Next Article in Journal
Effects of Rhamnolipids on Growth Performance, Immune Function, and Cecal Microflora in Linnan Yellow Broilers Challenged with Lipopolysaccharides
Previous Article in Journal
Clinical Outcomes and Safety of Meropenem–Colistin versus Meropenem–Tigecycline in Patients with Carbapenem-Resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Pneumonia
Previous Article in Special Issue
HPMCP-Coated Microcapsules Containing the Ctx(Ile21)-Ha Antimicrobial Peptide Reduce the Mortality Rate Caused by Resistant Salmonella Enteritidis in Laying Hens
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 10
Issue 8
10.3390/antibiotics10080904
antibiotics-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

Antibiotic Susceptibility of Staphylococcus Species Isolated in Raw Chicken Meat from Retail Stores

by
Erinda Lika
1,
Nikola Puvača
2,3,*,
Dejan Jeremić
4,
Slobodan Stanojević
5,
Tana Shtylla Kika
1,
Sonila Cocoli
1 and
Rosa de Llanos Frutos
2
1
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Agricultural University of Tirana, Koder Kamez, 1029 Tirana, Albania
2
Faculty of Health, Jaume I University, Avinguda de Vicent Sos Baynat, s/n, 12071 Castelló de la Plana, Spain
3
Department of Engineering Management in Biotechnology, Faculty of Economics and Engineering Management in Novi Sad, University Business Academy in Novi Sad, Cvećarska 2, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
4
Faculty of Business and Financial Studies, University of Business Studies in Banja Luka, Jovana Dučića 23a, 78000 Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
5
Faculty of Applied Management, Economics and Finance, University Business Academy in Novi Sad, Jevrejska 24/1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2021, 10(8), 904; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10080904
Submission received: 16 June 2021 / Revised: 19 July 2021 / Accepted: 21 July 2021 / Published: 23 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Optimization of Veterinary Antimicrobial Treatment in Companion and Food Animals)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The study was aimed at evaluating the presence of antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in retailed raw chicken meat from retail stores intended for human consumption. The presence, characterization, and antibiotic susceptibility of S. aureus from 38 retail raw chicken meat samples was performed using a standard microbiological method involving mannitol salt agar (MSA) and Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA). All the samples were positive for Staphylococcus species, of which 34 (89.5%) were positive for S. aureus. The S. aureus isolates were most resistant to tetracycline (88.24%), erythromycin (82.35%), and chloramphenicol (61.77%). Nevertheless, decreased resistance towards gentamycin (23.53%) and cotrimoxazole (38.24%) were recorded. All the S. aureus isolates in this study were resistant to cloxacillin, amoxicillin, and augmentin (amoxicillin + clavulanic acid). The present findings show how the raw chicken meat samples could be a potential source of multidrug-resistant S. aureus strains dissemination. Therefore, this study suggests high-level contamination of meat with multidrug-resistant S. aureus and highlights the public health consequences of consuming such products. Undoubtedly, uncontrolled drugs in food animal production as growth stimulators or medicinal treatment present a possible consequence to people’s health. Having the aforementioned in mind, there is a necessity to control the use of drugs and monitor any residues left in the food intended for human consumption.

1. Introduction

Meat and meat products are among the most consumed foods and are important sources of all the B-complex vitamins, as well as minerals, proteins, and amino acids in humans.
Meat of animal origin is the primary source of protein and valuable qualities of vitamins for most people in many parts of the world, thus it is essential for the growth, repair, and maintenance of body cells and necessary for our everyday activities [1,2]. Meat is the main source of iron in heme form, which is one of the most deficient micronutrients in humans [3]. Due to the chemical composition and biological characteristics, meats are highly perishable foods providing an excellent source of nutrients for the growth of several hazardous microorganisms that can cause infection in humans, resulting in spoilage of the meat and, therefore, economic loss [4,5]. The microbial pathogens found in meat microorganisms are Listeria monocytogenes [6], Micrococcus spp. [7], Staphylococcus spp. [8], Clostridium spp. [9], Bacillus spp. [10], Brochotrix thermophacta [11], Salmonella spp. [12], Escherichia coli [13], Serratia spp. [14] and Pseudomonas spp. [15]. Growth of foodborne pathogens such as Salmonella, and toxin-producing strains of E. coli, L. monocytogenes, C. perfringens, and S. aureus are the main concern with meat and poultry products [16,17,18]. These bacteria are the most common cause of foodborne illnesses. Besides poultry meat, S. aureus as well as Methicillin-resistant S. aureus can be found in swine [19] and cattle [20] meat.
