Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T19:37:03.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains isolated from mastitis outbreaks in dairy herds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2007

Shlomo Sela ,
Orly Hammer-Muntz ,
Oleg Krifucks ,
Riki Pinto ,
Limor Weisblit  and
Gabriel Leitner
Shlomo Sela
Affiliation:
Microbial Food-Safety Research Unit, Department of Food Sciences, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, PO Box 6, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
Orly Hammer-Muntz
Affiliation:
Microbial Food-Safety Research Unit, Department of Food Sciences, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, PO Box 6, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
Oleg Krifucks
Affiliation:
National Mastitis Reference Center, Kimron Veterinary Institute, PO Box 12, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
Riki Pinto
Affiliation:
Microbial Food-Safety Research Unit, Department of Food Sciences, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, PO Box 6, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
Limor Weisblit
Affiliation:
National Mastitis Reference Center, Kimron Veterinary Institute, PO Box 12, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
Gabriel Leitner*
Affiliation:
National Mastitis Reference Center, Kimron Veterinary Institute, PO Box 12, Bet Dagan 50250, Israel
*
*For correspondence; e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During 1998–2002 outbreaks of Pseudomonas sp. mastitis among more than 15 Israeli sheep and goat dairy herds were observed. The animals presented a wide spectrum of clinical signs ranging from subclinical to gangrenous udder. Ninety-five isolates of Pseudomonas sp. were isolated from clinical and subclinical mastitis of 47 sheep, 17 goats and 31 cows from 34 different farms. Biochemical and genetic analyses revealed that the all-causative organism was Ps. aeruginosa. Selections of isolates were further analysed on the bases of colony morphology, biochemical traits and capacity to form biofilm. All the strains displayed a wide heterogeneity in all the tested traits. No association between bacterial isolates, farm of origin and type of animal was found. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and cluster analysis showed no clonality among the tested strains. The present study revealed that a large variety of Ps. aeruginosa strains may cause mastitis outbreaks in sheep, goat and cattle in Israel.

Keywords

Pseudomonas aeruginosamastitissheepgoatscattle
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 74 , Issue 4 , November 2007 , pp. 425 - 429
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altschul, SF, Madden, TL, Schaffer, AA, Zhang, J, Zhang, Z, Miller, W & Lipman, DJ 1997 Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Research 25 3389–3402CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amann, RI, Ludwig, W & Schleifer, KH 1995 Phylogenetic identification and in situ detection of individual microbial cells without cultivation. Microbiological Reviews 59 143–169CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bergonier, D, de Cremoux, R, Rupp, R, Lagriffoul, G & Berthelot, X 2003 Mastitis of dairy small ruminants. Veterinary Research 34 689–716CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bertrand, X, Thouverez, M, Talon, D, Boillot, A, Capellier, G, Floriot, C & Helias, JP 2001 Endemicity, molecular diversity and colonisation routes of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in intensive care units. Intensive Care Medicine 27 1263–1268CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costerton, JW, Stewart, PS & Greenberg, EP 1999 Bacterial biofilms: a common cause of persistent infections. Science 284 1318–1322CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Douglas, MW, Mulholland, K, Denyer, V & Gottlieb, T 2001 Multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa outbreak in a burns unit – an infection control study. Burns 27 131–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erskine, RJ, Walker, RD, Bolin, CA, Bartlett, PC & White, DG 2002 Trends in antibacterial susceptibility of mastitis pathogens during a seven-year period. Journal of Dairy Science 85 1111–1118CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grundmann, H, Schneider, C, Hartung, D, Daschner, FD & Pitt, TL 1995 Discriminatory power of three DNA-based typing techniques for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 33 528–534CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall-Stoodley, L & Stoodley, P 2005 Biofilm formation and dispersal and the transmission of human pathogens. Trends in Microbiology 13 7–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartas, J, Hibble, M & Sriprakash, KS 1998 Simplification of a Locus-Specific DNA Typing Method (Vir Typing) for Streptococcus pyogenes. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 36 1428–1429CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan, SJ, Gonzalez, NR, Harmon, JR, Nickerson, CS, Oliver, PS, Pankey, JW & Smith, KL 1999 Laboratory Handbook on Bovine Mastitis. Revised edition. Madison WI, USA: NMC Inc.Google Scholar
Høiby, N 1977 Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in cystic fibrosis. Acta Pathologica Microbiologica Scandinavica Section B 28 1–96Google Scholar
International Dairy Federation 1985 Laboratory Methods for Use in Mastitis Work. IDF Document 132. International Dairy Federation, Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Jalal, S, Ciofu, O, Hoiby, N, Gotoh, N & Wretlind, B 2000 Molecular mechanisms of fluoroquinolone resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 44 710–712CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaufmann, ME 1998 Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. In Molecular Bacteriology: Protocols and Clinical Applications, pp. 33–50 (Eds Woodford, N & Johnson, AP). Totowa NJ, USA: Humana PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirk, JH & Bartlett, PC 1984 Nonclinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa mastitis in a dairy herd. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 184 671–673Google Scholar
Las Heras, A, Vela, AI, Fernandez, E, Casamayor, A, Dominguez, L & Fernandez-Garayzabal, JF 2002 DNA macrorestriction analysis by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from mastitis in dairy sheep. Veterinary Record 151 670–672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NCCLS 1999 Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilation susceptibility test for veterinary antimicrobial agents. Approved standard. M31-A. NCCLS, Wayne Pa, USAGoogle Scholar
Ojeniyi, B, Petersen, US & Høiby, N 1993 Comparison of genome fingerprinting with conventional typing methods used on Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from cystic fibrosis patients. Acta Pathologica, Microbiologic, et immunologica Scandinavica 101 168–175CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Toole, GA, Pratt, LA, Watnick, PI, Newman, DK, Weaver, VB & Kolter, R 1999 Genetic approaches to the study of biofilms. Methods in Enzymology 310 91–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsek, MR & Fuqua, C 2003 Biofilms: emerging themes and challenges in studies of surface-associated microbial life. Journal of Bacteriology 186 4427–4440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rementeria, A, Gallego, L, Quindos, G & Garaizar, J 2001 Comparative evaluation of three commercial software packages for analysis of DNA polymorphism patterns. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 7 331–336CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spencker, FB, Haupt, S, Claros, MC, Walter, S, Lietz, T, Schille, R & Rodloff, AC 2000 Epidemiologic characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients with cystic fibrosis. Clinical Microbiology and Infection 6 600–607CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ude, S, Arnold, DL, Moon, CD, Timms-Wilson, T & Spiers, AJ 2006 Biofilm formation and cellulose expression among diverse environmental Pseudomonas isolates. Environmental Microbiology 8 1997–2011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yeruham, I, Schwimmer, A, Friedman, S, Leitner, G, Zamir, S, Ilsar-Adiri, N & Goshen, T 2005 Investigation and control of mastitis outbreaks caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a sheep flock and a goat herd. Berliner und Munchener tierarztliche Wochenschrift 118 220–223Google Scholar