Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2000, p. 1832-1838, Vol. 38, No. 5
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Transfer of Erythromycin Resistance from Poultry to
Human Clinical Strains of Staphylococcus aureus
Saeed A.
Khan,
Mohamed S.
Nawaz,*
Ashraf A.
Khan, and
Carl E.
Cerniglia
Division of Microbiology, National Center for
Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
Jefferson, Arkansas 72079
Received 13 September 1999/Returned for modification 29 January
2000/Accepted 26 February 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The transfer of ermA and ermC genes, the
two most common resistance determinants of erythromycin resistance, was
studied with Luria-Bertani broth in the absence of additional
Ca2+ or Mg2+ ions. Fifteen human and five
poultry isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, which were
resistant to erythromycin but carried different genetic markers for
erythromycin resistance, were used for conjugation. Since both the
donors (Amps-Tetr) and recipients
(Ampr-Tets) were resistant to erythromycin, the
transconjugants were initially picked up as ampicillin- and
tetracycline-resistant colonies. The resistance transfer mechanisms of
the chromosomally located erythromycin rRNA methylase gene
ermA and the plasmid-borne ermC gene were
monitored by a multiplex PCR and gene-specific internal probing assay.
Four groups of transconjugants, based upon the transfer of the
ermA and/or ermC gene, were distinguished from each other by the use of this method. Selective antibiotic screening revealed only one type of transconjugant that was resistant to ampicillin and tetracycline. A high frequency of transfer (4.5 × 10
3) was observed in all of the 23 transconjugants
obtained, and the direction of tetracycline and erythromycin resistance
marker transfer was determined to be from poultry to clinical isolates. The transfers of the ermA and ermC genes were
via transposition and transformation, respectively.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Staphylococcus aureus is
an important cause of nosocomial as well as community-based infections.
The use of antibiotics in humans, to treat infections, and in animals,
to promote growth and prevent colonization by pathogenic bacteria, has
led to an increased resistance among bacteria (2, 21, 25).
The resistance often is transferable at interspecies and intergeneric
levels (3, 18, 28). The relative ease with which bacteria
become resistant to currently used antimicrobial agents is of concern to public health officials (8, 9, 31). The spread of
resistance to antimicrobial agents in S. aureus is largely
due to the acquisition of plasmids and/or transposons (19).
Although transfer of resistance between staphylococcal strains in the
laboratory has been shown to occur via transformation, transduction,
and conjugation (6, 14, 15, 17, 35), only conjugative
transfer appears to be significant in vivo (17, 35). In
staphylococci, the conjugative transfer of resistance determinants is
usually mediated by conjugative plasmids (5, 20, 38, 39) but
has also been shown to occur in the absence of detectable conjugative
plasmids (4). Conjugative plasmids, usually 35 to 50 kb
(7), spread resistance determinants between species and
genera (3, 17, 18, 28, 35). Besides transferring the
resistance determinants, they can mobilize nonconjugative plasmids
(5, 17), recombine with nonconjugative plasmids to form new
plasmids (37), or acquire and transfer resistance transposons (36).
Studies with human staphylococcal strains indicate that
Staphylococcus epidermidis is a reservoir of antibiotic
resistance genes that can be transferred to S. aureus under
in vitro and in vivo conditions (5, 10, 19, 20). Studies of
drug resistance transfer between staphylococcal strains have been done
mostly on human isolates; studies of transfer between animal and human staphylococcal strains are rare (16, 24), and little or no information is available about the transfer of drug resistance between
avian and human staphylococci. In the context of the prevalent use of
antibiotics in the poultry industry and the limited data about the role
of poultry staphylococcal isolates in drug resistance transfer, it is
pertinent to ask whether poultry isolates also contribute to the spread
of antibiotic resistance in human staphylococcal strains. The objective
of this study was to investigate the role of poultry S. aureus isolates in the dissemination of antibiotic resistance to
human clinical S. aureus isolates in vitro and the development of a method to study the resistance transfer between bacterial strains resistant to the same antibiotic. In this study, a
PCR-based method is reported that was used in combination with the
selective antibiotic screening method to study the direction and
mechanism of resistance transfer between poultry and human staphylococcal isolates, both of which were resistant to erythromycin but carried different genetic markers.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Bacterial strains and culture conditions.
