English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Enterococcus spp. and E. coli are recognized as indicator microorganisms for the human and animal intestinal flora , and are also known to be potent1al reservoirs of antimicrobial resistance genes. Among the various use of antimicrobial agents that can promote antibioresistance, on farm use of growth promoters ra1ses public health concerns. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the use of selected growth promoters on antim1crob1al res1stance profiles of Enterococcus spp. and E. coli isolates from swine in field conditions. Enterococcus and E. coli ISolates obtained from pooled fecal samples of p1gs receiving Tylosin (44 ppm, n = 1 00) and Virg1niamyc1n (22 ppm, n = 1 00) were compared to isolates obtained from a control group (n = 1 00) fed without growth promoters, in field conditions. Comparison was done between 1solates obtatned in the first week of treatment and isolates obtained 1n the 15th week. All isolates were tested for susceptibility to 20 antimicrobial agents using the disc diffusion method according to NCCLS guidelines. For Enterococcus isolates, an increase in resistance was observed for Chloramphentcol (C) and Gentamycin (CN) in the Tylosin fed group and for Ampicillin (AMP) for both V1rg1mamyctn fed and control groups. For E coli. isolates, no increase of resistance was observed in the control group but an increase of resistance for Chloramphenicol (C) and Cephalotln (KF) was noted for both Virginiamycin and Tylostn fed groups. Other Significant tncreases of res1stance were also noted for Erythromycin (E) and Sulfamethoxazol (RL) 1n Virginiamycin group and for Neomyc1n (N) and Kanamyc1n (K) in Tylostn group. A treatment effect (CTL, Virginiamycin or Tylosin feeding) was also noted for each increase of observed resistance The results Indicated that for E. coli isolates, Tylostn had h1gher effect on K and N resistance than Virginiamycin while Virginiamycin had higher effect on E resistance than Tylostn. It suggest that both Enterococcus and E coli ant1microb1al profiles varry with the age of p1gs and that antimicrobial resistance profiles can be modified through growth promoter admimstration.

international conference on the epidemiology and control of biological, chemical and physical hazards in pigs and pork

Impact of use of Tylosin and Virginiamycin on antimicrobial agents resistance profiles of Enterococcus spp. and E. coli isolates from swine in field conditions