4.7 Article

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius among dogs in the description of novel SCCmec variants

期刊

VETERINARY MICROBIOLOGY
卷 213, 期 -, 页码 136-141

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2017.11.022

关键词

S. pseudintermedius; SCCmec variants; psi SCCmec(57395); Sri Lanka

资金

  1. National Research Council, Sri Lanka [14-105]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The presence and genetic characteristics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius (MRSP) in Sri Lanka was investigated to add additional insight into global spread, emergence and evolution of MRSP. A total of 234 samples from dogs visiting veterinary clinics were cultured for staphylococci and the genomes of the MRSP isolates were sequenced, to identify resistance genes, the multilocus sequence types (MLST) and spa types. From a questionnaire the history of antimicrobial treatment and patient information was obtained. S. pseudintermedius was isolated from 116/229 samples, eight of these were MRSP. Six MRSP CC45 isolates contained a pseudo-SCC element psi SCCmec(57395). Two isolates belonging to ST429 (CC761) and ST121 (CC121) contained novel variants of the SCCmec Type V(T) element. The elements were designated SCCmccV(T)(SL/066), that carried additional transposon-related genes, and SCCmecV(T)(SL/154) that carried a type III restriction modification system, a type 7 ccr gene complex, and a cadA coding sequence. Thirty-seven percent of the dogs received antimicrobial treatment at the time of sampling of which four dogs were MRSP-positive. The proportion of MRSP among S. pseudintermedius is low compared to other countries, despite the fact that in Sri Lanka antimicrobials for treatment of dogs are available over the counter. Important is the finding of novel type V(T) SCCmec elements, which further underlines the high recombination frequency of SCC elements. The psi SCCmec(57395) was found in isolates of CC45, which is the only sequence type of MRSP known to contain this pseudo-cassette.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据