Erythromycin-resistant S. aureus strains were isolated from
the hock joints and internal organs of diseased chickens. These were
identified using the Automicrobic System (BioMerieux Vitek, Inc.,
Hazelwood, Mo.) and maintained as in-house stocks (27). The
clinical S. aureus strains were either from the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, or from the Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Food and Drug Administration, Washington, D.C. All the isolates, which were highly resistant to
erythromycin (MIC of >256 µg/ml), were stored in Luria-Bertani (LB)
broth containing 20% glycerol at
70°C. Organisms were grown overnight at 37°C in LB broth or on tryptic soy agar plates
supplemented with 5% sheep's blood (Remel, Lenexa, Kans.). The
plasmids pEM9698 and pE194, both maintained in Bacillus
subtilis, were used as controls for the detection of
ermA and ermC genes, respectively.
Antibiotic resistance profile of bacterial strains.
The
antibiotic resistance profiles of various S. aureus strains
obtained from poultry and human sources were determined by the
disk-diffusion assay method (1). The diameter of the
inhibition zone was measured in triplicate and interpreted according to
standards set by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory
Standards (26). Ampicillin, penicillin, streptomycin,
tetracycline, erythromycin, lincomycin, azithromycin, and ciprofloxacin
were used for determining the sensitivity of the above strains.
Transfer of antibiotic resistance in mixed liquid cultures.
Bacterial cultures were grown for 12 h in LB broth at 30°C
(~3 × 109 CFU/ml). Equal volumes (200 µl) of the
poultry strains (resistant to tetracycline) and clinical S. aureus cultures (resistant to ampicillin and ciprofloxacin but
sensitive to tetracycline and streptomycin) were mixed in an Eppendorf
tube. The cultures were supplemented with 200 µl of LB broth and
incubated at 37°C without shaking. Aliquots of 50 µl each were
withdrawn after 6 h and plated in triplicate on tetracycline (30 µg/ml)- and ampicillin (100 µg/ml)-tetracycline (30 µg/ml)-containing hard agar plates after appropriate dilution. After
24 h, colonies resistant to ampicillin and tetracycline were
picked up as transconjugants. The choice of these antibiotics was
purposefully made so that the resistant colonies might represent the
transconjugants where the transfer of ampicillin resistance from
clinical to poultry strains or the transfer of tetracycline resistance
from poultry to clinical strains had taken place. In either case, the
transconjugants would be resistant to ampicillin and tetracycline.
Although the transconjugants were initially picked up on these plates,
the transfer mechanisms of the erythromycin resistance markers,
ermA and ermC genes, were studied.
Isolation of DNA and gel electrophoresis.
The total DNA from
the overnight-grown cultures was isolated by the method of
Thakker-Varia et al. (33), and the plasmid DNA was isolated
by other methods (13, 30). The electrophoresis of plasmid
DNA, total DNA (chromosomal and plasmid DNA), or their EcoRI
digestion products was carried out on a 1.0% agarose gel. The gels
were run at 40 mA for 4 h, stained with ethidium bromide, and photographed.
Detection of ermA and ermC genes by PCR
and gene-specific probing.
The ermA and ermC
genes from the donors, recipients, and transconjugants were detected by
multiplex PCR analysis using the gene-specific PCR primers
(12). The transfer of these genes was studied by in-gel
probing of the EcoRI-digested chromosomal DNA for the
detection of ermA gene inserts or Southern blotting and
hybridization of the total DNA for detection of the ermC
gene by using gene-specific probes as described earlier (11,
12).
Frequency of transfer.
The transfer frequency of
tetracycline resistance was calculated as the ratio of ampicillin- and
tetracycline-resistant cells (average of three platings) to the total
number of tetracycline-resistant cells (average of three platings).
 |
RESULTS |
Antibiotic resistance profiles of poultry, clinical, and
transconjugant strains.
The poultry isolates were sensitive to
ampicillin, penicillin, and ciprofloxacin but resistant to
streptomycin, tetracycline, erythromycin, lincomycin, and azithromycin
(Fig. 1A). The clinical strains were
sensitive to streptomycin and tetracycline but resistant to the other
six antibiotics (Fig. 1B). After mixed culture transfer experiments and
plating on ampicillin (100 µg/ml)-tetracycline (30 µg/ml)-containing plates, 23 transconjugants were obtained. The
resistance profiles of the transconjugants (Fig. 1C) were similar to
those of the clinical strains (Fig. 1B), except that the
transconjugants were resistant to tetracycline.

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Antibiotic resistance and sensitivity profile of the
donors, recipients, and transconjugants. The strains were tested
against eight different antibiotics. The antibiotic resistance profiles
of the representative strains are shown for poultry isolates (A),
clinical isolates (B), and transconjugants (C). The antibiotics and
concentrations were as follows: ampicillin (Amp; 10 µg/ml),
penicillin (Pen; 10 U/ml), streptomycin (Str; 10 µg/ml), tetracycline
(Tet; 30 µg/ml), erythromycin (Ery; 15 µg/ml), lincomycin (Linc; 2 µg/ml), azithromycin (Azm; 15 µg/ml), and ciprofloxacin (Cip; 5 µg/ml).
|
|
DNA profiles of the donors, recipients, and transconjugants.
All of the poultry strains contained plasmids ranging from 1.6 to 8.0 kb in size (Fig. 2A). The clinical
strains, on the other hand, contained no plasmids (Fig. 2B). DNA
analysis of the transconjugants revealed that only 8 of the 23 transconjugants contained plasmids (Fig. 2C) and the other 15 did not
(data shown for only two transconjugants). This observation suggested
that there were at least two types of transconjugants, ones that had
acquired the plasmid DNA and others that had not.

View larger version (59K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Total DNA profile of the poultry and clinical S. aureus isolates. Approximately 1 µg (5 µl) of total DNA was
loaded on 1.0% agarose gels and electrophoresed. The gels were stained
with ethidium bromide and photographed. The letters p and c followed by
numbers represent poultry and clinical strains, respectively. (A) DNA
from poultry isolates. Lanes 1 and 7, supercoiled DNA ladder; lane 2, p45; lane 3, p46; lane 4, p58; lane 5, p62; lane 6, p63. (B) DNA from
clinical isolates. Lanes 1 and 17, supercoiled DNA ladder; lane 2, c16;
lane 3, c18; lane 4, c29; lane 5, c656; lane 6, c657; lane 7, c660;
lane 8, c661; lane 9, c712; lane 10; c714; lane 11, c716; lane 12, c720; lane 13, c722; lane 14, c772; lane 15, c796; lane 16, c803. (C)
DNA from transconjugants. Lanes 1 and 6, supercoiled DNA ladder; lane
2, c716; lane 3, p58; lane 4, p58-c716; lane 5, p58-c803.
|
|
Multiplex PCR and the direction of resistance transfer.
The
antibiotic resistance and the DNA profiles of the transconjugants were
helpful in screening and differentiating the transconjugants, but they
did not reveal any information about the transfer of either
ermA or the ermC gene. To determine whether the
transfer of the chromosomally located ermA and the
plasmid-borne ermC gene had taken place or not, the
bacterial lysates from parents and transconjugants were subjected to
multiplex PCR analysis to determine the presence of the two genes. The
PCR revealed that the poultry strains had both the ermA and
the ermC genes (Fig. 3A, lanes
5 to 9). The clinical strains, on the other hand, had only the
ermA gene, except for strains 712, 716, and 803, which had
neither ermA nor the ermC gene (Fig. 3A, lanes
18, 20, and 25). The transconjugants that had acquired the plasmid DNA
had also acquired the ermC gene (Fig. 3B, lanes 18 to 25).
The transconjugants that did not acquire the plasmid DNA were also
missing the ermC gene (Fig. 3B, lanes 2 to 16). All the
transconjugants, however, possessed the ermA gene (Fig. 3B,
lanes 2 to 16). The above observations suggested that the transfer of
these markers occurred from poultry to clinical isolates.

