4.4 Article

Characterization of Listeria monocytogenes isolated from Ganges water, human clinical and milk samples at Varanasi, India

Journal

INFECTION GENETICS AND EVOLUTION
Volume 14, Issue -, Pages 83-91

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.meegid.2012.09.019

Keywords

Listeria monocytogenes; Serotype identification; ERIC- and REP-PCR; Virulence genes

Funding

  1. Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi [5/3/3/10/2007-ECD-I]
  2. Department of Biotechnology, New Delhi
  3. UGC, New Delhi

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Listeria monocytogenes isolated from Ganges water, human clinical and milk samples were characterized by antibiotic susceptibility, serotype identification, detection of virulence genes and ERIC- and REP-PCR fingerprint analyses. All isolates were uniformly resistant to ampicillin, except two isolates, and showed variable resistance to gentamicin, cotrimoxazole, ofloxacin, rifampicin and tetracycline. Of the 20 isolates found positive for pathogens, seven (four human and three water isolates) belong to serogroups 4b, 4d and 4e; six (one human and five water isolates) belong to serogroups 1/2c and 3c; four milk isolates belong to serogroups 1/2b and 3b; and three milk isolates belong to serogroups 1/2a and 3a. Two water isolates, all human isolates, except one (Pb1) lacking inlJ gene, and three milk isolates possess inlA, inlC, plcA, prfA, actA, hlyA and iap genes. The remaining water and milk isolates showed variable presence of plcA, prfA, and iap genes. ERIC- and REP-PCR based analyses collectively indicated that isolates of human clinical samples belong to identical or similar clone and isolates of water and milk samples belong to different clones. Overall study demonstrates the prevalence of pathogenic L monocytogenes species in the environmental and clinical samples. Most of the isolates were resistant to commonly used antibiotics. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available