Skip to main content
Applied and Environmental Microbiology logoLink to Applied and Environmental Microbiology
. 2013 Jul;79(13):4170–4172. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00537-13

Assessment of Virulence Factors Characteristic of Human Escherichia coli Pathotypes and Antimicrobial Resistance in O157:H7 and Non-O157:H7 Isolates from Livestock in Spain

A Cabal a,b, S Gómez-Barrero a, C Porrero a, C Bárcena c, G López d, R Cantón e, C Gortázar b, L Domínguez a, J Álvarez e,
PMCID: PMC3697575  PMID: 23603685

Abstract

The distribution of virulence factors (VFs) typical of diarrheagenic Escherichia coli and the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles were assessed in 780 isolates from healthy pigs, broilers, and cattle from Spain. VF distribution was broader than expected, although at low prevalence for most genes, with AMR being linked mainly to host species.

TEXT

Pathogenic isolates of Escherichia coli are characterized by the presence of virulence factors (VFs) that can be combined, leading to different pathotypes (1). Six distinct intestinal pathotypes have been differentiated, including enteropathogenic (EPEC), enterotoxigenic (ETEC), enterohemorrhagic (EHEC), enteroaggregative (EAEC), enteroinvasive (EIEC), and diffusely adherent (DAEC) E. coli (2). The main reservoirs for EPEC, EAEC, and EIEC are humans (1, 3). In contrast, EHEC transmission from animals to humans may also occur through fecal contamination of food or water. In addition to the conventional E. coli pathotypes, novel hybrid pathotypes may emerge, as occurred with EAEC/EHEC O104:H4 of the German outbreak, which spread across several European countries, affecting almost 4,000 people and causing more than 50 deaths (4).

Limited information on the distribution of E. coli pathotypes in healthy livestock (especially non-Shiga toxin-producing E. coli [STEC]) and the possible association between the carriage of VF and their antimicrobial resistance (AMR) patterns is available. In this study, we evaluated the distribution of VFs and AMR profiles in E. coli isolates recovered from healthy livestock in Spain.

All these E. coli isolates were recovered in 2009 (n = 780) through the Spanish Surveillance Network of Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacteria of Veterinary Origin (VAV Network) (5). Isolate distribution was as follows: 50 O157:H7 E. coli strains from cattle and 730 E. coli strains (278 from pigs, 196 from broilers, and 256 from cattle) belonging to other serotypes (referred to here as non-O157:H7 E. coli regardless whether they were EHEC). These isolates were recovered from pooled samples collected at Spanish slaughterhouses selected according to their slaughter capacity and located in different regions within the country. Isolates were obtained by culturing pooled feces samples from pigs (2 animals per pool, 556 individual fecal samples analyzed), cattle (2 animals per pool, 512 individual fecal samples analyzed) and broilers (3 animals per pool, 588 individual fecal samples analyzed). Each pool represented one slaughter batch from one single farm.

Samples from pigs, broilers, and cattle were cultured on MacConkey agar plates (6). In addition, cattle feces were processed to obtain E. coli O157:H7 according to the ISO 16.654:2001 protocol.

Nine VFs (stx1, stx2, eae, ehxA, heat-stable enterotoxin [ST], heat-labile enterotoxin [LT], bfpA, pInv, and aggR) and the somatic and flagellar antigens of O157:H7 and O104:H4 serotypes were assessed in all isolates using conventional PCR (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). The β-d-glucuronidase-encoding gene uidA was also included for E. coli confirmation (7). In addition, the stx2 PCR product from two swine isolates was sequenced to assess their stx2 type (8). All isolates were also tested against 14 antibiotics by broth microdilution (6).

All isolates were E. coli, as demonstrated by the positive uidA results, and all were negative for bfpA, LT, aggR, and wzxo104/fliCH4 (data not shown). Distribution of VFs varied depending on the host species, with pigs and cattle presenting more diversity of genotypes, while 57 (29.1%) of the isolates from broilers carried eae as the only detected VF, in agreement with previous reports on avian isolates (9).

In cattle E. coli, the occurrence of eae (3.9%) and Shiga toxins (7.7%) in this study was lower among our strains than in previous works (10, 11, 12).

