Next Article in Journal
Exploring the Efficacy and Safety of Levamisole Hydrochloride against Microcotyle sebastis in Korean Rockfish (Sebastes schlegelii): An In Vitro and In Vivo Approach
Next Article in Special Issue
Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles, Virulence Determinants, and Biofilm Formation in Enterococci Isolated from Rhesus Macaques (Macaca mulatta): A Potential Threat for Wildlife in Bangladesh?
Previous Article in Journal
3D Reconstruction of the Blood Supply in an Elephant’s Forefoot Using Fused CT and MRI Sequences
Previous Article in Special Issue
Tetracycline Resistance Genes in Wild Birds from a Wildlife Recovery Centre in Central Italy
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 13
Issue 11
10.3390/ani13111790
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

One Health Approach: Invasive California Kingsnake (Lampropeltis californiae) as an Important Source of Antimicrobial Drug-Resistant Salmonella Clones on Gran Canaria Island

by
Kevin M. Santana-Hernández
1,
Eligia Rodríguez-Ponce
1,
Inmaculada Rosario Medina
1,2,
Begoña Acosta-Hernández
1,2,
Simon L. Priestnall
3,
Santiago Vega
4,*,
Clara Marin
4,
Marta Cerdà-Cuéllar
5,6,
Ana Marco-Fuertes
4,
Teresa Ayats
5,6,
Teresa García Beltrán
2 and
Pablo A. Lupiola-Gómez
7
1
Departamento de Patología Animal, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35413 Arucas, Spain
2
Instituto Universitario de Sanidad Animal (IUSA), Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35413 Arucas, Spain
3
Department of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, The Royal Veterinary College, Hatfield AL9 7TA, UK
4
Facultad de Veterinaria, Instituto de Ciencias Biomédicas, Universidad Cardenal Herrera-CEU, CEU Universities, 46115 Alfara del Patriarca, Spain
5
Unitat Mixta d’Investigació IRTA-UAB en Sanitat Animal, Centre de Recerca en Sanitat Animal (CReSA), Campus de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), 08193 Barcelona, Spain
6
IRTA, Programa de Sanitat Animal, Centre de Recerca en Sanitat Animal (CReSA), Campus de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), 08193 Barcelona, Spain
7
Departamento de Ciencias Clínicas, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35413 Arucas, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2023, 13(11), 1790; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13111790
Submission received: 3 April 2023 / Revised: 24 May 2023 / Accepted: 25 May 2023 / Published: 28 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Exploring the Antimicrobial Resistance Phenomenon in Wildlife: The Need for a Holistic Perspective for Global Health)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

The aim of this study was to investigate the invasive species Lampropeltis californiae (California kingsnake) as a reservoir of Salmonella and its ability to spread different clones of the bacterium with zoonotic potential into the environment, as well as study its antimicrobial resistance patterns in Gran Canaria (Spain). The main results showed that a high diversity of Salmonella subsp. salamae strains circulate in Gran Canaria with a high prevalence of resistance shown for antimicrobials of public health importance, as summarised in the European Decision 2013/652/EU.

Abstract

The increase in the reptile population has led to a rise in the number of zoonotic infections due to close contact with reptiles, with reptile-associated salmonellosis being particularly relevant. California kingsnake invasion not only threatens the endemic reptile population of the island of Gran Canaria (Spain) but also poses serious public health problems by spreading zoonotic pathogens and their antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to the environment. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the occurrence, genetic diversity, and AMR among Salmonella spp. strains isolated from California kingsnakes in Gran Canaria Island (Spain). Of 73 invasive individuals captured, 20.5% carried Salmonella spp., belonging to different subspecies and serovars, with subsp. salamae as the most abundant. Pulsed-field electrophoresis showed high genetic diversity among subsp. salamae isolates, and among these, 73.3% showed resistance to at least one of the antimicrobials tested. In conclusion, the present study revealed the importance of wild invasive California kingsnakes as reservoirs of drug-resistant Salmonella spp. that could pose a direct threat to livestock and humans. Identification of drug-resistant Salmonella strains in wildlife provides valuable information on potential routes of transmission that involve risks to public and animal health.

1. Introduction

The Canary Islands are considered a hotspot of Atlantic biodiversity due to their strategic geographical location, volcanic origin, and close contact with Africa and Europe [1]. This archipelago has a great diversity of endemic reptiles that form a large part of its terrestrial fauna. However, the endemic reptile species of the Canary Islands are threatened by a growing number of invasive species [2,3].
In recent years, the population of exotic and native reptiles as pets has increased considerably, with a total population of more than 11 million in European households [4]. The population of free-living exotic reptiles has also increased due to their accidental release or escape into the wild [5], becoming a major threat with a huge ecological impact and favouring the spread of pathogens in the environment [6]. Different studies have described how reptiles act as natural reservoirs of Salmonella spp. with a prevalence of up to 90% and are able to carry a wide variety of serovars asymptomatically [7,8,9,10]. The increase in the reptile population has led to a rise in the number of zoonotic infections due to close contact with reptiles, with reptile-associated salmonellosis (RAS) being particularly relevant in at-risk populations such as children, the elderly or immunocompromised adults [11,12,13]. In addition, some authors have described the ability of Salmonella strains isolated from domestic reptiles to develop antimicrobial resistance (AMR) [14], thus posing a serious threat to free-living reptiles because of their role in the dissemination of AMR in the environment [15]. Salmonella is a very complex gender with a most complex taxonomy than other bacteria [16]. S. enterica has long been subdivided by differential antibody reactions into serovars [17]. The use of specific antibodies that could identify distinct cell-surface antigens within lipopolysaccharide and flagella has led to the distinction of over 2500 serovars that differ in their antigenic formulas [18]. In addition, Salmonella is also subdivided taxonomically into S. enterica, which contains multiple subspecies, and a separate species, S. bongori [18].
In this context, the invasion of Lampropeltis californiae (California kingsnake) that has occurred in recent years in Gran Canaria (Canary Islands, Spain) is of particular relevance.
The California kingsnake was first detected free-living in Gran Canaria in 1998, and its population has been rising since then, mainly due to the accidental or intentional release of this invasive snake species into the island ecosystem [3,19]. The increase of the California kingsnake has caused a decrease in the population of different reptiles endemic to Gran Canaria because their diet on the island is mainly based on the endemic reptile species: the Gran Canaria gigant lizard (Gallotia stehlini), the Gran Canaria skink (Chalcides sexlineatus), and Boettger’s wall gecko (Tarantula boettgeri) [20]. In fact, in the areas where the California kingsnake lives, the gigant lizard is locally extinct, the skink has reduced its population by almost 83%, and the Boettger´s wall gecko population has been reduced by half [3], causing a serious ecological impact in Gran Canaria [20]. In addition, this California kingsnake invasion also poses serious public health problems by spreading zoonotic pathogens and their AMR to the environment, where they can be transmitted to humans and other animals (wild or domestic), contributing to the growing problem of AMR [21].
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has declared AMR and its ability to transmit between different animal species and humans through the environment as one of the ten most significant threats to public health, encompassing this problem under the “One Health” perspective [22], a concept that refers to a global strategy that seeks to increase interdisciplinary collaboration in the health care of people, animals and the environment to develop and implement programs, policies and laws to improve public, animal and environmental health [23].
Pathogens like Salmonella spp. can easily acquire resistance genes through contact with commensal bacteria [24], so the high prevalence of RAS combined with this ability of bacteria to acquire AMR leads to salmonellosis caused by AMR- Salmonella strains [25]. Therefore, Salmonella spp. could entail therapeutic consequences for humans in close contact with reptiles [26].
With this perspective, the aim of this study is to assess the genetic diversity and the AMR patterns among Salmonella spp. strains isolated from California kingsnakes in Gran Canaria Island (Spain).

