4.6 Article

Whole-genome sequencing of Listeria monocytogenes isolated from the first listeriosis foodborne outbreak in South Korea

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1182090

关键词

Listeria monocytogenes; foodborne outbreak; South Korea; WGS; MLST; llsX

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a Listeria monocytogenes strain responsible for a foodborne outbreak in South Korea was characterized. The strain exhibited specific characteristics in antibiotic resistance and virulence genes. These findings will contribute to assessing the characteristics of CC224 strains in South Korea that have the potential to cause listeriosis outbreaks.
Listeria monocytogenes is a foodborne pathogen that causes listeriosis in humans with severe symptoms. In South Korea, listeriosis had only been reported sporadically among hospitalized patients until the first foodborne outbreak occurred in 2018. In this study, a L. monocytogenes strain responsible for this outbreak (FSCNU0110) was characterized via whole genome sequencing and compared with publicly available L. monocytogenes genomes of the same clonal complex (CC). Strain FSCNU0110 belonged to multilocus sequence typing (MLST)-based sequence type 224 and CC224, and core genome MLST-based sublineage 6,178. The strain harbored tetracycline resistance gene tetM, four other antibiotic resistance genes, and 64 virulence genes, including Listeria pathogenicity island 1 (LIPI-1) and LIPI-3. Interestingly, llsX in LIPI-3 exhibited a characteristic SNP (deletion of A in position 4, resulting in a premature stop codon) that was missing among all CC224 strains isolated overseas but was conserved among those from South Korea. In addition, the tetM gene was also detected only in a subset of CC224 strains from South Korea. These findings will provide an essential basis for assessing the characteristics of CC224 strains in South Korea that have shown a potential to cause listeriosis outbreaks.

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