Abstract
The present study reported the first serotyping (O:H typing) data documented in Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) strains of animal origin in Iran in isolates recovered between 2008 to 2016. A total number of 75 STEC strains previously isolated from fecal samples of cattle, sheep, goats, pigeons, humans, and deer were assessed by different polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays detecting the major virulence genes of STEC and phylogroups. Then, the strains were tested for the 16 important O-groups by PCR. Finally, twenty strains were selected for H-genotyping by PCR plus sequencing. The predominant serogroup was O113 which was detected in nine isolates (five cattle, 55.50%; two goats, 22.20%; two red deer, 22.20%) followed by O26 (3/3, 100%) in cattle, O111 (3/3, 100%) in cattle, O5 (3/3, 100%) in sheep, O63 (1/1, 100%) in pigeon, O75 (2/2, 100%) in pigeons, and O128 in goats (2/3, 66.60%) and pigeon (1/3, 33.30%). The most important recognized serotypes were O113:H21 in cattle (2/3) and goat (1/3), O113:H4 in red deer (1/1), O111:H8 in calves (2/2), O26:H11 in calve (1/1), O128:H2 in goats (2/3) and pigeon (1/3), and O5:H19 in sheep (3/3). One cattle strain carrying stx1, stx2, eae, and Ehly genes belonged to O26:H29 serotype. Most strains with determined O-groups were from the bovine source that highlighted the importance of cattle as reservoirs of potentially pathogenic serovars. The present study suggested that the top seven non-O157 serogroups should be assessed along with O157 in all future research and clinical diagnostics of STEC in Iran.
Key Words: Animals, Iran, Serotypes, STEC, Typing
Introduction
Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) strains have been implicated as major human pathogens in gastro-intestinal infections and foodborne outbreaks worldwide.1 These infections range from mild diarrhea to serious diseases, such as hemorrhagic colitis (HC) or hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).1,2 Progressive renal failure, acute hemolytic anemia and thrombocytopenia are the main symptoms of HUS which are associated with acute kidney injury in humans, especially in infants and children.3
The importance of STEC strains has been well documented worldwide and also in developing countries such as Iran.4,5 Transmission of these strains occurs through the consumption of undercooked ground beef, unpasteurized dairy products, contaminated drinking water and contact with infected animals.6 In the previous reports in Iran and other countries cattle were highlighted as the main reservoirs of HUS-associated E. coli (HUSEC).7-9
Among virulence factors of STEC, Vero toxins (VT), also called Shiga toxins (Stx), are the key virulence factors which are classified into two main types: stx1 and stx2, responsible for inhibiting protein synthesis in eukaryotic cells.4 STECs producing only stx2 toxin are posing a high risk to the development of severe human infections including HUS.10,11 Another virulence factor associated with HUS is the production of enterohemolysin encoded by Ehly (ehxA) which has a cytolytic effect.4 Reports from previous studies have shown a significant number of Ehly positive isolates in STEC strains contributing to human HUS.12,13 Intimin is another virulence-associated factor encoded by the eae gene accountable for intimate attachment of STEC to intestinal epithelial cells.4 The STEC strains which are positive for intimin are closely linked with cases of HC and HUS.14
The STEC strains causing human infections belong to a large number of O:H serotypes which have been classified into five seropathotypes A to E.4,15 Seropathotype A consists of O157:H7 and O157:NM (nonmotile) which are considered to be the most important serotypes in human HUS outbreaks. Seropathotype B comprises O26:H11, O103:H2, O111:NM, O121:H19 and O145:NM which are also associated with HUS, however, are more associated with smaller outbreaks. Seropathotype C is composed of serotypes O91:H21 and O113:H21 which are related to sporadic cases of HUS. Seropathotype D is associated with individual cases of diarrhea and seropathotype E has not been involved in human infections.4
Although the O157:H7 is the most frequently involved serotype in large outbreaks, other serotypes can also be important in sporadic cases of HUS and life-threatening health conditions.4,15 For decades in Iran, a large number of studies on STEC was aimed at O157:H7 detection.15,16 Recent studies are increasingly reporting the importance of non-O157 STEC strains in both animal and human hosts from different regions, however, documented data about these serotypes are still limited.17-19
Lack of the availability of O:H serotyping data in most developing countries has been a public health challenge to track outbreaks and monitor the possible sources in different geographical regions. To this end, here we reported for the first time the distribution of major STEC serotypes (O:H types) in a collection of STEC strains isolated from different provinces and a variety of sources in Iran.
