4.6 Article

Antimicrobial-Resistant Bacteria from Free-Living Green Turtles (Chelonia mydas)

期刊

ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12081268

关键词

One Health; AMR; microbial distribution; marine pollution biomonitor

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Green sea turtles are suitable bioindicators of marine pollution and the presence of pathogens that cause diseases in humans. This study aimed to investigate the green sea turtle as a reservoir of resistant bacteria, mainly due to the impact of anthropic factors in Brazilian coastal regions.
Bioindicator species are used to assess the damage and magnitude of possible impacts of anthropic origin on the environment, such as the reckless consumption of antimicrobials. Chelonia mydas has several characteristics that make it a suitable bioindicator of marine pollution and of the presence of pathogens that cause diseases in humans. This study aimed to investigate the green sea turtle as a reservoir of resistant bacteria, mainly because C. mydas is the most frequent sea turtle species in Brazilian coastal regions and, consequently, under the intense impact of anthropic factors. Free-living green sea turtles ranging from 42.8 to 92 cm (average = 60.7 cm) were captured from Itaipu Beach, Brazil. Cloaca samples (characterizing the gastrointestinal tract) and neck samples (representing the transient microbiota) were collected. Bacterial species were identified, and their was resistance associated with the antimicrobials cephalothin, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, tetracycline, and vancomycin. Citrobacter braaki, Klebsiella oxytoca, K. variicola and Proteus mirabilis were found resistant to cephalothin and Morganella morganii and Enterococcus faecalis tetracycline-resistant isolates in cloaca samples. In neck samples, species resistant to tetracycline were Salmonella sp., Serratia marcescens, S. ureylitica and Proteus mirabilis. This data reinforces that the green turtle is a bioindicator of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

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