The most significant Gram-positive organism that has gained attention because of its associated hospital- and community-acquired infections is S. aureus [21,22,23]. This bacterium multiplies quickly at room temperature to produce toxins that cause food poisoning [24]. Naturally, its distribution is very common globally, but the most important infection origin of S. aureus is food [25]. According to Scallan et al. [26], S. aureus has come into the spotlight as a foodborne pathogen with more than 200,000 estimated yearly infections domestically acquired within the US. The number of cases may actually be higher than this, however the lower known incidences of S. aureus foodborne disease could be due to misdiagnosis, inadequate sample collection and laboratory analyses, lack of seeking medical health care by the affected persons (complicating the laboratory confirmation), and lack of routine surveillance of clinical stool specimens for S. aureus [27].
Staphylococcal food contamination represents the greatest economically significant foodborne illness [28] and produces gastrointestinal illness through a wide variety of toxins [29], including staphylococcal enterotoxins characterized by vomiting and diarrhea within 2 to 6 h after the consumption of contaminated food [30,31,32]. A large number of daily consumed foods serve as an optimum growth medium for S. aureus [27], and this varies from country to country, especially due to different habits in food consumption [33]. S. aureus and other pathogens in meat result from improper hygienic practices at the point of handling by slaughter personnel during meat processing, and other faulty abattoir processes such as improper evisceration of animals which increases the chances of cross-contamination of gut pathogens to meat [34,35].
Residues from medicines, insecticides, herbicides, and other compounds used in daily agricultural practice could be detected in minor quantities in food of animal origin. A few hundred compounds, mainly antibiotics, have been used to cure animals and protect their health, however, some of them have also been used to enhance food animal production. Among many unethically used compounds, the most often used are antimicrobials, β-adrenoreceptor blocking agents, ivermectin, sedatives, coccidiostats, vasodilatory drugs, and painkillers. Residues from such compounds in food products are a major public health concern, especially with rising interest and increased awareness of the potential deposits of drugs and their metabolites in the meat and meat products consumed by humans, as well as the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Treatment of S. aureus infections involves the use of antibiotics [36]. However, the use and misuse of antibiotics prophylactically or sub-therapeutically to prevent bacterial infections in livestock and the resultant residue, in general have been responsible for the development of multidrug-resistant bacterial isolates and a significant public health issue. Several microorganisms have developed resistance to various antibiotics, which have triggered the expansion of novel antibiotics with a higher resistance level [37,38,39].
Numerous studies have shown the presence of S. aureus in raw meat and meat products from retail stores with a prevalence below 1% in Asia [40], up to around 12% in Europe [41].
The study was aimed at evaluating the antimicrobial resistance profile of S. aureus isolates in retail raw chicken meat intended for human consumption.

2. Results and Discussion

We examined a total of 38 samples of raw chicken meat from retail stores for the presence of Staphylococcus spp. Our results showed that all 38 samples were positive for Staphylococcus spp. of which 89.5% (34 samples) of the confirmed isolates were S. aureus. All the isolates fermented mannitol salt agar and appeared golden yellow, showing the biochemical characteristics previously reported by Konuku et al. [42] for Staphylococcus spp. Our results of the occurrence of Staphylococcus spp. in meat samples is in agreement with previously reported results that describe S. aureus as a common pathogen of raw meats [41,43].
The presence of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria in meat has been widely reported from different parts of the world. The use of antibiotics in livestock and the resultant residue contribute to high antibiotic resistance levels of S. aureus found in meat products. All the S. aureus isolates in this study were resistant to cloxacillin, amoxicillin, and augmentin (Figure 1). In accordance with the findings of our research, Waters et al. [44] also reported strains of S. aureus in US meat and poultry resistant to ciprofloxacin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, clindamycin, erythromycin, oxacillin, and daptomycin. Varying resistance of S. aureus from raw meat has been reported by many authors, ranging from 25.00% to 73.30% [34,43,45,46].
S. aureus strains were least resistant to gentamycin (23.53%) and cotrimoxazole (38.24%). Some authors have reported that S. aureus gentamicin-resistant isolates from raw meat can range up to 19.40% [34,47,48,49]. This may lower percentage may be because it is in injection form and hardly used, unlike a vast majority of antibiotics that come in capsule or tablet forms. For cotrimoxazole, contrary to the findings of this study, Effah et al. [50] reported a 57.80% resistance of Methicillin-resistant S. aureus isolated from raw meat. Other authors, however, reported varying resistances (8.00 to 34.2%) to Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) from humans [51,52].
S. aureus is among the most prevalent cause of clinical infections globally and has garnered substantial public attention due to the increased mortality associated with the multidrug resistance phenomenon. Our findings also show the potential dissemination of multidrug-resistant S. aureus strains in the raw chicken meat samples examined. S. aureus isolates were multidrug-resistant to at least three antibiotics tested (Table 1). Consistent with the findings of our research, Effah et al. [50] reported multidrug resistance of MRSA to 16 antibiotics, of which 6 of those antibiotics were among those herein tested. The presence of multidrug-resistant strains poses a severe public health risk, as well as other emerging novel diseases [53].