2. Materials and Methods

The animals that are part of the study originate from a program for eradicating invasive species by the Government of the Canary Islands (Spanish Royal Degree 216/2019 and Order 336/20). All the procedures used in this study were performed in accordance with Directive 2010/63/EU EEC for animal experiments.

2.1. Sample Collection

From June to October 2019, a total of 73 individuals of California kingsnake were captured by the staff of Gestión y Planeamiento territorial y ambiental (GesPlan) manually and using box-traps in the framework of the eradication project (https://www.gesplan.es/content/orden-33620-que-modifica-la-n%C2%BA-12419-ejecucion-plan-post-life-lampropeltis-y-actuaciones-del, accessed on 1 March 2023). Individuals were captured at four different nuclei in the island of Gran Canaria (1. Main nucleus. 2. Secondary nucleus. 3. Third nucleus. 4. Fourth nucleus, represented in Figure 1). Prior to euthanasia, they were sexed, measured, and weighed. In addition, for Salmonella detection, cloacal samples were taken from asymptomatic individuals using sterile cotton swabs immediately after animals were euthanased (Cary–Blair sterile transport swabs, DELTALAB, Barcelona, Spain). The swab was inserted approximately 1 cm into the cloaca to obtain the sample and then kept in Cary–Blair transport medium. All collected samples were transported refrigerated at ≤4 °C to the microbiology laboratory at the Faculty of Veterinary Sciences of the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria for microbial analyses within 24 h of collection.

2.2. Salmonella Isolation

For Salmonella detection, strains were isolated and identified using conventional culture methods as follows: The cloacal swabs were pre-enriched for 24 h in Buffered Peptone water (1:10 vol:vol, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Le Pont de Claix, France (BDC). The pre-enriched samples (100 µL) were transferred onto Rappaport Vassiliadis semisolid agar (MRSV, BDC) at 42 °C for 24 h. The culture obtained onto MRSV was transferred to two different selective agar plates, Xylose Lysine Deoxycholate agar (BDC) and Hektoen Enteric agar (BDC), which were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. Suspicious colonies that produced sulfhydric acid were selected for biochemical tests (Kliger Iron (BDC), Citrate agar (BDC), Motility–indole (BDC), Phenylalanine agar (BDC), and Voges Proskauer (BDC)). Considering variabilities in the fermentation of lactose by common serovars of subspecies arizonae and diarizonae, fermenting and non-fermenting colonies were selected. Then, the Analytical Profile Index (API) 20E (BioMérieux, Madrid, Spain) was performed to carry out the confirmation of Salmonella spp., following the manufacturer’s indications. Then, to determine the subspecies of Salmonella isolates, an analysis was performed following the method proposed by Popoff and Le Minor based on the determination of biochemical characteristics and susceptibility to phage O1 [18]. Finally, confirmed Salmonella spp. strains were serotyped in accordance with Kauffman–White–Le Minor technique [18] at the National Reference Laboratory for Animal Health (Algete, Madrid, Spain).

2.3. Molecular Typing of Salmonella Isolates

Genotyping of Salmonella spp. isolates was performed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PGFE) according to the PulseNet standardised protocol (www.pulsenetinternational.org/protocols/pfge/, accessed on 15 March 2023). The genomic DNA of the isolates was digested with Xbal and BlnI restriction enzymes (Roche Applied Science, Indianapolis, IN). We analysed the resulting PFGE band patterns using Fingerprinting II v3.0 software (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA). Similarity matrices were calculated using the Dice coefficient with a band position tolerance of 1.5%, and cluster analysis was performed by the unweighted-pair group method with arithmetic mean (UPGMA). A cut-off of 90% was used for the determination of the different profiles (PFGE type or pulsotype).

2.4. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Salmonella spp. strains were inoculated onto Müller–Hinton agar (BDC) to form a bacterial lawn; then, antibiotic discs were put on the plates, which were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. Antimicrobial agents were selected following those set out in Decision 2013/652/EU [27], including two quinolones: ciprofloxacin (CIP; 5 µg) and nalidixic acid (NAL; 30 µg); one aminoglycoside: gentamicin (GEN, 10 μg); one potentiated sulfonamide: trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TRS; 25 µg); one phenicol: chloramphenicol (CHL; 30 µg); one pyrimidine: trimethoprim (TRI; 5 µg); three ß-lactams: ampicillin (AMP; 10 µg), cefotaxime (CTA; 30 µg), ceftazidime (CTZ; 30 µg); one macrolide: azithromycin (AZI; 15 µg); one polymyxin: colistin (COL; 10 µg); and one glycylcycline: tigecycline (TIG; 15 µg). After the 24 h incubation period at 37 °C, the inhibition zone around each disc was measured. These zones were interpreted as susceptible (S) or resistant (R) according to the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) indications [28] (http://www.eucast.org/clinical_breakpoints/, accessed on 6 February 2023) for Enterobacteriaceae, and when not possible, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) indications were used (https://clsi.org/media/2663/m100ed29_sample.pdf, accessed on 6 February 2023) [29]. Multidrug resistance (MDR) was defined as acquired resistance to at least one agent in three or more antimicrobial classes [30].