View larger version (61K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Multiplex PCR analysis of the donors, recipients, and
transconjugants. PCR samples (5 µl) from different bacterial strains
were loaded on a 1.0% agarose gel, and the gels were photographed
after staining with ethidium bromide. (A) Lanes 1, 10, and 26, 100-bp
DNA ladder; lane 2, ermA control from plasmid pEM9698; lane
3, ermC control from plasmid pE194; lane 4, ermA-ermC control; lane 5, p45; lane 6, p46; lane 7, p58;
lane 8, p62; lane 9, p63; lane 11, c16; lane 12, c18; lane 13, c29;
lane 14, c656; lane 15, c657; lane 16, c660; lane 17, c661; lane 18, c712; lane 19, c714; lane 20, c716; lane 21, c720; lane 22, c722; lane
23, c772; lane 24, c796; lane 25, c803. (B) Lanes 1, 17, and 26, 100-bp
DNA ladder; lane 2, p45-c16; lane 3, p45-c18; lane 4, p45-c772; lane 5, p58-c657; lane 6, p62-c656; lane 7, p62-c657; lane 8, p62-c660; lane 9, p62-c661; lane 10, p62-c720; lane 11, p62-c722; lane 12, p63-c18; lane
13, p46-c716; lane 14, p58-c803; lane 15, p62-c712; lane 16, p63-c716;
lane 18, p45-c29; lane 19, p45-c722; lane 20, p46-c714; lane 21, p46-c796; lane 22, p58-c18; lane 23, p58-c714; lane 24, p63-c29; lane
25, p58-c716. The transconjugants are identified as donor-recipient
pairs. The transconjugants belonging to different groups are indicated.
Designations beginning with "p" are for poultry strains; those
beginning with "c" are for clinical strains.
|
|
Based upon the presence or absence of the ermA and/or
ermC gene, the transconjugants were classified into four
groups (Table 1). The transconjugants
that belonged to group 1 possessed the ermA gene (Fig. 3B,
lanes 2 to 12). The group 2 transconjugants also had the
ermA gene (Fig. 3B, lanes 13 to 16), but the DNA-recipient parent strains did not have the ermA gene (Fig. 3A, lanes
18, 20, and 25). The third group of transconjugants showed the presence of both the ermA and the ermC genes (Fig. 3B,
lanes 18 to 24). The only transconjugant strain that belonged to group
4 also had the ermA and the ermC genes (Fig. 3B,
lane 25), but like group 2 transconjugants, the recipient parent did
not have either of the two genes (Fig. 3A, lane 20).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
TABLE 1.
Transfer frequency of tetracycline resistance and the
presence of ermA and ermC genes
in transconjugants
|
|
In-gel and Southern hybridization.
To determine the locations
of the ermA and/or ermC gene, each group of
transconjugants was probed with gene-specific internal probes for
ermA and ermC genes. To determine the copy number
of the ermA gene, EcoRI-digested chromosomal DNA
molecules from the donors, recipients, and transconjugants were
separated on agarose gels and subjected to in-gel probing with an
ermA gene-specific internal oligonucleotide probe. The avian
isolates (donors) had only two inserts, of 8.0 and 6.2 kb each (data
shown for p58 only), which hybridized with the ermA
gene-specific probe (Fig. 4A, lane 2),
whereas the clinical isolates (recipients) had three to four copies
(Fig. 4A, lanes 3 and 7). The recipients that did not test positive for
the ermA gene by PCR also did not show any hybridization signal with the ermA gene-specific probe (Fig. 4A, lanes 5 and 9). All the transconjugants, however, had acquired an extra copy of
the ermA gene (Fig. 4A, lanes 4, 6, 8, and 10) as 3.1-kb
chromosomal DNA inserts (data shown for only one representative from
each group of transconjugants).