Antibiotic susceptibility patterns for the raw chicken meat associated bacteria identified in this study are presented in Table 2. Antibiotics included in the testing were augmentin, amoxicillin, erythromycin, tetracycline, cloxacillin, gentamicin, cotrimoxazole, and chloramphenicol. According to Kovačević et al. [54], the most used antibiotics in inflammation therapy in food animals are penicillin, streptomycin, gentamicin, tetracycline, cephalexin, sulfonamides, and enrofloxacin.
Correspondence analysis was used to describe the bactericidal potential of different antibiotics on bacteria isolated from the raw chicken meat samples and shows associations of different bacteria and the evaluated antibiotics in terms of bacteria resistance (R) or sensitivity (S). As previously stated, Staphylococcus spp. have shown resistance toward all investigated antibiotics, with intermediate (I) resistance towards COT and GEN. As in our findings, Regecová et al. [55] investigated antimicrobial resistance of coagulase-negative Staphylococci isolated from sea fish meat. They observed that all isolates showed antimicrobial resistance to seven antibiotics, with most isolates resistant to ampicillin (AMP) and GEN. Ljubojević et al. [56] pointed out significant problems of widespread use of tetracyclines in poultry farming. Irregular and unprescribed usage of antibiotics may have resulted in the development and transmission of resistant strains from poultry to humans via the food chain. Furthermore, Puvača and de Llanos [57] have explained mechanisms of transmission and resistance via the fecal-oral route between humans, environmental sources, and food and pet animals in their review. The significant impact on drug resistance could also be due to inappropriate antibiotic medical decision therapy [58].
The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBCs) of S. aureus and Staphylococcus spp. to augmentin, amoxicillin, and cloxacillin antibiotics are shown in Table 3. Our results show that all isolates of S. aureus and Staphylococcus spp. found in raw chicken meat samples were multidrug resistant to these three antibiotics. Recorded MIC/BMC concentration in our study regarding S. aureus was as follows: AMX > CXC > AUG (8.2/16.4 mg/L > 6.4/12.8 mg/L > 5.8/11.6 mg/L); while Staphylococcus spp. recorded a similar trend (7.6/15.4 mg/L > 7.3/14.6 mg/L > 4.6/9.2 mg/L).
In the research of Thorburn et al. [59], post-antibiotic and post-β-lactamase inhibitor effects of amoxicillin were investigated. The effects of AMX were investigated on several bacteria including S. aureus and E. coli and a necessity for antibiotic dosage reduction was observed. Also, Sader et al. [60] highlighted that the usage of third-generation antibiotics exhibits more balanced spectrums of activity against pathogens and infections when compared with other antibiotics, but only in strictly controlled therapy.

3. Materials and Methods

The fresh raw chicken meat samples (thighs, breasts, and wings of the same chicken) were randomly purchased in January 2021, from a total of 38 different retail meat stores originating from different producers in a territory of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina located in the Republic of Serbia. Chickens came from independent processing plants. Meat samples were packed in a protective atmosphere and transferred in sterile flask coolers at +4 °C, upon which samples were sent to the laboratory for further analysis.
A total of 25 g of mixture of meat samples were ground and aseptically weighed into a stomacher bag containing 225 mL of sterile saline solution. This was followed by homogenization in a stomacher (Lab. Lemco 400, Worthing, West Sussex, UK) for about 100 s. To prepare decimal dilutions, 1.0 mL of the initial suspension (10−1) to 9.0 mL of peptone saline diluent (PSD) (to a tolerance of ±2% at ambient temperature), avoiding contact between the pipette tip and the diluent, was transferred and mixed carefully using a vortex mixer (Drawell, Chongqing, China) for 5–10 s. PSD was prepared by suspending 15 g of Peptone Water in 1000 mL of distilled water, followed by the addition of the test carbohydrate until completely dissolved, and then dispensed into inverted Durham’s tubes and sterilized by autoclaving at 121 °C for 15 min. The time lapse between preparation of the initial suspension and the beginning of preparation of the further dilutions did not exceed 30 min, and the overall time lapse between preparation of the initial suspension and inoculation of the plating media did not exceed 45 min. After a ten-fold serial dilution, 0.1 mL of diluted homogenate was spread-plated in duplicates on mannitol salt agar (MSA) supplemented with egg yolk-tellurite emulsion (Oxoid Limited, Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK), and incubated at 35 °C for 24 h.
From each plate, typical colonies of Staphylococcus spp. with similar morphologies were isolated and cultured separately on MSA before storing in Nutrient Agar Slant for confirmation. Identification of bacterial isolates was confirmed using the Cowan and Steel [61] manual for the Identification of Medical Bacteria, and Bergey and Holt [62] manual of Determinative Bacteriology.
