Skip to main content
Frontiers in Microbiology logoLink to Frontiers in Microbiology
. 2016 Oct 27;7:1649. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01649

Genome Sequencing of Four Multidrug-Resistant Enterobacter aerogenes Isolates from Hospitalized Patients in Brazil

Ana Laura Grazziotin 1,*, Newton M Vidal 2, Jussara K Palmeiro 3,4, Libera Maria Dalla-Costa 3,4,*, Thiago M Venancio 1,*
PMCID: PMC5081556  PMID: 27833588

Background

Enterobacter aerogenes is a motile, non-spore forming, Gram-negative bacteria from the Enterobacteriaceae family. Enterobacter spp. have emerged as multidrug-resistant (MDR) nosocomial bacteria, especially in intensive care units (Loiwal et al., 1999; Piagnerelli et al., 2002). Therefore, over the last decade Enterobacter spp. were included in the ESKAPE group, which also comprises Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Rice, 2008; Boucher et al., 2009). Further, bloodstream infections with MDR E. aerogenes have been associated with high mortality rates (Davin-Regli and Pagés, 2015).

Hospital outbreaks due to E. aerogenes have been reported in Europe since the mid-1990s and have been related to an epidemic extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) clone carrying the blaTEM-24 gene (Bosi et al., 1999; Galdbart et al., 2000; Dumarche et al., 2002; Salso et al., 2003). Constitutive AmpC a (beta-lactamase) overexpression is the major cephalosporin resistance mechanism in Enterobacter spp., happening more often than the acquisition of ampC genes through the activity of mobile genetic elements (Perez-Perez and Hanson, 2002). Further, the increased expression of ESBLs led to the adoption of carbapenems to treat E. aerogenes infections (Perez-Perez and Hanson, 2002; Davin-Regli and Pagés, 2015).

Carbapenems have been considered the antibiotic of choice for treating patients infected with ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae (Vardakas et al., 2012). However, emergence of carbapenem-resistant E. aerogenes isolates during carbapenem therapy of hospitalized patients (Chen et al., 2008), cases of sepsis due to carbapenem-resistant E. aerogenes after liver transplantation (Chen et al., 2009) and hospital disseminations of carbapenemase-producing E. aerogenes have been recently reported in several countries (Lavigne et al., 2013; Kuai et al., 2014; Qin et al., 2014; Pulcrano et al., 2016). Acquisition and expression of carbapenemases constitute the primary mechanism underlying the development of carbapenem resistance (Rapp and Urban, 2012). Nevertheless, loss of function mutations in porin genes and increased expression of efflux pumps or their regulators have also been associated with carbapenem resistance profiles (Pradel and Pages, 2002; Yigit et al., 2002; Bornet et al., 2003).

Broad-spectrum antimicrobial-resistant E. aerogenes isolates, some resistant to carbapenems (Qin et al., 2014) and last-line therapeutic options such as colistin (Diene et al., 2013), have been responsible for outbreaks in the United States of America (Wong et al., 2010), China (Qin et al., 2014), Japan (Goshi et al., 2002), France (Diene et al., 2013), Fiji (Narayan et al., 2009) and Brazil (Tuon et al., 2015). However, few reports related to E. aerogenes epidemiology, pathogenesis, and molecular characterization have been conducted in Brazil. Recently, five panresistant E. aerogenes isolates were reported in a Brazilian teaching hospital, resulting in a high mortality rate (37.5%) among 16 infected patients (Tuon et al., 2015). We have observed high prevalence (>20%) of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae spp., in particular K. pneumoniae and E. aerogenes, in our hospital since 2003 (Nogueira Kda et al., 2014, 2015). Previous molecular characterization studies conducted over 5 years in our hospital showed high prevalence of blaCTX-M2, -M15, -M59, blaSHV-2 and blaTEM genes in Enterobacter spp. isolates (Nogueira Kda et al., 2014, 2015). The presence of blaPER-2 was also detected in a few isolates (Nogueira Kda et al., 2014, 2015). Given the severity of E. aerogenes infections and the urgent need to better understand the genetic basis of multidrug resistance, here we report the whole-genome sequencing and resistance gene repertoire of four multidrug-resistant E. aerogenes isolated from hospitalized patients in Brazil.

Methods

Sample collection and identification

E. aerogenes isolates C10, D2, D3, and E9 were obtained between 2006 and 2012 from patients hospitalized in wards or intensive care units at the Hospital de Clínicas of the Universidade Federal do Paraná (Curitiba, Brazil). The main selection criterion for genome sequencing was the MDR phenotype, particularly in carbapenem resistant isolates. The negative laboratory tests for carbapenemases were also taken into account, as divergent enzymes or alternative resistance mechanisms could be relevant to the observed MDR phenotypes. C10 and D2 samples were isolated from different body sites of the same patient. Isolates were grown in selective medium with an ertapenem disk (10 ug) and stored at −80°C in trypticase soy broth containing glycerol 15%. Identification of isolates was performed using Vitek® 2 Compact (BioMérieux S.A., Marcy l'Etoile, France) and by mass spectrometry using Microflex LT instrument (Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany). This study was carried out in accordance with the Brazilian legislation and was approved by the Institutional Ethics Review Board of the Hospital de Clínicas, Universidade Federal do Paraná (IRB#: 2656.263/2011-11). Our study involved only bacterial isolates and no human specimens were analyzed or stored. Further, we used no patient information other than the anatomical sites from where the isolates were collected. Therefore, the same Ethics Review Board exempted us from obtaining informed consent forms.

Resistance profile analysis

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Isolates were tested by agar dilution against 15 antibiotics according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute guidelines (CLSI, 2015a). Minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) was interpreted as recommended by CLSI standards (CLSI, 2015b). Polymyxin, tigecycline and fosfomycin breakpoints were interpreted using EUCAST standards (Eucast, 2016). Modified Hodge test (MHT), double-disk synergy and hydrolysis assay were performed to determine the carbapenem resistance phenotypes, as previously described (Carvalhaes et al., 2010; Eucast, 2013).

Molecular typing and detection of resistance markers

The genetic relatedness of the E. aerogenes isolates were determined by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), as described elsewhere (Kaufmann, 1998). DNA fingerprints were interpreted as recommended by Tenover et al. (1995). The presence of the blaMOX, blaCMY, blaLAT, blaBIL, blaDHA, blaACC, blaMIR, blaACT, blaFOX, blaTEM, blaSHV, blaCTX-M1, -M2, -M8, -M9, -M25, blaKPC, blaGES, blaIMP, blaVIM, blaNDM, blaSPM, blaGIM, blaSIM, blaOXA-23, -48, -51, -58, and -143 was tested by PCR as previously described (Payne and Thomson, 1998; Poirel et al., 2000, 2011; Perez-Perez and Hanson, 2002; Naas et al., 2008; Higgins et al., 2009; Woodford, 2010; Nordmann et al., 2011).

Genome sequencing, assembly, and annotation

Genomic DNA was extracted using DNeasy 96 Blood & Tissue Kit (QIAGEN Silicon Valley, Redwood City, USA). DNA quality was assessed using a Bioanalyzer 2100 system (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, USA). DNA quantification was performed using Qubit (Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Waltham, USA). Illumina sequencing libraries with an average fragment size of 550 bp were prepared using Illumina TruSeq DNA PCR-free LT Kit (Illumina Inc., San Diego, USA). Whole-genome sequencing of paired-end (PE) libraries was performed using a HiSeq 2500 instrument in RAPID run mode (Illumina Inc., San Diego, USA) at the Life Sciences Core Facilities of the State University of Campinas (São Paulo, Brazil). Quality-based trimming and filtering was performed using Trimmomatic version 0.32 (Bolger et al., 2014). PE reads were assembled de novo using Velvet version 1.2.10 (Zerbino and Birney, 2008) and contigs were scaffolded using SSPACE version 3.0 (Boetzer et al., 2011). Gene predictions and annotations were performed using NCBI Prokaryotic Genome Automatic Annotation Pipeline (PGAAP; Angiuoli et al., 2008).

Identification of antibiotic resistance genes

Antibiotic resistance-related genes were predicted using the ResFinder database version 2.1 (Zankari et al., 2012) with the following parameters: “all databases” were used for antimicrobial configuration, type of reads as “assembled genomes/contigs” and thresholds of 98 identity and 80% coverage between sequences. This dataset of resistance genes was complemented with BLASTp searches against the ARDB (Antibiotic Resistance Genes Database) version 1.1 (Liu and Pop, 2009) using “resistance gene complete” database, 40% identity and e-value of 0.0001.

