Next Article in Journal
Do Anti-Phage Antibodies Persist after Phage Therapy? A Preliminary Report
Next Article in Special Issue
A Seven-Year Microbiological and Molecular Study of Bacteremias Due to Carbapenemase-Producing Klebsiella Pneumoniae: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis of Changes in the Carbapenemase Gene’s Distribution after Introduction of Ceftazidime/Avibactam
Previous Article in Journal
Occurrence and Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in a Sub-Catchment of the Yodo River Basin, Japan
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Point Prevalence Survey of Healthcare-Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Use in Public Acute Care Hospitals in Crete, Greece
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 11
Issue 10
10.3390/antibiotics11101356
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

Occurrence and Biological Cost of mcr-1-Carrying Plasmids Co-harbouring Beta-Lactamase Resistance Genes in Zoonotic Pathogens from Intensive Animal Production

by
Tiago Lima
1,2,
Dina Loureiro
3,
Ana Henriques
3,
Fernando Ramos
1,4,
Constança Pomba
5,
Sara Domingues
1,2 and
Gabriela Jorge da Silva
1,2,*
1
Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, 3000-458 Coimbra, Portugal
2
Center for Neuroscience and Cell Biology, University Coimbra, 3004-517 Coimbra, Portugal
3
ALS-Controlvet, 3460-070 Tondela, Portugal
4
REQUIMTE/LAQV, R. D. Manuel II, 4051-401 Oporto, Portugal
5
Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Animal Health, Laboratory of Antibiotic Resistance, CIISA, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Lisbon, 1300-477 Lisbon, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2022, 11(10), 1356; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11101356
Submission received: 31 August 2022 / Revised: 26 September 2022 / Accepted: 30 September 2022 / Published: 5 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial Resistance in Humans: The Final Frontier)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Colistin is classified as a high-priority critical antimicrobial by the World Health Organization (WHO). A better understanding of the biological cost imposed by mcr-plasmids is paramount to comprehending their spread and may facilitate the decision about the ban of colistin in livestock. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of mcr and ESBL genes from 98 Escherichia coli and 142 Salmonella enterica isolates from food-producing animals and the impact of the mcr-1 acquisition on bacterial fitness. Only mcr-1 was identified by multiplex PCR (mcr-1 to mcr-10) in 15.3% of E. coli. Colistin MICs ranged between 8–32 mg/L. In four isolates, blaTEM-1, blaCTX-M-1, and blaCTX-M-15 co-existed with mcr-1. The IncH12, IncHI1, IncP, IncN, and IncI plasmids were transferred by conjugation to E. coli J53 at frequencies of 10−7 to 10−2 cells/recipient. Growth kinetics assays showed that transconjugants had a significantly lower growth rate than the recipient (p < 0.05), and transconjugants’ average growth rate was higher in the absence than in the presence of colistin (1.66 versus 1.32 (p = 0.0003)). Serial transfer assay during 10 days demonstrated that plasmid retention ranged from complete loss to full retention. Overall, mcr-1-bearing plasmids impose a fitness cost, but the loss of plasmids is highly variable, suggesting that other factors beyond colistin pressure regulate the plasmid maintenance in a bacterial population, and colistin withdrawal will not completely lead to a decrease of mcr-1 levels.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Extensive use and misuse of antimicrobial agents are recognised as the most important causes of the emergence and selection of antimicrobial resistance worldwide. Nowadays, antimicrobial resistance has been widely considered a global threat to human and animal health and should be seen from a One Health perspective [1,2].
In veterinary medicine and intensive animal farm production, the overuse of antibiotics with therapeutic, prophylactic, and metaphylatic purposes led to the emergence of important clinical resistance genes, such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) and mobilised colistin resistance (mcr) genes, in bacteria of animal origin that may enter in the food chain and/or spread into the environment [3]. There are several reports of the prophylactic administration of cephalosporins in intensive pig production to prevent neonatal infections, namely Streptococcus suis infections, navel infections, arthritis and colibacillosis diarrhoea [4]. Colistin is approved in pig production in some countries for the control of Enterobacteriaceae infections, particularly for those caused by Escherichia coli [5]. In addition, according to the European Medicines Agency report, colistin should only be used for therapy or metaphylaxis purposes in food-producing animals [6]. However, according to the recommendations for the prudent and responsible use of antibiotics used in animals, colistin should have its use restricted and, whenever possible, its use should be based on antimicrobial susceptibility tests, given its extreme importance in human medicine thus following a One Health approach [7].
The first report of ESBL-producing bacteria was in 1980, shortly after the introduction of the third-generation cephalosporins in clinical practice. Nowadays, there are several types of ESBL that promote resistance to all beta-lactams, except carbapenems. The most widespread are the ESBL types generated due to point mutations in the classical penicillinases SHV-1/2, TEM-1/2 and the CTX-M family beta-lactamases [8].
The lack of effective antibiotics in human medicine, particularly to fight carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales, led to a renewed interest in the old antibiotic colistin, which became one of the last-resort therapeutic options [9]. Colistin, also known as polymyxin E, was used in human medicine several decades ago, but it was banned due to its neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity. In contrast, it has been widely used in animal production practice in numerous countries for therapeutic, prophylactic and growth promotion purposes, mostly in pigs, poultry and cattle, due to its efficiency and low cost [10].
The prevalence of colistin resistance has been gradually reported in the last few years, and understanding the underlying resistance mechanisms is a priority [11]. Colistin resistance is mainly associated with LPS structure modifications, with consequent reduced or absent affinity to colistin [10]. Until 2015, all known colistin resistance mechanisms were chromosomally encoded as a result of specific mutations that led to an overexpression of LPS-modifying genes [12]. Then, the first plasmid-mediated colistin resistance gene (mcr-1) was identified in E. coli isolates from pigs’ samples, retail meat and human clinical isolates in China. The mcr gene encodes a phosphoethanolamine transferase that adds a phosphoethanolamine group to Lipid A, leading to decreased binding of colistin to LPS [13]. Since then, mcr-1 homologs (mcr-1 to mcr-10) and several variants have been identified worldwide in diverse Gram-negative bacteria of different origins, mainly associated with food-producing animals [10,14,15,16,17].
It is generally assumed that antibiotic resistance by the acquisition of mobile genetic elements, like plasmids, confers a reduction in the fitness of the recipient cell that is expressed as reduced growth rates, lower virulence, lower transmission rates or less invasiveness [18]. However, the fitness cost is strongly dependent on the plasmid backbone and on the host cell type [19]. In addition, plasmids may harbour diverse resistance genes, which under the selective pressure of antibiotic treatment, may result in co-selection of the plasmid-carrying multiple resistance genes [20].
The co-occurrence of ESBL and mcr genes has been reported [4,15,16]. Their dissemination is fuelled by horizontal gene transfer mechanisms, such as conjugation, which may spread to pathogenic Gram-negative bacteria, further limiting the treatment options [10,21]. Therefore, the surveillance and molecular characterization of colistin resistance in zoonotic pathogens play a key role in the need to decide on restrictions on antibiotic use in animal production [22]. Moreover, understanding the biological cost of the acquisition of mcr-carrying plasmids is important to infer their stability in the host and dissemination.
The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of mcr and ESBLs genes in E. coli and Salmonella enterica isolates, two well-known zoonotic pathogens, collected from intensive farming animals and farm environments, to assess the potential of horizontal dissemination of these genes and to evaluate the impact of mcr-1 acquisition in the fitness of the host.

