Next Article in Journal
Digestibility of Amino Acids in Protein-Rich Feed Ingredients Originating from Animals, Peanut Flour, and Full-Fat Soybeans Fed to Pigs
Next Article in Special Issue
Immunomodulatory Effects of Dietary Phosphorus and Calcium in Two Strains of Laying Hens
Previous Article in Journal
Psychological Stress, Its Reduction, and Long-Term Consequences: What Studies with Laboratory Animals Might Teach Us about Life in the Dog Shelter
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impact of Housing Environment on the Immune System in Chickens: A Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 10
Issue 11
10.3390/ani10112060
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Detection of Plasmid-Mediated Colistin Resistant mcr-1 Gene in Escherichia coli Isolated from Infected Chicken Livers in Nepal

by
Sayara Bista
1,†,
Upendra Thapa Shrestha
1,†,
Binod Dhungel
1,
Pragya Koirala
2,
Tulsi Ram Gompo
2,
Nabaraj Shrestha
2,
Nabaraj Adhikari
1,
Dev Raj Joshi
1,
Megha Raj Banjara
1,
Bipin Adhikari
3,
Komal Raj Rijal
1,* and
Prakash Ghimire
1
1
Central Department of Microbiology, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu 44618, Nepal
2
Central Veterinary Laboratory Ministry of Agriculture, Land Management and Cooperatives, Government of Nepal, Tripureshwor, Kathmandu 44618, Nepal
3
Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3SY, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors have equally contributed in this study.
Animals 2020, 10(11), 2060; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112060
Submission received: 30 August 2020 / Revised: 22 October 2020 / Accepted: 25 October 2020 / Published: 7 November 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Poultry Microbiology and Immunology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

The poultry industry is one of the top agribusinesses in Nepal. However, despite the government’s restriction on the use of antibiotics as growth promotors in animals, the overuse and misuse of antibiotics can be seen all over the country. Such inappropriate use of antibiotics has led to the rise of antibiotic resistance among treatment options for both human and animal pathogens. Several findings suggest the failure of colistin, a polymyxin E antibiotic (once regarded as the last resort drug), in the treatment of human bacterial infections is due to the emergence and spread of the plasmid-mediated colistin resistance gene (mcr-1) among Gram-negative bacterial pathogens. The emergence and rapid transfer of resistant strains in poultry farms are associated with unwanted loss of livestock, economic burden and spread of drug-resistance to other animals, humans and the environment, as well. In this study, we characterized the mcr-1 gene from infected chicken livers, where prevalence was found to be alarmingly high. This study identifies the result of regulatory failures. Therefore, this report provides valuable reference to the policy makers so that a more effective policy can be formulated and implemented to curb the spread of drug-resistant pathogens.

Abstract

Background: Plasmid-mediated resistance to the colistin in poultry is considered as an emerging problem worldwide. While poultry constitutes the major industry in Nepal, there is a paucity of evidence on colistin resistance in Escherichia coli isolates causing natural infections in poultry. This study aimed to explore the prevalence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance gene, mcr-1 in E. coli isolated from liver samples of dead poultry suspected of E. coli infections. Methods: A total of two hundred and seventy liver samples (227 broilers and 43 layers) from dead poultry suspected of colibacillosis were collected from post-mortem in the Central Veterinary Laboratory (CVL), Kathmandu, between 1 February and 31 July 2019. The specimens were processed to isolate and identify E. coli; an antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) using disk diffusion method was performed with 12 different antibiotics: Amikacin (30 µg), ampicillin (10 µg), ciprofloxacin (5 µg), chloramphenicol (30 µg), cefoxitin (30 µg), ceftazidime (30 µg), ceftriaxone (30 µg), cotrimoxazole (25 µg), gentamicin (10 µg), imipenem (10 µg), levofloxacin (5 µg) and tetracycline (30 µg). Colistin resistance was determined by agar dilution method and colistin-resistant strains were further screened for plasmid-mediated mcr-1 gene, using conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Results: Out of 270 liver samples, 53.3% (144/270) showed growth of E. coli. The highest number (54%; 109/202) of E. coli isolates was obtained in the liver samples from poultry birds (of both types) aged less than forty days. In AST, 95.1% (137/144) and 82.6% (119/144) of E. coli isolates were resistant against tetracycline and ciprofloxacin, respectively, while 13.2% (19/144) and 25.7% (37/144) isolates were resistant to cefoxitin and imipenem, respectively. In the same assay, 76.4% (110/144) E. coli isolates were multi-drug resistant (MDR). The phenotypic prevalence of colistin resistance was 28.5% (41/144). In the PCR assay, 43.9% (18/41) of colistin-resistant isolates were screened positive for plasmid-mediated mcr-1. Conclusion: The high prevalence of mcr-1 in colistin-resistant E. coli isolates in our study is a cause of concern for the probable coming emergence of colistin resistance in human pathogens, due to horizontal transfer of resistant genes from poultry to human isolates.

1. Introduction

Escherichia coli is a member of Enterobacteriaceae family of Gram-negative bacteria and a normal inhabitant of the intestinal tract of humans and animals, although gut commensals can also cause a variety of infections as opportunistic pathogens under favourable conditions [1]. Infections caused by pathogenic E. coli (APEC) in poultry are known as colibacillosis and are responsible for sacculitis, pericarditis, peritonitis, salpingitis, synovitis, osteomyelitis, cellulitis, coligranuloma and yolk sac infections in chicken [2]. Most APEC are pathogenic to avian species and pose a low risk to human health. However, some previous studies based on molecular characterization have confirmed the genetic similarity between E. coli strains (not specifically APEC) isolated from poultry and those isolated from human infections [3].
All broad-spectrum antibiotics were effective against the infections caused by E. coli until the emergence of resistant strains capable of producing resistance enzymes such as beta-lactamases (carbapenemases), i.e., esterases, phophotransferases [4,5]. With the emergence of colistin resistance, a last resort drug to treat life threatening infections (both in humans and animals), concerns about potential transfer of resistance to food chain and to human beings are higher [6]. The burgeoning of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has compelled the veterinarians to prescribe the drugs which otherwise are not considered as standard regimen of therapy. One such instance is colistin, a polymyxin E antibiotic which is being widely used as a last resort drug for the treatment of carbapenemase, producing multi-drug-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections, irrespective of neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity [7,8,9].
The frequently isolated variant of plasmid-encoded mobile colistin-resistant gene (mcr), mcr-1, was first reported in E. coli isolates from livestock and human specimens in China [10]. After an initial report in 2016, mcr-1 strains have been reported worldwide among several species of Enterobacteriaceae [11]. Natural and phenotypic mechanisms were attributed to colistin-resistant strains, the former occurring via mutations of bacterial genomes while the latter was the result of adaptive mechanism [12,13]. The mechanism of horizontal transfer of mcr-1 was a paradigm shift due to its rapid movement between animals and humans, and vice versa, via mobile genetic elements. Poultry is considered as the major reservoir and good habitat of mcr-1-producing organisms that have been isolated from different stages of production and supply chain [1].
While the use of antimicrobials in humans and animals are in comparable proportion, the chance of mutations in animals is higher due to larger animal biomass [14]. Antibiotics in the poultry industry are typically used for growth promotion, prophylactic and therapeutic purposes [15,16], and are administered in inappropriate doses throughout their lifespan [17,18]. Such unsafe drug residues tend to accumulate in various concentrations in edible poultry parts [19]. Continuous exposure to accumulated antibiotics may accelerate the process of antimicrobial resistance by the microbes in the host [20]. The antimicrobial-resistant bacteria originating in poultry populations are transmitted to humans through the environment, food products and direct contact [21], yet the current approaches to tackling AMR suffer from inadequate multi-sectoral and cross-disciplinary efforts embedded in the “one health approach”.
Since poultry remains one of the staple industries in developing countries like Nepal, outbreaks of different sorts of diseases are associated with significant economic burdens [22,23]. In recent years, sudden outbreaks of various avian diseases (mostly collibacillosis) have risen [24]. Treatment regimens against these infections are constantly challenged by unabated AMR. Moreover, most of the diagnoses in Nepal are based on the clinical symptoms and conventional approaches that lack molecular detection and characterization of the causative agent of the disease [22]. These practices have overlooked the precise diagnosis and implementation of the best treatment regimen, which is ultimately worsening the plight of AMR among pathogens [24]. In addition, several other factors such as poultry-rearing conditions, extensive use of drugs and horizontal transfer of resistant genes such as mcr-1 could be associated with a high burden of colistin resistance among poultries in Nepal. Hence, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of the plasmid-mediated mcr-1 gene among E. coli isolated from infected liver samples of poultry.

2. Methods

2.1. Sample Collection, Bacterial Isolation and Identification

This study was carried out from 1 February to 31 July 2019. A total of 270 liver samples (227 from broiler and 43 from layers), each obtained from individual dead birds that had died with suspected colibacillosis, were obtained from the postmortem department of the Central Veterinary Laboratory (CVL), Kathmandu. The liver samples processed in this study were from Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Bhaktapur, Dhading, Kavre, Nuwakot and other districts near Kathmandu. More than 70% of samples were from poultry aged less than 40 days. Liver samples were collected from boilers and layers from both small and large flock size (greater than 1500 birds). Demographic information such as geographical district, poultry age, production type and flock size were also recorded during the collection of samples. The samples were collected aseptically and analysed in the Bacteriology Laboratory of CVL as soon as possible after collection. The inoculum obtained was cultured on MacConkey agar (MA) and Eosin Methylene Blue (EMB) agar. After inoculation, the media was incubated for at least 24 h at 37 °C. Colonies showing typical characteristics and morphology of E. coli were transferred to nutrient agar and incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. E. coli was confirmed by conventional biochemical tests such as indole methyl red, Voges Prausker, citrate utilization test, urease test, oxidative-fermentative test, triple sugar iron test and typical greenish metallic sheen on EMB agar [25,26].

2.2. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

All E. coli isolates were subjected for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) using the modified Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method as recommended by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI-2017) guidelines using Mueller Hinton Agar (MHA) [27]. The twelve antibiotics used in this study were amikacin (30 µg), ampicillin (10 µg), ciprofloxacin (5 µg), chloramphenicol (30 µg), cefoxitin (30 µg), ceftazidime (30 µg), ceftriaxone (30 µg), cotrimoxazole (25 µg), gentamicin (10 µg), imipenem (10 µg), levofloxacin (5 µg) and tetracycline (30 µg) (Hi-media Laboratories Pvt. Limited, Bombay, India). After inoculation and incubation, the bacterial growth was examined, the zone of inhibition (ZOI) was measured and the results were interpreted as sensitive, resistant and intermediate by comparing with a standard chart as described by CLSI guidelines. All intermediates were also included in the resistant group. Those isolates which were non-susceptible to at least one antibiotic from three or more different classes were reported as multi-drug resistant (MDR) [28].