Materials and Methods
STEC isolates. During eight years of fecal sampling (2008 to 2016), a total number of 75 non-duplicate STEC strains isolated in previous studies were selected. Samples were obtained from different provinces and a variety of animal hosts in Iran: 35 isolates were originated from cattle, 22 from sheep and goats, 14 from pigeons and four were obtained from other sources (two human isolates and two isolates from red deer) which were archived as cryopreserved stocks at – 70.00 ˚C. The study was carried out in accordance with Iran National Committee for Ethics in Biomedical Research. Accordingly, a written or verbal informed consent was obtained from all participants for human experimentations and verbal informed consent was obtained from the owners of the companion animals. The research committee reviewed and approved that all the study protocols were conducted in accordance with the related guidelines and regulations (IR.1396.1236). For recovery, each isolate was aseptically transferred to brain heart infusion broth (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) and incubated for 24 hr at 37.00 ˚C. Then, the cultures were streaked on MacConkey agar and subjected to DNA extraction after 24 hr incubation at 37.00 ˚C.
DNA extraction. All 75 confirmed STEC isolates on MacConkey agar were cultured on Luria Bertani (LB) agar and incubated for 24 hr at 37.00 ˚C. After overnight culture on LB agar, total genomic DNA was extracted by boiling method as described previously.20
Multiplex Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for stx1, stx2, stx2f, Ehly, eae. The virulence genes of STEC isolates were evaluated by multiplex PCR as described previously.21,22 The PCR was carried out in 25.00 μL using 3.00 μL template DNA, 1.00-unit Taq DNA polymerase (Ampliqon A/S, Odense, Denmark), 0.30 μM of each primer, 2.00 mM MgCl2 (Ampliqon A/S) and 200 μM dNTP mix in 1x buffer (Ampliqon A/S) (Table 1). E. coli O157:H7 strain (ATCC 35218) was used as positive control. For detection of stx in pigeon isolates, a pair of primers were used that amplifed the stx2f according to Schmidt's et al. study (Table 1). 22
Table 1.
Primers used for identification of virulence genes, serogroups, H-types, and phylogenetic groups in this study.
Name | Sequence (5ˊ to 3ˊ) | Target (bp) | Condition | References | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Annealing temperature (˚C) | Time (sec) | ||||
stx1-F
stx1-R |
ATAAATCGCCATTCGTTGACTAC AGAACGCCCACTGAGATCATC |
stx1 (180) | 58.00 - 65.00* | 30 - 60* | 21 |
stx2-F
stx2-R |
GGCACTGTCTCTCTGAAACTGCTCC TCGCCAGTTATCTGACATTCTG |
stx2 (255) | 58.00 - 65.00* | 30 - 60* | - |
stx2f-1
stx2f-2 |
AGATTGGGCGTCATTCACTGGTTG TACTTTAATGGCCGCCCTGTCTCC |
stx2f (428) | 56.00 | 60 | 22 |
Ehly-F
Ehly-R |
GCATCATCAAGCGTACGTTCC AATGAGCCAAGCTGGTTA AGCT |
Ehly (534) | 58.00 - 65.00* | 30 - 60* | 21 |
eae-F
eae-R |
GACCCGGCACAAGCATAAGC CCACCTGCAGCAACAAGAGG |
eae (384) | 58.00 - 65.00* | 30 - 60* | - |
O26-F
O26-R |
CAATGGGCGGAAATTTTAGA ATAATTTTCTCTGCCGTCGC |
O26 (155) | 56.00 | 60 | 23 |
O45-F
O45-R |
TGCAGTAACCTGCACGGGCG AGCAGGCACAACAGCCACTACT |
O45 (238) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O103-F | TTGGAGCGTTAACTGGACCT | O103 (321) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O103-R | GCTCCCGAGCACGTATAAAG | ||||
O111-F | TGTTTCTTCGATGTTGCGAG | O111 (438) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O111-R | GCAAGGGACATAAGAAGCCA | ||||
O113-F | TGCCATAATTCAGAGGGTGAC | O113 (514) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O113-R | AACAAAGCTAATTGTGGCCG | ||||
O121-F
O121-R |
TCCAACAATTGGTCGTGAAA AGAAAGTGTGAAATGCCCGT |
O121 (628) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O145-F
O145-R |
TTCATTGTTTTGCTTGCTCG GGCAAGCTTTGGAAATGAAA |
O145 (750) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O157-F
O157-R |
TCGAGGTACCTGAATCTTTCCTTCTGT ACCAGTCTTGGTGCTGCTCTGACA |
O157 (894) | 56.00 | 60 | - |
O118-F
O118-R |
TGCAAGAGATGGTATTGAGCTGGG TCCTGAGCCAATTTCTGTAGGTCG |
O118 (517) | 54.00 | 60 | 24 |
O55-F
O55-R |
TCCTTATTTGTGTCGGGGGCCAGGAAAGCTGCCAATTATC | O55 (207) | 54.00 | 60 | 25 |
O63-F
O63-R |
ATTCGGTGCTGCTGGAATTA TGAACATTATGCCACCGATG |
O63 (995) | 54.00 | 60 | 23 |
O91-F
O91-R |