In pigs prevalence of VF was also low, with one isolate being pInv positive and two isolates being positive for both stx2 and ST (Table 1). In fact, a significant association for the concurrent presence of stx2 and ST was found in both cattle and swine isolates (Fisher's exact test, P < 0.001). Interestingly, this combination had not been previously described for cattle. The sequencing of the stx gene from the two ST+ stx2+ swine strains identified them as stx2e. In previous studies, this pattern was detected in healthy pigs and piglets suffering from postweaning diarrhea (13, 14). Our stx2e/ST-positive strains were obtained from adult healthy pigs, highlighting their possible role as asymptomatic reservoirs of this intermediate strain.

Table 1.

Positive samples in each animal species for detection of the selected VFs

E. coli serotype Origin No. of strains No. (%) positive for:
stx1 stx2 eae ehxAa (pO157) pInv ST rbfO157/fliCH7
Non-O157:H7 Cattle 256 1 (0.4) 1 (0.4) 10 (3.9) NDc 0 3 (1.17) 3b (1.17)
Swine 278 0 4 (1.4) 2 (0.72) ND 1 (0.36) 2 (0.72) 0
Broilers 196 0 0 57 (29.1) ND 0 0 0
O157:H7 Cattle 50 33 (66) 50 (100) 50 (100) 50 (100) 0 0 50 (100)
a

As enterohemolysin (ehxA) is present in EHEC strains, it was analyzed only in O157:H7 isolates.

b

rbfO157-positive fliCH7-negative isolates.

c

ND, not determined.

Regarding E. coli O157:H7 strains, 100% of the isolates were positive for at least three of the typical EHEC VFs (ehxA, eae, and stx2), confirming the role of cattle as a relevant reservoir of this pathotype and a public health concern, as previously described (15).

Almost 20% of the isolates showed no resistance to the studied antimicrobials, and no resistance to colistin was detected (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). The highest resistance rates were found for tetracycline, streptomycin, and sulfonamides, especially in pig isolates. However, the largest proportion of isolates resistant to quinolones and beta-lactams, including third-generation cephalosporins, was observed in avian isolates. Bovine strains showed lower AMR percentages, although cattle E. coli O157:H7 isolates accounted for the highest levels of resistance to gentamicin, kanamycin, and chloramphenicol (see Table S1). Significant differences (Pearson chi-square test, P < 0.05) in the proportion of resistant isolates to the different antibiotics were observed depending on the host species. In cattle, there was a significantly (P < 0.05) higher proportion of resistant isolates among O157:H7 than in non-O157:H7 E. coli strains for all the antimicrobials except florfenicol (P = 0.49) and third-generation cephalosporins (no resistant cattle isolates).

Compared with previous data (16), resistance levels among our E. coli isolates from pigs and broilers were moderate to high for some antibiotics while they were low in the case of bovine E. coli isolates. A higher proportion of resistance to gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, tetracycline and nalidixic acid was observed in the O157:H7 E. coli cattle isolates analyzed in this study compared with previous reports.

The homogeneity of the limited VF distribution found in pigs and broilers made it impossible to detect resistance patterns related to VF combinations in these animal species. In contrast, differences in AMR between E. coli O157:H7 and non-O157:H7 isolates from cattle indicate that, although both types of strains were theoretically under the same selective pressure, there may be a specific mechanism that makes O157:H7 E. coli strains more resistant than non-O157:H7 E. coli strains. However, comparison of non-O157:H7 E. coli isolates revealed a strong association with the host species.

In summary, the selected VFs, commonly regarded in the literature as specific to a given E. coli pathotype, showed a broader distribution than expected among healthy livestock in Spain, although most of the VFs analyzed were present at low frequencies. The assessment of the presence of potentially pathogenic E. coli (not only EHEC) in healthy animals could be a useful tool to evaluate and predict the risk of the emergence of new pathogenic strains from animal reservoirs.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental material

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was partially supported by The Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment and by the Autonomous Community of Madrid, Spain (S0505/AGR-0265; S2009/AGR-1489). J. Álvarez is a recipient of a Sara Borrell postdoctoral contract (CD11/00261, Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación).

We thank our technicians, M. Carmen Comerón, Nisrin Maasoumi, and Lorena del Moral, for their excellent work. We also thank Silvia Herrera-León from the National Center of Microbiology (Institute of Health Carlos III), Madrid, Spain, for providing an EPEC strain and Martina Bielaszewska from the University of Münster for providing ETEC, EIEC, and EAEC strains and the O104:H4 EAEC strain of the German outbreak to be used as positive controls in the molecular analyses.

This article is a contribution to EU FP7 ANTIGONE (project number 278976).

Footnotes

Published ahead of print 19 April 2013

Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00537-13.