2. Results

2.1. Origin of Bacterial Isolates and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test

A total of 240 bacterial isolates were collected: 142 S. enterica and 98 E. coli from different sources (Table 1 and Table 2) and from diverse Portuguese and Spain regions. The majority of the isolates were from poultry (Table 1). S. enterica serovar Typhimurium was the most prevalent serotype detected, followed by the serovar Enteritidis in poultry. Sixty-eight (47.9%) S. enterica isolates were recovered from the farm environment and one from animal-derived food (Table 2).
Bacterial susceptibility testing showed that in S. enterica, 41 isolates (28.87%) were resistant to amoxicillin, 26 (18.31%) were resistant to tetracycline, 6 (4.23%) to the combination amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, 3 (2.11%) to cephalosporins, 3 (2.11%) to aztreonam, and 3 (2.11%) to quinolones. Regarding E. coli, it was found 77 (78.57%) tetracycline-resistant isolates, 72 (73.47%) amoxicillin-resistant isolates, 45 (45.92%) quinolone-resistant isolates, 13 (13.27%) resistant isolates to the combination amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, 6 (6.12%) aztreonam-resistant isolates and 3 (4.08%) resistant isolates to cephalosporins.
Phenotypic screening of ESBL suggested that 18 (12.68%) S. enterica and 14 (14.29%) E. coli were ESBL producers.
It was observed that 94 bacterial isolates (39.17%) grew in EMB agar supplemented with 3.5 mg/L of colistin, of which 37 grew after 24 h (30 E. coli and 7 S. enterica; 15.42%) and 57 (20 E. coli and 37 S. enterica) only after 48 h (23.75%) of incubation.

2.2. Screening of mcr and ESBL Genes

The multiplex PCR allowed for the detection of 15 E. coli (15.31%) carrying mcr-1, but not in S. enterica isolates. The other mcr genes were not detected in any isolate. All the mcr-1 positive strains were classified as resistant to colistin, with MICs values ranging from 8 to 32 mg/L. Two of the mcr-1 positive E. coli strains only grew after 48 h under colistin selection, despite the MIC values of 8 and 16 mg/L. The majority of the mcr-1 positive strains (n = 9; 60%) were collected from pig samples, while the others were from poultry (n = 4; 27%) and rabbits (n = 2; 13%).
Phenotypic screening of ESBL revealed 13.33% (32/240 isolates) of positivity, and all were screened for blaTEM, blaSHV and blaCTX-M genes. Twenty beta-lactamase-producing isolates (8.33%) were found, including 16.33% E. coli (16/98 E. coli) and 2.82% S. enterica (4/142 S. enterica). The four S. enterica isolates carried blaTEM-1 (2.82%). In relation to the E. coli isolates, 10 (10.20%) carried only blaTEM-1. Five (5.10%) E. coli isolates carried, beyond blaTEM-1, mcr-1 (n = 2), mcr-1 and blaCTX-M-15 (n = 1), blaCTX-M-1 (n = 1) and blaOXY-2 (n = 1). One E. coli carried both mcr-1 and blaCTX-M-1. These results are summarised in Table 3.

2.3. Conjugation Experiments

Conjugation assays were performed with the 15 mcr-1 E. coli positive strains and E. coli J53 as the recipient cell. The mcr-1 gene was successfully transferred to E. coli J53 from all the donor cells at a frequency between 10−7 to 10−2 cells per recipient (Table 3). Additionally, blaTEM-1 and blaCTX-M-1 were also co-transferred in E. coli 166, E. coli 170, E. coli 186 and E. coli 189, but not the blaCTX-M-15 in E. coli 186 (Table 3). The success of the gene transfer was confirmed by PCR detection of mcr-1 and beta-lactamase genes. The transconjugants showed a resistance profile to colistin identical to the donors, with MICs values identical to the mcr-1-borne plasmids donor strain. PCR-based replicon typing showed that these genes were located on IncH12, IncHI1, IncP IncN and IncI1 plasmids.

2.4. Growth Rates and Plasmid Stability

Growth kinetics of E. coli J53 and its mcr-1-carrying transconjugants were investigated. Significant growth rate differences between E. coli J53 and transconjugants 162T, 185T, 186T, 212T and 221T were found (p < 0.05). In addition, a significant difference in growth rates (p = 0.0003) was observed between transconjugants in the absence and in the presence of colistin, after 30 h assessment, with a mean growth rate of 1.66 and 1.32, respectively (Figure 1).
The stability of the mcr-1 plasmids was determined by serial passages for 10 days in the absence of colistin. As shown in Figure 2A,B, plasmid retention rates were diverse. Briefly, in E. coli 177 and 185, IncHI2 plasmids were highly retained (>85%) but lost in their transconjugants (<95%). Otherwise, IncHI2 plasmids of E. coli 186 and its transconjugant were maintained in 37% and 31%, respectively. IncP plasmids were lost in both E. coli 170 and in its transconjugant; in contrast, in E. coli 166, 27% of parental strain and only 19% of transconjugants IncP plasmid was retained. Finally, an untypable plasmid was maintained stably in 60% of E. coli 189 and its transconjugants at least 10 days of passage in an antibiotic-free environment.