TTGCATCTGGCGCAATAAACACGGACACCATCCCAAATACCTGCTTGC | O91 (616) | 54.00 | 60 | 24 |
O128-F
O128-R |
ATGATTTCTTACGGAGTGCCTCTAACCTAATCCCTCCC | O128 (782) | 50.00 | 50 | 26 |
O104-F
O104-R |
TGAACTGATTTTTAGGATGGAGAACCTCACTCAAATTATG | O104 (351) | 50.00 | 50 | 27 |
O5-F
O5-R |
CTTATCCGATTAATGGCTTCTAGTCGATTTGCTTTTATGG | O5 (144) | 50.00 | 50 | 28 |
O75-F
O75-R |
GAGATATACATGGGGAGGTAGGCTACCCGATAATCATATTCTTCCCAAC | O75 (511) | 54.00 | 60 | 29 |
fliC-F
fliC-R |
CAAGTCATTAATAC(A/C)AACAGCC GACAT(A/G)TT(A/G)GA(G/A/C)ACTTC(G/C)GT |
fliC (Variable) | 56.00 | 70 | 30 |
chuA.1bchuA.2 | ATGGTACCGGACGAACCAAC TGCCGCCAGTACCAAAGACA |
chuA (288) | 59.00 | 20 | - |
yjaA.1byjaA.2b | CAAACGTGAAGTGTCAGGAG AATGCGTTCCTCAACCTGTG |
yjaA (211) | 59.00 | 20 | - |
TspE4C2.1bTspE4C2.2b | CACTATTCGTAAGGTCATCCAGTTTATCGCTGCGGGTCGC | TspE4.C2 (152) | 59.00 | 20 | - |
AceK.f
ArpA1.r |
AACGCTATTCGCCAGCTTGCTCTCCCCATACCGTACGCTA | arpA (400) | 59.00 | 20 | - |
*According to a touchdown PCR protocol as described previously.21
Molecular determination of serogroups (O-serogroups). The 16 important O-groups of STEC isolates were studied by different PCR assays via targeting serogroup-associated antigen genes (Table 1) as described previously.23-28 The first PCR panel included the top eight STEC serogroups (O26, O45, O103, O111, O113, O121, O145, and O157) as described by DebRoy et al.23 Other panels included Panel 2: O91, O118, O55 and Panel 3: O5, O104, O128. The remaining serogroups were tested using uniplex assays including O63 and O75. For final confirmation, PCRs were repeated separately for the positive serogroups. E. coli O157:H7 (295 EC-TMU) and Ferdowsi University of Mashhad collection strains were used as control for O26 (Strain code: 162s2 EC) and O111 (Strain code: 11s EC-2008).
Amplification and sequencing of fliC gene (H-typing). A PCR assay was applied to amplify the variable portion of the fliC gene based on the method presented by Machado et al.29 Then, 20 strains with a known O-types (except two important strains with unknown O-types) were selected from different animals for identification of H-genotypes by sequencing of the fliC gene in both reverse and forward directions with the same primer used for the fliC gene amplification (Sinaclon, Tehran, Iran), (Table 1). The obtained sequences were blasted in NCBI databases (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi). Only the strains in which both forward and reverse directions designated a particular H-types were kept for data analyses.
Phylogenetic group analysis. All confirmed O:H serotyped strains were subjected to determination of phylogenetic groups based on the updated Clermont’s PCR based method.30 Amplification was performed at a final volume of 25.00 μL containing 50.00 ng template DNA, 1-unit Taq DNA polymerase (Ampliqon A/S), 1.00 μM of each primer, 1.50 mM MgCl2 (Ampliqon A/S) and 200.00 μM dNTP mix in 1x PCR buffer (Ampliqon A/S). Strains were assigned into one of the eight phylogenetic groups (A, B1, B2, C, D, E, F and Clade I) based on the possession or absence of four genetic markers including arpA, yjaA, chuA, and tspE (Table 1). The complementary PCR tests applied on the isolates were not typed in the first step as recommended.30
Results
Multiplex PCR ( stx 1 , stx 2 , stx 2 f , Ehly , eae ). In 35 cattle isolates, 6 (17.10%) carried only stx1, 25 (71.40%) only stx2 and 4 (11.40%) both stx1 and stx2 genes. All 35 cattle isolates (100%) harbored Ehly gene and 11 isolates (31.40%) were also positive for eae gene. In 22 sheep and goats’ isolates, 11 (50.00%) carried stx1, 3 (13.60%) harbored stx2 and 8 (36.30%) both stx1 and stx2 genes. Sixteen isolates (72.70%) harbored Ehly gene and all isolates (100%) were eae-negative. All 14 pigeons’ isolates (100%) carried only stx2f and 12 isolates (85.70%) were also positive for eae gene. All isolates (100%) were negative for stx1 and Ehly genes. All human isolates (2/2, 100%) were positive for stx1 and Ehly genes and all of them (100%) were negative for stx2 and eae genes. All red deer isolates (2/2, 100%) carried stx2 and Ehly and all of them (100%) were negative for stx1 and eae genes. Figure 1 shows the distribution of STEC major virulence genes in cattle, sheep/goats and pigeons isolates.