2.5. Statistical Analysis

A Generalised Linear Model (GLM), which assumed a binomial distribution for Salmonella spp. shedding was fitted to the data to determine whether there was an association with the categorical variables (sex, body length, and weight) or not. A p ≤ 0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference. Data are presented as least squares means ± standard error of the least squares means for the body length and weight. In addition, a GLM was performed to assess the serovars isolated in this study. Finally, a GLM was performed to study the relationship between Salmonella spp. and their AMR. Analyses were carried out using a commercially available software application (SPSS 24.0 software package; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA, 2002).

3. Results

During this study, a total of 73 California kingsnakes were captured at four different nuclei in the Gran Canaria Island: Nucleus 1 (n = 57), Nucleus 2 (n = 4), Nucleus 3 (n = 4) and Nucleus 4 (n = 8). From all animals sampled, 50.7% (37/73) were females and 49.3% (36/73) were males. The mean body length and weight of the total animals were 922.5 ± 18.4 cm and 264.7 ± 15.0 g, respectively.

3.1. Salmonella spp. Identification and Serotyping

From all animals sampled, 20.5% (15/73) tested positive for Salmonella spp. (Table 1). Due to the difference in the number of samples taken between the different nuclei, it was not possible to establish statistical significance among the different nuclei. In addition, statistically significant differences were observed between the presence of Salmonella and the sex of the sampled animals, with the presence of Salmonella being more prevalent in females than in males (p < 0.05). However, no statistically significant differences were observed between the presence of Salmonella and the measure and weight of the positive animals (p > 0.05).
All Salmonella spp. isolates were classified as Salmonella enterica (n = 15). The subspecies isolated were, in decreasing order, S. salamae (66.6%, 10/15), S. enterica (20.0%, 3/15), S. diarizonae (6.7%, 1/15), and S. houtenae (6.7%, 1/15). Seven different serovars of S. enterica were identified (Table 2).

3.2. Salmonella Molecular Typing

PFGE analysis revealed six different pulsotypes within the ten subsp. salamae isolates, five of them belonging to serovar 42:z:e,n.x.z15 and the remaining one corresponding to isolates of serovar 41:d:z6 (Figure 2). Isolates of ser. 42:z:e,n.x.z15 were grouped in two main clusters at 83.11% and 71.92% similarity, respectively. The single isolates of ser. Cerro and ser. Kentucky were not typable with the enzyme BlnI.

3.3. Antimicrobial Susceptibility

From all strains isolated, 73.3% (11/15) were resistant to at least one of the twelve antimicrobials tested. The highest frequency of AMR was found to GEN (60%, 9/15) and TIG (40%, 6/15), followed by AZI (13.3%, 2/15), and AMP and CTZ with only one strain resistant (6.7%, 1/15) (p < 0.001). No resistance was found against CHL, CIP, COL, CTA, NAL, TRS, and TRI (Figure 2). Furthermore, the S. enterica ser. Cerro isolate was resistant to three different antimicrobials.
Overall, four different resistance patterns were found (Table 3, Figure 2). GEN alone (36.4%, 4/11) and GEN-TIG (36.4%, 4/11) were the most frequent patterns observed. Isolates with either of these AMR patterns also showed different PFGE profiles (Figure 2). AZI alone and the combination of GEN-AZI-TIG and AMP-CTZ-TIG were only observed once (9.1%, 1/11).