3. Discussion

In this study, E. coli and S. enterica isolates were recovered from animal biological and food samples and from farm environments in Portugal and Spain with the objective of assessing the epidemiology of mcr-1 to mcr-10 genes and ESBL genes.
Only the mcr-1 gene was identified in E. coli samples. The majority (60%) of mcr-1 identified in E. coli was from swine samples, which is in accordance with most of the current reports, where the main sources of E. coli carrying mcr-1 are pigs, poultry samples and their derivate food products [16,23,24,25]. Yet, the majority of samples were from poultry, with the majority of isolates being S. enterica, including from boots’ swabs. Surprisingly, mcr genes were not detected in S. enterica despite the growth in media supplemented with colistin. Although less frequently than in E. coli, there are several reports worldwide of the occurrence of mcr genes in S. enterica, mostly the mcr-1 gene, including in Portugal [10,25,26,27]. The presence of chromosomal mutations of the PmrA/PmrB and PhoP/PhoQ two-component regulatory systems, which are responsible for the biosynthesis of L-Ara4N and PEtn [10], or other uncharacterised variants of mcr genes may explain the growth of some S. enterica strains under colistin selection. The mechanisms and evolutionary pathways resulting in decreased susceptibility to colistin in certain Salmonella serovars remain to be fully understood, but bacterial tolerance, persistence or heteroresistance to antimicrobials and natural and spontaneous phenomena may be an explanation for bacterial growth in the presence of colistin [28,29].
Intensive swine production has been pointed to as the main source of emergence and spread of mobile colistin resistance due to the wide use of colistin for treatment and control of gastrointestinal infections caused by Enterobacterales in pigs and piglets [5,30]. Also, in industrial rabbit breeding, the recorded consumption of colistin is relevant, and in fact, we found the mcr-1 gene in two E. coli isolates from rabbit meat, which is rarely reported [31,32,33]. It is highly expected that transmission between intensive farming animals is facilitated by close contact between them [34]. The food chain may play a major role in the spread of colistin resistance since mcr genes have been mostly found in samples from food-producing animals. There are several reports from human clinical samples [5]. The rate of mcr genes that have been found in our study and in the rest of Europe [35,36,37] was lower compared to the high rates observed in China. This may be explained by the previously high levels of colistin consumption observed in some Asian Countries, including China, where the use of colistin as a feed additive was allowed until recently as a growth promoter [37,38].
The co-occurrence of mcr-1 with other clinically relevant resistance genes in E. coli was previously reported [4,15,16,24,39]. Here, the strains showed high levels of resistance to tetracycline and beta-lactams, as expected, because these antimicrobial agents were and are widely used in livestock production to prevent and control respiratory and gastrointestinal disease [40], including in Portugal [41]. Although ciprofloxacin is not used in livestock production, some isolates were ciprofloxacin-resistant. This can be explained by the cross-resistance to enrofloxacin, which is commonly used in farm animals and is partially metabolised to ciprofloxacin in animals [42]. Moreover, the mcr-1 gene can easily spread due to the use of colistin or co-selection with other antibiotic classes [6]. Thus, the administration of different antibiotics to animals plays a key role in the development and spread of various resistance profiles [43].
Phenotypic screening of ESBL indicated a higher production of these enzymes compared to the PCR detection, which suggests that other less common ESBLs than blaCTX-M-1 and blaCTM-M-15 that were identified in this study may be produced. Additionally, there seems to be a connection between mcr-1 and ESBL genes, which can lead to co-selection of the resistance to beta-lactams and colistin.
All mcr-1-carrying E. coli isolates were able to transfer the colistin resistance gene by conjugation at different frequencies, as reported [35]. The mcr-1 gene has been often found on IncHI2, IncHI1, IncP, IncI1and IncN conjugative plasmids [30,44]. Other reports indicate that IncX4 and IncHI2 are the two major plasmid incompatibility groups implicated in mcr-1 dissemination [27]. The genetic platforms of mcr in this study were variable. The plasmid IncHI2 was not completely lost in the absence of colistin, which might explain the highest frequency found. Moreover, it was shown that the dissemination of mcr-1 is linked with the co-spread of ESBLs, namely blaCTX-M-1. The MICs for colistin for transconjugants showed a similar value to the donor strain, suggesting that colistin resistance is specific and not influenced by other resistance mechanisms in the donor strains. Nevertheless, the colistin-resistant wild strains may display chromosomal resistance genes.
The dissemination and the high diversity of mcr-encoding plasmid backbones assume greater relevance in the context of livestock production, particularly in swine production [5,21,45,46]. Animal manure should be regarded as a source of antibiotic residues and DNA, and in this case, it is not clear that the processing through composting is effective in reducing amounts of colistin or mcr genes in pig manure [5,21,46]. The role of animal manure used in land fertilization and in the environmental dissemination of mcr genes should be further studied.
Many isolates, especially from S. enterica, grew with colistin only after 48 h of incubation. As observed for two E. coli isolates, our study demonstrated that the prevalence of mcr genes might be underestimated because some positive mcr-1 strains did not show visible growth after 24 h of incubation. Since mcr-1 may be present in colistin-susceptible strains, it has been suggested that mcr genes may play a physiological role in bacterial cells [47]. Thus, the prevalence of these genes may be underestimated by the breakpoint value that might need an update and/or by the time of incubation, as shown in the present study.
In addition, the slow growth of some colistin-resistant isolates might be related to a fitness cost. Studying the biological cost of exogenous DNA in the recipient cell is important to comprehend the dynamic of transmission of plasmids in a bacterial population and to further understand whether colistin withdrawal in intensive animal production may attenuate the spread of the mcr-1 gene with positive implications in public health in the view of the One Health context. A report showed that in China, after the ban of colistin as a growth promoter in 2017, the prevalence of colistin resistance and mcr genes was reduced [48]. However, this is not a paradigm [49,50]. To assess the biological cost of mcr-carrying-plasmid acquisition, we compared the growth rate of transconjugants and the recipient strain E. coli J53, observing that the carriage of the mcr-plasmid imposes a fitness cost to the host, as previously described [51,52,53]. Also, the comparison of growth rates between transconjugants in the presence and absence of colistin showed that the presence of colistin impairs the in vitro growth of mcr-1-carrying bacteria resulting in reduced fitness. This suggests that colistin withdrawal from intensive animal production could indeed attenuate the spread of the mcr-1 gene because susceptible strains would be more fit. However, plasmid stability assays revealed that the loss of plasmids was highly variable, ranging from complete loss to full retention. IncHI2 was more retained than others, which might explain their higher prevalence association with mcr genes, while other plasmids, such as IncP, rarely described as carrying mcr-genes, were partially or completely lost [51,54]. These findings show that the acquisition of mcr-1-carrying plasmids reduces the fitness of the host, but plasmid loss in the absence of colistin is highly variable, and other factors beyond colistin pressure contribute to resistance-plasmid maintenance in a bacterial population. The variability in plasmid stability may be related to plasmid features (type, size) and bacterial host [51,55]. Compensatory adaptations may explain the mcr-1 expression at a low fitness cost. However, the mechanisms that are responsible for the equilibrium between mcr-1 expression to provide protection in the colistin environment and normal cellular functions remain unknown and should be further studied [50].