O-serogroups. The predominant serogroup was O113 as it was detected in nine isolates from different sources including cattle (five isolates, 55.50%), goats (two isolates, 22.20%) and red deer (two isolates, 22.20%). O26 (3/3, 100%) and O111 (3/3, 100%) were found only in cattle isolates. O5 (3/3, 100%) was only detected in sheep, O63 (1/1, 100%) and O75 (2/2, 100%) were only found in pigeons and O128 was detected in goats (2/3, 66.60%) as well as pigeon (1/3, 33.30%). All strains were negative for O157, O45, O121, O145, O55, O91, O103, O104 and O118 serogroups (Table 2).
Table 2.
Distribution of the top eight and the other important STEC serogroups in 75 E. coli isolates in Iran.
Serogroup | Cattle (n = 35) | Sheep and Goats (n = 22) | Pigeons (n = 14) | Others (n = 4) | Total (n = 75) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
O26 | 3 | - | - | - | 3 (4.00%) |
O111 | 3 | - | - | - | 3 (4.00%) |
O113 | 5 | 2G | - | 2R | 9 (12.00%) |
O5 | - | 3S | - | - | 3 (4.00%) |
O63 | - | - | 1 | - | 1 (1.30%) |
O75 | - | - | 2 | - | 2 (2.60%) |
O128 | - | 2G | 1 | - | 3 (4.00%) |
G: Goats, R: Red deer, and S: Sheep.
Molecular H-types. Of 20 strains selected for identification of H-genotypes, H2 was the predominant H-types obtained from goats (two isolates) and pigeons (five isolates), followed by other H-types including H21 from cattle (two isolates) and goat (one isolate), H19 from sheep (three isolates), H8 from calves (two isolates), H11 from calve (one isolate), H29 from calve (one isolate), H10 from cattle (one isolate) and H4 from red deer (one isolate). The H-type for one isolate from pigeon was not typeable (Table 3).
Table 3.
Characteristics of twenty serotyped STEC strains in Iran.
No. | Serotype (number) | Source | Province (year) | Virulence Genotype | Phylotype |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | O26:H11 | Calve | Tehran (2009) | stx2/Ehly | B1 |
2 | O26:H29 | Calve | Tehran (2010) | stx1/stx2/Ehly/eae | B1 |
3 | O111:H8 (2) | Calve a | Tehran (2008) | stx1/Ehly/eae | B1 |
4 | O113:H21 (2) | Cattle | Golestan (2012) | stx2/Ehly | B1 |
5 | O*:H10b | Cattle | Golestan (2012) | stx2/Ehly | A |
6 | O113:H4 | Red deer | Tehran (2014) | stx1/stx2/Ehly | A |
7 | O5:H19 (3) | Sheep | Semnan (2012) | stx1/stx2/Ehly | B1 |
8 | O128:H2 (2) | Goat | Fars (2013) | stx1 | B1 |
9 | O113:H21 | Goat | Fars (2013) | stx2/Ehly | B1 |
10 | O128:H2 | Pigeon | Mazandaran (2012) | stx2f/eae | B1 |
11 | O75:H2 (3) | Pigeon | Tehran (2011) | stx2f/eae | B1 |
12 | O*:H2c | Pigeon | Tehran (2011) | stx2f/eae | B1 |
13 | O63:H* | Pigeon | Mazandaran (2012) | stx2f/eae | B2 |
a: Diarrheic calves, b: Hybrid pathogenic strain (Enteroaggregative Hemorrhagic E. coli: EAHEC), c: T5b-Ir isolate (Accession number: KJ397538), and *: Non-typeable.