4. Discussion

The present study demonstrates that 20.5% of invasive California kingsnakes from the island of Gran Canaria (Canary Islands, Spain) carry Salmonella spp. Genotyping analysis showed high diversity among isolates of subsp. salamae. From these isolates, 73.3% presented resistance to at least one of the antimicrobials tested, included in Decision 2013/652/EU. To our knowledge, this is the first study in the literature assessing the prevalence, genetic relatedness, and AMR of this zoonotic pathogen in the California kingsnake on Gran Canaria Island.
Reptiles have been considered carriers of Salmonella spp. worldwide, and their serological variety and antimicrobial resistance have been studied [10,29,31,32]. Therefore, they may pose a danger as a source of dissemination of the bacterium in the environment, as well as an important cause of animal and human infection, especially in at-risk populations [11,29,33]. Different studies worldwide have shown a wide variety of Salmonella spp. prevalence in domestic and wild snakes (being less prevalent in the latter), based on the geographic area, reptile species, time of sampling (as shedding is intermittent), and methodology used [31]. This vast difference among studies highlights the poor knowledge about Salmonella epidemiology in wild reptiles [31]. Salmonella spp. is an enterobacterium that is highly associated with stress. Hence, situations that increase stress in these animals increase the shedding of the bacteria into the environment [11]. Therefore, as has been done in other animals (such as livestock), it seems mandatory to unify methodology in terms of sampling and analysis of samples to be able to compare results between different regions and thus obtain more information from all the research carried out. In line with previous studies, our results showed that California kingsnake carries different subspecies and serovars of Salmonella [31] and, as in other studies, our results showed that sex directly influences the shedding of Salmonella spp. in reptiles, as the prevalence has been found in our study to be higher in California kingsnake females than in males [34,35]. However, as also seen in other studies, our results showed that size and weight have no influence on Salmonella shedding in reptiles [36].
Similarly to other reports, in this study, Salmonella enterica was the most common species isolated from reptiles [10,36,37]. The four subspecies we isolated (S. enterica enterica [I] (3/15), S. enterica salamae [II] (10/15), S. enterica diarizonae [IIIb] (1/15) and S. enterica houtenae [IV] (1/15)) have also been widely reported in different reptile studies, including snakes, turtles, and lizards [6,10,14,29,32]. In addition, Salmonella enterica enterica has been reported in the Gran Canaria Island as the main species isolated from feral cats, although the identified subspecies do not coincide with those found in the California kingsnake [34].
In some studies, snakes have been found to have the greatest diversity of Salmonella subspecies [32]. Of all Salmonella enterica subspecies, enterica has been considered the most prevalent subspecies in reptiles [38,39]. However, we have isolated this subspecies with a low prevalence. Instead, subsp. salamae was the most prevalent subspecies isolated in this study (53.3%). One of the hypotheses that could explain this fact is that the Canary Islands are a limited geographical area, which has allowed subsp. salamae to colonise these populations. Subsp. salamae has previously been isolated from other animals, such as carnivores [40], wild boars [41], and poultry [42]. However, this subspecies has not frequently been associated with human infections [43,44,45]. Finally, subsp. diarizonae and subsp. houtenae are two species especially related to snakes [46], and these subspecies have also been occasionally found in other animal species [41,47,48]. subsp. diarizonae and subsp. houtenae have also been described in human cases as a result of the close contact between humans and their exotic pets [49,50,51,52].
Salmonella serovars, with major epidemiological importance in human medicine and domestic animals, occur less frequently in cold-blooded animals [31]. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first report of the isolation of Salmonella ser. 42:z:e,n.x.z15 in the world, as well as the first report of Salmonella ser. Cerro, Midway, Kentucky, 41:d:z6, 60:-:-, and 43:z4,z23:- from California kingsnakes. Among them, ser. Kentucky has been considered a public health threat [52], as it has been identified as causing human pathologies, such as urinary tract infections or gastroenteritis [53,54]. This serovar has been isolated from a wide range of animals, ranging from pet reptiles (snakes, turtles, or lizards) [55] to poultry, dairy, cattle, or food [56], being an important source of human infections, directly through pets [55] or indirectly through food consumption [56]. Regarding S. ser. Cerro, it is a serovar infrequent in humans and widely adapted and associated with cattle pathologies [57,58], but it has also been described in some snake species [59,60] and other reptiles such as lizards [61] and turtles [11]. In turn, S. ser. Midway [32,62] and 43:z4,z23:- [9,52,59,61] have been widely reported in different snake species, as they are serovars closely related to snakes. To the authors’ knowledge, the serovar 41:d:z6 has only been reported once, isolated from a green lizard, and it was designed as S. Hennepi [63], but no more references have been found.
The high genetic diversity of subsp. salamae isolates, which were all recovered from snakes from the same nuclei, suggests different sources of infection. Nevertheless, a broader sampling and a greater number of isolates to compare would be needed to confirm this. In addition, further studies, including whole genome sequencing (WGS), could be interesting for improving the information related to the epidemiology of Salmonella in reptiles [64].
Studies on AMR in Salmonella spp. isolates from wild snakes are scarce [15,65], but some studies suggest similar patterns of drug resistance to strains isolated from captive or pet snakes [29,52,66]. In line with previous studies, resistance against GEN was the most common AMR observed [15,65,67], followed by TIG and AZI [68]. This study has also shown resistance against AMP and CTZ [29,52]. Bacterial resistance to these antimicrobials has been widely documented due to its extensive use in veterinary medicine [65,67,68]. Hence, the close contact of these snakes with humans and livestock could explain the high frequency of GEN-resistant strains in this study and, in addition, to TIG and AZI. These results, along with those of other authors, suggest that the problem of AMR is not limited to its initial niches, potentially livestock, but that wildlife could also play an important role in the spread of these strains in households [69].
In our study, no resistance against CIP, NAL, CHL, TRS, TRI, COL, and CTA was found in Salmonella isolates, as seen in other studies [32,68]. However, there is a huge difference in AMR patterns of Salmonella spp. strains depending on the geographical location [31,32,52], ranging from 14% in Taiwan [70] to 90% in Italy [68]. These results demonstrate that external factors other than the animal species could influence the development of AMR patterns.

