Cargando…

Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle

Macrolides are the first-line treatment against bovine respiratory disease (BRD), and are also used to treat infections in humans. The macrolide, tylosin phosphate, is often included in the diet of cattle as a preventative for liver abscesses in many regions of the world outside of Europe. This stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zaheer, Rahat, Cook, Shaun R., Klima, Cassidy L., Stanford, Kim, Alexander, Trevor, Topp, Edward, Read, Ron R., McAllister, Tim A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3664329/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23750157
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00133
_version_ 1782271083896897536
author Zaheer, Rahat
Cook, Shaun R.
Klima, Cassidy L.
Stanford, Kim
Alexander, Trevor
Topp, Edward
Read, Ron R.
McAllister, Tim A.
author_facet Zaheer, Rahat
Cook, Shaun R.
Klima, Cassidy L.
Stanford, Kim
Alexander, Trevor
Topp, Edward
Read, Ron R.
McAllister, Tim A.
author_sort Zaheer, Rahat
collection PubMed
description Macrolides are the first-line treatment against bovine respiratory disease (BRD), and are also used to treat infections in humans. The macrolide, tylosin phosphate, is often included in the diet of cattle as a preventative for liver abscesses in many regions of the world outside of Europe. This study investigated the effects of administering macrolides to beef cattle either systemically through a single subcutaneous injection (therapeutic) or continuously in-feed (subtherapeutic), on the prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Mannheimia haemolytica and Enterococcus spp. isolated from the nasopharynx and faeces, respectively. Nasopharyngeal and faecal samples were collected weekly over 28 days from untreated beef steers and from steers injected once with tilmicosin or tulathromycin or continuously fed tylosin phosphate at dosages recommended by manufacturers. Tilmicosin and tulathromycin were effective in lowering (P < 0.05) the prevalence of M. haemolytica, whereas subtherapeutic tylosin had no effect. M. haemolytica isolated from control- and macrolide-treated animals were susceptible to macrolides as well as to other antibiotics. Major bacteria co-isolated with M. haemolytica from the nasopharynx included Pasteurella multocida, Staphylococcus spp., Acinetobacter spp., Escherichia coli and Bacillus spp. With the exception of M. haemolytica and P. multocida, erythromycin resistance was frequently found in other isolated species. Both methods of macrolide administration increased (P < 0.05) the proportion of erythromycin resistant enterococci within the population, which was comprised almost exclusively of Enterococcus hirae. Injectable macrolides impacted both respiratory and enteric microbes, whereas orally administered macrolides only influenced enteric bacteria.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3664329
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36643292013-06-07 Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle Zaheer, Rahat Cook, Shaun R. Klima, Cassidy L. Stanford, Kim Alexander, Trevor Topp, Edward Read, Ron R. McAllister, Tim A. Front Microbiol Microbiology Macrolides are the first-line treatment against bovine respiratory disease (BRD), and are also used to treat infections in humans. The macrolide, tylosin phosphate, is often included in the diet of cattle as a preventative for liver abscesses in many regions of the world outside of Europe. This study investigated the effects of administering macrolides to beef cattle either systemically through a single subcutaneous injection (therapeutic) or continuously in-feed (subtherapeutic), on the prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Mannheimia haemolytica and Enterococcus spp. isolated from the nasopharynx and faeces, respectively. Nasopharyngeal and faecal samples were collected weekly over 28 days from untreated beef steers and from steers injected once with tilmicosin or tulathromycin or continuously fed tylosin phosphate at dosages recommended by manufacturers. Tilmicosin and tulathromycin were effective in lowering (P < 0.05) the prevalence of M. haemolytica, whereas subtherapeutic tylosin had no effect. M. haemolytica isolated from control- and macrolide-treated animals were susceptible to macrolides as well as to other antibiotics. Major bacteria co-isolated with M. haemolytica from the nasopharynx included Pasteurella multocida, Staphylococcus spp., Acinetobacter spp., Escherichia coli and Bacillus spp. With the exception of M. haemolytica and P. multocida, erythromycin resistance was frequently found in other isolated species. Both methods of macrolide administration increased (P < 0.05) the proportion of erythromycin resistant enterococci within the population, which was comprised almost exclusively of Enterococcus hirae. Injectable macrolides impacted both respiratory and enteric microbes, whereas orally administered macrolides only influenced enteric bacteria. Frontiers Media S.A. 2013-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC3664329/ /pubmed/23750157 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00133 Text en Copyright © 2013 Zaheer, Cook, Klima, Stanford, Alexander, Topp, Read and McAllister. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc.
spellingShingle Microbiology
Zaheer, Rahat
Cook, Shaun R.
Klima, Cassidy L.
Stanford, Kim
Alexander, Trevor
Topp, Edward
Read, Ron R.
McAllister, Tim A.
Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
title Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
title_full Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
title_fullStr Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
title_full_unstemmed Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
title_short Effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in Mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
title_sort effect of subtherapeutic vs. therapeutic administration of macrolides on antimicrobial resistance in mannheimia haemolytica and enterococci isolated from beef cattle
topic Microbiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3664329/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23750157
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00133
work_keys_str_mv AT zaheerrahat effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT cookshaunr effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT klimacassidyl effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT stanfordkim effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT alexandertrevor effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT toppedward effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT readronr effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle
AT mcallistertima effectofsubtherapeuticvstherapeuticadministrationofmacrolidesonantimicrobialresistanceinmannheimiahaemolyticaandenterococciisolatedfrombeefcattle