Molecular serotypes (O:H types). Among twenty serotyped strains in this study (Fig. 1), the main recognized serotypes were O113:H21 (3/20, 15.00%) in cattle (2/3, 66.60%) and goat (1/3, 33.30%), O113:H4 (1/20, 5.00%) in red deer (1/1, 100%), O111:H8 (2/20, 10.00%) in calves (2/2, 100%), O26:H11 (1/20, 5.00%) in calve (1/1, 100%), O128:H2 (3/20, 15.00%) in goats (2/3, 66.60%) and pigeon (1/3, 33.30%), and O5:H19 (3/20, 15.00%) in sheep (3/3, 100%). One strain (1/20, 5.00%) from cattle carrying stx1, stx2, Ehly and eae was belonged to O26:H29 serotype (Table 3).
Fig. 1.
Distribution of virulence genes among 71 STEC isolates and serotypes of 20 STEC isolates with respect to hosts: Cattle (A), sheep/goats (B) and pigeons (C) in Iran.
Phylogenetic groups of serotyped strains. Phylogenetic analysis of serotyped strains revealed B1 as the predominant phylotype (17/20, 85.00%) followed by other types including A (2/20, 10.00%) and B2 (1/20, 5.00%). Five STEC isolates from pigeons had a similar phylogroup (B1) and harbored stx2f/eae genes. Two isolates from calves yielded the same virulence profile (stx1/Ehly/eae) and phylotype (B1), (Table 3).
Discussion
The main virulence factor of STEC is stx with two major types stx1 and stx2. As shown in our results, out of 75 STEC isolates, 30 (40.00%) harbored only stx2-encoding genes which was the predominant stx genotype, especially in cattle isolates (25/35, 71.40%). Similar to our study, Gutema et al. and Hoyle et al. reported that among 17 and 1948 (over the 110 sampled herds) STEC was identified in cattle fecal samples, 82.30% and 70.20% of isolates were positive for stx2 as the sole toxin type, respectively.31,32 Importantly, in the study of Scheutz, it has been shown that the HUS-associated E. coli (HUSEC) carrying stx2 genotypes had a higher risk and were more pathogenic than those strains producing stx1 alone or both stx1 and stx2.33 Moreover, Karmali in Canada and Scotland et al. in the United Kingdom indicated that STEC producing only stx2 had a higher prevalence of infection among HUS patients.34,35 As a result, it seems that STEC strains that possess only stx2 are associated with the highest rates of HUS, accordingly, stx typing may provide worthy information about the virulence of STEC strains.36 Of particular interest in this study was the presence of plasmid-borne gene Ehly in all (35/35, 100%) of the bovine STEC isolate. In accordance with our study, Fremaux et al. found Ehly gene in 92.00% of 118 STEC strains isolated from environment and fecal samples of dairy cattle farms in France.37 In addition, in the study of Mercado et al., 80.00% of 15 STEC isolates were positive for Ehly gene isolated from diarrhoeic calves in different farms of Argentina.38 Besides, the studies of Welinder-Olsson et al. and Brunder et al. indicated that most isolates from patients with severe infections such as HUS carried the Ehly gene and this might be due to the role of Ehly in stimulating the growth of STEC in the gut by providing the iron source.12,13,39 Therefore, if we consider only the major toxins of STEC, isolates from cattle may pose higher risk for development of severe infections in humans.
In research projects conducted in Iran and other countries, acute diarrhea has been associated with STEC O157 and non-O157 serogroups with animal origins.15,17-19,40-43 In our study, the predominant serogroup was O113 as it was detected in nine isolates from different sources (five cattle, two goats and two red deer) and importantly O157 was not present in any sources. In agreement with the present study, the O113 serogroup was also common among STEC strains reported in dairy cattle in Brazil and our previous study conducted in cattle in Iran.44,17
The role of the O113 serogroup in human HUS has been well demonstrated in some previous studies reported from Australia, Argentina and Germany.45,46 Similar to our results, Koochakzadeh et al., also did not detect any O157 isolates among STEC strains obtained from fecal samples of 180 clinically healthy cattle in Iran.18 Moreover, in the study of Aslani and Bouzari , of 29 STEC strains isolated from diarrheal and asymptomatic persons during three years in Iran, none of the isolates were belonged to O157.19 In addition to O157 serogroup importance, the similarity between our results and mentioned studies revealed that non-O157 serogroups were particularly important as a cause of HUS and might be involved in both small outbreaks and sporadic cases in Iran.4,16 Another important point in the current study was the host specificity of O26 and O111 serogroups which were among the top eight STEC O-groups. Accordingly, O26 and O111 were identified only in cattle isolates. Other studies similarly reported this in cattle isolates in the UK, France and our previous study in Iran.17,32,37 O26 and O111 account for a significant proportion of causing diarrhea in children based on studies conducted in Iran.17 Remarkably, Fukushima et al., demonstrated that O26 and O111 could survive for a long time (1 to 8 weeks at 15.00 ˚C) in bovine feces indicating cattle were potential reservoirs for transmitting these serogroups to foodstuff and environment.47
Based on the results of the present study, the main recognized serotypes were O113:H21 (cattle and goats), O113:H4 (red deer), O111:H8 (calves), O26:H11 (calve), O128:H2 (goats and pigeons), and O5:H19 (sheep). Despite the fact that there were no O157:H7 found in the studied isolates, the reported serotypes are known to be associated with human gastrointestinal illness and sporadic HUS cases as we are going to briefly discuss.15,16 O113:H21 is considered as one of the non-O157 HUS-causing STEC serotypes in the studies of Newton et al. and Mellmann et al.41,48 Moreover, O113:H21 was initially reported in clinical cases of HUS patients in Australia.15 O113:H4 is an emerging serotype of human clinical significance linking to human gastrointestinal illness as demonstrated by Monaghan et al. in Ireland.42 As shown in the study of Karch et al., O111:H8 and O26:H11 are also among serotypes isolated from patients with HUS in Germany.49 O128:H2 was recognized worldwidly to be a non-O157 STEC isolated from HUS patients reported by Domingue et al. in the UK.43 In order to control the spread of these dangerous serotypes, it is indispensable to exert practical strategies through a national surveillance network to trace, identify and report the top important serotypes circulating in the animals, environment and diarrheic cases in Iran.
Regarding other recognized serotypes not associated with severe infections, similar to our study, O5:H19 has been isolated from sheep in China as reported by Liu et al.50Although O5:H19 were not related to human HUS, O5 serogroups were associated with human gastrointestinal symptoms.16 It is worthwhile to note that all ovine serotyped isolates in the current study were belonged to O5:H19 serotype suggesting the host specificity of this serotype, whereas, pigeon isolates were belonged to four serotypes expressing a high degree of serotype diversity. Due to the limited number of other serotypes, it is difficult to conclude host specificity or diversity for other serotypes. Among our calve isolates, strain O26:H29 carried stx1, stx2, Ehly and eae. We believed that this was the first report of O26:H29 serotype which carried two main types of stx along with Ehly, and eae virulence genes. To our knowledge, this O26:H29 serotype has not yet been reported elsewhere andO26 serogroups have emerged as highly virulent clones causing human diseases and spread throughout Europe after its emergence in Germany in the mid-1990s.15,16 Resultantly, we suggested O26:H29 to be considered a potentially highly pathogenic clone in Iran.
In conclusion, this study provided the first serotyping (O:H typing) data documented in STEC strains of animal origin in Iran. Although most studies have been focused on O157:H7, the results of this study demonstrated that O157:H7 might not be a predominant serotype in Iran. Additionally, most strains with determined O-groups were from the bovine source that highlighted the importance of cattle as reservoirs of potentially pathogenic seropathotypes. Besides, O26, O111, and O113 should be included in all future serotyping studies of STEC in humans and animals in Iran. Finally, the recognized O26:H29 strain in this study carried the essential facility for development of severe infections in humans that needs further investigations as a possible emerging strain.
Conflict of interest
None to declare.
Acknowledgments
None to declare.
References
- 1.Capps KM, Ludwig JB, Shridhar PB, et al. Identification, Shiga toxin subtypes and prevalence of minor serogroups of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in feedlot cattle feces. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):8601 . doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-87544-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.AL-Mazini MA. Molecular study for Escherichia coli isolates causing diarrhea at children. J Med Res Health Sci. 2021;4(7):1329–1341. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Dixon BP, Gruppo RA. Atypical hemolytic uremic syn-drome. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2018;65(3):509–525. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2018.02.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Gyles CL. Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli: an overview. J Anim Sci. 2007;85(13 Suppl):E45–E62. doi: 10.2527/jas.2006-508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Hooman N, Khodadost M, Sadeghian M, et al. The prevalence and incidence of hemolytic uremic syndrome in Iran, a systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran J Kidney Dis. 2020;14(3):173–183. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Kaper JB, Nataro JP, Mobley HL. Pathogenic Escherichia coli. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2(2):123–140. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro818. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Ahmadi E, Mardani K, Amiri A. Molecular detection and antimicrobial resistance patterns of Shiga toxigenic Escherichia coli isolated from bovine subclinical mastitis milk samples in Kurdistan, Iran. Arch Razi Inst. 2020;75(2):169–177. doi: 10.22092/ARI.2019.124238.1278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ludwig JB, Shi X, Shridhar PB, et al. Multiplex PCR assays for the detection of one hundred and thirty seven serogroups of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli associated with cattle. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020;10:378. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Shinde DB, Singhvi S, Koratkar SS, et al. Isolation and characterization of Escherichia coli serotype O157: H7 and other verotoxin-producing E. coli in healthy Indian cattle. Vet World. 2020;13(10):2269–2274. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2020.2269-2274. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Beutin L, Miko A, Krause G, et al. Identification of human-pathogenic strains of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli from food by a combination of serotyping and molecular typing of Shiga toxin genes. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(15):4769–4775. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00873-07. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Haddad N, Johnson N, Kathariou S, et al. Next generation microbiological risk assessment-Potential of omics data for hazard characterisation. Int J Food Microbiol. 2018;287:28–39. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2018.04.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Welinder-Olsson C, Badenfors M, Cheasty T, et al. Genetic profiling of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli strains in relation to clonality and clinical signs of infection. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40(3):959–964. doi: 10.1128/JCM.40.3.959-964.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Brunder W, Schmidt H, Frosch M, et al. The large plasmids of Shiga-toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) are highly variable genetic elements. Microbiology (Reading). 