Antibiotic sensitivity patterns of all the confirmed Staphylococcus spp. were performed using the standard disk diffusion method on Mueller-Hinton agar (Titan, Biotech Ltd.) following the procedures recommended by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) [63]. Ten commonly used antibiotics (µg/disc) such as augmentin (30 µg) (amoxicillin + clavulanic acid), amoxycillin (25 µg), erythromycin (5 µg), tetracycline (10 µg), cloxacillin (5 µg), gentamycin (10 µg), cotrimoxazole (25 µg), chloramphenicol (30 µg) were tested. From an overnight culture in Brain Heart Infusion Broth, a 108 cell/mL (0.5 MacFarland turbidity standards) bacterial culture was prepared in sterile saline solution, from which 0.1 mL was inoculated onto Mueller-Hinton agar, after which antibiotic discs were carefully and aseptically placed on the surface of the agar. The plates were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. Inhibition zones for various isolates were measured and interpreted as sensitive, intermediate, or resistant according to the CLSI [64,65]. When a single isolate was resistant to one key antimicrobial agent, multidrug resistance was registered [66].
The Brain Heart Infusion (BHI) Broth microdilution method was used to establish the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC) corresponding to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guideline [67]. The 180 µL aliquots of Tryptone soya broth were added to 96-well microtiter plates. As the final step, 20 µL of the standardized bacterial suspension (108 cell/mL) was inoculated into each well. The assay was performed in a total volume of 200 µL with final antimicrobial concentrations ranging from 100 to 0.09 mg/L, while the final microbial concentration was 105 CFU/mL. Plates were incubated at 37 °C, during 6 h in darkness. After visual examination, the plates were additionally incubated for 18 h. Change of color from blue (oxidized) to pink (reduced) indicated the growth of bacteria. MIC was defined as the lowest concentration at which the color change occurred [68]. Bacterial growth was determined by measuring absorbance at 600 nm.
To determine the minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC), known as the lowest concentration that reduces the bacterial population 99.9% after incubation at 35 °C for 24 h, 100 μL of the microtiter wells with no visible growth in the MIC determination assay was transferred to count agar plates (Lab M, International Diagnostics Group Plc, Bury, Lancashire, UK), which were incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. Those wells that yielded plates with no visible colonies were considered to be the MBC.

4. Conclusions

The role of food in the spread of pathogens cannot be over-emphasized in public health. Based on our results, raw chicken meat from retail stores remains a potential source in transmitting pathogenic foodborne bacteria. All the samples were positive for Staphylococcus species, of which 34 (89.5%) were positive for S. aureus. The S. aureus isolates were most resistant to tetracycline (88.24%), erythromycin (82.35%), and chloramphenicol (61.77%), while decreased resistance toward gentamycin (23.53%) and cotrimoxazole (38.24%) was recorded. All the S. aureus isolates in this study were resistant to cloxacillin, amoxicillin, and augmentin (amoxicillin + clavulanic acid). Therefore, there is the need for adequate food processing, especially at a suitable temperature, to reduce the possible microbial contamination in the food products, as well as surveillance of and good hygiene practice by meat handlers in the face of an increasing threat of multidrug-resistant S. aureus both in animals and humans. From our findings, it was determined that raw chicken meat from retail stores can be classified as “very high additional risk” or even as “high additional risk”. This highlights the importance of continued surveillance and the need to take measures in the primary sector to minimize the risk for the consumer.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.P. and E.L.; methodology, S.C.; software, N.P.; validation, S.C., and T.S.K.; formal analysis, N.P.; investigation, E.L.; resources, D.J.; data curation, S.S.; writing—original draft preparation, N.P.; writing—review and editing, R.d.L.F.; visualization, N.P.; supervision, T.S.K.; project administration, N.P.; funding acquisition, N.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia, and through a Beatriz Galindo Fellowship of the Ministerio de Educacion y Formacion Profesional, Spanish Government (BGP18/00062).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. de Castro Cardoso Pereira, P.M.; dos Reis Baltazar Vicente, A.F. Meat Nutritional Composition and Nutritive Role in the Human Diet. Meat Sci. 2013, 93, 586–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Olmedilla-Alonso, B.; Jiménez-Colmenero, F.; Sánchez-Muniz, F.J. Development and Assessment of Healthy Properties of Meat and Meat Products Designed as Functional Foods. Meat Sci. 2013, 95, 919–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Shubham, K.; Anukiruthika, T.; Dutta, S.; Kashyap, A.V.; Moses, J.A.; Anandharamakrishnan, C. Iron Deficiency Anemia: A Comprehensive Review on Iron Absorption, Bioavailability and Emerging Food Fortification Approaches. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 99, 58–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Doulgeraki, A.I.; Ercolini, D.; Villani, F.; Nychas, G.-J.E. Spoilage Microbiota Associated to the Storage of Raw Meat in Different Conditions. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2012, 157, 130–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Lika, E. Sustainable Rural Development in Albania Through Agriculture and Livestock: Challenges in the European Union Perspective. J. Agron. Technol. Eng. Manag. 2021, 4, 577–582. [Google Scholar]
