4.6 Article

Species distribution and antimicrobial resistance of enterococci isolated from surface and ocean water

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 105, Issue 4, Pages 1017-1025

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2008.03828.x

Keywords

beach pollution; Enterococcus species; water quality

Funding

  1. California Water Resources Control Board
  2. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP)
  3. Orange County Sanitation District Laboratory

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: The species identification and antimicrobial resistance profiles were determined for enterococci isolated from Southern California surface and ocean waters. Methods and Results: Species identification was determined for 1413 presumptive Enterococcus isolates from urban runoff, bay, ocean and sewage water samples. The most frequently isolated species were Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, Enterococcus hirae, Enterococcus casseliflavus and Enterococcus mundtii. All five of these species were isolated from ocean and bay water with a frequency ranging from 7% to 36%. Enterococcus casseliflavus was the most frequently isolated species in urban runoff making up 36-65% of isolates while E. faecium was the most frequently isolated species in sewage making up 53-78% of isolates. The similar distribution of species in urban runoff and receiving water suggests that urban runoff may be the source of Enterococcus. No vancomycin or high level gentamycin resistance was detected in E. faecalis and E. faecium isolates. Conclusions: Enterococcus faecalis, E. faecium, E. casseliflavus and E. mundtii are the most commonly isolated Enterococcus species from urban runoff and receiving waters in Southern California. Significance and Impact of the Study: Determination of the Enterococcus species isolated from receiving waters and potential pollution sources may assist in determining the sources of pollution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available