5. Conclusions

The present study revealed the importance of wild invasive California kingsnakes as reservoirs of Salmonella spp., which could pose a direct threat to livestock and humans. Identification of drug-resistant Salmonella subsp. and serovars in wildlife provides valuable information on potential routes of transmission that involve risks to public and animal health.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.A.L.-G., T.G.B., S.L.P., S.V. and E.R.-P.; methodology, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; software, C.M. and A.M.-F.; validation, C.M. and A.M.-F.; formal analysis, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C. and T.A.; investigation, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; resources, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; data curation, C.M. and A.M.-F.; writing—original draft preparation, C.M. and A.M.-F.; writing—review and editing, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; visualization, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; supervision, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; project administration, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G.; funding acquisition, K.M.S.-H., E.R.-P., I.R.M., B.A.-H., S.L.P., S.V., C.M., A.M.-F., M.C.-C., T.A., T.G.B. and P.A.L.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the project “POSTLIFE+ Lampropeltis para el control de la culebra real de California en Gran Canaria (LIFE10/NAT/ES/656)” financed by the Government of Canary Islands, Cabildo of Gran Canaria and Universidad Cardenal Herrera-CEU (IDOC 19/15, and INDI 20-21, INDI 22-34).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethical review and approval were not applicable for this study because obtaining samples from sacrificed animals is not considered animal experimentation (Spanish RoyalDegree 53/2013), which is not subject to the local ethical committee for animal experiment assessment.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the collaboration of Ramón Gallo Barneto, Head of Gestión y planeamiento territorial y ambiental (GesPlan S.A.), as well as Miguel Ángel Cabrera Pérez, from Servicio de Biodiversidad, Dirección general de protección de la naturaleza, Gobierno de Canarias, for the donation of the specimens. We would also like to thank the personnel of GesPlan, who collected snakes in the field, veterinarians in charge of the euthanasia, laboratory technicians and, finally, the aid of de Blas during the sampling and transportation. The authors wish to thank the “Improvement of Production System-related Food Safety and End Products” research group (Veterinary Faculty, University Cardenal Herrera-CEU) for the technical support. CERCA Programme from the Generalitat de Catalunya is also acknowledged.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Santana-Hernández, K.M.; Javorská, K.; Rodríguez-Ponce, E.; Fecková, B.; Šlapeta, J.; Modrý, D. Sarcocystis Sp. Infection (Apicomplexa: Sarcocystidae) in Invasive California Kingsnake Lampropeltis californiae (Serpentes: Colubridae) in Gran Canaria. Parasitology 2022, 149, 1419–1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Piquet, J.C.; Warren, D.L.; Saavedra Bolaños, J.F.; Sánchez Rivero, J.M.; Gallo-Barneto, R.; Cabrera-Pérez, M.Á.; Fisher, R.N.; Fisher, S.R.; Rochester, C.J.; Hinds, B.; et al. Could Climate Change Benefit Invasive Snakes? Modelling the Potential Distribution of the California Kingsnake in the Canary Islands. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 294, 112917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Piquet, J.C.; Maestresalas, B.; López-Darias, M. Coupling Phenotypic Changes to Extinction and Survival in an Endemic Prey Community Threatened by an Invasive Snake. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 18249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. FEDIAF (The European Pet Food Industry). FEDIAF Annual Report 2022; FEDIAF: Brussels, Belgium, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  5. Fisher, S.R.; Fisher, R.N.; Alcaraz, S.E.; Gallo-Barneto, R.; Patino-Martinez, C.; López-Jurado, L.F.; Rochester, C.J. Life-History Comparisons between the Native Range and an Invasive Island Population of a Colubrid Snake. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333262467_Life-history_comparisons_between_the_native_range_and_an_invasive_island_population_of_a_colubrid_snake (accessed on 28 November 2022).
  6. Marin, C.; Ingresa-Capaccioni, S.; González-Bodi, S.; Marco-Jiménez, F.; Vega, S. Free-Living Turtles Are a Reservoir for Salmonella but Not for Campylobacter. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e72350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Kikillus, K.H.; Gartrell, B.D.; Motion, E. Prevalence of Salmonella Spp., and Serovars Isolated from Captive Exotic Reptiles in New Zealand. N. Z. Vet. J. 2011, 59, 174–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Hydeskov, H.B.; Guardabassi, L.; Aalbæk, B.; Olsen, K.E.P.; Nielsen, S.S.; Bertelsen, M.F. Salmonella Prevalence among Reptiles in a Zoo Education Setting. Zoonoses Public Health 2013, 60, 291–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Pedersen, K.; Lassen-Nielsen, A.M.; Nordentoft, S.; Hammer, A.S. Serovars of Salmonella from Captive Reptiles. Zoonoses Public Health 2009, 56, 238–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bjelland, A.M.; Sandvik, L.M.; Skarstein, M.M.; Svendal, L.; Debenham, J.J. Prevalence of Salmonella Serovars Isolated from Reptiles in Norwegian Zoos. Acta Vet. Scand. 2020, 62, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Marin, C.; Martín-Maldonado, B.; Cerdà-Cuéllar, M.; Sevilla-Navarro, S.; Lorenzo-Rebenaque, L.; Montoro-Dasi, L.; Manzanares, A.; Ayats, T.; Mencía-Gutiérrez, A.; Jordá, J.; et al. Antimicrobial Resistant Salmonella in Chelonians: Assessing Its Potential Risk in Zoological Institutions in Spain. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kanagarajah, S.; Waldram, A.; Dolan, G.; Jenkins, C.; Ashton, P.M.; Carrion Martin, A.I.; Davies, R.; Frost, A.; Dallman, T.J.; de Pinna, E.M.; et al. Whole Genome Sequencing Reveals an Outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis Associated with Reptile Feeder Mice in the United Kingdom, 2012–2015. Food Microbiol. 2018, 71, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Marin, C.; Martelli, F.; Rabie, A.; Davies, R. Commercial Frozen Mice Used by Owners to Feed Reptiles Are Highly Externally Contaminated with Salmonella Enteritidis PT8. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2018, 18, 453–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Marin, C.; Vega, S.; Marco-Jiménez, F. Tiny Turtles Purchased at Pet Stores Are a Potential High Risk for Salmonella Human Infection in the Valencian Region, Eastern Spain. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2016, 16, 455–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Zając, M.; Wasyl, D.; Różycki, M.; Bilska-Zając, E.; Fafiński, Z.; Iwaniak, W.; Krajewska, M.; Hoszowski, A.; Konieczna, O.; Fafińska, P.; et al. Free-Living Snakes as a Source and Possible Vector of Salmonella Spp. and Parasites. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 2016, 62, 161–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Alikhan, N.F.; Zhou, Z.; Sergeant, M.J.; Achtman, M. A Genomic Overview of the Population Structure of Salmonella. PLoS Genet. 2018, 14, e1007261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Gwyn, L.B. On Infection with a Para-Colin Bacillus in a Case with All the Clinical Features of Typhoid Fever. Johns Hopkins Hosp. Bull. 1898, 84, 54–56. [Google Scholar]