  6. Moretro, T.; Langsrud, S.; Heir, E. Bacteria on Meat Abattoir Process Surfaces after Sanitation: Characterisation of Survival Properties of Listeria Monocytogenes and the Commensal Bacterial Flora. Adv. Microbiol. 2013, 3, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Møretrø, T.; Langsrud, S. Residential Bacteria on Surfaces in the Food Industry and Their Implications for Food Safety and Quality. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2017, 16, 1022–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Lavilla Lerma, L.; Benomar, N.; Gálvez, A.; Abriouel, H. Prevalence of Bacteria Resistant to Antibiotics and/or Biocides on Meat Processing Plant Surfaces throughout Meat Chain Production. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2013, 161, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nørrung, B.; Andersen, J.K.; Buncic, S. Main Concerns of Pathogenic Microorganisms in Meat. In Safety of Meat and Processed Meat; Toldrá, F., Ed.; Food Microbiology and Food Safety; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 3–29. ISBN 978-0-387-89026-5. [Google Scholar]
  10. Van Ba, H.; Seo, H.-W.; Pil-Nam, S.; Kim, Y.-S.; Park, B.Y.; Moon, S.-S.; Kang, S.-J.; Choi, Y.-M.; Kim, J.-H. The Effects of Pre-and Post-Slaughter Spray Application with Organic Acids on Microbial Population Reductions on Beef Carcasses. Meat Sci. 2018, 137, 16–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Breuch, R.; Klein, D.; Siefke, E.; Hebel, M.; Herbert, U.; Wickleder, C.; Kaul, P. Differentiation of Meat-Related Microorganisms Using Paper-Based Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy Combined with Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Talanta 2020, 219, 121315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Visvalingam, J.; Zhang, P.; Ells, T.C.; Yang, X. Dynamics of Biofilm Formation by Salmonella Typhimurium and Beef Processing Plant Bacteria in Mono- and Dual-Species Cultures. Microb. Ecol. 2019, 78, 375–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Huang, L.; Hwang, C.-A.; Fang, T. Improved Estimation of Thermal Resistance of Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella spp., and Listeria monocytogenes in Meat and Poultry—The Effect of Temperature and Fat and A Global Analysis. Food Control 2019, 96, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Odeyemi, O.A.; Alegbeleye, O.O.; Strateva, M.; Stratev, D. Understanding Spoilage Microbial Community and Spoilage Mechanisms in Foods of Animal Origin. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2020, 19, 311–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Ríos-Castillo, A.G.; Ripolles-Avila, C.; Rodríguez-Jerez, J.J. Evaluation of Bacterial Population Using Multiple Sampling Methods and the Identification of Bacteria Detected on Supermarket Food Contact Surfaces. Food Control 2021, 119, 107471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Schirone, M.; Visciano, P.; Tofalo, R.; Suzzi, G. Editorial: Foodborne Pathogens: Hygiene and Safety. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 1974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  17. Sosnowski, M.; Osek, J. Microbiological Safety of Food of Animal Origin from Organic Farms. J. Vet. Res. 2021, 65, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Charlermroj, R.; Makornwattana, M.; Phuengwas, S.; Meerak, J.; Pichpol, D.; Karoonuthaisiri, N. DNA-Based Bead Array Technology for Simultaneous Identification of Eleven Foodborne Pathogens in Chicken Meat. Food Control 2019, 101, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Smith, T.C.; Male, M.J.; Harper, A.L.; Kroeger, J.S.; Tinkler, G.P.; Moritz, E.D.; Capuano, A.W.; Herwaldt, L.A.; Diekema, D.J. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Strain ST398 Is Present in Midwestern U.S. Swine and Swine Workers. PLoS ONE 2009, 4, e4258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Hasman, H.; Moodley, A.; Guardabassi, L.; Stegger, M.; Skov, R.L.; Aarestrup, F.M. Spa Type Distribution in Staphylococcus Aureus Originating from Pigs, Cattle and Poultry. Vet. Microbiol. 2010, 141, 326–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wu, D.; Chen, Y.; Sun, L.; Qu, T.; Wang, H.; Yu, Y. Prevalence of Fosfomycin Resistance in Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Patients in a University Hospital in China from 2013 to 2015. JPN J. Infect. Dis. 2018, 71, 312–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Mendes, R.E.; Sader, H.S.; Castanheira, M.; Flamm, R.K. Distribution of Main Gram-Positive Pathogens Causing Bloodstream Infections in United States and European Hospitals during the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (2010–2016): Concomitant Analysis of Oritavancin in Vitro Activity. J. Chemother. 2018, 30, 280–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Bush, K.; Bradford, P.A. Epidemiology of β-Lactamase-Producing Pathogens. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2020, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Hennekinne, J.-A. Chapter 7—Staphylococcus aureus as a Leading Cause of Foodborne Outbreaks Worldwide. In Staphylococcus Aureus; Fetsch, A., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 129–146. ISBN 978-0-12-809671-0. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ebert, M. Chapter 11—Hygiene Principles to Avoid Contamination/Cross-Contamination in the Kitchen and During Food Processing. In Staphylococcus Aureus; Fetsch, A., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 217–234. ISBN 978-0-12-809671-0. [Google Scholar]