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Bacterial Isolates

Ninety-eight E. coli and 142 S. enterica isolates were collected from animals of intensive farming production and farmer’s boots between January 2016 and April 2018 by ALS-Controlvet (Tondela, Portugal). These isolates were collected from swine, poultry, rabbit, sheep and bovine from Portugal and Spain. All S. enterica isolates were serotyped accordingly to the Kauffmann-White scheme [56].

4.2. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

The antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by the disc diffusion method with the antibiotics: amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin, apramycin, cefalexin, ceftiofur, doxycycline, erythromycin, enrofloxacin, florfenicol, flumequine, lincomycin/spectinomycin, nalidixic acid, neomycin, oxolinic acid, pipemidic acid, spiramycin, tetracycline, tiamulin, tilmicosin and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (Oxoid, Basingstoke, UK), according to the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing guidelines (EUCAST) [57]. Phenotypic detection of ESBL was performed by the double disc diffusion method with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, aztreonam, ceftazidime and cefotaxime disks (Oxoid, Basingstoke, UK). The data were interpreted according to the EUCAST guidelines [57].
Screening of colistin-resistant isolates was performed according to a previously described method, with some modifications [58]. The SuperPolymyxin® medium was developed for this purpose. However, our study was performed only with Gram-negative bacteria, and so neither amphotericin B nor daptomycin was used. Therefore, bacterial growth was observed in EMB agar (Liofilchem, Roseto degli Abruzzi, Italy) supplemented with 3.5 mg/L of colistin (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) after 24 and 48 h of incubation. Colistin susceptibility was evaluated by the broth microdilution method, according to EUCAST recommendations [57], determining the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) both for wild strains and transconjugants.

4.3. Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes

Screening of blaSHV, blaTEM and blaCTX-M type genes was performed by PCR with specific primers, as previously reported [59]. Bacterial isolates that grew in colistin-supplemented EMB agar were screened for mcr-1 to mcr-10 genes. PCR screening for mcr-1 to -5 was carried out using the multiplex PCR protocol, according to Rebelo et al., with some alterations [60]. Briefly, the multiplex PCR was divided into two: one for screening mcr-1 and mcr-3 and the second for mcr-2, mcr-4 and mcr-5. Screening of mcr-6 to -9 genes was performed according to Borowiak et al. [61], and mcr-10 was screened by simplex PCR using the in-house designed primers: mcr-10_fw [5′-ATTCCGTTTGTGCTGGTTGC-3′] and mcr-10_rv [5′-AACATACAGGGCACCGAGAC-3′] and the following conditions: initial denaturation at 95 °C for 60 s, followed by 30 cycles of denaturation at 95 °C for 30 s, annealing at 58 °C for 30 s and elongation at 72 °C for 60 s, and a final cycle of elongation at 72 °C for 10 min. The mcr-10 amplicon size was 707 base pairs.
Identification of the resistance genes was confirmed by nucleotide sequencing of the amplicons (Stabvida, Caparica, Portugal).

4.4. Conjugation Assay and Plasmid Replicon Typing

Conjugation experiments were performed to determine the transferability of mcr genes using sodium azide-resistant E. coli J53 as a recipient strain at a bacterial cell ratio 1:10. Transconjugants were selected on Mueller Hinton (MH) Agar (Liofilchem, Roseto degli Abruzzi, Italy) plates supplemented with sodium azide (150 mg/L; Scharlab, Barcelona, Spain) and colistin (2 mg/L). The success of conjugation was further confirmed by mcr-1-PCR detection and colistin susceptibility testing by the microdilution method in transconjugants. Conjugation frequency (CF) was determined as the number of transconjugants per recipient cell.
Incompatibility groups were identified among mcr-1-borne plasmids carried by transconjugants by PCR-based replicon typing, using eighteen pairs of primers, as previously described [62].

4.5. Determination of Growth Rates

Growth rates of E. coli J53 and 14 transconjugants carrying the mcr-1-bearing IncH12, IncHI1, IncP IncN, IncI1, FIB plasmids and blaTEM-1, blaCTX-M-1 and blaCTX-M-15 genes were evaluated by measuring the optical density (OD) at 600 nm. Bacterial strains were inoculated in antibiotic-free and in 4 mg/L colistin-containing Luria-Bertani (LB) broth (Liofilchem, Roseto degli Abruzzi, Italy) at a 1:100 ratio. Bacterial growth was recorded by monitoring OD600 every 30 min for seven h and then at 8, 9, 10, 12, 24 and 30 h. The kinetics is expressed in a specific growth rate constant (µ).
Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 8 software (GraphPad San Diego, CA, USA). The differences were assessed using paired, two-tailed t-test and ANOVA test. p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

4.6. Plasmid Stability Assay

The stability of mcr-1-bourne plasmids was investigated in vitro, as previously described [63]. Briefly, 10 µL of overnight cultures of six transconjugants and their donors were inoculated in 10 mL of antibiotic-free LB broth (1:1000 ratio). Sub-culturing was performed after 24 h of incubation at 37 °C in an orbital shaker at 120 rpm and repeated for 10 consecutive days. Each day, the culture broths were serially diluted and plated both onto antibiotic-free and 4 mg/L colistin-containing MH agar once 8 mg/L was the lowest MIC value found among these strains.
The percentage of plasmid retention was calculated by dividing the number of colonies on colistin-containing MH agar by the number of colonies on antibiotic-free MH agar.

5. Conclusions

We demonstrate that the prevalence of mcr genes might be underestimated due to the slow growth of colistin-resistant bacteria in phenotypic screening, suggesting the re-evaluation of reliable guidelines for epidemiological purposes. Colistin withdrawal from intensive farm production will not completely lead to a decrease of mcr-1 levels since the reversal of colistin resistance mediated by mcr genes is not straightforward.
The results highlight the need of continuous surveillance of foodborne pathogens and implementation or improvement of antibiotic stewardship in animal production since it promotes the emergence of bacteria carrying important clinical resistance genes, which can enter the food chain and human gut. These data are important because they can provide a basis for the development of national policies, and they can help guide the risk of colistin resistance management and assess the effect on animal, environmental and public health of possible interventions following a One Health perspective. For efficient monitoring systems at the national level, coordination between the many stakeholders is essential.
With the application of sufficient science-based risk management policies that adhere to transdisciplinary recommendations, the One Health concept is more crucial than ever to better control colistin resistance at the interface between the human, animal and environment with the goal of achieving a balance between the need to protect public health and the potential impact of risk management measures on animal health.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.J.d.S., S.D. and C.P.; methodology, T.L., D.L. and A.H.; formal analysis, T.L., G.J.d.S. and S.D.; investigation, T.L.; resources, G.J.d.S. and F.R.; writing—original draft preparation, T.L.; writing—review and editing, T.L., G.J.d.S., S.D., F.R. and C.P.; supervision, G.J.d.S., S.D. and C.P.; project administration, G.J.d.S.; funding acquisition, G.J.d.S., S.D. and C.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the Faculty of Pharmacy of the University of Coimbra; and FEDER funds through the “Programa Operacional Factores de Competitividade—COMPETE 2020” and by National Funds from “FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia no âmbito do projecto Estratégico: UID/NEU/04539/2013”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Tiago Lima acknowledges to Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) for his Ph.D. Grant SFRH/BD/132555/2017.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. WHO. Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance. Available online: https://www.who.int/antimicrobial-resistance/publications/global-action-plan/en/ (accessed on 10 October 2019).
  2. CDC. Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/pdf/threats-report/2019-ar-threats-report-508.pdf (accessed on 10 December 2019).
  3. Economou, V.; Gousia, P. Agriculture and food animals as a source of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria. Infect. Drug Resist. 2015, 8, 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Lima, T.; Fernandes, L.; Matias, M.; Mateus, A.; Silveira, E.; Domingues, S.; Pomba, C.; Da Silva, G.J. Longitudinal Study Detects the Co-Carriage of ESBL and mcr-1 and -4 Genes in Escherichia coli Strains in a Portuguese Farrow-to-Finish Swine Herd. Animals 2022, 12, 2209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Rhouma, M.; Beaudry, F.; Theriault, W.; Letellier, A. Colistin in Pig Production: Chemistry, Mechanism of Antibacterial Action, Microbial Resistance Emergence, and One Health Perspectives. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 1789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. EMA. Updated Advice on the Use of Colistin Products in Animals within the European Union: Development of Resistance and Possible Impact on Human and Animal Health—EMA/CVMP/CHMP/231573/2016; EMA: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  7. European Medicines Agency. Categorisation of Antibiotics in the European Union; EMA/CVMP/CHMP/682198/2017; European Medicines Agency: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  8. Rawat, D.; Nair, D. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in Gram Negative Bacteria. J. Glob. Infect. Dis. 2010, 2, 263–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. WHO. Critically Important Antimicrobials for Human Medicine—3rd Rev. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/77376/;jsessionid=0C947CA333F9F82CF7708F537AE6FB85?sequence=1 (accessed on 10 October 2019).
  10. Lima, T.; Domingues, S.; Da Silva, G.J. Plasmid-Mediated Colistin Resistance in Salmonella enterica: A Review. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Zafer, M.M.; El-Mahallawy, H.A.; Abdulhak, A.; Amin, M.A.; Al-Agamy, M.H.; Radwan, H.H. Emergence of colistin resistance in multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli strains isolated from cancer patients. Ann. Clin. Microbiol. Antimicrob. 2019, 18, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Pragasam, A.K.; Shankar, C.; Veeraraghavan, B.; Biswas, I.; Nabarro, L.E.; Inbanathan, F.Y.; George, B.; Verghese, S. Molecular Mechanisms of Colistin Resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae Causing Bacteremia from India-A First Report. Front. Microbiol. 2016, 7, 2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Liu, Y.Y.; Wang, Y.; Walsh, T.R.; Yi, L.X.; Zhang, R.; Spencer, J.; Doi, Y.; Tian, G.; Dong, B.; Huang, X.; et al. Emergence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance mechanism MCR-1 in animals and human beings in China: A microbiological and molecular biological study. Lancet. Infect. Dis. 2016, 16, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hadjadj, L.; Baron, S.A.; Olaitan, A.O.; Morand, S.; Rolain, J.M. Co-occurrence of Variants of mcr-3 and mcr-8 Genes in a Klebsiella pneumoniae Isolate From Laos. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 2720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Fournier, C.; Aires-de-Sousa, M.; Nordmann, P.; Poirel, L. Occurrence of CTX-M-15- and MCR-1-producing Enterobacterales in pigs in Portugal: Evidence of direct links with antibiotic selective pressure. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2019, 55, 105802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Manageiro, V.; Clemente, L.; Romao, R.; Silva, C.; Vieira, L.; Ferreira, E.; Canica, M. IncX4 plasmid carrying the new mcr-1.9 gene variant in a CTX-M-8-producing Escherichia coli isolate recovered from swine. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Wang, C.; Feng, Y.; Liu, L.; Wei, L.; Kang, M.; Zong, Z. Identification of novel mobile colistin resistance gene mcr-10. Emerg. Microbes Infect. 2020, 9, 508–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Andersson, D.I. The biological cost of mutational antibiotic resistance: Any practical conclusions? Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2006, 9, 461–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Humphrey, B.; Thomson, N.R.; Thomas, C.M.; Brooks, K.; Sanders, M.; Delsol, A.A.; Roe, J.M.; Bennett, P.M.; Enne, V.I. Fitness of Escherichia coli strains carrying expressed and partially silent IncN and IncP1 plasmids. BMC Microbiol. 2012, 12, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Andersson, D.I.; Hughes, D. Antibiotic resistance and its cost: Is it possible to reverse resistance? Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 8, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lima, T.; Domingues, S.; Da Silva, G.J. Manure as a Potential Hotspot for Antibiotic Resistance Dissemination by Horizontal Gene Transfer Events. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, Y.; Liu, J.H. Monitoring colistin resistance in food animals, an urgent threat. Expert Rev. Anti-Infect. Ther. 2018, 16, 443–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Wang, Y.; Hu, Y.; Cao, J.; Bi, Y.; Lv, N.; Liu, F.; Liang, S.; Shi, Y.; Jiao, X.; Gao, G.F.; et al. Antibiotic resistance gene reservoir in live poultry markets. J. Infect. 2019, 78, 445–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Clemente, L.; Manageiro, V.; Correia, I.; Amaro, A.; Albuquerque, T.; Themudo, P.; Ferreira, E.; Canica, M. Revealing mcr-1-positive ESBL-producing Escherichia coli strains among Enterobacteriaceae from food-producing animals (bovine, swine and poultry) and meat (bovine and swine), Portugal, 2010–2015. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2019, 296, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ling, Z.; Yin, W.; Shen, Z.; Wang, Y.; Shen, J.; Walsh, T.R. Epidemiology of mobile colistin resistance genes mcr-1 to mcr-9. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2020, 75, 3087–3095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Figueiredo, R.; Card, R.M.; Nunez, J.; Pomba, C.; Mendonca, N.; Anjum, M.F.; Da Silva, G.J. Detection of an mcr-1-encoding plasmid mediating colistin resistance in Salmonella enterica from retail meat in Portugal. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2016, 71, 2338–2340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Campos, J.; Cristino, L.; Peixe, L.; Antunes, P. MCR-1 in multidrug-resistant and copper-tolerant clinically relevant Salmonella 1,4,[5],12:i:-and S. Rissen clones in Portugal, 2011 to 2015. Euro Surveill. Bull. Eur. Sur Les Mal. Transm. = Eur. Commun. Dis. Bull. 2016, 21, 30270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Band, V.I.; Weiss, D.S. Heteroresistance: A cause of unexplained antibiotic treatment failure? PLoS Pathog. 2019, 15, e1007726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Brauner, A.; Fridman, O.; Gefen, O.; Balaban, N.Q. Distinguishing between resistance, tolerance and persistence to antibiotic treatment. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2016, 14, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kieffer, N.; Aires-de-Sousa, M.; Nordmann, P.; Poirel, L. High Rate of MCR-1-Producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae among Pigs, Portugal. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2017, 23, 2023–2029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Freitas-Silva, J.; Inacio, A.S.; Mourao, J.; Antunes, P.; Mendes, A.; de Carvalho, A.P.; Vasconcelos, V.; Peixe, L.; da Costa, P.M. Occurrence of mcr-1 in Escherichia coli from rabbits of intensive farming. Vet. Microbiol. 2018, 227, 78–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Agnoletti, F.; Brunetta, R.; Bano, L.; Drigo, I.; Mazzolini, E. Longitudinal study on antimicrobial consumption and resistance in rabbit farming. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2018, 51, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, X.; Zhai, Z.; Zhao, X.; Zhang, H.; Jiang, H.; Wang, X.; Wang, H.; Chang, W. Occurrence and characteristics of Escherichia coli mcr-1-like in rabbits in Shandong, China. Vet. Med. Sci. 2021, 7, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Argudin, M.A.; Deplano, A.; Meghraoui, A.; Dodemont, M.; Heinrichs, A.; Denis, O.; Nonhoff, C.; Roisin, S. Bacteria from Animals as a Pool of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes. Antibiotics 2017, 6, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Wang, R.; van Dorp, L.; Shaw, L.P.; Bradley, P.; Wang, Q.; Wang, X.; Jin, L.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, Y.; Rieux, A.; et al. The global distribution and spread of the mobilized colistin resistance gene mcr-1. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tong, H.; Liu, J.; Yao, X.; Jia, H.; Wei, J.; Shao, D.; Liu, K.; Qiu, Y.; Ma, Z.; Li, B. High carriage rate of mcr-1 and antimicrobial resistance profiles of mcr-1-positive Escherichia coli isolates in swine faecal samples collected from eighteen provinces in China. Vet. Microbiol. 2018, 225, 53–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Catry, B.; Cavaleri, M.; Baptiste, K.; Grave, K.; Grein, K.; Holm, A.; Jukes, H.; Liebana, E.; Lopez Navas, A.; Mackay, D.; et al. Use of colistin-containing products within the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA): Development of resistance in animals and possible impact on human and animal health. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2015, 46, 297–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Sun, J.; Zhang, H.; Liu, Y.H.; Feng, Y. Towards Understanding MCR-like Colistin Resistance. Trends Microbiol. 2018, 26, 794–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Li, B.; Ke, B.; Zhao, X.; Guo, Y.; Wang, W.; Wang, X.; Zhu, H. Antimicrobial Resistance Profile of mcr-1 Positive Clinical Isolates of Escherichia coli in China From 2013 to 2016. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Burow, E.; Rostalski, A.; Harlizius, J.; Gangl, A.; Simoneit, C.; Grobbel, M.; Kollas, C.; Tenhagen, B.A.; Kasbohrer, A. Antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli from pigs from birth to slaughter and its association with antibiotic treatment. Prev. Vet. Med. 2019, 165, 52–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Figueiredo, R.; Henriques, A.; Sereno, R.; Mendonca, N.; da Silva, G.J. Antimicrobial resistance and extended-spectrum beta-lactamases of Salmonella enterica serotypes isolated from livestock and processed food in Portugal: An update. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2015, 12, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Schulz, J.; Kemper, N.; Hartung, J.; Janusch, F.; Mohring, S.A.I.; Hamscher, G. Analysis of fluoroquinolones in dusts from intensive livestock farming and the co-occurrence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 5117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Huang, X.; Yu, L.; Chen, X.; Zhi, C.; Yao, X.; Liu, Y.; Wu, S.; Guo, Z.; Yi, L.; Zeng, Z.; et al. High Prevalence of Colistin Resistance and mcr-1 Gene in Escherichia coli Isolated from Food Animals in China. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Li, X.P.; Sun, R.Y.; Song, J.Q.; Fang, L.X.; Zhang, R.M.; Lian, X.L.; Liao, X.P.; Liu, Y.H.; Lin, J.; Sun, J. Within-host heterogeneity and flexibility of mcr-1 transmission in chicken gut. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2020, 55, 105806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Brauer, A.; Telling, K.; Laht, M.; Kalmus, P.; Lutsar, I.; Remm, M.; Kisand, V.; Tenson, T. Plasmid with Colistin Resistance Gene mcr-1 in Extended-Spectrum-beta-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli Strains Isolated from Pig Slurry in Estonia. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2016, 60, 6933–6936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gao, Y.; Lu, C.; Shen, D.; Liu, J.; Ma, Z.; Yang, B.; Ling, W.; Waigi, M.G. Elimination of the risks of colistin resistance gene (mcr-1) in livestock manure during composting. Environ. Int. 2019, 126, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Carroll, L.M.; Gaballa, A.; Guldimann, C.; Sullivan, G.; Henderson, L.O.; Wiedmann, M. Identification of Novel Mobilized Colistin Resistance Gene mcr-9 in a Multidrug-Resistant, Colistin-Susceptible Salmonella enterica Serotype Typhimurium Isolate. MBio 2019, 10, e00853-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Wang, Y.; Xu, C.; Zhang, R.; Chen, Y.; Shen, Y.; Hu, F.; Liu, D.; Lu, J.; Guo, Y.; Xia, X.; et al. Changes in colistin resistance and mcr-1 abundance in Escherichia coli of animal and human origins following the ban of colistin-positive additives in China: An epidemiological comparative study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020, 20, 1161–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Kyung-Hyo, D.; Jae-Won, B.; Wan-Kyu, L. Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles of Escherichia coli from Diarrheic Weaned Piglets after the Ban on Antibiotic Growth Promoters in Feed. Antibiotics 2020, 9, 755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Yang, Q.; Li, M.; Spiller, O.B.; Andrey, D.O.; Hinchliffe, P.; Li, H.; MacLean, C.; Niumsup, P.; Powell, L.; Pritchard, M.; et al. Balancing mcr-1 expression and bacterial survival is a delicate equilibrium between essential cellular defence mechanisms. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 2054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Ma, K.; Feng, Y.; Zong, Z. Fitness cost of a mcr-1-carrying IncHI2 plasmid. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0209706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Wu, J.; Dong, X.; Zhang, L.; Lin, Y.; Yang, K. Reversing Antibiotic Resistance Caused by Mobile Resistance Genes of High Fitness Cost. mSphere 2021, 6, e0035621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Li, W.; Liu, Z.; Yin, W.; Yang, L.; Qiao, L.; Song, S.; Ling, Z.; Zheng, R.; Wu, C.; Wang, Y.; et al. MCR Expression Conferring Varied Fitness Costs on Host Bacteria and Affecting Bacteria Virulence. Antibiotics 2021, 10, 872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Shen, C.; Zhong, L.L.; Yang, Y.; Doi, Y.; Paterson, D.L.; Stoesser, N.; Ma, F.; El-Sayed Ahmed, M.A.E.; Feng, S.; Huang, S.; et al. Dynamics of mcr-1 prevalence and mcr-1-positive Escherichia coli after the cessation of colistin use as a feed additive for animals in China: A prospective cross-sectional and whole genome sequencing-based molecular epidemiological study. Lancet Microbe 2020, 1, e34–e43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wu, R.; Yi, L.X.; Yu, L.F.; Wang, J.; Liu, Y.; Chen, X.; Lv, L.; Yang, J.; Liu, J.H. Fitness Advantage of mcr-1-Bearing IncI2 and IncX4 Plasmids in Vitro. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Grimont, P.A.; Weill, F.X. Antigenic formulae of the Salmonella serovars. WHO Collab. Cent. Ref. Res. Salmonella 2007, 9, 1–166. [Google Scholar]
  57. EUCAST. Breakpoint Tables for Interpretation of MICs and Zone Diameters, Version 9.0. 2019. Available online: https://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Breakpoint_tables/v_9.0_Breakpoint_Tables.pdf (accessed on 4 October 2022).
  58. Nordmann, P.; Jayol, A.; Poirel, L. A Universal Culture Medium for Screening Polymyxin-Resistant Gram-Negative Isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2016, 54, 1395–1399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  59. Mendonca, N.; Leitao, J.; Manageiro, V.; Ferreira, E.; Canica, M. Spread of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase CTX-M-producing Escherichia coli clinical isolates in community and nosocomial environments in Portugal. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2007, 51, 1946–1955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Rebelo, A.R.; Bortolaia, V.; Kjeldgaard, J.S.; Pedersen, S.K.; Leekitcharoenphon, P.; Hansen, I.M.; Guerra, B.; Malorny, B.; Borowiak, M.; Hammerl, J.A.; et al. Multiplex PCR for detection of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance determinants, mcr-1, mcr-2, mcr-3, mcr-4 and mcr-5 for surveillance purposes. Euro Surveill. Bull. Eur. Sur Les Mal. Transm. Eur. Commun. Dis. Bull. 2018, 23, 17-00672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Borowiak, M.; Baumann, B.; Fischer, J.; Thomas, K.; Deneke, C.; Hammerl, J.A.; Szabo, I.; Malorny, B. Development of a Novel mcr-6 to mcr-9 Multiplex PCR and Assessment of mcr-1 to mcr-9 Occurrence in Colistin-Resistant Salmonella enterica Isolates From Environment, Feed, Animals and Food (2011-2018) in Germany. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Carattoli, A.; Bertini, A.; Villa, L.; Falbo, V.; Hopkins, K.L.; Threlfall, E.J. Identification of plasmids by PCR-based replicon typing. J. Microbiol. Methods 2005, 63, 219–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Bryksin, A.V.; Matsumura, I. Rational design of a plasmid origin that replicates efficiently in both gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e13244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Antibiotics 11 01356 g001 550
Figure 1. Growth kinetics assay results. Growth kinetics assays revealed that transconjugants have a mean growth rate of 1.66 in absence of COL (blue bars) and 1.32 in presence of COL (purple bars), p-value = 0.0003.
Figure 1. Growth kinetics assay results. Growth kinetics assays revealed that transconjugants have a mean growth rate of 1.66 in absence of COL (blue bars) and 1.32 in presence of COL (purple bars), p-value = 0.0003.
Antibiotics 11 01356 g001
Antibiotics 11 01356 g002a 550Antibiotics 11 01356 g002b 550
Figure 2. Stability of mcr-1 plasmids. Assessment of E. coli donor strains (A) and its transconjugants (B) over 10 days in the absence of colistin.
Figure 2. Stability of mcr-1 plasmids. Assessment of E. coli donor strains (A) and its transconjugants (B) over 10 days in the absence of colistin.
Antibiotics 11 01356 g002aAntibiotics 11 01356 g002b
Table
Table 1. Origin of Escherichia coli and serovar of Salmonella enterica isolates. The numbers at the end of table are the number of strains.
Table 1. Origin of Escherichia coli and serovar of Salmonella enterica isolates. The numbers at the end of table are the number of strains.
SourceE. coli
(n = 98)		S. enterica
(n = 142)
Poultry S. Typhimurium19
S. Enteritidis14
S. Anatum11
S. Infantis11
S. Havana10
S. 4,12:i:-9
S. Brandenburg7
S. Typhimurium -like6
S. Cerro4
S. Indiana4
S. Lexington4
S. Bredeney3
S. Rissen 3
S. Virchow3
S. Kentucky2
S. Mbandaka2
S. Tennessee2
S. 9,46:-:-1
S. 3,15:z10:1
S. Salamae 4(5),12:b-1
S. Agona 1
S. Bardo1
S. Berta1
S. Hadar1
S. Kottbus1
S. Llandoff1
S. Newport1
S. Ohio1
S. Seftenberg1
S. Schwarzengrund1
Not typed6
77 133
Swine S. Derby2
S. Typhimurium1
Not typed4
16 7
Rabbit3--
Sheep2--
Animal feed-Not typed1
Bovine-S. Anatum1
Table
Table 2. Frequency of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica according to biological, food and environmental samples.
Table 2. Frequency of Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica according to biological, food and environmental samples.
E. coli
(n = 98)		S. enterica
(n = 142)
Boots swabs 58
Carcasses/fresh meat4220
Ready to cook meat 18
Organs402
Rectal swabs6
Faeces624
Incubator/bed swabs210
Neck skin 5
Abscess2
Frozen meat 2
Eggs 2
Animal feed 1
Table
Table 3. Origin, phenotypic and genetic characteristics of antimicrobial resistance of mcr-1 positive and/or ESBL-producing E. coli isolates.
Table 3. Origin, phenotypic and genetic characteristics of antimicrobial resistance of mcr-1 positive and/or ESBL-producing E. coli isolates.
IsolateSource of IsolatesDate of IsolationGrowth in Agar a (h)Resistance GenesColistin MIC b (mg/L)Antimicrobial Resistance cConjugation Frequency (Cells per Recipient)mcr-1 Plasmid Typing
E. coli 162Chicken organs 12/201724mcr-18AMC; AML; TE; CIP10−2P
E. coli 166Fowl carcasse01/201824mcr-1; blaTEM-116AMC; AML; TE; CIP10−4HI2; P
E. coli 170Turkey carcasse10/201724mcr-1; blaTEM-18AMC; AML; TE; CIP10−2P
E. coli 176Rabbit organs11/201724mcr-116AML; TE; CIP10−6I1/Iγ
E. coli 177Rabbit organs11/201724mcr-132AML; TE; CIP10−7HI2
E. coli 182Chicken organs11/2017No growthblaTEM-1; blaCTX-M-1N.A.ATM; CTX; AML; TE; CIPn.a.n.a.
E. coli 185Swine organs11/201724mcr-116AML; TE; CIP10−7HI2
E. coli 186Swine organs11/201748mcr-1; blaTEM-1; blaCTX-M-1516ATM; CTX; AML; TE10−5HI2
E. coli 189Swine organs11/201724mcr-1; blaCTX-M-132ATM; CTX; AML; TE; CIP 10−4F (FIB)
E. coli 206Turkey organs11/201748blaTEM-1; blaOXY-2N.A.AMC, AML; TE; CIP; CEXn.a.n.a.
E. coli 212Swine rectal swab12/201724mcr-116AML; TE; CIP10−3n.d.
E. coli 216Swine rectal swab12/201724mcr-116AMC; AML; TE; CIP10−4N
E. coli 219Piglet faeces12/201724mcr-116AML; TE10−2N
E. coli 220Piglet faeces12/201724mcr-18AML; TE10−2HI1
E. coli 221Swine rectal swab12/201724mcr-116AML; TE; CIP10−3HI1
E. coli 222Swine rectal swab12/201748mcr-18AML; TE10−2n.d.
E. coli 226Poultry carcass01/201824mcr-116AML; TE; CIP10−3n.d.
a EMB supplemented with 3.5 mg/L colistin; b MICs for donors and transconjugants; c Abbreviations: AMC—Amoxicillin/Clavulanic acid; AML—Amoxicillin; TE—Tetracycline; CIP—Ciprofloxacin; ATM—Aztreonam; CTX—Cefotaxime; CEX—Cefalexin; n.a.—not applicable; n.d.—not determined.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lima, T.; Loureiro, D.; Henriques, A.; Ramos, F.; Pomba, C.; Domingues, S.; da Silva, G.J. Occurrence and Biological Cost of mcr-1-Carrying Plasmids Co-harbouring Beta-Lactamase Resistance Genes in Zoonotic Pathogens from Intensive Animal Production. Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1356. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11101356

AMA Style

Lima T, Loureiro D, Henriques A, Ramos F, Pomba C, Domingues S, da Silva GJ. Occurrence and Biological Cost of mcr-1-Carrying Plasmids Co-harbouring Beta-Lactamase Resistance Genes in Zoonotic Pathogens from Intensive Animal Production. Antibiotics. 2022; 11(10):1356. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11101356

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lima, Tiago, Dina Loureiro, Ana Henriques, Fernando Ramos, Constança Pomba, Sara Domingues, and Gabriela Jorge da Silva. 2022. "Occurrence and Biological Cost of mcr-1-Carrying Plasmids Co-harbouring Beta-Lactamase Resistance Genes in Zoonotic Pathogens from Intensive Animal Production" Antibiotics 11, no. 10: 1356. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11101356

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