1999;145(Pt 5):1005–1014. doi: 10.1099/13500872-145-5-1005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Paton JC, Paton AW. Pathogenesis and diagnosis of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli infections. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1998;11(3):450–479. doi: 10.1128/cmr.11.3.450. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Bettelheim KA, Goldwater PN. Serotypes of non-O157 Shigatoxigenic Escherichia coli (STEC) Adv Microbiol. 2014;4(7):377–389. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Bettelheim KA. The non-O157 Shiga-toxigenic (verocytotoxigenic) Escherichia coli; under-rated pathogens. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2007;33(1):67–87. doi: 10.1080/10408410601172172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Jajarmi M, Imani Fooladi AA, Badouei MA, et al. Virulence genes, Shiga toxin subtypes, major O-sero-groups, and phylogenetic background of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli strains isolated from cattle in Iran. Microb Pathog. 2017;109:274–279. doi: 10.1016/j.micpath.2017.05.041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Koochakzadeh A, Askari Badouei M, Mazandarani E, et al. Survey on O157: H7 enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) in cattle in Golestan province, Iran. Iran J Microbiol. 2014;6(4):276–280. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Aslani MM, Bouzari S. Characterization of virulence genes of non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli isolates from two provinces of Iran. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2009;62(1):16–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Askari Badouei M, Jajarmi M, Mirsalehian A. Virulence profiling and genetic relatedness of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli isolated from humans and ruminants. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015;38:15–20. doi: 10.1016/j.cimid.2014.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Paton AW, Paton JC. Direct detection and characterization of Shiga toxigenic Escherichia coli by multiplex PCR for stx1, stx2, eae, ehxA, and saa. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40(1):271–244. doi: 10.1128/JCM.40.1.271-274.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Schmidt H, Scheef J, Morabito S, et al. A new Shiga toxin 2 variant (Stx2f) from Escherichia coli isolated from pigeons. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66(3):1205–1208. doi: 10.1128/aem.66.3.1205-1208.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.DebRoy C, Roberts E, Fratamico PM. Detection of O antigens in Escherichia coli. Anim Health Res Rev. 2011;12(2):169–185. doi: 10.1017/S1466252311000193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Li Y, Liu D, Cao B, et al. Development of a serotype-specific DNA microarray for identification of some Shigella and pathogenic Escherichia coli strains. J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44(12):4376–4383. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01389-06. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Iguchi A, Iyoda S, Seto K, et al. Escherichia coli O-genotyping PCR: a comprehensive and practical platform for molecular O serogrouping. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;53(8):2427–2432. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00321-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bielaszewska M, Mellmann A, Zhang W, et al. Characterisation of the Escherichia coli strain associated with an outbreak of haemolytic uraemic syndrome in Germany, 2011: a microbiological study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2011;11(9):671–676. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70165-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Sánchez S, Llorente MT, Echeita MA, et al. Development of three multiplex PCR assays targeting the 21 most clinically relevant serogroups associated with Shiga toxin-producing E. coli infection in humans. PLoS One. 2015;10(1):e0117660. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117660. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Li D, Liu B, Chen M, et al. A multiplex PCR method to detect 14 Escherichia coli serogroups associated with urinary tract infections. J Microbiol Methods. 2010;82(1):71–77. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2010.04.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Machado J, Grimont F, Grimont PA. Identification of Escherichia coli flagellar types by restriction of the amplified fliC gene. Res Microbiol. 2000;151(7):535–546. doi: 10.1016/s0923-2508(00)00223-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Clermont O, Christenson JK, Denamur E, et al. The Clermont Escherichia coli phylo‐typing method revisited: improvement of specificity and detection of new phylo‐groups. Environ Microbiol Rep. 2013;5(1):58–65. doi: 10.1111/1758-2229.12019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Gutema FD, Rasschaert G, Agga GE, et al. Occurrence, molecular characteristics, and antimicrobial resistance of Escherichia Coli O157 in cattle, beef, and humans in Bishoftu Town, central Ethiopia. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2021;18(1):1. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2020.2830. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Hoyle DV, Keith M, Williamson H, et al. Prevalence and epidemiology of non-O157 Escherichia coli serogroups O26, O103, O111, and O145 and Shiga toxin gene carriage in Scottish cattle, 2014-2015. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2021;87(10):e03142–20. doi: 10.1128/AEM.03142-20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Scheutz F. Taxonomy meets public health: The case of Shiga toxin‐producing Escherichia coli. Microbiol Spectr. 2014;2(3):doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.EHEC-0019-2013. doi: 10.1128/microbiolspec.EHEC-0019-2013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Karmali MA. Infection by verocytotoxin-producing Escherichia coli. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1989;2(1):15–38. doi: 10.1128/cmr.2.1.15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Scotland SM, Willshaw GA, Smith HR, et al. Properties of strains of Escherichia coli belonging to serogroup O157 with special reference to production of Vero cytotoxins VTl and VT2. Epidemiol Infect. 1987;99(3):613–624. doi: 10.1017/s0950268800066462. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Loconsole D, Giordano M, Centrone F, et al. Epidemiology of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli infections in southern Italy after implementation of symptom-based surveillance of bloody diarrhea in the pediatric population. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(14):5137. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17145137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Fremaux B, Raynaud S, Beutin L, et al. Dissemination and persistence of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) strains on French dairy farms. Vet Microbiol. 2006;117(2-4):180–191. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2006.04.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Mercado EC, Gioffré A, Rodríguez SM, et al. Non‐O157 Shiga toxin‐producing Escherichia coli isolated from diarrhoeic calves in Argentina. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 2004;51(2):82–88. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0450.2004.00729.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Hooman N, Khodadost M, Ahmadi A, et al. The prevalence of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in patients with gastroenteritis in Iran, systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran J Kidney Dis. 2019;13(3):139–150. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Askari Badouei M, Morabito S, Najafifar A, et al. Molecular characterization of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli hemolysin gene (EHEC-hlyA)-harboring isolates from cattle reveals a diverse origin and hybrid diarrheagenic strains. Infect Genet Evol. 2016;39:342–348. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2016.02.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Mellmann A, Bielaszewska M, Köck R, et al. Analysis of collection of hemolytic uremic syndrome–associated enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(8):1287–1290. doi: 10.3201/eid1408.071082. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Monaghan AM, Byrne B, McDowell D, et al. Characterization of farm, food, and clinical Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli (STEC) O113. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2012;9(12):1088–1096. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2012.1257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Domingue G, Willshaw GA, Smith HR, et al. DNA‐based subtyping of verocytotoxin‐producing Escherichia coli (VTEC) O128ab:H2 strains from human and raw meat sources. Lett Appl Microbiol. 2003;37(6):433–437. doi: 10.1046/j.1472-765x.2003.01424.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Irino K, Kato MA, Vaz TM, et al. Serotypes and virulence markers of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) isolated from dairy cattle in São Paulo State, Brazil. Vet Microbiol. 2005;105(1):29–36. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2004.08.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Paton AW, Woodrow MC, Doyle RM, et al. Molecular characterization of a Shiga toxigenic Escherichia coli O113:H21 strain lacking eae responsible for a cluster of cases of hemolytic-uremic syndrome. J Clin Microbiol. 1999;37(10):3357–3361. doi: 10.1128/jcm.37.10.3357-3361.1999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Feng PC, Delannoy S, Lacher DW, et al. Genetic diversity and virulence potential of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O113:H21 strains isolated from clinical, environmental, and food sources. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014;80(15):4757–4763. doi: 10.1128/AEM.01182-14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Fukushima H, Hoshina K, Gomyoda M. Long-term survival of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli O26, O111, and O157 in bovine feces. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999;65(11):5177–5181. doi: 10.1128/aem.65.11.5177-5181.1999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Newton HJ, Sloan J, Bulach DM, et al. Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli strains negative for locus of enterocyte effacement. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15(3):372–380. doi: 10.3201/eid1502.080631. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Karch H, Tarr PI, Bielaszewska M. Enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli in human medicine. Int J Med Microbiol. 2005;295(6-7):405–418. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2005.06.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Liu Y, Li H, Chen X, et al. Characterization of Shiga toxin‐producing Escherichia coli isolated from cattle and sheep in Xinjiang province, China, using whole‐genome sequencing. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2022;69(2):413–422. doi: 10.1111/tbed.13999. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]