antibiotic resistance and phylogenetic profiling of Escherichia coli from dairy farm soils; organic versus conventional systems. CURRENT RESEARCH IN MICROBIAL SCIENCES 2022; 3:100088. [PMID: 34977826 PMCID: PMC8688864 DOI: 10.1016/j.crmicr.2021.100088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2021] [Revised: 10/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/29/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
First known comparison of antimicrobial resistance traits in E. coli strains from new zealand farms practicing organic and conventional husbandry. Potential extended spectrum β-lactamase producing strains isolated from dairy farm environments. Organic dairy farms tended to harbour fewer resistant isolates than those recovered from conventionally farmed counterparts. Evidence for anthroponotic transmission of resistant strains of human origin to farm environments. Implications for the spread of antimicrobial resistance traits from farm environments discussed.
The prevalence and spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as a result of the persistent use and/or abuse of antimicrobials is a key health problem for health authorities and governments worldwide. A study of contrasting farming systems such as organic versus conventional dairy farming may help to authenticate some factors that may contribute to the prevalence and spread of AMR in their soils. A case study was conducted in organic and conventional dairy farms in the South Canterbury region of New Zealand. A total of 814 dairy farm soil E. coli (DfSEC) isolates recovered over two years were studied. Isolates were recovered from each of two farms practicing organic, and another two practicing conventional husbandries. The E. coli isolates were examined for their antimicrobial resistance (AMR) against cefoxitin, cefpodoxime, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, meropenem, nalidixic acid, and tetracycline. Phylogenetic relationships were assessed using an established multiplex PCR method. The AMR results indicated 3.7% of the DfSEC isolates were resistant to at least one of the eight selected antimicrobials. Of the resistant isolates, DfSEC from the organic dairy farms showed a lower prevalence of resistance to the antimicrobials tested, compared to their counterparts from the conventional farms. Phylogenetic analysis placed the majority (73.7%) of isolates recovered in group B1, itself dominated by isolates of bovine origin. The tendency for higher rates of resistance among strains from conventional farming may be important for future decision-making around farming practices Current husbandry practices may contribute to the prevalence and spread of AMR in the industry.
Collapse
|
3
|
Kumar H, Bhardwaj K, Kaur T, Nepovimova E, Kuča K, Kumar V, Bhatia SK, Dhanjal DS, Chopra C, Singh R, Guleria S, Bhalla TC, Verma R, Kumar D. Detection of Bacterial Pathogens and Antibiotic Residues in Chicken Meat: A Review. Foods 2020; 9:E1504. [PMID: 33092226 PMCID: PMC7588929 DOI: 10.3390/foods9101504] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2020] [Revised: 10/15/2020] [Accepted: 10/16/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Detection of pathogenic microbes as well as antibiotic residues in food animals, especially in chicken, has become a matter of food security worldwide. The association of various pathogenic bacteria in different diseases and selective pressure induced by accumulated antibiotic residue to develop antibiotic resistance is also emerging as the threat to human health. These challenges have made the containment of pathogenic bacteria and early detection of antibiotic residue highly crucial for robust and precise detection. However, the traditional culture-based approaches are well-comprehended for identifying microbes. Nevertheless, because they are inadequate, time-consuming and laborious, these conventional methods are not predominantly used. Therefore, it has become essential to explore alternatives for the easy and robust detection of pathogenic microbes and antibiotic residue in the food source. Presently, different monitoring, as well as detection techniques like PCR-based, assay (nucleic acid)-based, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA)-based, aptamer-based, biosensor-based, matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry-based and electronic nose-based methods, have been developed for detecting the presence of bacterial contaminants and antibiotic residues. The current review intends to summarize the different techniques and underline the potential of every method used for the detection of bacterial pathogens and antibiotic residue in chicken meat.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harsh Kumar
- School of Bioengineering & Food Technology, Shoolini University of Biotechnology and ManagementSciences, Solan 173229, India;
| | - Kanchan Bhardwaj
- School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Shoolini University of Biotechnology and ManagementSciences, Solan 173229, India; (K.B.); (R.V.)
| | - Talwinder Kaur
- Department of Agriculture, Sri Guru Teg Bahadur Khalsa College, Sri Anandpur Sahib, Punjab 140117, India;
| | - Eugenie Nepovimova
- Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Hradec Kralove,50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic;
| | - Kamil Kuča
- Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, University of Hradec Kralove,50003 Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic;
| | - Vinod Kumar
- School of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield MK43 0AL, UK;
| | - Shashi Kant Bhatia
- Department of Biological Engineering, College of Engineering, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Korea;
| | - Daljeet Singh Dhanjal
- School of Bioengineering and Biosciences, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab 144411, India; (D.S.D.); (C.C.); (R.S.)
| | - Chirag Chopra
- School of Bioengineering and Biosciences, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab 144411, India; (D.S.D.); (C.C.); (R.S.)
| | - Reena Singh
- School of Bioengineering and Biosciences, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab 144411, India; (D.S.D.); (C.C.); (R.S.)
| | - Shivani Guleria
- Department of Biotechnology, TIFAC-Centre of Relevance and Excellence in Agro and Industrial Biotechnology (CORE), Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala 147001, India;
| | - Tek Chand Bhalla
- Department of Biotechnology, Himachal Pradesh University, Summer Hill, Shimla 171005, India;
| | - Rachna Verma
- School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Shoolini University of Biotechnology and ManagementSciences, Solan 173229, India; (K.B.); (R.V.)
| | - Dinesh Kumar
- School of Bioengineering & Food Technology, Shoolini University of Biotechnology and ManagementSciences, Solan 173229, India;
| |
Collapse
|