  18. Grimont, P.A.D.; Weill, F.-X. Antigenic Formulae of the Salmonella Serovars, 9th ed.; WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Salmonella: Paris, France, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  19. Piquet, J.C.; López-Darias, M. Spatial Ecology to Strengthen Invasive Snake Management on Islands. Sci. Rep. 2022. in print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Piquet, J.C.; López-Darias, M. Invasive Snake Causes Massive Reduction of All Endemic Herpetofauna on Gran Canaria. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2021, 288, 20211939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. McWhorter, A.; Owens, J.; Valcanis, M.; Olds, L.; Myers, C.; Smith, I.; Trott, D.; McLelland, D. In Vitro Invasiveness and Antimicrobial Resistance of Salmonella enterica Subspecies Isolated from Wild and Captive Reptiles. Zoonoses Public Health 2021, 68, 402–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Marco-Fuertes, A.; Marin, C.; Lorenzo-Rebenaque, L.; Vega, S.; Montoro-Dasi, L. Antimicrobial Resistance in Companion Animals: A New Challenge for the One Health Approach in the European Union. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Vega, S.; Marín, C. ¿Qué Es One Health? In One Health: Cambio Climático, Contaminación Ambiental y el Impacto Sobre la Salud Humana y Animal; Ábrego Bonaforte, J., Díaz Sáez, G.J., Eds.; Amazing Books: Zaragoza, Spain, 2019; pp. 31–60. ISBN 978-84-17403-51-5. [Google Scholar]
  24. Edrington, T.S.; Farrow, R.L.; Hume, M.E.; Anderson, P.N.; Hagevoort, G.R.; Caldwell, D.J.; Callaway, T.R.; Anderson, R.C.; Nisbet, D.J. Evaluation of the Potential Antimicrobial Resistance Transfer from a Multi-Drug Resistant Escherichia coli to Salmonella in Dairy Calves. Curr. Microbiol. 2013, 66, 132–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kwon, J.; Kim, S.G.; Kim, H.J.; Giri, S.S.; Kim, S.W.; Lee, S.B.; Park, S.C. Bacteriophage as an Alternative to Prevent Reptile-Associated Salmonella Transmission. Zoonoses Public Health 2021, 68, 131–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Kiebler, C.A.; Bottichio, L.; Simmons, L.; Basler, C.; Klos, R.; Gurfield, N.; Roberts, E.; Kimura, A.; Lewis, L.S.; Bird, K.; et al. Outbreak of Human Infections with Uncommon Salmonella Serotypes Linked to Pet Bearded Dragons, 2012–2014. Zoonoses Public Health 2020, 67, 425–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. EUR-Lex—32013D0652—ES—EUR-Lex. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2013/652/oj?locale=es (accessed on 29 November 2022).
  28. EUCAST: New S, I and R Definitions. Available online: https://www.eucast.org/newsiandr (accessed on 29 November 2022).
  29. Marin, C.; Lorenzo-Rebenaque, L.; Laso, O.; Villora-Gonzalez, J.; Vega, S. Pet Reptiles: A Potential Source of Transmission of Multidrug-Resistant Salmonella. Front. Vet. Sci. 2021, 7, 1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Magiorakos, A.P.; Srinivasan, A.; Carey, R.B.; Carmeli, Y.; Falagas, M.E.; Giske, C.G.; Harbarth, S.; Hindler, J.F.; Kahlmeter, G.; Olsson-Liljequist, B.; et al. Multidrug-Resistant, Extensively Drug-Resistant and Pandrug-Resistant Bacteria: An International Expert Proposal for Interim Standard Definitions for Acquired Resistance. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2012, 18, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Merkevičienė, L.; Butrimaitė-Ambrozevičienė, Č.; Paškevičius, G.; Pikūnienė, A.; Virgailis, M.; Dailidavičienė, J.; Daukšienė, A.; Šiugždinienė, R.; Ruzauskas, M. Serological Variety and Antimicrobial Resistance in Salmonella Isolated from Reptiles. Biology 2022, 11, 836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Dec, M.; Zając, M.; Puchalski, A.; Szczepaniak, K.; Urban-Chmiel, R. Pet Reptiles in Poland as a Potential Source of Transmission of Salmonella. Pathogens 2022, 11, 1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Whitten, T.; Bender, J.B.; Smith, K.; Leano, F.; Scheftel, J. Reptile-Associated Salmonellosis in Minnesota, 1996-2011. Zoonoses Public Health 2015, 62, 199–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. View of Prevalence, Risk Factors and Antimicrobial Resistance of Salmonella Infection in Turtles in Khon Kaen Province. Available online: https://he01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/tjvm/article/view/247794/167908 (accessed on 18 January 2023).
  35. Colon, V.A.; Lugsomya, K.; Lam, H.K.; Wahl, L.C.; Parkes, R.S.V.; Cormack, C.A.; Horlbog, J.A.; Stevens, M.; Stephan, R.; Magouras, I. Serotype Diversity and Antimicrobial Resistance Profile of Salmonella enterica Isolates from Freshwater Turtles Sold for Human Consumption in Wet Markets in Hong Kong. Front. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 912693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Casalino, G.; Bellati, A.; Pugliese, N.; Camarda, A.; Faleo, S.; Lombardi, R.; Occhiochiuso, G.; D’onghia, F.; Circella, E. Salmonella Infection in Turtles: A Risk for Staff Involved in Wildlife Management? Animals 2021, 11, 1529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kuroki, T.; Ishihara, T.; Furukawa, I.; Okatani, A.T.; Kato, Y. Prevalence of Salmonella in Wild Snakes in Japan. Jpn. J. Infect. Dis. 2013, 66, 295–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Piasecki, T.; Chrząstek, K.; Wieliczko, A. Salmonella Serovar Spectrum Associated with Reptiles in Poland. Acta Vet. Brno 2014, 83, 287–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sadiq, M.S.; Othman, R.M. Phylogenetic Tree Constructed of Salmonella enterica Subspecies Enterica Isolated from Animals and Humans in Basrah and Baghdad Governorates, Iraq. Iraqi J. Vet. Sci. 2022, 36, 895–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gambi, L.; Ravaioli, V.; Rossini, R.; Tranquillo, V.; Boscarino, A.; Mattei, S.; D’incau, M.; Tosi, G.; Fiorentini, L.; di Donato, A. Prevalence of Different Salmonella enterica Subspecies and Serotypes in Wild Carnivores in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy. Animals 2022, 12, 3368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Gil-Molino, M.; Gonçalves, P.; Risco, D.; Martín-Cano, F.E.; García, A.; Rey, J.; Fernández-Llario, P.; Quesada, A. Dissemination of Antimicrobial-Resistant Isolates of Salmonella Spp. in Wild Boars and Its Relationship with Management Practices. Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 2022, 69, e1488–e1502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Shalaby, A.; Ismail, M.M.; El-Sharkawy, H. Isolation, Identification, and Genetic Characterization of Antibiotic Resistance of Salmonella Species Isolated from Chicken Farms. J. Trop. Med. 2022, 2022, 6065831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. López-Quintana, B.; Rivas-González, P.; Toro-Rueda, C.; Enríquez-Crego, A. Infección Por Salmonella enterica Subespecie Salamae En Un Paciente Ecuatoguineano Consumidor de Carne de Tortuga. Enferm. Infecc. Microbiol. Clínica 2015, 33, 430–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Yan, M.; Zhou, Y.; Cao, Y.; Li, Z.; Lu, X.; Pang, B.; Wang, S.; Kan, B. Salmonella enterica Subsp. II Serovar 4,5,12:A:- May Cause Gastroenteritis Infections in Humans. Gut Microbes 2022, 14, 2089007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hounmanou, Y.M.G.; Baniga, Z.; García, V.; Dalsgaard, A. Salmonella salamae and S. waycross Isolated from Nile Perch in Lake Victoria Show Limited Human Pathogenic Potential. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 4229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Pulford, C.V.; Wenner, N.; Redway, M.L.; Rodwell, E.V.; Webster, H.J.; Escudero, R.; Kröger, C.; Canals, R.; Rowe, W.; Lopez, J.; et al. The Diversity, Evolution and Ecology of Salmonella in Venomous Snakes. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2019, 13, e0007169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Pławińska-Czarnak, J.; Wódz, K.; Piechowicz, L.; Tokarska-Pietrzak, E.; Bełkot, Z.; Bogdan, J.; Wiśniewski, J.; Kwieciński, P.; Kwieciński, A.; Anusz, K. Wild Duck (Anas Platyrhynchos) as a Source of Antibiotic-Resistant Salmonella enterica Subsp. Diarizonae O58—The First Report in Poland. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Andruzzi, M.N.; Krath, M.L.; Lawhon, S.D.; Boudreau, B. Salmonella enterica Subspecies Houtenae as an Opportunistic Pathogen in a Case of Meningoencephalomyelitis and Bacteriuria in a Dog. BMC Vet. Res. 2020, 16, 437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Uelze, L.; Borowiak, M.; Flieger, A.; Simon, S.; Tausch, S.H.; Malorny, B. Complete Genome Sequence of Salmonella enterica Subsp. Diarizonae Serovar 61:K:1,5,(7) Strain 14-SA00836-0, Isolated from Human Urine. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 2020, 9, e00683-20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Horvath, L.; Kraft, M.; Fostiropoulos, K.; Falkowski, A.; Tarr, P.E. Salmonella enterica Subspecies Diarizonae Maxillary Sinusitis in a Snake Handler: First Report. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2016, 3, ofw066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Karle, E.; Schuh, S.; Ziadeh, A.; Patil, S.M. A Rare Cause of Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia in a Patient with Poorly Controlled Diabetes. Chest 2022, 162, A514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zajaç, M.; Skarżyńska, M.; Lalak, A.; Kwit, R.; Śmiałowska-Węglińska, A.; Pasim, P.; Szulowski, K.; Wasyl, D. Salmonella in Captive Reptiles and Their Environment—Can We Tame the Dragon? Microorganisms 2021, 9, 1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Xu, H.; Cao, X.; Zhang, W.; Li, Q. Co-Existence of Two Ciprofloxacin-Resistant Salmonella enterica Serovar Kentucky Strains in the Urine of a Bladder Cancer Patient. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2022, 30, 354–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Neelambike, S.M.; Chitharagi, V.; Rao, M.R.; Badveti, S.; Rao, R. Ceftriaxone Resistant Salmonella enterica Serovar Kentucky as a Cause of Bacteremia and Gastroenteritis: A Case Report. J. Lab. Physicians 2023, 15, 175–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Zajac, M.; Wasyl, D.; Hoszowski, A.; le Hello, S.; Szulowski, K. Genetic Lineages of Salmonella enterica Serovar Kentucky Spreading in Pet Reptiles. Vet. Microbiol. 2013, 166, 686–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Slowey, R.; Kim, S.W.; Prendergast, D.; Madigan, G.; van Kessel, J.A.S.; Haley, B.J. Genomic Diversity and Resistome Profiles of Salmonella enterica Subsp. Enterica Serovar Kentucky Isolated from Food and Animal Sources in Ireland. Zoonoses Public Health 2022, 69, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Salaheen, S.; Kim, S.W.; Haley, B.J.; van Kessel, J.A.S. Differences between the Global Transcriptomes of Salmonella enterica Serovars Dublin and Cerro Infecting Bovine Epithelial Cells. BMC Genom. 2022, 23, 498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Cohn, A.R.; Orsi, R.H.; Carroll, L.M.; Liao, J.; Wiedmann, M.; Cheng, R.A. Salmonella enterica Serovar Cerro Displays a Phylogenetic Structure and Genomic Features Consistent with Virulence Attenuation and Adaptation to Cattle. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 4725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Weerakhun, S.; Kongsanan, P.; Kongkham, W. Distribution of Salmonella Spp. and Serovars Isolated from Captive Reptiles in Four Zoos of the Zoological Park Organization, Thailand, between 2017 and 2018. Thai J. Vet. Med. 2022, 52, 349–358. [Google Scholar]
  60. Cambre, R.C.; Earl Green, D.; Smith, E.E.; Montali, R.J. Salmoneilosis and Arizonosis in the Reptile Collection at the National Zoological Park. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1980, 177, 803. [Google Scholar]
