Pokaż uproszczony rekord

Journal od Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

dc.contributor.authorYang, Dongsheng
dc.contributor.authorHeederik, Dick J. J.
dc.contributor.authorMevius, Dik J.
dc.contributor.authorScherpenisse, Peter
dc.contributor.authorLuiken, Roosmarijn E. C.
dc.contributor.authorVan Gompel, Liese
dc.contributor.authorSkarżyńska, Magdalena
dc.contributor.authorWadepohl, Katharina
dc.contributor.authorChauvin, Claire
dc.contributor.authorHeijnsbergen van, Eri
dc.contributor.authorWouters, Inge M.
dc.contributor.authorGreve, Gerdit D.
dc.contributor.authorJongerius-Gortemaker, Betty G. M.
dc.contributor.authorTersteeg-Zijderveld, Monique
dc.contributor.authorZając, Magdalena
dc.contributor.authorWasyl, Dariusz
dc.contributor.authorJuraschek, Katharina
dc.contributor.authorFischer, Jennie
dc.contributor.authorWagenaar, Jaap A.
dc.contributor.authorSmit, Lidwien A. M.
dc.contributor.authorSchmitt, Heike
dc.contributor.authoron behalf of the EFFORT consortium
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-23T11:36:47Z
dc.date.available2022-02-23T11:36:47Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifierhttps://dspace.piwet.pulawy.pl/xmlui/handle/123456789/233
dc.identifier.issn0305-7453
dc.identifier.urihttps://academic.oup.com/jac/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jac/dkac002/6513516?login=true
dc.description.abstractObjectives: The occurrence and zoonotic potential of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in pigs and broilers has been studied intensively in past decades. Here, we describe AMR levels of European pig and broiler farms and determine the potential risk factors. Methods: We collected faeces from 181 pig farms and 181 broiler farms in nine European countries. Real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) was used to quantify the relative abundance of four antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs) [aph(3′)-III, erm(B), sul2 and tet(W)] in these faeces samples. Information on antimicrobial use (AMU) and other farm characteristics was collected through a questionnaire. A mixed model using country and farm as random effects was performed to evaluate the relationship of AMR with AMU and other farm charac- teristics. The correlation between individual qPCR data and previously published pooled metagenomic data was evaluated. Variance component analysis was conducted to assess the variance contribution of all factors. Results: The highest abundance of ARG was for tet(W) in pig faeces and erm(B) in broiler faeces. In addition to the significant positive association between corresponding ARG and AMU levels, we also found on-farm biose- curity measures were associated with relative ARG abundance in both pigs and broilers. Between-country and between-farm variation can partially be explained by AMU. Different ARG targets may have different sample size requirements to represent the overall farm level precisely. Conclusions: qPCR is an efficient tool for targeted assessment of AMR in livestock-related samples. The AMR variation between samples was mainly contributed to by between-country, between-farm and within-farm dif- ferences, and then by on-farm AMU.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectdrug resistanceen_US
dc.subjectmicrobial fecesen_US
dc.subjectgenesen_US
dc.subjectsuidaeen_US
dc.subjectfarm animalsen_US
dc.subjectbiosecurityen_US
dc.titleRisk factors for the abundance of antimicrobial resistance genes aph(3′)-III, erm(B), sul2 and tet(W) in pig and broiler faeces in nine European countriesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitation2022
dcterms.titleJournal od Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkac002


Pliki tej pozycji

Thumbnail

Pozycja umieszczona jest w następujących kolekcjach

Pokaż uproszczony rekord