REFERENCES

  • 1. Kaper JB, Nataro JP, Mobley HL. 2004. Pathogenic Escherichia coli. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2:123–140 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Palaniappan RU, Zhang Y, Chiu D, Torres A, Debroy C, Whittam TS, Chang YF. 2006. Differentiation of Escherichia coli pathotypes by oligonucleotide spotted array. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44:1495–1501 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Sousa CP. 2006. The versatile strategies of Escherichia coli pathotypes: a mini review. J. Venomous Animals Toxins Trop. Dis. 12:363–373 [Google Scholar]
  • 4. World Health Organization 2011. Outbreaks of E. coli O104:H4 infection: update 30. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Moreno MA, Dominguez L, Teshager T, Herrero IA, Porrero MC. 2000. Antibiotic resistance monitoring: the Spanish programme. The VAV Network. Red de Vigilancia de Resistencias Antibioticas en Bacterias de Origen Veterinario. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 14:285–290 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Moreno MA, Porrero MC, Garcia M, Teshager T, Cubillo I, Rivero E, Rigaut D, Dominguez L. 2006. Veterinary monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in Spain, VAV 2005, 12th report. C.E.R.S.A., Madrid: www.vigilanciasanitaria.es/en/veterinary-monitoring-of-antimicrobial-resistance-in-spain-vav-2005-twelfth-report/12=320/ 2 April 2013, date last accessed [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Martins MT, Rivera IG, Clark DL, Stewart MH, Wolfe RL, Olson BH. 1993. Distribution of uidA gene sequences in Escherichia coli isolates in water sources and comparison with the expression of beta-glucuronidase activity in 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta-d-glucuronide media. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59:2271–2276 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Sonntag AK, Bielaszewska M, Mellmann A, Dierksen N, Schierack P, Wieler LH, Schmidt MA, Karch H. 2005. Shiga toxin 2e-producing Escherichia coli isolates from humans and pigs differ in their virulence profiles and interactions with intestinal epithelial cells. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 71:8855–8863 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Kobayashi H, Pohjanvirta T, Pelkonen S. 2002. Prevalence and characteristics of intimin- and Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli from gulls, pigeons and broilers in Finland. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 64:1071–1073 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Andrade GI, Coura FM, Santos EL, Ferreira MG, Galinari GC, Facury Filho EJ, de Carvalho AU, Lage AP, Heinemann MB. 2012. Identification of virulence factors by multiplex PCR in Escherichia coli isolated from calves in Minas Gerais, Brazil. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 44:1783–1790 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Huasai S, Chen A, Wang C, Li Y, Tongrige B. 2012. Occurrence and characteristics of virulence genes of Escherichia coli strains isolated from healthy dairy cows in Inner Mongolia, China. Braz. J. Microbiol. 43:528–534 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Rivera FP, Sotelo E, Morales I, Menacho F, Medina AM, Evaristo R, Valencia R, Carbajal L, Ruiz J, Ochoa TJ. 2012. Short communication: detection of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) in healthy cattle and pigs in Lima, Peru. J. Dairy Sci. 95:1166–1169 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Kim YJ, Kim JH, Hur J, Lee JH. 2010. Isolation of Escherichia coli from piglets in South Korea with diarrhea and characteristics of the virulence genes. Can. J. Vet. Res. 74:59–64 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Schierack P, Steinrück H, Kleta S, Vahjen W. 2006. Virulence factor gene profiles of Escherichia coli isolates from clinically healthy pigs. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72:6680–6686 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. McGee P, Scott L, Sheridan JJ, Earley B, Leonard N. 2004. Horizontal transmission of Escherichia coli O157:H7 during cattle housing. J. Food Prot. 67:2651–2656 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Saenz Y, Zarazaga M, Brinas L, Lantero M, Ruiz-Larrea F, Torres C. 2001. Antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli isolates obtained from animals, foods and humans in Spain. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 18:353–358 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Mora A, Blanco JE, Blanco M, Alonso MP, Dhabi G, Echeita A, Gonzalez EA, Bernardez MI, Blanco J. 2005. Antimicrobial resistance of Shiga toxin (verotoxin)-producing Escherichia coli O157:H7 and non-O157 strains isolated from humans, cattle, sheep and food in Spain. Res. Microbiol. 156:793–806 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplemental material

Articles from Applied and Environmental Microbiology are provided here courtesy of American Society for Microbiology (ASM)

RESOURCES