  26. Scallan, E.; Hoekstra, R.M.; Angulo, F.J.; Tauxe, R.V.; Widdowson, M.-A.; Roy, S.L.; Jones, J.L.; Griffin, P.M. Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major Pathogens. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2011, 17, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Kadariya, J.; Smith, T.C.; Thapaliya, D. Staphylococcus Aureus and Staphylococcal Food-Borne Disease: An Ongoing Challenge in Public Health. BioMed Res. Int. 2014, 2014, e827965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Chen, J.; Lü, Z.; An, Z.; Ji, P.; Liu, X. Antibacterial Activities of Sophorolipids and Nisin and Their Combination against Foodborne Pathogen Staphylococcus Aureus. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2020, 122, 1900333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Abril, G.A.; Villa, G.T.; Barros-Velázquez, J.; Cañas, B.; Sánchez-Pérez, A.; Calo-Mata, P.; Carrera, M. Staphylococcus Aureus Exotoxins and Their Detection in the Dairy Industry and Mastitis. Toxins 2020, 12, 537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Umeda, K.; Nakamura, H.; Yamamoto, K.; Nishina, N.; Yasufuku, K.; Hirai, Y.; Hirayama, T.; Goto, K.; Hase, A.; Ogasawara, J. Molecular and Epidemiological Characterization of Staphylococcal Foodborne Outbreak of Staphylococcus Aureus Harboring Seg, Sei, Sem, Sen, Seo, and Selu Genes without Production of Classical Enterotoxins. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2017, 256, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Denayer, S.; Delbrassinne, L.; Nia, Y.; Botteldoorn, N. Food-Borne Outbreak Investigation and Molecular Typing: High Diversity of Staphylococcus Aureus Strains and Importance of Toxin Detection. Toxins 2017, 9, 407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Le, H.H.T.; Dalsgaard, A.; Andersen, P.S.; Nguyen, H.M.; Ta, Y.T.; Nguyen, T.T. Large-Scale Staphylococcus Aureus Foodborne Disease Poisoning Outbreak among Primary School Children. Microbiol. Res. 2021, 12, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Argudín, M.Á.; Mendoza, M.C.; Rodicio, M.R. Food Poisoning and Staphylococcus Aureus Enterotoxins. Toxins 2010, 2, 1751–1773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jaja, I.F.; Jaja, C.-J.I.; Chigor, N.V.; Anyanwu, M.U.; Maduabuchi, E.K.; Oguttu, J.W.; Green, E. Antimicrobial Resistance Phenotype of Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli Isolates Obtained from Meat in the Formal and Informal Sectors in South Africa. BioMed Res. Int. 2020, 2020, 3979482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Puvača, N.; Milenković, J.; Galonja Coghill, T.; Bursić, V.; Petrović, A.; Tanasković, S.; Pelić, M.; Ljubojević Pelić, D.; Miljković, T. Antimicrobial Activity of Selected Essential Oils against Selected Pathogenic Bacteria: In Vitro Study. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Leong, H.N.; Kurup, A.; Tan, M.Y.; Kwa, A.L.H.; Liau, K.H.; Wilcox, M.H. Management of Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections with a Special Focus on the Role of Newer Antibiotics. Infect. Drug Resist. 2018, 11, 1959–1974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Wellington, E.M.; Boxall, A.B.; Cross, P.; Feil, E.J.; Gaze, W.H.; Hawkey, P.M.; Johnson-Rollings, A.S.; Jones, D.L.; Lee, N.M.; Otten, W.; et al. The Role of the Natural Environment in the Emergence of Antibiotic Resistance in Gram-Negative Bacteria. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2013, 13, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Omwenga, I.; Aboge, G.O.; Mitema, E.S.; Obiero, G.; Ngaywa, C.; Ngwili, N.; Wamwere, G.; Wainaina, M.; Bett, B. Antimicrobial Usage and Detection of Multidrug-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus, Including Methicillin-Resistant Strains in Raw Milk of Livestock from Northern Kenya. Microb. Drug Resist. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Kimera, Z.I.; Mgaya, F.X.; Misinzo, G.; Mshana, S.E.; Moremi, N.; Matee, M.I.N. Multidrug-Resistant, Including Extended-Spectrum Beta Lactamase-Producing and Quinolone-Resistant, Escherichia coli Isolated from Poultry and Domestic Pigs in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lim, S.-K.; Nam, H.-M.; Park, H.-J.; Lee, H.-S.; Choi, M.-J.; Jung, S.-C.; Lee, J.-Y.; Kim, Y.-C.; Song, S.-W.; Wee, S.-H. Prevalence and Characterization of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus in Raw Meat in Korea. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 20, 775–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. de Boer, E.; Zwartkruis-Nahuis, J.T.M.; Wit, B.; Huijsdens, X.W.; de Neeling, A.J.; Bosch, T.; van Oosterom, R.A.A.; Vila, A.; Heuvelink, A.E. Prevalence of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus in Meat. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2009, 134, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Konuku, S.; Rajan, M.M.; Muruhan, S. Morphological and Biochemical Characteristics and Antibiotic Resistance Pattern of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Grapes. Int. J. Nutr. Pharmacol. Neurol. Dis. 2012, 2, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Pesavento, G.; Ducci, B.; Comodo, N.; Nostro, A.L. Antimicrobial Resistance Profile of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Raw Meat: A Research for Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA). Food Control 2007, 18, 196–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Waters, A.E.; Contente-Cuomo, T.; Buchhagen, J.; Liu, C.M.; Watson, L.; Pearce, K.; Foster, J.T.; Bowers, J.; Driebe, E.M.; Engelthaler, D.M.; et al. Multidrug-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus in US Meat and Poultry. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2011, 52, 1227–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Yucel, N.; Citak, S.; Bayhün, S. Antimicrobial Resistance Profile of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Clinical Samples and Foods of Animal Origin. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2010, 8, 427–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Pekana, A.; Green, E. Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Meat Carcasses and Bovine Milk in Abattoirs and Dairy Farms of the Eastern Cape, South Africa. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Wu, S.; Huang, J.; Wu, Q.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, F.; Yang, X.; Wu, H.; Zeng, H.; Chen, M.; Ding, Y.; et al. Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated From Retail Meat and Meat Products in China: Incidence, Antibiotic Resistance and Genetic Diversity. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Kim, Y.B.; Seo, K.W.; Jeon, H.Y.; Lim, S.-K.; Lee, Y.J. Characteristics of the Antimicrobial Resistance of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Chicken Meat Produced by Different Integrated Broiler Operations in Korea. Poult. Sci. 2018, 97, 962–969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Adzitey, F.; Ekli, R.; Abu, A. Prevalence and Antibiotic Susceptibility of Staphylococcus Aureus Isolated from Raw and Grilled Beef in Nyankpala Community in the Northern Region of Ghana. Cogent Food Agric. 2019, 5, 1671115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Effah, C.Y.; Otoo, B.A.F.; Ntiefo, R.A. Prevalence and Phenotypic Antibiotic Bioassay of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus in Raw Meats Sold at Various Retail Outlets in the Cape Coast Metropolis of Ghana. J. Food Microbiol. 2018, 2, 7–11. [Google Scholar]
  51. Goldberg, E.; Paul, M.; Talker, O.; Samra, Z.; Raskin, M.; Hazzan, R.; Leibovici, L.; Bishara, J. Co-Trimoxazole versus Vancomycin for the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteraemia: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2010, 65, 1779–1783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Marwa, K.J.; Mushi, M.F.; Konje, E.; Alele, P.E.; Kidola, J.; Mirambo, M.M. Resistance to Cotrimoxazole and Other Antimicrobials among Isolates from HIV/AIDS and Non-HIV/AIDS Patients at Bugando Medical Centre, Mwanza, Tanzania. AIDS Res. Treat. 2015, 2015, 103874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Puvača, N.; Lika, E.; Brkanlić, S.; Esteve, E.B.; Ilić, D.; Kika, S.; Brkić, I. The Pandemic of SARS-CoV-2 as a Worldwide Health Safety Risk. J. Agron. Technol. Eng. Manag. 2021, 4, 10. [Google Scholar]
  54. Kovačević, Z.; Radinović, M.; Čabarkapa, I.; Kladar, N.; Božin, B. Natural Agents against Bovine Mastitis Pathogens. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Regecová, I.; Pipová, M.; Jevinová, P.; Marušková, K.; Kmeť, V.; Popelka, P. Species Identification and Antimicrobial Resistance of Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci Isolated from the Meat of Sea Fish. J. Food Sci. 2014, 79, M898–M902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ljubojević, D.; Pelić, M.; Puvača, N.; Milanov, D. Resistance to Tetracycline in Escherichia coli Isolates from Poultry Meat: Epidemiology, Policy and Perspective. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 2017, 73, 409–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Puvača, N.; de Llanos Frutos, R. Antimicrobial Resistance in Escherichia coli Strains Isolated from Humans and Pet Animals. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Puvača, N.; Britt, C. Welfare and Legal Aspects of Making Decisions on Medical Treatments of Pet Animals. Pravo—Teorija I Praksa 2020, 37, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Thorburn, C.E.; Molesworth, S.J.; Sutherland, R.; Rittenhouse, S. Postantibiotic and Post-Beta-Lactamase Inhibitor Effects of Amoxicillin plus Clavulanate. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 1996, 40, 2796–2801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  60. Sader, H.S.; Jacobs, M.R.; Fritsche, T.R. Review of the Spectrum and Potency of Orally Administered Cephalosporins and Amoxicillin/Clavulanate. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2007, 57, S5–S12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cowan, S.T.; Steel, K.J. Manual for the Identification of Medical Bacteria. Man. Identif. Med. Bacteria. 1965, 149, 852. [Google Scholar]
  62. Bergey, D.H.; Holt, J.G. Bergey’s Manual of Determinative Bacteriology; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (LWW): Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1994; ISBN 978-0-683-00603-2. [Google Scholar]
  63. Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria That Grow Aerobically; Approved Standards—Ninth Edition; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2012.
