4.6 Article

Genomic Comparison of Eight Closed Genomes of Multidrug-Resistant Salmonella enterica Strains Isolated From Broiler Farms and Processing Plants in Trinidad and Tobago

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.863104

关键词

Salmonella; multi-drug resistance; complete genome; nanopore sequencing; poultry; Trinidad and Tobago

资金

  1. Chief Scientist Challenge Grants Program [2021-200F07A]
  2. FDA Foods Program Intramural Funds
  3. University of the West Indies, St. Augustine Campus Research and Publication Fund Committee [2660-457522]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, long and short-read sequencing were used to close genomes of eight multidrug-resistant strains of Salmonella enterica, which were isolated from broiler chicken farms and processing plants in Trinidad and Tobago. The study identified multiple antimicrobial resistance genes in these strains, highlighting the importance of genome sequencing for source tracking and outbreak investigations.
Salmonella enterica is an important foodborne pathogen worldwide. We used long and short-read sequencing to close genomes of eight multidrug-resistant (MDR) S. enterica strains, belonging to serovars Infantis (2), Albany, Oranienburg, I 4,[5],12:i:-, Javiana, Schwarzengrund, and Kentucky from broiler chicken farms and processing plants in Trinidad and Tobago. They also belonged to seven different sequence types (STs- 32, 292, 1510, 19, 24, 152, and 96). Among the strains, seven had demonstrated multi-drug resistance with the presence of at least three AMR genes, whereas three isolates contained the quinolone resistance gene qnr(B19) in plasmids (CFSAN103840, CFSAN103854, and CFSAN103872). The extended-spectrum beta-lactamase genes bla(CTX-M-65) (CFSAN103796) and bla(TEM-1) (CFSAN103852) were detected in this study. The genomes closed in this study will be useful for future source tracking and outbreak investigations in Trinidad and Tobago and worldwide.

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

4.6
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