View larger version (82K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
In-gel and Southern hybridization. (A)
EcoRI-digested DNAs of the donors, recipients, and
transconjugants were probed with an ermA gene-specific
internal oligonucleotide probe. Lanes 1 and 11, digoxigenin-labeled DNA
molecular size marker III (Boehringer Mannheim); lane 2, p58; lane 3, c657; lane 4, p58-c657; lane 5, c803; lane 6, p58-c803; lane 7, c18;
lane 8, p58-c18; lane 9, c716; lane 10, p58-c716. (B) Southern
hybridization of the donor and transconjugant total DNA with an
ermC gene-specific internal oligonucleotide probe. Lanes 1 and 25, control plasmid pE194 DNA; lane 2, p45; lane 3, p46; lane 4, p58; lane 5, p62; lane 6, p63; lane 7, p45-c16; lane 8, p45-c772; lane
9, p58-c657; lane 10, p62-c656; lane 11, p62-c660; lane 12, p62-c661;
lane 13, p62-c720; lane 14, p62-c722; lane 15, p63-c18; lane 16, p46-c716; lane 17, p58-c803; lane 18, p62-c712; lane 19, p45-c29; lane
20, p45-c722; lane 21, p46-c796; lane 22, p58-c714; lane 23, p63-c29;
lane 24, p58-c716. Designations are explained in the legend to Fig.
3.
|
|
To determine which plasmid harbored the ermC gene, the DNA
gel was blotted onto a nylon membrane and probed with an
ermC gene-specific internal oligonucleotide probe. The probe
hybridized with a 2.5-kb plasmid in group 3 and 4 transconjugants (Fig.
4B, lanes 19 to 24), suggesting that the ermC gene was
present on this plasmid only. The transconjugants belonging to groups 1 (Fig. 4B, lanes 7 to 15) and 2 (Fig. 4B, lanes 16 to 18) showed no
hybridization signal with the ermC gene-specific internal
probe. No hybridization signal was detected with the chromosomal DNA in
any group of transconjugants (Fig. 4B, lanes 2 to 24).
Frequency and efficiency of transfer of genetic markers.
Based
upon the antibiotic resistance phenotype and the PCR data, the transfer
of tetracycline resistance and the two major determinants of
erythromycin resistance, namely, ermA and ermC, occurred from poultry to clinical isolates. The efficiency of transfer
was, however, different for different genetic markers. The transfer
frequency of tetracycline resistance was calculated to be 4.5 × 10
3. Since all the 23 transconjugants that were resistant
to tetracycline also acquired an extra copy of the ermA
gene, it was assumed that the transfer frequency of the ermA
gene was at least equal to that of tetracycline resistance. The
ermC gene was present in only 8 of the 23 transconjugants,
and therefore, its transfer frequency appears to be three times lower
than that for ermA or tet.
 |
DISCUSSION |
The ampicillin and tetracycline resistance phenotype of the
transconjugants could arise by the transfer either of ampicillin resistance from clinical to poultry strains or of tetracycline resistance from poultry to clinical isolates. Upon comparison, the
antibiotic resistance and sensitivity profile of the transconjugants was found to be similar to that of the clinical strains, except that
the transconjugants were resistant to tetracycline. The sensitivity of
transconjugants to streptomycin and their resistance to ciprofloxacin suggested that they had more in common with the clinical isolates than
with the poultry isolates. The clinical strains appeared to have
acquired the tetracycline resistance from the poultry isolates. In the
event of transfer from clinical to poultry isolates, the ampicillin,
penicillin, and ciprofloxacin resistance has to have been transferred
in order to explain the resistance and sensitivity profile of the
transconjugants. Further, the sensitivity of the transconjugants to
streptomycin could not be explained if the transfer of resistance(s)
occurred from clinical to poultry strains. The direction of
tetracycline resistance transfer was, therefore, determined to be from
poultry to clinical S. aureus isolates.
The use of ampicillin and tetracycline as selective antibiotics was
helpful in determining the direction of tetracycline resistance transfer but it was of no use in determining if the transfer of erythromycin resistance markers, ermA and ermC,
between poultry and clinical strains had also occurred. Both the
poultry and the clinical strains were resistant to high concentrations
of erythromycin (MIC of >256 µg/ml). Based upon the total DNA
analysis of the transconjugants, only two types of transconjugants, the
ones that acquired the plasmids and the ones that did not, were
obtained. The PCR amplification of the ermA and
ermC genes, however, indicated four types of
transconjugants. The hybridization of a 3.1-kb insert with the
ermA gene-specific probe in all the transconjugants and the
presence of the ermC gene bearing plasmids in group 3 and 4 transconjugants also confirmed the PCR data. The use of a selective antibiotic in determining the resistance transfer between the donors
and the recipients that show resistance to the same antibiotic is of
little or no use. The use of PCR and gene-specific probing along with
the selective antibiotic screening for the transconjugants is not only
useful in determining the direction of resistance transfer but also
helpful in determining the mechanism of resistance transfer.
The transfer of drug resistance in mixed liquid cultures was initially
thought to require phage mediation and Ca2+ or
Mg2+ ions (34), but it was shown later on that
it can also occur in the absence of the phage (6, 22). The
absence of externally added metal ions and transducing phages in our
experiments, however, excluded the possibility of phage-mediated
conjugation and transduction and pointed toward a phage-independent
transfer mechanism(s). The transfer of the chromosomally located
ermA gene, which is known to be associated with transposon
Tn554 (29), suggested the possibility of
transposon-mediated drug resistance transfer. The presence of an extra
3.1-kb chromosomal DNA insert in all the transconjugants confirmed that
the transposition of the ermA gene to a different site on
the recipient's chromosome had taken place. Our results are similar to
those of an earlier study (32) in which the transposition of
chromosomal gene markers was observed, but unlike our observations, the
transfer was achieved during filter mating only and not in mixed
culture transfer experiments.
Although the transfer of the ermA gene was shown to occur
via transposition, the transfer of the plasmid-based ermC
gene could not be explained by this mechanism. If transposition was
responsible for the mobilization of smaller plasmids, all the
transconjugants would have acquired the ermC gene. Since the
transposition of the ermA gene took place in all the
transconjugants and only 8 of the 23 transconjugants acquired the
ermC gene, transposition does not seem to be responsible for
the transfer of ermC. The involvement of conjugative
plasmids that are known to mobilize the smaller plasmids was also ruled
out because of our repeated failure to isolate larger conjugative
plasmids by known techniques (13, 30). In the absence of
detectable conjugative plasmids and phage-mediated conjugation,
transformation seems to be the most likely mechanism for the transfer
of the ermC gene. In fact, in an earlier mixed liquid
culture transfer study (23), the transfer of smaller
plasmids bearing penicillin resistance was observed in the absence of
Ca2+ and transformation was believed to be the mechanism of
transfer. Since our results were also similar to those of the above
study, the transfer of smaller plasmids is believed to take place via transformation.
The demonstration that the poultry S. aureus strains can
transfer the resistance to human S. aureus strains indicates
that the strains belonging to different ecosystems can contribute to the spread of antibiotic resistance genes. Up until now, the transfer of resistance was studied between donors and recipients that were resistant to different antibiotics. The data presented in this study
clearly demonstrate the usefulness of PCR and gene-specific probing
along with the conventional selective antibiotic screening method to
study the transfer of drug resistance between organisms that are
resistant to the same antibiotic but carry different genetic markers.
The method presented here offers a unique approach to analyze the
transconjugants and could be extended to other such systems. By the use
of this procedure, the direction of resistance transfer was clearly
established to be from avian to human isolates of S. aureus.
The transfer of resistance was found to be via transposition and transformation.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We gratefully acknowledge the receipt of plasmids pEM9698 and
pE194 provided by E. Murphy, Department of Public Health, Research Institute of the City of New York, and B. Weisblum, University of
Wisconsin, Madison. We also acknowledge the receipt of
erythromycin-resistant clinical strains from F. Khambaty, Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), Food and Drug
Administration, Washington, D.C.
The work was supported by an appointment of S. Khan to the Postgraduate
Research Program at the National Center for Toxicological Research and
administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy
and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of
Microbiology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 3900 NCTR Road, Jefferson, AR 72079. Phone: (870)
543-7586. Fax: (870) 543-7307. E-mail:
mnawaz{at}nctr.fda.gov.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bauer, A. W.,
W. M. M. Kirby,
J. C. Sherris, and M. Turck.
1966.
Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method.
Am. J. Clin. Pathol.
45:493-496[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Davies, J.
1994.
Inactivation of antibiotics and the dissemination of resistance genes.
Science
264:375-382[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Dutka-Malen, S.,
R. Leclercq,
V. Coulant,
J. Duval, and P. Courvalin.
1990.