  61. Scheelings, T.F.; Lightfoot, D.; Holz, P. Prevalence of Salmonella in Australian Reptiles. J. Wildl. Dis. 2011, 47, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Nakadai, A.; Kuroki, T.; Kato, Y.; Suzuki, R.; Yamai, S.; Yaginuma, C.; Shiotani, R.; Yamanouchi, A.; Hayashidani, H. Prevalence of Salmonella Spp. in Pet Reptiles in Japan. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2005, 67, 97–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Moran, A.B.; Mcwhorter, A.C. A Hitherto Undescribed Salmonella Serotype: S. hennepin. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 1966, 16, 143–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Brown, E.W.; Bell, R.; Zhang, G.; Timme, R.; Zheng, J.; Hammack, T.S.; Allard, M.W. Salmonella Genomics in Public Health and Food Safety. EcoSal Plus 2021, 9, eESP-0008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rush, E.M.; Amadi, V.A.; Johnson, R.; Lonce, N.; Hariharan, H. Salmonella Serovars Associated with Grenadian Tree Boa (Corallus grenadensis) and Their Antimicrobial Susceptibility. Vet. Med. Sci. 2020, 6, 565–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ramos, C.P.; Santana, J.A.; Morcatti Coura, F.; Xavier, R.G.C.; Leal, C.A.G.; Oliveira Junior, C.A.; Heinemann, M.B.; Lage, A.P.; Lobato, F.C.F.; Silva, R.O.S. Identification and Characterization of Escherichia coli, Salmonella Spp., Clostridium perfringens, and C. difficile Isolates from Reptiles in Brazil. Biomed. Res. Int. 2019, 2019, 9530732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Thomas, M.; Fenske, G.J.; Antony, L.; Ghimire, S.; Welsh, R.; Ramachandran, A.; Scaria, J. Whole Genome Sequencing-Based Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence in Non-Typhoidal Salmonella enterica Isolated from Wildlife. Gut Pathog. 2017, 9, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Bertelloni, F.; Chemaly, M.; Cerri, D.; le Gall, F.; Ebani, V.V. Salmonella Infection in Healthy Pet Reptiles: Bacteriological Isolation and Study of Some Pathogenic Characters. Acta Microbiol. Immunol. Hung. 2016, 63, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. de Oliveira Iovine, R.; Dejuste, C.; Miranda, F.; Filoni, C.; Bueno, M.G.; de Carvalho, V.M. Isolation of Escherichia coli and Salmonella Spp. from Free-Ranging Wild Animals. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2015, 46, 1257–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Chen, C.Y.; Chen, W.C.; Chin, S.C.; Lai, Y.H.; Tung, K.C.; Chiou, C.S.; Hsu, Y.M.; Chang, C.C. Prevalence and Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Salmonellae Isolates from Reptiles in Taiwan. J. Vet. Diagn. Investig. 2010, 22, 44–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Animals 13 01790 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution of California kingsnakes sampled in the island of Gran Canaria. (A). Location of the Canary Islands in the Atlantic Ocean; (B). Location of the island of Gran Canaria in the Canary Archipelago; (C). Representation of the locations where the samples were taken (Nucleus 1, Nucleus 2, Nucleus 3, Nucleus 4). Note: distribution of positive snakes in this study is represented by red dots.
Figure 1. Distribution of California kingsnakes sampled in the island of Gran Canaria. (A). Location of the Canary Islands in the Atlantic Ocean; (B). Location of the island of Gran Canaria in the Canary Archipelago; (C). Representation of the locations where the samples were taken (Nucleus 1, Nucleus 2, Nucleus 3, Nucleus 4). Note: distribution of positive snakes in this study is represented by red dots.
Animals 13 01790 g001
Animals 13 01790 g002 550
Figure 2. PFGE dendrogram of Xbal and Blnl profiles of Salmonella enterica subsp. salamae. isolates from California kingsankes in Gran Canaria and their resistance patterns. GEN: gentamicin, TIG: tigecycline, AZI: azithromycin. S: sensible.
Figure 2. PFGE dendrogram of Xbal and Blnl profiles of Salmonella enterica subsp. salamae. isolates from California kingsankes in Gran Canaria and their resistance patterns. GEN: gentamicin, TIG: tigecycline, AZI: azithromycin. S: sensible.
Animals 13 01790 g002
Table
Table 1. Relationship between positive animals and their location, sex, body length, and weight.
Table 1. Relationship between positive animals and their location, sex, body length, and weight.
n% Salmonella spp. p-Value
Location 15786.6
(nuclei)240
346.7
486.7
SexFemale3773.3 ap = 0.042
Male3626.7 b
Body Length≤900 cm3340.0p = 0.647
>900 cm4060.0
Weight≤250 g3946.7p = 0.732
251–500 g2840.0
>500 g613.3
n: total number of animals sampled. a, b: different superscripts in each column mean significant differences with a p-value < 0.05. %: percentage of Salmonella positive animals.
Table
Table 2. Salmonella enterica serovars isolated from California kingsnake.
Table 2. Salmonella enterica serovars isolated from California kingsnake.
SubspeciesSerovarnNucleiPrevalence (%)
salamae42:z:e,n.x.z158153.3 a
41:d:z62113.2 b
entericaCerro116.7 b
Kentucky136.7 b
Midway116.7 b
diarizonae60:-:-146.7 b
houtenae43:z4,z23:-116.7 b
n: Number of Salmonella strains per serovar. %: Percentage of positive samples. Nuclei: 1. Main nucleus, 3. Third nucleus, 4. Fourth nucleus. a,b Different superscripts in each column mean significant differences with a p-value < 0.05.
Table
Table 3. Antimicrobial resistance according to the antibiotic and the Salmonella species and serovars isolated.
Table 3. Antimicrobial resistance according to the antibiotic and the Salmonella species and serovars isolated.
SpeciesSerovarnCIPAMPNALGENCHLTRSTRICOLCTAAZICTZTIG
S. enterica subsp. salamae42:z:e,n.x.z158000400000103
41:d:z62000200000001
S. enterica subsp. entericaCerro1000100000101
Kentucky1000100000000
Midway1000100000000
S. enterica subsp. diarizonae60:-:-1010000000011
S. enterica subsp. houtenae43:z4,z23:-1000000000000
n: number of Salmonella strains. CIP: ciprofloxacin, AMP: ampicillin, NAL: nalidixic acid, GEN: gentamicin, CHL: chloramphenicol, TRS: trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole, TRI: trimethoprim, COL: colistin, CTA: cefotaxime, AZI: azithromycin, CTZ: ceftazidime, TIG: tigecycline.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Santana-Hernández, K.M.; Rodríguez-Ponce, E.; Medina, I.R.; Acosta-Hernández, B.; Priestnall, S.L.; Vega, S.; Marin, C.; Cerdà-Cuéllar, M.; Marco-Fuertes, A.; Ayats, T.; et al. One Health Approach: Invasive California Kingsnake (Lampropeltis californiae) as an Important Source of Antimicrobial Drug-Resistant Salmonella Clones on Gran Canaria Island. Animals 2023, 13, 1790. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13111790

AMA Style

Santana-Hernández KM, Rodríguez-Ponce E, Medina IR, Acosta-Hernández B, Priestnall SL, Vega S, Marin C, Cerdà-Cuéllar M, Marco-Fuertes A, Ayats T, et al. One Health Approach: Invasive California Kingsnake (Lampropeltis californiae) as an Important Source of Antimicrobial Drug-Resistant Salmonella Clones on Gran Canaria Island. Animals. 2023; 13(11):1790. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13111790

Chicago/Turabian Style

Santana-Hernández, Kevin M., Eligia Rodríguez-Ponce, Inmaculada Rosario Medina, Begoña Acosta-Hernández, Simon L. Priestnall, Santiago Vega, Clara Marin, Marta Cerdà-Cuéllar, Ana Marco-Fuertes, Teresa Ayats, and et al. 2023. "One Health Approach: Invasive California Kingsnake (Lampropeltis californiae) as an Important Source of Antimicrobial Drug-Resistant Salmonella Clones on Gran Canaria Island" Animals 13, no. 11: 1790. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13111790

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop