4.7 Article

The detection of fosfomycin resistance genes in Enterobacteriaceae from pets and their owners

Journal

VETERINARY MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 193, Issue -, Pages 67-71

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2016.07.019

Keywords

Fosfomycin resistance; fosA3 gene; Pet; Pet owners

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31422055]
  2. National Key Basic Research Program of China [2013CB127200]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of fosfomycin resistance and molecular characteristic of fosfomycin-resistant strains isolated from companion animals and their owners. A total of 171 samples collected from pets and pet owners in a Chinese veterinary teaching hospital were screened for the presence of phenotype and genotype of fosfomycin-resistance by selective media containing fosfomycin and PCR & sequencing. Among 171 samples tested, nineteen isolates were resistant to fosfomycin. Sixteen and three of these fosfomycin-resistant isolates were positive for fosA3 and fosA genes, respectively. The fosA3 gene was detected both in chromosomes and plasmids in bacteria. All of the fosA3 gene-positive isolates except one were CTX-M producers and nearly half (7/16) of them also harbored the rmtB gene. The fosA3 gene-carrying plasmids, which were readily transferrable to recipient E. coli J53 by conjugation, conferred resistance to multiple antimicrobial agents. Genetic structures were IS26-385bp-fosA3-1810bp-IS26 (n=11) and IS26-385bp-fosA3-588bp-IS26 (n=5). Molecular typing indicated that two fosA3-positive isolates from dogs were genetically identical to the isolates from the pet owners. Our results indicated that active transmission of fosA3-mediated fosfomycin resistance has occurred among Enterobacteriaceae isolated from pets and their owners by both horizontal transfer and clonal expansion. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available