Phenotypic and genotypic heterogeneity of glycopeptide resistance determinants in gram-positive bacteria.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
34:1875-1879[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
El Solh, N.,
J. Allignet,
R. Bismuth,
B. Buret, and J. M. Fouace.
1986.
Conjugative transfer of staphylococcal antibiotic resistance markers in the absence of detectable plasmid DNA.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
30:161-169[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Forbes, B. A., and D. R. Schaberg.
1983.
Transfer of resistance plasmids from Staphylococcus epidermidis to Staphylococcus aureus: evidence of conjugative exchange of resistance.
J. Bacteriol.
153:627-634[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Fouace, J.
1981.
Mixed cultures of Staphylococcus aureus: some observations concerning transfer of antibiotic resistance.
Ann. Inst. Pasteur (Paris)
132:375-386.
|
| 7.
|
Gillespi, M. T.,
J. W. May, and R. A. Skurray.
1984.
Antibiotic susceptibilities and plasmid profiles of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a retrospective study.
J. Med. Microbiol.
17:295-310[Abstract].
|
| 8.
|
Grabo, W. O. K.,
I. G. Middendorf, and O. W. Prozesky.
1973.
Survival in maturation ponds of coliform bacteria with transferable drug resistance.
Water Res.
7:1589-1597[CrossRef].
|
| 9.
|
Harada, K., and S. Mitsuhashi.
1977.
Physiology of R factors, p. 135-160.
In
S. Mitsuhashi (ed.), R factor, drug resistance plasmid. University Park Press, Baltimore, Md.
|
| 10.
|
Jaffe, H. W.,
H. M. Sweeney,
C. Nathan,
R. A. Weinstein,
S. A. Kabins, and S. Cohen.
1980.
Identity and interspecific transfer of gentamicin resistance plasmids in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis.
J. Infect. Dis.
141:738-747[Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Khan, S. A.,
M. S. Nawaz,
A. A. Khan, and C. E. Cerniglia.
1999.
Direct in-gel hybridization of digoxigenin-labelled non-radioactive probes.
Mol. Cell. Probes
13:233-237[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Khan, S. A.,
M. S. Nawaz,
A. A. Khan, and C. E. Cerniglia.
1999.
Simultaneous detection of erythromycin-resistant methylase genes ermA and ermC by multiplex-PCR in Staphylococcus sp.
Mol. Cell. Probes
13:381-387[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Labigne-Roussel, A.,
G. Gerbaud, and P. Courvalin.
1981.
Translocation of sequences encoding antibiotic resistance from the chromosome to a receptor plasmid in Salmonella ordonez.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
182:390-408[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Lacey, R. W.
1975.
Antibiotic resistance plasmids of Staphylococcus aureus and their clinical importance.
Bacteriol. Rev.
39:1-32[Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Lacey, R. W.
1980.
Evidence for two mechanisms of plasmid transfer in mixed cultures of Staphylococcus aureus.
J. Gen. Microbiol.
119:423-435[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Lacey, R. W.
1980.
Rarity of gene transfer between animal and human isolates of Staphylococcus aureus in vitro.
J. Gen. Microbiol.
119:437-442[Medline].
|
| 17.
|
Lacey, R. W.
1984.
Antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and streptococci.
Br. Med. Bull.
40:77-83[Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Leclercq, R.,
E. Derlot,
M. Weber,
J. Duval, and P. Courvalin.
1989.
Transferable vancomycin and teicoplanin resistance in Enterococcus faecium.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
33:10-15[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Lyon, B. R., and R. A. Skurray.
1987.
Antimicrobial resistance of Staphylococcus aureus: genetic basis.
Microbiol. Rev.
51:88-134[Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
McDonnell, R. W.,
H. M. Sweeney, and S. Cohen.
1983.
Conjugal transfer of gentamicin resistance plasmids intra- and interspecifically in Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
23:151-160[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
McGowan, J. E., Jr.
1991.
Abrupt changes in antibiotic resistance.
J. Hosp. Infect.
18:202-210.
|
| 22.
|
Meijers, J. A.,
K. C. Winkler, and E. E. Stobberingh.
1981.
Resistance transfer in mixed cultures of Staphylococcus aureus.
