4.2 Article

Occurrence, Virulence Factors, Antimicrobial Resistance, and Genotyping of Staphylococcus aureus Strains Isolated from Chicken Products and Humans

期刊

VECTOR-BORNE AND ZOONOTIC DISEASES
卷 16, 期 3, 页码 157-164

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2015.1891

关键词

S. aureus; Enterotoxins; PVL; MRSA; spa-PCR-RFLP; gamma-Hemolysin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Staphylococcus aureus in food is a consequence of inadequate hygienic handling and processing, posing a potential risk to public health. The current study aimed to characterize virulence factors, as well as antimicrobial resistance of Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) isolated from retail chicken products and hand swabs from vendors in Egypt. In addition, genetic relatedness of the isolates from chicken and humans was evaluated by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) using protein A as a target. A total of 110 samples were collected from chicken products (n = 80) and vendors (n = 30). Overall, 30 (37.5%) chicken products samples were positive for S. aureus, whereas hand swabs from meat handlers revealed that 18 (60%) were positive. Ten MRSA strains were characterized by the presence of the mecA gene, comprising seven isolates from chicken and three from humans. Virulence-associated factors were evaluated by PCR, revealing that 31.3% of S. aureus isolates harbored the Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) gene, whereas 10.4% were positive for the sea and sed genes each, and only two isolates were positive for gamma-hemolysin-associated gene. Genotyping using spa PCR-RFLP showed identical restriction banding patterns of MRSA isolates of human and chicken meat origin, indicating the genetic relatedness of the isolates. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to characterize PVL-positive MRSA from chicken products and to utilize spa-RFLP for evaluating the genetic relatedness between MRSA of human and chicken origin in Egypt.

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