4.2 Article

Characterization of virulence factors and phylogenetic group determination of Escherichia coli isolated from diarrheic and non-diarrheic calves from Brazil

期刊

FOLIA MICROBIOLOGICA
卷 62, 期 2, 页码 139-144

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12223-016-0480-9

关键词

Escherichia coli; Calves; Pathovars; Phylogenetic group

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Tecnico e Cientifico [CNPq 448357/2014-3]
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (Fapemig)
  3. CNPq
  4. Capes [13827/13-8]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to detect virulence factors, pathovars, and phylogenetic groups of Escherichia coli strains obtained from feces of calves with and without diarrhea up to 70 days old and to determine the association between occurrence of diarrhea, phylogenetic groups, and pathovars. Phylo-typing analysis of the 336 E. coli strains isolated from calves with Clermont method showed that 21 (6.25 %) belong to phylogroup A, 228 (67.85 %) to phylogroup B1, 2 (0.6 %) to phylogroup B2, 5 (1.49 %) to phylogroup C, 57 (16.96 %) to phylogroup E, and 3 (0.9 %) to phylogroup F. Phylogroup D was not identified and 20 strains (5.95 %) were assigned as unknown. The distribution of phylogenetic groups among pathovars showed that NTEC belong to phylogroups B1 (17) and C (4); EPEC to phylogroups B1 (6) and E (8); STEC to phylogroups A (5), B1 (56), B2 (2), C (1), and E (15); EHEC to phylogroups B1 (95) and E (5); and ETEC to phylogroups A (3), B1 (7), and E (10). The EAST-1 strains were phylogroups A (13), B1 (47), E (19), and F (3); E. coli strains of unknown phylogroups belonged to pathovars EPEC (1), EHEC (2), STEC (7), and EAST-1 strains (6). ETEC was associated with diarrhea (P = 0.002). Our study did not find association between the phylogenetic background and occurrence of diarrhea (P = 0.164) but did find some relationship in phylogenetic group and pathovar. The study showed that EHEC and STEC are classified as phylogroup B1, EAST-1 phylogroup A, ETEC, and EPEC phylogroup E.

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

4.2
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