J. Med. Microbiol.
14:21-39[Abstract].
|
| 23.
|
Mitra, M.,
M. Mukherjee,
M. S. Gupta, and A. N. Chakrabarty.
1995.
Phage-mediated conjugation in staphylococci as a means of transfer of drug-resistance.
Indian J. Exp. Biol.
33:505-508[Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Muhammad, G.,
K. H. Hoblet,
D. J. Jackwood,
S. B. Nielsen, and K. L. Smith.
1993.
Interspecific conjugal transfer of antibiotic resistance among staphylococci isolated from the bovine mammary gland.
Am. J. Vet. Res.
54:1432-1440[Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Munoz, P.,
M. D. Diaz,
M. Rodriguez-Creixems,
E. Cercenado,
T. Pelaez, and E. Bouza.
1993.
Antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella isolates in a Spanish hospital.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
36:1200-1202.
|
| 26.
|
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
1997.
Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests, 6th ed.
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa.
|
| 27.
|
Nawaz, M. S.,
A. A. Khan,
S. A. Khan,
D. D. Paine,
J. V. Pothuluri, and C. E. Cerniglia.
1999.
Biochemical and molecular characterization of erythromycin resistant Staphylococcus spp. isolated from diseased chicken.
Poult. Sci.
78:1191-1197[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Noble, W. C.,
Z. Virani, and R. G. Cree.
1992.
Co-transfer of vancomycin and other resistance genes from Enterococcus faecalis NCTC 12201 to Staphylococcus aureus.
FEMS Microbiol. Lett.
72:195-198[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Philipps, S., and R. P. Novick.
1979.
Tn554 a site specific repressor-controlled transposon in Staphylococcus aureus.
Nature
278:476-478[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Portnoy, D. A.,
S. L. Moseley, and S. Falkow.
1981.
Characterization of plasmids and plasmid-associated determinants of Yersinia enterocolitica pathogenesis.
Infect. Immun.
31:775-782[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Shaw, D. R., and V. J. Cabelli.
1980.
R plasmid transfer frequencies from environmental isolates of Escherichia coli to laboratory and fecal strains.
Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
40:756-764[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Stout, V. G., and J. J. Iandolo.
1990.
Chromosomal gene transfer during conjugation by Staphylococcus aureus is mediated by transposon-facilitated mobilization.
J. Bacteriol.
172:6148-6150[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Thakker-Varia, S.,
W. D. Jenssen,
L. Moon-McDermott,
M. P. Weinstein, and D. T. Dubin.
1987.
Molecular epidemiology of macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
31:735-743[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Townsend, D. E.,
S. Bolton,
N. Ashdown,
S. Taheri, and W. B. Grubb.
1986.
Comparison of phage-mediated and conjugative transfer of staphylococcal plasmids in vitro and in vivo.
J. Med. Microbiol.
22:107-114[Abstract].
|
| 35.
|
Townsend, D. E.,
D. L. Hollander,
S. Bolton, and W. B. Grubb.
1986.
Clinical isolates of staphylococci conjugate on contact with dry absorbent surfaces.
Med. J. Aust.
144:166[Medline].
|
| 36.
|
Udo, E. E., and W. B. Grubb.
1990.
Excision of a conjugative plasmid from the Staphylococcus chromosome.
J. Med. Microbiol.
31:207-212[Abstract].
|
| 37.
|
Udo, E. E., and W. B. Grubb.
1991.
Transfer of resistance determinants from a multi-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolate.
J. Med. Microbiol.
35:72-79[Abstract].
|
| 38.
|
Udo, E. E., and W. B. Grubb.
1995.
Transfer of plasmid-borne resistance from a multiply resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolate, WBG1022.
Curr. Microbiol.
31:71-76[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Yu, L., and J. N. Baldwin.
1971.
Intraspecific transduction in Staphylococcus epidermidis and interspecific transduction between Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis.
Can. J. Microbiol.
17:767-773[Medline].
|
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2000, p. 1832-1838, Vol. 38, No. 5
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Huys, G., D'Haene, K., Van Eldere, J., von Holy, A., Swings, J.
(2005). Molecular Diversity and Characterization of Tetracycline-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from a Poultry Processing Plant. Appl. Environ. Microbiol.
71: 574-579
[Abstract]
[Full Text]