Background This study describes the occurrence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in commensal Escherichia coli and Enterococcus/Streptococcus spp. (ES) isolated from fecal samples of dairy cows and assesses the variation of AMR profiles across regions and seasons following the implementation of the Food and Agricultural Code (FAC) Sections 14400–14408 (formerly known as Senate Bill, SB 27) in California (CA). Methods The study was conducted on ten dairies distributed across CA’s three milk sheds: Northern California (NCA), Northern San Joaquin Valley (NSJV), and the Greater Southern California (GSCA). On each study dairy, individual fecal samples were collected from two cohorts of lactating dairy cows during the fall/winter 2018 and spring/summer 2019 seasons. Each cohort comprised of 12 cows per dairy. The fecal samples were collected at enrollment before calving (close-up stage) and then monthly thereafter for four consecutive time points up to 120 days in milk. A total of 2,171 E. coli and 2,158 ES isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility using the broth microdilution method against a select panel of antimicrobials. Results The E. coli isolates showed high resistance to florfenicol (83.31% ± 0.80) and sulphadimethoxine (32.45%), while resistance to ampicillin (1.10% ± 0.21), ceftiofur (1.93% ± 0.29), danofloxacin (4.01% ± 0.42), enrofloxacin (3.31% ± 0.38), gentamicin (0.32% ± 0.12) and neomycin (1.61% ± 0.27) had low resistance proportions. The ES isolates were highly resistant to tildipirosin (50.18% ± 1.10), tilmicosin (48% ± 1.10), tiamulin (42%) and florfenicol (46% ± 1.10), but were minimally resistant to ampicillin (0.23%) and penicillin (0.20%). Multidrug resistance (MDR) (resistance to at least 1 drug in ≥3 antimicrobial classes) was observed in 14.14% of E. coli isolates and 39% of ES isolates. Escherichia coli isolates recovered during winter showed higher MDR prevalence compared to summer isolates (20.33% vs. 8.04%). A higher prevalence of MDR was observed in NSJV (17.29%) and GSCA (15.34%) compared with NCA (10.10%). Conclusions Our findings showed high rates of AMR to several drugs that are not labeled for use in lactating dairy cattle 20 months of age or older. Conversely, very low resistance was observed for drugs labeled for use in adult dairy cows, such as cephalosporins and penicillin. Overall, our findings identified important differences in AMR by antimicrobial class, region and season.
Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) is a bacterium that can cause substantial economic losses in infected dairy herds due to reduced milk production and increased cow-replacement costs. In order to control MAP in dairies with drylot pens, a standardized environmental sampling protocol to quantify MAP in fecal slurry was developed based on an existing protocol for freestall pens. Specifically, following a 24 h hold of the flush, a grab sample of approximately 10 ml of fecal slurry was collected every 1 m along the flush lane of the drylot pens, avoiding individual cow fecal pats. To determine the reliability and repatability of the new environmental sampling protocol for estimation of MAP bioburden at the pen level, two collectors simultaneously collected fecal slurry samples every day for 3 days from six drylot cow pens on two Central California dairies. During the study period no cow movement between pens was allowed with the exception of sick cows. The study herds had MAP seroprevalence of 5.8% and 3.2%, respectively, based on whole pen serum ELISA results. Variance components models for quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) results showed samples collected from different pens on different dairies accounted for greater variablitiy in MAP concentration (65%), while samples collected by different collectors had the least variability (0.1%). In contrast, variability in MAP concentration in environmental samples collected on different days had 25% variability. The intraclass correlation coefficient showed high reliability (93%) of environmental sampling simultaneously by different collectors. In contrast, the reliability of environmental sampling at different days was 65%, which was similar to the reliability for sampling by different collectors on different days. Investigators can expect high reliability when employing the new environmental sampling protocol along with qPCR testing of environmental samples from drylot pens.
Lumpy skin disease (LSD) was firstly reported in Thailand in 2021. It was known that antibody against LSD virus (LSDV) could be detected until 7 months post infection. There was a limited report on immune response of LSDV infection in Thailand where recombinant vaccine strain circulated. The aim of research was to study the duration of LSD immune response of subclinical and clinical animals after natural infection in dairy cattle as well as cell-mediated immunity (CMI). Total 66 dairy cattle from ten farms affected by LSD in central and western regions of Thailand were investigated. Blood and skin nodules were tested by molecular methods. Antibody was detected by serum neutralization test (SNT) and ELISA. CMI was evaluated by gene expressions of cytokines. LSDV genome was detected in blood and skin tissues until 75 and 77 days after symptom. Antibody was detected until at least 15 months after symptom. Subclinical animals had antibody level substantially less than in clinical animals during the studied period. IFNG and TNFa levels were increased, while IL-10 level was decreased in the infected animals compared to the controls. This study elucidated immune response in dairy cattle herd affected by the first recombinant LSDV outbreak in Thailand.
Our objectives were to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a rapid and novel immunochromatography-based mastitis kit that includes 3 independent tests to detect coliforms (Escherichia coli or Klebsiella pneumoniae), Streptococcus spp., and Staphylococcus aureus. The kit was developed to facilitate diagnostic-based mastitis treatment. Validation of the kit was based on 154 aseptically collected mastitis samples from 2 clinical herds (clinical population) and 120 milk samples from 3 nonclinical herds (nonclinical population) without clinical cases at the time of enrollment. One herd sampled at different times was common to both populations. A 3-test in 2-population Bayesian latent class model with uniform priors for all test parameters except specificity of culture, which was modeled informatively, was used to estimate sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of the test kit, culture, and PCR at the cow level. The mastitis test kit's 96.9% Sp for Streptococcus spp. had a low false positive percentage (3.1%), which, together with the kit's rapid turnaround time for results, makes it a suitable initial screening test that producers can use to identify clinical cows to treat based on Streptococcus spp. mastitis in kit-positive results. Due to the 60.4% kit Se, producers should follow up on Streptococcus spp. kit-negative cows using a confirmatory test such as PCR (Sp of 98.4%) or culture (Sp of 99.6%). In contrast, aerobic culture had Se of 76.5% and Sp of 99.6% for Streptococcus spp. Similarly, the Sp of the kit (98.2%) and culture (99.8%) for Staph. aureus were particularly high, and even though the kit's Se (61.0%) was lower than culture (88.4%; posterior probability of difference 98%), the kit could be beneficial before use of a confirmatory test for kit-negative samples due to its ease and rapid turnaround time. Mostly, quantitative real-time (q)PCR outperformed the kit's Se (37.7%) and Sp (92.9%) for coliforms, as well as the kit's Se (60.4%) for Streptococcus spp. However, qPCR may require more technical skills and turnaround time for final results. Use of the on-farm mastitis test kit evaluated in the present study could enhance sustainable antimicrobial drug use by rapidly identifying Streptococcus mastitis for targeted treatment. Furthermore, the kit may be used in a Staph. aureus outbreak where cows can be rapidly screened to identify cases for segregation or culling during an outbreak and kit-negative cows further confirmed by milk culture or qPCR. However, the cost-effectiveness of such an approach has not been investigated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.