* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Abstract
Nutriepigenomics wikipedia , lookup
Nucleic acid analogue wikipedia , lookup
Molecular Inversion Probe wikipedia , lookup
Comparative genomic hybridization wikipedia , lookup
Nucleic acid double helix wikipedia , lookup
SNP genotyping wikipedia , lookup
Cell-free fetal DNA wikipedia , lookup
DNA vaccination wikipedia , lookup
Non-coding DNA wikipedia , lookup
DNA supercoil wikipedia , lookup
Epigenomics wikipedia , lookup
Metagenomics wikipedia , lookup
Designer baby wikipedia , lookup
Deoxyribozyme wikipedia , lookup
Vectors in gene therapy wikipedia , lookup
Molecular cloning wikipedia , lookup
Site-specific recombinase technology wikipedia , lookup
Cre-Lox recombination wikipedia , lookup
Therapeutic gene modulation wikipedia , lookup
Genomic library wikipedia , lookup
Genetically modified crops wikipedia , lookup
Genetic engineering wikipedia , lookup
Helitron (biology) wikipedia , lookup
Extrachromosomal DNA wikipedia , lookup
No-SCAR (Scarless Cas9 Assisted Recombineering) Genome Editing wikipedia , lookup
Microevolution wikipedia , lookup
Abstract Background: In order to assess the possibility that antibiotic resistance genes are being transferred from animals to environmental bacteria, non-enteric Ampicillin resistant (AmpR) bacteria were isolated from a cattle farm, a meat packing plant sewage lagoon, and the Mississippi river. Methods: Organisms were isolated on APT media containing 50 mg/L Amp, screened for cefinase activity, and the inability to ferment lactose to acid and gas in broth. MIC for Amp was determined using Etest strips, and a profile of resistance to 17 antibiotics was determined using the Kirby-Bauer agar diffusion test. Chromosomal DNA was extracted by phenol:chloroform separation in the presence of CTAB detergent and by DNeasy. Plasmid extractions were performed with the Qiagen mini-prep kit and the Wizard mini-prep kit. These DNAs were used in Southern hybridization experiments with probes for class A (TEM1-type) and class B (metallo-) -lactamases. Six of the isolates were identified by sequencing of PCR amplified 16S rDNA (GenBank accession numbers). Results: A total of 17 non-enteric strains were studied, and 14 had MIC values greater than 256 mg/L. Pseudomonas sp. FDM13 (AY464123), from the sewage lagoon, contained plasmid DNA, but was not capable of transforming E. coli strains INVF’ or XL10 Gold. No plasmid DNA was detected in the 16 isolates from the cattle farm and the Mississippi river. None of the chromosomal DNAs, or FDM13 plasmid DNA hybridized with the TEM1 probe. Pseudomonas sp. CPE30 (AY484469), Aeromonas sp. WC56 (AY484470), Morganella sp. CPD30 (AY464464), Pseudomonas sp. ACP14 (AY464463), and Chryseobacterium ACP12 (AY464462) showed the strongest hybridization with the metallo-β-lactamase probe. Conclusion: The lack of R-plasmids and the failure of hybridization with the TEM1 probe suggest that lateral gene transmission from enteric bacteria associated with animals to environmental bacteria is not taking place. On the other hand, environmental bacteria that show a high degree of resistance to Amp were widespread, and resistance in these bacteria may be due to zinchydrolases, or other yet unidentified resistance mechanisms. Antibiotic Resistance Transfer in Agriculture Use of antibiotics for feed and treatment selects for AbR phenotype Cow Enteric Bacteria ? Resistance evolved over time Class B metallo--lactamase genes Manure Fecal Coliform Class A TEM bla genes Non-enteric soil bacteria ? Non-enteric soil bacteria Lateral gene transfer – Conjugation, transformation, transduction Investigation into Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria in Agricultural Settings Hypothesis 1 - Resistance due to lateral gene transfer Hypothesis 2 (null) Resistance evolved in soil microorganisms – Resistance highly specific – Broader resistance to to antibiotics used – Resistance genes may be carried on plasmids – -Lactamase gene may resemble class A TEM bla found in enterics variety of antibiotics encountered in soil over time – Resistance may be plasmid or chromosomally encoded – Class B Metallo- Lactamase observed in Caulobacter may be present Water Collection Sites Meat Cattle farm in Swinton, MO. Antibiotic use reported as penicillin only. 100 ml water samples were taken from 3 ponds and a creek adjacent to the farm ( ) UTM 16 coordinates shown for map datum NAD 27 in CONUS. ArcMap used to plot the points onto the topographic map. Isolation Approach Ampicillin resistance – Plated on APT agar w/ 50 g/ml ampicillin – Single colony taken from each plate with growth, unless additional morphotypes present – Screened for cefinase activity Non-coliform status (accepted if one of the following are true) – Gram positive – No lactose fermentation on EMB – No gas from lactose broth Organisms Isolate Source Tentative Identification GenBank Accession Number ACP12 Cattle Pond 1 Chryseobacterium AY464462 ACP14 Cattle Pond 1 Pseudomonas AY464463 CPA20 Cattle Pond 2 CPA30 Cattle Pond 3 Pseudomonas Not yet prepared CPB30 Cattle Pond 3 CPC20 Cattle Pond 2 Pseudomonas Not yet prepared CPC32 Cattle Pond 3 CPC30 Cattle Pond 3 CPD30 Cattle Pond 3 Morganella AY464464 CPD32 Cattle Pond 3 Escherichia senegalensis Not yet prepared CPE30 Cattle Pond 3 Pseudomonas AY484469 WC20 Wolf Creek WC24 Wolf Creek WC42 Wolf Creek WC56 Wolf Creek Aeromonas AY484470 MR55 Mississippi River FDM13 Meat-packing plant sewage Pseudomonas syringiae AY464123 Documentation of Resistance MIC of Ampicillin for isolates was determined with Etest strips (upper left) – Result: 14 of the isolates had a MIC of greater than 256 µg/ml. CPB30 (96µg/ml) and CPC32 (128 µg/ml) were slightly lower. Kirby-Bauer Agar diffusion tests (upper right) were used to test for resistance to lactam (Oxacillin, Cefaclor, Cefazolin, Cefotaxime, Imipenem, Carbenicillin )and non-lactam antibiotics (Levaquin, tetracycline, Polymyxin B, Erythromycin, Kanamycin, Streptomycin, Rifampin, Novobiocin). – Result 1: All of the isolates were resistant to at least 1 non--lactam antibiotic, and 14 were resistant to 2 or more. – Result 2: None of the isolates showed resistance to imipenem, suggesting no metallo- -lactamase activity. Comparison of Frequency of Resistance to Various Antibiotics Organisms used – Cattle farm isolates (organisms under study) – Reference organisms associated with soil (Lab teaching strains): B. cereus, B. megaterium, B. subtilis, B. brevis, B. pumilis, P. aeruginosa, P. putida, P. fluorescens, P. paucimobilis, P. stutzeri – Chat Pile Lead-mine tailings isolates (non-selected environmental isolates): 10 organisms including Rhodococcus, Pseudomonas, Streptomyces, Ochrobactrum, and Arthrobacter Antibiotics used – -lactam: Ampicillin, Carbenecillin, Cefazolin, Cephatoxime, Cefaclor – Non- -lactam: Erythromycin, Kanamycin, Polymyxin B, Streptomycin, Tetracycline Frequency of Resistance among Isolates by Antibiotic Group Organisms/Ab Susceptible Intermediate Resistant Total Reference/ βlactam 8 32 6 37 21 36 137 4 11 1 8 4 4 32 38 7 73 35 25 10 191 50 50 80 80 50 50 360 Reference/ Non-β-lactam Cattle Farm/βlactam Cattle Farm/ Non-β-lactam Chat Pile/ βlactam Chat Pile/Nonβ-lactam Total Chi-square Contingency Table Organism/Ab Susceptible Intermediate Resistant Total Reference / β-lactam 6.7 0.0 5.4 12.2a Reference / Non-βlactam 8.1 9.7 14.0 31.8b Cattle Farm/β-lactam 20.3 5.3 23.3 48.9 Cattle Farm/ Non-βlactam 1.1 0.1 1.1 2.3 Chat Pile/ β-lactam 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 Chat Pile/Non-β-lactam 14.1 0.0 9.9 24.1 Total 50.4 15.2 53.8 119.4c a significantly higher than expected, α=0.005, df=2, Fcrit= 10.6 b significantly lower than expected, α=0.005, df=2, Fcrit= 10.6 C significant variation among groups; α=0.005, df=10, Fcrit= 25.2 Antibiotic Testing Summary Non-imepenem resistance implies no metallo-lactamase activity Cattle farm isolates resistant to 3 or more classes of antibiotics suggesting exposure to more than just penicillin Cattle farm isolates are more resistant to -lactam than non- -lactam antibiotics, suggesting a specific mechanism of resistance Molecular Approaches Isolate plasmids Isolate chromosomal DNA Southern Blot performed on each isolate using probes for TEM and metallo-lactamases WC24 Plasmid DNA Isolation Studies DNA was isolated from each bacterium, as well as FDM13 23kbp (an antibiotic resistant 4kbp bacterium known to harbor 2kbp plasmids). glycosylated DNA, but no distinct bands No plasmids detected 500bp WC24 – Techniques used: Wizard miniprep (shown here), Qiagen spin kit, Qiagen miniprep kit – Smears likely due to 23kbp 4kbp 2kbp 500bp CPB30 WC20 WC56 WC42 16S rDNA Hybridization - Control 23kbp 2kbp 23kbp 2kbp 500bp CPD30 CPD32 500bp Chromosomal DNA was obtained with DNeasy kit 16s rDNA hybridization was used to determine if DNA was suitable for hybridization. RFLP can also be used to determine if some of the bacteria are similar or the same species. E.coli ACP12 EcoRI-digested Chromosomal DNA probed with a 1064 bp BstXI fragment of a putative metallo-βlactamase from G. metallireducens (positive control) ACP12 - 9kbp, WC56 - 3kbp, ACP14 - 9kbp and 8kbp, CPD30 8kbp and 6kbp, and CPE30 - 8kbp and 6kbp E. coli (negative control), WC24, CPA30, MR55, CPA20, and CPD32 showed non specific hybridization. CPB30, WC42, CPC20, CPC32, WC20, and CPC30, and reference strains showed no hybridization to this probe. CPD30 Metallo-ß-Lactamase Hybridization 23kbp * 4kbp 2kbp 500bp * * * * 23kbp 4kbp 2kbp 500bp E. coli CPD30 Lack of TEM1 Hybridization • EcoRI Chromosomal DNA was probed with a 540 DdeI internal fragment of the bla gene from pBR322. •Hem2B is plasmid DNA containing the bla gene (positive control). E. coli is negative control. •No hybridization with this probe was seen with any ampicillin resistant laboratory strains. Conclusion Chromosomal DNA did not hybridize with TEM1 probe. Interspecies gene transfer from enteric to environmental bacteria may not be occurring. Bacteria in the environment are already resistant to antibiotics and are more competitive than the transient fecal organisms. Conclusion Resistance may be due to metallo-βlactamase or some other unidentified mechanism. Pseudomonas resistant to cefotaxime, this resistance may be due to chromosomal AmpC. Acknowledgements Principal funding for this project came from the Southeast Missouri State University Grants and Research Funding Committee. Additional funding to support 16S rDNA sequencing costs came from the Southeast Missouri State University Undergraduate Research Program. Julie Rengel would like to thank Dr. Allan Bornstein and Dr. Jane Stephens for their support of undergraduate research. Funding for student travel was made available through the Southeast Missouri State University Student Professional Development program (Drs. Rick Burns and Christina Frazier). Co-authors not in attendance: Julie Rengel, Melanie Miller, Jennifer Arnold, and Josh Wolozynek Kimberleigh Foster’s thesis Committee: Dr. Bjorn Olesen and Dr. Allen Gathman Dr. Walt Lilly, Dr. John Scheibe, and Maija Bluma Dave Bridges for help with ARC Map