4.7 Article

Virulence Characteristics and Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles of Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia coli Isolates from Humans in South Africa: 2006-2013

期刊

TOXINS
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins11070424

关键词

STEC; human; virulence; antimicrobial resistance; PFGE

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa [TTK13062619943, RTF14012762427]
  2. Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (GDARD)
  3. South African Medical Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) isolates (N = 38) that were incriminated in human disease from 2006 to 2013 in South Africa were characterized by serotype, virulence-associated genes, antimicrobial resistance and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). The isolates belonged to 11 O: H serotypes. STEC O26: H11 (24%) was the most frequent serotype associated with human disease, followed by O111: H8 (16%), O157: H7 (13%) and O117: H7 (13%). The majority of isolates were positive for key virulence-associated genes including stx1 (84%), eaeA (61%), ehxA (68.4%) and espP (55%), but lacked stx2 (29%), katP (42%), etpD (16%), saa (16%) and subA (3%). stx2 positive isolates carried stx2c (26%) and /or stx2d (26%) subtypes. All pathogenicity island encoded virulence marker genes were detected in all (100%) isolates except nleA (47%), nleC (84%) and nleD (76%). Multidrug resistance was observed in 89% of isolates. PFGE revealed 34 profiles with eight distinct clusters that shared 80% intra-serotype similarity, regardless of the year of isolation. In conclusion, STEC isolates that were implicated in human disease between 2006 and 2013 in South Africa were mainly non-O157 strains which possessed virulence genes and markers commonly associated with STEC strains that have been incriminated in mild to severe human disease worldwide. Improved STEC monitoring and surveillance programs are needed in South Africa to control and prevent STEC disease in humans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据