Distribution and Antimicrobial Resistance of Vibrio parahaemolyticus Isolated from Korean Shellfish

Abstract

The contamination status of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in commercially valuable shellfish from the south and west coasts of Korea and the antimicrobial resistance patterns of isolated V. parahaemolyticus were investigated from July through October, 2011. The range of V. parahaemolyticus concentrations in oysters Crassostrea gigas and short neck clams Venerupis philippinarum was <30~290 MPN/100 g and <30~46,000 MPN/100 g, respectively, and greater than 10,000 MPN/100 g of V. parahaemolyticus was detected from 7 of 40 short neck clams. During the survey period, 436 strains of V. parahaemolyticus were isolated (129 from oysters and 307 from short-neck clams) and the antimicrobial resistance patterns of all of the isolates were examined. Antimicrobial resistance against at least one antibiotic was seen in 79.8% of the oyster isolates (103 strains) and 63.8% of the short neck clam isolates (196 strains). The antimicrobial resistance patterns were relatively simple because the antimicrobial resistance of the isolates was simply due to resistance to ampicillin. Only one oyster isolate and three short neck clam isolates showed multiple antibiotic resistance, i.e., resistance against more than four antibiotics.

Occurrence of pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus in seafood distribution channels and their antibiotic resistance profiles in S. Korea

“…Yu et al . () showed 43·6% of V. parahaemolyticus isolated from shellfish were resistant to AMP, but all isolates were tdh or trh ‐negative. Lee et al .…”

“…Yu et al . () reported that none of the 436 isolates from shellfish farm was tdh or trh ‐positive. Park et al .…”

“…The antibiotic susceptibility profiles of pathogenic V. parahaemolyticus isolates showed that all isolates were resistant to AMP (P < 0Á05) and that the diameters of the three isolates were not similar, but pathogenic isolates were susceptible to ciprofloxacin (CIP), amoxycillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin sulbactam (SAM), chloramphenicol (C), and TEs and gentamicin (GM) ( Table 4). Yu et al (2014) showed 43Á6% of V. parahaemolyticus isolated from shellfish were resistant to AMP, but all isolates were tdh or trhnegative. Lee et al (2009) also showed that all V. parahaemolyticus isolated from fishery products were resistant to AMP, and Son et al (2003) reported that 75% of V. parahaemolyticus isolated from fishery products and seawater were resistant to AMP.…”

“…Among the isolates, only one V. parahaemolyticus isolate (SMFM201709-CO2-2) was tdh gene-positive and two V. parahaemolyticus isolates (SMFM201708-OY1 and SMFM201709-CO1-2) were trh gene-positive, indicating that only very small portion of the V. parahaemolyticus isolates are pathogenic (data not shown). Yu et al (2014) reported that none of the 436 isolates from shellfish farm was tdh or trh-positive. Park et al (2018) reported all V. parahaemolyticus isolated from sea water were negative for the tdh and trh, but 13% of isolates from stream estuary areas were positive for the tdh gene.…”

Virulence Factors and Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Vibrio parahaemolyticus Isolated from the Oyster Crassostrea gigas

“…oxytetracycline, tetracycline, quinolone, sulphonamides trimethoprim , , (Oh et al, 2011;Rico et al, 2012;Sani et al, 2013;Xu et al, 2014;Yano et al, 2014;Yu et al, 2014). (Okamoto et al, 2009;Letchumanan et al, 2015).…”