2.3. Determination of Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) of Colistin

Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC) of colistin was determined by the agar dilution method following CLSI-2017. Different concentrations of colistin ranging from 4 to 32 mg/L were prepared in the agar medium. The inoculums were applied rapidly to the agar surface and the plates were incubated at 37 °C for up to 18 h. The MIC end point was determined as the lowest concentration of antibiotics that completely inhibits the visible growth [29]. According to the CLSI guidelines, isolates with a MIC of ≤4 μg/mL were considered colistin susceptible while MIC of >4 μg/mL were considered colistin resistant.

2.4. Quality Control

Each batch of media and reagents was subjected to sterility and performance testing. In AST, the control strains of E. coli ATCC 25922 were used as quality control.

2.5. Extraction of Plasmid DNA and PCR Amplification of Colistin Resistance Gene (mcr-1)

Plasmid DNA was extracted from E. coli isolates by alkaline lysis method [30], and the presence of plasmids was confirmed on 0.8% agarose gel electrophoresis at 120 V for 1 h with ethidium bromide (EtBr) with a concentration of 0.1 µg/mL. A set of primer pairs CLR5-F (5ʹ-CGGTCAGTCCGTTTGTTC-3ʹ) and CLR5-R (5ʹ-CTTGGTCGGTCTGTAGGG-3ʹ) were used for the amplification of mcr-1. The amplification was performed in a thermocycler, Prime GeNeiTM (Bangalore, India). The PCR reaction mixture for the mcr-1 amplification was carried out in a final volume of 25 µL (21 µl of 1× Qiagen Master Mix, 3 µL of template plasmid DNA, 0.5 µL forward and 0.5 µL reverse primer of mcr-1, as mentioned above). Amplification was performed following standard methods. The PCR amplification cycle was run, initial denaturation at 95 °C for 15 min, 30 cycles with denaturation at 94 °C for 1 min, annealing at 57 °C for 1.5 min and extension at 72 °C for 1 min, and final extension of 10 min at 72 °C. The amplified products were fractionated by electrophoresis through 1.2% Agarose gel visualized by staining with EtBr. The presence of the mcr-1 was confirmed by comparing with a positive control and 100 bp DNA Ladder, Thermo Fisher Scientific in the gel run [31,32].

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Data were entered and analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0, Armonk, NY: IBM Corp, Chicago, IL, USA. Descriptive and inferential statistics were analysed using Chi-square (χ2) test. A p-value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

2.7. Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

This study was reviewed by Institutional Review committee, Institute of Science and Technology, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal. No human sample was involved in this study. Prior to the collection of Liver samples, permission was obtained from the Post-mortem Department, Department of Livestock Services, Central Veterinary Laboratory (CVL), Ministry of Agriculture, Land Management and Cooperatives, Government of Nepal.

3. Results

3.1. Distribution of E. coli

Out of 270 liver samples, 53.3% (144/270) were positive for E. coli and 46.67% (126/270) showed no growth. During the six-month study period from 1 February to 31 July 2019, the highest number of E. coli positive samples were isolated from broilers in May (66%; 31/47), June (59.6%; 31/52) and July (59.7%; 37/62) (Figure 1).
Similarly, the highest number of E. coli was isolated from layers in April (75%; 3/4), followed by the months of May and June (Figure 2).
The highest number of E. coli positive samples was isolated in samples collected from Kavre District (66.7%; 8/12) followed by Dhading District (60.9%; 14/23) and Nuwakot District (58.3%; 7/12) (Figure 3).
From a total of 270 samples, growth of E. coli was observed in 144. The highest number (54%; 109/202) was obtained in the liver samples from poultry aged less than 40 days; however, this finding was not statistically significant. There was a significant association concerning the flock size: More than two thirds of the samples from large poultry flocks (>1500) were positive for E. coli (74.4%; 67/90), while less than half (42.8%; 77/180) of the samples from small poultry flocks (size < 1500) were positive. Higher prevalence of E. coli was observed in broilers (58.60%; 133/227) compared to layers, a finding that was also statistically significant (p < 0.05) (Table 1).

3.2. Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern

Among the 12 different antibiotics evaluated, E. coli isolates were most frequently resistant to tetracycline 95.1% (137/144) and less resistant to cefoxitin (13.2%; 19/144). A total of 76.4% (110/144) isolates were MDR (Table 2).

3.3. Determination of MIC and Colistin-Resistant E. coli Isolates

The MIC value of E. coli isolates ranged from 4 to 32 µg/mL. The number of isolates and MIC to colistin is represented on Table 3.

3.4. Prevalence of mcr-1 among Colistin-Resistant E. coli Isolates from Poultry Infected Livers

Forty-one colistin resistant E. coli isolates were further screened for plasmid-mediated mcr-1 using conventional PCR. In the PCR assay, 43.9% (18/41) colistin-resistant E. coli isolates were positive for mcr-1 (Figure 4).

4. Discussion

This study aimed to detect plasmid-mediated colistin-resistant mcr-1 in colistin-resistant E. coli strains isolated from poultry suspected to have died with colibacillosis.
Colibacillosis is a major cause of morbidity in poultry [33]. Out of 270 liver samples, 53.3% (144/270) were reported to be infected with E. coli, which is similar to a study published in Nigeria reporting 43.3% prevalence of E. coli [34]. However, a study from Korea reported prevalence of 4.9% E. coli infection in chicken [35]. Growth of E. coli in this study was lower than in a previous similar study conducted at Chitwan, a district of Nepal [24]. This diversity may be attributed to differences in geographic location, climate, breeding and growth conditions.
Poultry health management along with biosecurity measures are the emerging issues which can have a major impact on transmission to humans [36]. In our study, the prevalence of E. coli isolates was higher (range: 45.5% in Kathmandu to 66.7% in Kavre) compared to the earlier report (33.3%; 60/180) in the four major districts of Nepal: Kathmandu, Bhaktapur, Lalitpur and Kaski [37]. This difference in prevalence rate may have occurred due to the type of poultry and density of flocks included in the studies. Moreover, the greater the flock size, the greater the chance of E. coli infections in poultry [38].
There was no significant difference between the growth of E. coli and the age of poultry. A slightly higher rate of E. coli infection was observed in the poultry ≤40 days old. While there were higher numbers of E. coli isolated in younger birds, this finding was not statistically significant and is likely due to sampling bias. Normally, broilers aged 40–42 days (six weeks) are ready for slaughter and marketing in our national context. A higher infection rate before 40 days might have a huge impact on the commercial market of poultry. A higher chance of extensive use of antibiotics in infections occurring after 40 days just before marketing could lead to consumption of meat with high-dose antibiotics. This is a leading cause of the emergence of antibiotic-resistant strains. The highest number of E. coli was isolated from flock sizes greater than 1500 (74.4%; 67/90), which is similar to a previous report from Sudan [39]. A higher prevalence of E. coli in larger flocks may be due to poor environmental hygiene and sanitation, including frequent faecal contamination of feeds, water, eggs and delay in collection of dead birds [40].
This study reported a higher percentage of E. coli in broilers (58.6%; 133/227) than in layers (25.6%; 11/43), which is similar to previous reports from Bangladesh [41] and Sudan [39]. Similar findings were reported from South Korea [42] and the Netherlands [43]. The difference in prevalence among different types of poultry could be attributed to the housing conditions where broilers are reared in semi-intensive systems while the intensive systems are used for layers [39,44]. In addition to this, studies have reported broilers to have comparatively lower immunity than layers [45]. In addition, due to the popularity of broiler poultry farms, there is a higher number of broiler poultry farms in Nepal, which may have led to larger flock sizes, accelerating the spread of pathogens, the use of antimicrobials and consequently the emergence of antimicrobial resistance.
A higher rate of colibacillosis was found during the month of May in this study. The annual technical report of the CVL also suggests historical evidence of a higher rate of colibacillosis in the months of April and May [46]. This could be due to the beginning of the rainy season, which could aggravate the poor hygiene, sanitation and contamination. This study only collected data for February to July and thus does not represent the every season of the year. While the current study was not intended to determine the prevalence or evaluate risk factors for positive samples, the differences may be due to a number of factors including farm size, flock characteristics, farm management, biosecurity practices and climate. Future epidemiological studies should be conducted to explore factors associated with this prevalence, including the potential measures for preventing infectious diseases such as colibacillosis among poultries.
Antibiotic susceptibility profiles of E. coli in this study are consistent with previous studies reported from Bangladesh [47], the Netherlands [48] and Nepal [49]. While tetracycline was not in use as a treatment options against E. coli infections in poultry farms, high resistance seen towards this drug could be attributable to the misuse of tetracycline as growth promoters [46]. The high sensitivity against cefoxitin could be due to its infrequent use in poultry farms. In this study, 76.4%% of isolates were found to be MDR, which is similar to a report published in the Netherlands [50] and a recent study in Nepal [51]. When compared with previous studies, the finding of this study indicates the persistence (unabated rate) of antibiotic resistance over the period of time [37,51].
This may be due to excessive and inappropriate use of antibiotics for growth promotion and prevention of diseases, which are available over the counter in Nepal [52]. This can further trigger the mechanisms that lead to the emergence of drug-resistant strains of E. coli.
Poultry products along with their complex supply chain (farms, transportation to slaughterhouse, the slaughter chain, processing plant, human handling, etc.) facilitate the horizontal exchange of antimicrobial-resistant genes between animals and humans, and vice versa, via mobile genetic elements [53,54]. Moreover, the environment, pets and wildlife are also factors that influence the transmission of AMR between the different reservoirs [54,55].
Similar to our findings, an MIC value of colistin ranging from 4 mg/L to 32 mg/L was reported from Brazil [56] and many other countries [57]. Elevated MIC of colistin in this study is probably due to the continuous exposure of E. coli to colistin as a result of its extensive use in feed additives and treatment therapies. The difference in the range of MIC values for colistin may be due to differences in doses of colistin in different countries.
In this study, we screened for mcr-1 gene among phenotypically colistin-resistant isolates. Eighteen of the colistin-resistant E. coli isolates were mcr-1 positive showing MICs for colistin ranging from 4 to 32 mg/L. High 307 prevalence (43.9%; 18/41) of mcr-1 in our study is similar to other reports from China [58] and Pakistan [59]. Our study does differ slightly from the first report on prevalence of mcr-1 in Nepal, which showed a prevalence rate of 22.8% in colistin-resistant E. coli isolates obtained from marketed poultry meat [37]

Strengths and Limitations

The study serves as a reference tool in epidemiological studies of mcr-1 genes isolated from poultry in Nepal, although with some limitations. Firstly, we could not confirm colibacillosis in infected samples due to the lack of histological and molecular investigations. In addition, performing nucleotide sequencing to confirm APEC among E. coli isolates was beyond the scope of this study. Secondly, the infected livers were analyzed only for bacteriological investigation, so other probable pathogens, such as virus, fungi and parasites were not explored. Thirdly, due to the unavailability of required materials and advanced facilities, including molecular screening of drug-resistant pathogens, we relied on the agar-dilution method in AST, although CLSI has already abrogated this method as a standard tool for the detection of colistin resistance. While this study was a recent one in the context of Nepal, detection of other variants of mcr genes (mcr-1 to mcr-10) and whole genome sequencing could be recommended for future studies.

5. Conclusions

The high prevalence of colistin-resistant E. coli among poultry isolates in this study could be due to the extensive use of colistin in poultry feeds. Moreover, the presence of mcr-1 in E. coli poses a potential threat of spreading colistin-resistant genes to human pathogens, contributing to the emergence of resistance to the last resort of antimicrobials in humans. Therefore, awareness programmes, including the implementation and regulation of strict polices on poultry management and biosecurity measures in addition to surveillance of colistin resistance in poultry, are essential to reduce the inappropriate use of this drug.

Author Contributions

All the authors made substantial contribution to the study. S.B., U.T.S., P.K., T.R.G., N.S. conceived and designed the study. S.B. collected samples, investigated and recorded the laboratory findings. U.T.S., N.A., D.R.J., N.S. and P.K. supervised the laboratory work. B.D., M.R.B., K.R.R., B.A. and P.G. advised and formulated the methodology for the study. S.B., U.T.S., B.D. and K.R.R. drafted the original draft. U.T.S., M.R.B. and K.R.R. analyzed the data. U.T.S., K.R.R. and B.A. are responsible for reviewing several versions of manuscript. Others helped to review and amend this manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The molecular work of this study was financially from Faculty Research Grants (Team Leader; Upendra Thapa Shrestha) supported by University Grants Commission (UGC Faculty Research Grants; FRG-2075/76-S&T-05), Bhaktapur, Nepal. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Acknowledgments

We express our sincere gratitude to all the faculties and laboratory assistants of Central Department of Microbiology, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal and Central Veterinary Laboratory, Kathmandu, Nepal. We are thankful to Dev Ram Sunuwar, Asian College for Advance Studies, for his kind help in creating map. We are also thankful to University Grants Commission, Nepal for the financial support and also to Katie Steneroden for language and substantive editing.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Rafique, M.; Potter, R.F.; Ferreiro, A.; Wallace, M.A.; Rahim, A.; Ali Malik, A.; Siddique, N.; Abbas, M.A.; D’Souza, A.W.; Burnham, C.D.; et al. Genomic Characterization of Antibiotic Resistant Escherichia coli Isolated from Domestic Chickens in Pakistan. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 3052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. De Carli, S.; Ikuta, N.; Lehmann, F.K.; da Silveira, V.P.; de Melo Predebon, G.; Fonseca, A.S.; Lunge, V.R. Virulence gene content in Escherichia coli isolates from poultry flocks with clinical signs of colibacillosis in Brazil. Poult. Sci. 2015, 94, 2635–2640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Manges, A.R.; Johnson, J.R. Food-borne origins of Escherichia coli causing extraintestinal infections. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2012, 55, 712–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Kayastha, K.; Dhungel, B.; Karki, S.; Adhikari, B.; Banjara, M.R.; Rijal, K.R.; Ghimire, P. Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella species in Pediatric Patients Visiting International Friendship Children’s Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal. Infect. Dis. 2020, 13, 1178633720909798. [Google Scholar]
  5. Dhungana, K.; Awal, B.K.; Dhungel, B.; Sharma, S.; Banjara, M.R.; Rijal, K.R. Detection of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) and metallo betalactamae (MBL) producing Gram negative bacteria isolated from different clinical samples in a Transplant Center, Kathmandu, Nepal. ASMI 2019, 2, 60–69. [Google Scholar]
  6. Amin, M.B.; Sraboni, A.S.; Hossain, M.I.; Roy, S.; Mozmader, T.; Unicomb, L.; Rousham, E.K.; Islam, M.A. Occurrence and genetic characteristics of mcr-1 positive colistin resistant E. coli from poultry environments in Bangladesh. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2020, 22, 546–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Falagas, M.E.; Karageorgopoulos, D.E.; Nordmann, P. Therapeutic options for infections with Enterobacteriaceae producing carbapenem-hydrolyzing enzymes. Future Microbiol. 2011, 6, 653–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. MacNair, C.R.; Stokes, J.M.; Carfrae, L.A.; Fiebig-Comyn, A.A.; Coombes, B.K.; Mulvey, M.R.; Brown, E.D. Overcoming mcr-1 mediated colistin resistance with colistin in combination with other antibiotics. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  9. Temkin, E.; Adler, A.; Lerner, A.; Carmeli, Y. Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: Biology, epidemiology, and management. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2014, 1323, 22–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Liu, Y.Y.; Wang, Y.; Walsh, T.R.; Yi, L.X.; Zhang, R.; Spencer, J.; Doi, Y.; Tian, G.; Dong, B.; Huang, X.; et al. Emergence of plasmid-mediated colistin resistance mechanism MCR-1 in animals and human beings in China: A microbiological and molecular biological study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2016, 16, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Poirel, L.; Kieffer, N.; Liassine, N.; Thanh, D.; Nordmann, P. Plasmid-mediated carbapenem and colistin resistance in a clinical isolate of Escherichia coli. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2016, 16, 281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Zhang, J.; Chen, L.; Wang, J.; Butaye, P.; Huang, K.; Qiu, H.; Zhang, X.; Gong, W.; Wang, C. Molecular detection of colistin resistance genes (mcr-1 to mcr-5) in human vaginal swabs. BMC Res. Notes 2018, 11, 143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Mello, M.M.; Vieira, J.; Simoes, F.V.; Freire, S.V.; Moraes, R.; Santos, R.P. Microbial resistance to colistin in consequence of mutations in the mcr-1 gene of Escherichia coli. MOJ Public Health 2018, 7, 59–63. [Google Scholar]
  14. Van Boeckel, T.P.; Glennon, E.E.; Chen, D.; Gilbert, M.; Robinson, T.P.; Grenfell, B.T.; Levin, S.A.; Bonhoeffer, S.; Laxminarayan, R. Reducing antimicrobial use in food animals. Science 2017, 357, 1350–1352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Marshall, B.M.; Levy, S.B. Food animals and antimicrobials: Impacts on human health. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2011, 24, 718–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Chowdhury, R.; Haque, M.; Islam, K.M.S.; Khaleduzzaman, A.B.M. A review on Antibiotics in an Animal Feed. Bangladesh J. Anim. Sci. 2009, 38, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Rokka, M.; Jestoi, M.; Peltonen, K. Trace level determination of polyether ionophores in feed. BioMed Res. Int. 2013, 2013, 151363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Kabir, J.; Umoh, V.J.; Audu-okoh, E.; Umoh, J.U.; Kwaga, J.K.P. Veterinary Drug Use in Poultry Farms and Determination of Antimicrobial Drug Residues in Commercial Eggs and Slaughtered Chicken in Kaduna State, Nigeria. Food Control 2004, 15, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Seri, H.I. Introduction to Veterinary Drug Residues: Hazards and Risks. In Proceedings of the Workshop: Veterinary Drug Residues in Food Derived from Animals (Our Goal of Protecting Consumers), The National Medicinal and Poisons Board, Khartoum, Sudan, 26–27 May 2013; Available online: http://www.sustech.edu/staff_publications/2013070315212363.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2019).
  20. Dominguez, J.E.; Redondo, L.M.; Figueroa Espinosa, R.A.; Cejas, D.; Gutkind, G.O.; Chacana, P.A.; Di Conza, J.A.; Fernandez Miyakawa, M.E. Simultaneous Carriage of mcr-1 and Other Antimicrobial Resistance Determinants in Escherichia coli from Poultry. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 1679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Laxminarayan, R.; Duse, A.; Wattal, C.; Zaidi, A.K.; Wertheim, H.F.; Sumpradit, N.; Vlieghe, E.; Hara, G.L.; Gould, I.M.; Goossens, H.; et al. Antibiotic resistance-the need for global solutions. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2013, 13, 1057–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Gautam, G.; Devkota, B.; Thapaliya, S. Recent case flow pattern in veterinary teaching Hospital of Agriculture and Forestry University, Chitwan, Nepal. J. Agric. For. Univ. 2017, 1, 119–128. [Google Scholar]
  23. Shrestha, E.K.; Dhakal, I.P.; Sapkota, M.; Manandhar, P.; Rijal, T.B. Antimicrobial resistance pattern of Eshcerichia coli isolates from chicken and human samples in Chitwan. Nepal. Vet. J. 2011, 30, 38–44. [Google Scholar]
  24. Subedi, M.; Luitel, H.; Devkota, B.; Bhattarai, R.K.; Phuyal, S.; Panthi, P.; Shrestha, A.; Chaudhary, D.K. Antibiotic resistance pattern and virulence genes content in avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC) from broiler chickens in Chitwan, Nepal. BMC Vet. Res. 2018, 14, 113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Overdevest, I.; Willemsen, I.; Rijnsburger, M.; Eustace, A.; Xu, L.; Hawkey, P.; Heck, M.; Savelkoul, P.; Vandenbroucke-Grauls, C.; van der Zwaluw, K.; et al. Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase genes of Escherichia coli in chicken meat and humans, The Netherlands. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2011, 17, 1216–1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Guragin, N.; Pradhan, A.; Dhungel, B.; Banjara, M.R.; Rijal, K.R.; Ghimire, P. Extended spectrum B-lactamase producing Gram Negative bacterial isolates from urine of patients visiting Everest Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal. TUJM 2019, 6, 26–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). M100 Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, 27th ed.; An Informational Supplement; CLSI: Wayne, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  28. Magiorakos, A.P.; Srinivasan, A.; Carey, R.B.; Carmeli, Y.; Falagas, M.E.; Giske, C.G.; Harbarth, S.; Hindler, J.F.; Kahlmeter, G.; Olsson-Liljequist, B.; et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: An international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2012, 18, 268–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Andrews, J.M. Determination of minimum inhibitory concentrations. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2001, 48 (Suppl. 1), 5–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Gurung, S.; Kafle, S.; Dhungel, B.; Adhikari, N.; Shrestha, U.T.; Adhikari, B.; Banjara, M.R.; Rijal, K.R.; Ghimire, P. Detection of OXA-48 Gene in Carbapenem-Resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae from Urine Samples. Infect. Drug Resist. 2020, 13, 2311–2321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Birnboim, H.C.; Doly, J. A rapid alkaline extraction procedure for screening recombinant plasmid DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 1979, 7, 1513–1523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Newton-Foot, M.; Snyman, Y.; Maloba, M.R.B.; Whitelaw, A.C. Plasmid-mediated mcr-1 colistin resistance in Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. clinical isolates from the Western Cape region of South Africa. Antimicrob. Resist. Infect. Control 2017, 6, 78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Mellata, M. Human and avian extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli: Infections, zoonotic risks, and antibiotic resistance trends. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2013, 10, 916–932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Adeyanju, G.T.; Ishola, O. Salmonella and Escherichia coli contamination of poultry meat from a processing plant and retail markets in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. Springerplus 2014, 3, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Lee, G.Y.; Jang, H.I.; Hwang, I.G.; Rhee, M.S. Prevalence and classification of pathogenic Escherichia coli isolated from fresh beef, poultry, and pork in Korea. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2009, 134, 196–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chantziaras, I.; Boyen, F.; Callens, B.; Dewulf, J. Correlation between veterinary antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance in food-producing animals: A report on seven countries. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2014, 69, 827–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Joshi, P.R.; Thummeepak, R.; Leungtongkam, U.; Pooarlai, R.; Paudel, S.; Acharya, M.; Dhital, S.; Sitthisak, S. The emergence of colistin-resistant Escherichia coli in chicken meats in Nepal. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2019, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sobur, M.A.; Ievy, S.; Haque, Z.F.; Nahar, A.; Zaman, S.B.; Rahman, M.T. Emergence of colistin-resistant Escherichia coli in poultry, house flies, and pond water in Mymensingh, Bangladesh. J. Adv. Vet. Anim. Res. 2019, 6, 50–53. [Google Scholar]
  39. Omer, M.M.; Abusalab, S.M.; Gumaa, M.M.; Mulla, S.A.; Omer, E.A.; Jeddah, I.E.; Al-Hassan, A.M.; Hussein, M.A.; Ahmed, A.M. Outbreak of colibacillosis among broiler and layer flocks in Intensive and semi Intensive poultry farms in Kassala State, Eastern Sudan. Asian J. Poult. Sci. 2010, 4, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Ferens, W.A.; Hovde, C.J. Escherichia coli O157:H7: Animal reservoir and sources of human infection. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2011, 8, 465–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Matin, M.A.; Islam, M.A.; Khatun, M.M. Prevalence of colibacillosis in chickens in greater Mymensingh district of Bangladesh. Vet. World 2017, 10, 29–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Tonu, N.S.; Sufian, M.A.; Sarker, S.; Kamal, M.M.; Rahman, M.H.; Hossain, M.M. Pathological study of colibacillosis in chicken and detection of E. coli by PCR, Bangladesh. J. Vet. Med. 2011, 9, 17–25. [Google Scholar]
  43. Landman, W.J.; van Eck, J.H. The incidence and economic impact of the Escherichia coli peritonitis syndrome in Dutch poultry farming. Avian Pathol. 2015, 44, 370–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Omer, M.M.; Khaldga, A.; Abusalab, S.M.; Gumma Mulla, S.A.; Ahmed, A.M. An outbreak of gumboro disease associated with Colibacillosis among broiler and layer chicks in Kassala state, Eastern Sudan. Res. J. Poult. Sci. 2008, 2, 27–28. [Google Scholar]
  45. Koenen, M.E.; Boonstra-Blom, A.G.; Jeurissen, S.H.M. Immunological differences between layer- and broiler-type chickens. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2002, 89, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Annual Technical Report 2074/075 (2017/018): Government of Nepal MoAaLD, Department of Livestock Services, Central Veterinary Laboratory, Tripureshwor, Kathmandu, Nepal. Available online: www.cvl.gov.np (accessed on 20 January 2020).
  47. Sarker, S.; Mannan, S.; Ali, Y.; Bayzid Ahad, A.; Bupasha, Z.B. Antibiotic resistance of E. coli isolated from broilers sold at live bird markets in Chattogramm Bangladesh. J. Adv. Vet. Anim. Res. 2019, 3, 272–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. van den Bogaard, A.E.; Stobberingh, E.E. Epidemiology of resistance to antibiotics. Links between animals and humans. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2000, 14, 327–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Khanal, T.; Raut, S.B.; Paneru, U. Study of antibiotic resistance in E. coli in commercial poultry of Nepal. Nepal. Vet. J. 2017, 34, 6–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. van den Bogaard, A.E.; London, N.; Driessen, C.; Stobberingh, E.E. Antibiotic resistance of faecal Escherichia coli in poultry, poultry farmers and poultry slaughterers. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2001, 47, 763–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Muktan, B.; Thapa Shrestha, U.; Dhungel, B.; Mishra, B.C.; Shrestha, N.; Adhikari, N.; Banjara, M.R.; Adhikari, B.; Rijal, K.R.; Ghimire, P. Plasmid mediated colistin resistant mcr-1 and co-existence of OXA-48 among Escherichia coli from clinical and poultry isolates: First report from Nepal. Gut Pathog. 2020, 12, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Pokharel, S.; Raut, S.; Adhikari, B. Tackling antimicrobial resistance in low-income and middle-income countries. BMJ Glob. Health 2019, 4, e002104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Nhung, N.T.; Chansiripornchai, N.; Carrique-Mas, J.J. Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Poultry Pathogens: A Review. Front. Vet. Sci. 2017, 4, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Zhang, J.; Chen, L.; Wang, J.; Yassin, A.K.; Butayae, P.; Kelly, P.; Gong, J.; Guo, W.; Li, J.; Li, M.; et al. Molecular detection of colistin resistance genes (mcr-1, mcr-2 and mcr-3) in nasal/oropharyngeal and anal/cloacal swabs from pigs and poultry. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 3705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Chen, L.; Zhang, J.; Wang, J.; Butayae, P.; Kelly, P.; Li, M.; Yang, F.; Gong, J.; Yassin, A.K.; Guo, W.; et al. Newly identified colistin resistance genes, mcr-4 and mcr-5, from upper and lower alimentary tract of pigs and poultry in China. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0193957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Morales, A.S.; Fragoso de Araujo, J.; de Moura Gomes, V.T.; Reis Costa, A.T.; dos Prazeres Rodrigues, D.; Porfida Ferreira, T.S.; de Lima Filsner, P.H.; Felizardo, M.R.; Micke Moreno, A. Colistin resistance in Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica strains isolated from swine in Brazil. Sci. World J. 2012, 2012, 109795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Barlaam, A.; Parisi, A.; Spinelli, E.; Caruso, M.; Taranto, P.D.; Normanno, G. Global Emergence of Colistin-Resistant Escherichia coli in Food Chains and Associated Food Safety Implications: A Review. J. Food Prot. 2019, 82, 1440–1448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Zhang, P.; Shen, Z.; Zhang, C.; Song, L.; Wang, B.; Shang, J.; Yue, X.; Qu, Z.; Li, X.; Wu, L.; et al. Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance among Escherichia coli from chicken and swine, China, 2008–2015. Vet. Microbiol. 2017, 203, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Azam, M.; Ehsan, I.; Sajjad Ur, R.; Saleemi, M.K.; Javed, M.R.; Mohsin, M. Detection of the colistin resistance gene mcr-1 in avian pathogenic Escherichia coli in Pakistan. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2017, 11, 152–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Animals 10 02060 g001 550
Figure 1. Month-wise distribution of E. coli isolated in broiler liver samples.
Figure 1. Month-wise distribution of E. coli isolated in broiler liver samples.
Animals 10 02060 g001
Animals 10 02060 g002 550
Figure 2. Month-wise distribution of E. coli in liver samples from layers.
Figure 2. Month-wise distribution of E. coli in liver samples from layers.
Animals 10 02060 g002
Animals 10 02060 g003 550
Figure 3. Isolation of E. coli in poultry liver samples collected in different districts of Nepal.
Figure 3. Isolation of E. coli in poultry liver samples collected in different districts of Nepal.
Animals 10 02060 g003
Animals 10 02060 g004 550
Figure 4. Amplification of plasmid-mediated mcr-1 gene from different E. coli isolates with positive and negative controls (Lane 1, marker (GeneRuler 100 bp DNA Ladder, Thermo Fisher Scientific), Lane 2–Lane 4, no amplifications; Lane 5–Lane 7, positive amplification; Lane 8, no amplification; Lane 9, negative control; Lane 10, positive control).
Figure 4. Amplification of plasmid-mediated mcr-1 gene from different E. coli isolates with positive and negative controls (Lane 1, marker (GeneRuler 100 bp DNA Ladder, Thermo Fisher Scientific), Lane 2–Lane 4, no amplifications; Lane 5–Lane 7, positive amplification; Lane 8, no amplification; Lane 9, negative control; Lane 10, positive control).
Animals 10 02060 g004
Table
Table 1. Growth of E. coli in the poultry liver samples according to age of dead poultry, flock size and type of poultry.
Table 1. Growth of E. coli in the poultry liver samples according to age of dead poultry, flock size and type of poultry.
Age (Days)E. coliNo GrowthTotalp-Value
≤40109(54%)93(46%)202(74.8)0.72
>4035(51.5%)33(48.5%)68(25.2%)
Total144126270(100%)
Flock SizeE. coliNo GrowthTotalp-Value
>150067(74.4%)23(25.6%)90(33.3%)0.0001
≤150077(42.8%)103(57.2)180(66.7%
Total144126270(100%)
Type of PoultryE. coliNo GrowthTotalp-Value
Broiler133(58.6%)94(41.4%)227(84.1%)0.0001
Layer11(25.6%)32(74.4%)43(15.9%)
Total144126270 (100%)
Table
Table 2. Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of E. coli isolates from colibacillosis-related dead poultry (n = 144).
Table 2. Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of E. coli isolates from colibacillosis-related dead poultry (n = 144).
Antibiotic CategoryAntibioticsSusceptibility Pattern
ResistantSensitive
N.%N.%
AminoglycosidesAmikacin10371.54128.5
Gentamicin11076.43423.6
Penicillins Ampicillin8861.15638.9
CephamycinsCefoxitin1913.212586.8
3rd generation cephalosporinsCeftriaxone4631.99868.1
PhenicolsChloramphenicol8458.36041.7
FluoroquinolonesCiprofloxacin11982.62517.4
Levofloxacin11076.43423.6
Folate pathway inhibitorsCotrimoxazole9868.14631.9
CarbapenemsImipenem3725.710774.3
TetracyclinesTetracycline13795.174.9
Table
Table 3. Colistin susceptibility pattern of E. coli at different concentrations.
Table 3. Colistin susceptibility pattern of E. coli at different concentrations.
OrganismNumberConcentration of Colistin Total
4 mg/L8 mg/L16 mg/L32 mg/L
E. coli14414
(34.1%)		10
(24.4%)		8
(19.5%)		9
(22%)		41
(28.5%)
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bista, S.; Thapa Shrestha, U.; Dhungel, B.; Koirala, P.; Gompo, T.R.; Shrestha, N.; Adhikari, N.; Joshi, D.R.; Banjara, M.R.; Adhikari, B.; et al. Detection of Plasmid-Mediated Colistin Resistant mcr-1 Gene in Escherichia coli Isolated from Infected Chicken Livers in Nepal. Animals 2020, 10, 2060. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112060

AMA Style

Bista S, Thapa Shrestha U, Dhungel B, Koirala P, Gompo TR, Shrestha N, Adhikari N, Joshi DR, Banjara MR, Adhikari B, et al. Detection of Plasmid-Mediated Colistin Resistant mcr-1 Gene in Escherichia coli Isolated from Infected Chicken Livers in Nepal. Animals. 2020; 10(11):2060. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112060

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bista, Sayara, Upendra Thapa Shrestha, Binod Dhungel, Pragya Koirala, Tulsi Ram Gompo, Nabaraj Shrestha, Nabaraj Adhikari, Dev Raj Joshi, Megha Raj Banjara, Bipin Adhikari, and et al. 2020. "Detection of Plasmid-Mediated Colistin Resistant mcr-1 Gene in Escherichia coli Isolated from Infected Chicken Livers in Nepal" Animals 10, no. 11: 2060. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112060

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop