4.7 Article

Antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter strains isolated from French broilers before and after antimicrobial growth promoter bans

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 54, Issue 6, Pages 1025-1030

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkh473

Keywords

standard broilers; free range broilers; C. jejuni; C. coli

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The antimicrobial susceptibility of Campylobacter strains isolated from standard and free-range broilers in 1992-1996 and 2001-2002 was studied. Methods: Strains were isolated from caeca or skin samples collected from standard or free-range broilers arriving in slaughterhouses. The MICs of ampicillin, nalidixic acid, enrofloxacin, tetracycline, erythromycin and gentamicin were determined by agar dilution and compared according to species (Campylobacter jejuni or Campylobacter coli), production system and sampling period. Results: Results showed that all chickens harboured Campylobacter. An increase over time of the C. coli/C. jejuni ratio for standard chickens occurred. A wide range of MICs was observed among isolates from the same broiler or from the same farm. Strains collected on entry to the slaughterhouse and after storage showed no significant difference in their antibiotic resistance. C. coli was more resistant than C. jejuni to tetracycline and erythromycin during the first period and to all tested molecules (except gentamicin) during the second period. Strains isolated from standard chickens were also more often resistant than those isolated from free-range broilers. The percentage of C. jejuni strains resistant to ampicillin decreased from 1992-1996 to 2001-2002, whereas no change could be observed for the other antimicrobial agents. However, for C. coli the resistance to ampicillin, nalidixic acid, enrofloxacin, tetracycline and erythromycin significantly increased. Conclusion: There was an increase in the incidence of antibiotic resistance of C. coli between 1992-1996 and 2001-2002.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available