  64. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria Isolated from Animals; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2008.
  65. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk Susceptibility Tests; Approved Standard M02-A12 2007; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2007.
  66. 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] [Green Version]
  67. CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; 25th Informational Supplement; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  68. Elshikh, M.; Ahmed, S.; Funston, S.; Dunlop, P.; McGaw, M.; Marchant, R.; Banat, I.M. Resazurin-Based 96-Well Plate Microdilution Method for the Determination of Minimum Inhibitory Concentration of Biosurfactants. Biotechnol. Lett. 2016, 38, 1015–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Antibiotics 10 00904 g001 550
Figure 1. Percentage of S. aureus isolates resistant to common antibiotics (number of positive samples; n = 34), %.
Figure 1. Percentage of S. aureus isolates resistant to common antibiotics (number of positive samples; n = 34), %.
Antibiotics 10 00904 g001
Table
Table 1. Multidrug resistance of S. aureus isolates in raw chicken meat samples.
Table 1. Multidrug resistance of S. aureus isolates in raw chicken meat samples.
AntibioticsIsolate’s Resistance (n)
AUG-AMX-CXC-TET-ERY8
AUG-AMX-CXC-TET-ERY-CHL6
AUG-AMX-CXC-TET-ERY-CHL-COT8
AUG-AMX-CXC-TET-ERY-CHL-COT-GEN6
AUG—augmentin; AMX—amoxicillin; ERY—erythromycin; TET—tetracycline; CXC—cloxacillin; GEN—gentamicin; COT—cotrimoxazole; CHL—chloramphenicol; n—number of isolates.
Table
Table 2. Antibiotic susceptibility patterns for the raw chicken meat associated bacteria.
Table 2. Antibiotic susceptibility patterns for the raw chicken meat associated bacteria.
BacteriaAUGAMXERYTETCXCGENCOTCHL
Staphylococcus spp.RRRRRRIR
AUG—augmentin; AMX—amoxicillin; ERY—erythromycin; TET—tetracycline; CXC—cloxacillin; GEN—gentamicin; COT—cotrimoxazole; CHL—chloramphenicol; I—intermediate; R—resistant.
Table
Table 3. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBCs) of S. aureus and Staphylococcus spp. to augmentin, amoxicillin, and cloxacillin antibiotics.
Table 3. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and minimal bactericidal concentrations (MBCs) of S. aureus and Staphylococcus spp. to augmentin, amoxicillin, and cloxacillin antibiotics.
SampleAUGAMXCXC
MIC, mg/LMBC, mg/LCutoff, mg/LMIC, mg/LMBC, mg/LCutoff, mg/LMIC, mg/LMBC, mg/LCutoff, mg/L
S. aureus5.811.61.458.216.42.056.412.81.6
Staphylococcus spp.4.69.21.157.615.41.97.314.61.83
AUG—augmentin; AMX—amoxicillin; CXC—cloxacillin.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lika, E.; Puvača, N.; Jeremić, D.; Stanojević, S.; Shtylla Kika, T.; Cocoli, S.; de Llanos Frutos, R. Antibiotic Susceptibility of Staphylococcus Species Isolated in Raw Chicken Meat from Retail Stores. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 904. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10080904

AMA Style

Lika E, Puvača N, Jeremić D, Stanojević S, Shtylla Kika T, Cocoli S, de Llanos Frutos R. Antibiotic Susceptibility of Staphylococcus Species Isolated in Raw Chicken Meat from Retail Stores. Antibiotics. 2021; 10(8):904. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10080904

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lika, Erinda, Nikola Puvača, Dejan Jeremić, Slobodan Stanojević, Tana Shtylla Kika, Sonila Cocoli, and Rosa de Llanos Frutos. 2021. "Antibiotic Susceptibility of Staphylococcus Species Isolated in Raw Chicken Meat from Retail Stores" Antibiotics 10, no. 8: 904. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10080904

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