Results

Resistance profiles

All isolates showed MDR profile and had increased MIC for at least one carbapenem. Information regarding collection date and site, clinical setting, PFGE profile and antimicrobial resistance profiles of each isolate are available in Table 1. Among the four analyzed samples, C10 and D2 were isolated from different body sites of the same patient within a short period of time (a month) and belong to the same PFGE profile. These genomes allow one to analyze the possible genome plasticity between the isolates. D3 and E9 samples were isolated from two patients with an interval of collection date greater than 5 years. D3 and E9 were also interesting because of their sensitivity to meropenem and resistance to ertapenem and imipenem. Surprisingly, E9 showed resistance to carbapenems but not to 3rd (ceftazidime and cefotaxime) and 4th generation (cefepime) cephalosporins (Table 1). All isolates possessed blaAmpC and blaTEM, as detected by PCR. The gene blaCTX-M2 was found in all isolates except E9. Phenotypic tests (i.e., Modified Hodge test and double-disk synergy) to detect carbapenemases were positive for C10, D2, and E9. However, no class A, B, and D carbapenemase encoding genes were detected by PCR. All isolates tested negative in carbapenem hydrolysis assays.

Table 1.

Clinical, phenotypic, molecular data, and genomic features of the four Enterobacter aerogenes isolates reported in the present work.

Sample ID E. aerogenes C10 E. aerogenes D2 E. aerogenes D3 E. aerogenes E9
CLINICAL DATA
Date of isolation 09.28.2007 10.12.2007 12.12.2006 01.31.2012
Clinic Ward Ward Ward ICUb
Source Blood Catheter tip BALa Urine
MINIMAL INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION (mg/L)
Amicacin 64 64 64 64
Gentamicin >64 >64 >64 2
Ceftazidime 16 32 16 0.5
Cefepime 128 >128 128 0.5
Cefotaxime >128 128 128 0.5
Ertapenem 32 32 16 2
Imipenem 8 8 32 8
Meropenem 8 8 2 0.5
Polimyxin 0.25 0.25 0.5 0.25
Ciprofloxacin >16 >16 16 2
Levofloxacin >8 8 >8 0.25
Tigecycline 2 2 1 0.5
Doxycycline 16 16 64 8
Minocycline 8 8 8 2
Fosfomycin 256 256 >512 64
MOLECULAR FEATURES
PFGE profile A A1 B C
bla genes blaAmpC, blaTEM, blaCTX−M2 blaAmpC, blaTEM, blaCTX−M2 blaAmpC, blaTEM, blaCTX−M2 blaAmpC, blaTEM
GENOMIC FEATURES
Estimate genome size (bp) 5,833,521 5,821,782 5,584,745 5,637,471
Genome coverage 208x 182x 137x 197x
Number of scaffolds 58 57 55 59
N50 (bp) 505,999 464,022 505,714 461,836
Number of paired-end reads used 14,346,552 12,939,780 9,406,438 12,891,456
%GC 53.61 53.63 53.69 53.67
Predicted genes 5,636 5,622 5,311 5,402
Predicted protein-coding genes 5,363 5,380 5,067 5,129
tRNAs 82 80 83 85
rRNAs (5S, 16S, 23S) 9, 5, 16 6, 3, 8 8, 4, 9 8, 10, 13
ncRNAs 12 12 13 12
Pseudogenes 149 133 127 145

Numbers in bold indicate resistance to a given antibiotic.

a

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) and

b

Intensive care unit (ICU).

Genomic features

We obtained between 16,841,714 and 25,138,390 150 bp PE reads per library. After genome assembly, 5,833,521 bp were assembled in 58 scaffolds for C10, 5,821,782 bp were assembled in 57 scaffolds for D2, 5,584,745 bp were assembled in 55 scaffolds for D3 and 5,637,471 bp were assembled in 59 scaffolds for E9. By using the NCBI Prokaryotic Annotation Pipeline, we were able to predict 5,363, 5,380, 5,067, and 5,129 protein-coding sequences in each of the genomes listed above, respectively. Genomic features of the four sequenced genomes are summarized in Table 1.

Antibiotic resistance genes

A total of 18 enzymes related to antibiotic resistance were identified using ResFinder, ARDB and PGAAP (Table 2). All isolates harbor genes related to: (i) aminoglycoside resistance (genes aacA4 and aadA); (ii) beta-lactam resistance, including genes belonging to class A beta-lactamases (TEM family), class B beta-lactamases (Ribonuclease Z), class C beta-lactamases (CMY/LAT/MOX/ACT/MIR/FOX family) and class D beta-lactamases (OXA-9); (iii) bacitracin resistance (gene bacA), and (iv) sulphonamide resistance (gene sul1; Table 2). Genes sul2 and rmtD were only identified in E. aerogenes D3. The gene sul2 has been implicated on sulphonamide resistance for inducing high expression levels of the enzyme dihydropteroate synthase (Sköld, 2001), while rmtD has been related to aminoglycoside resistance and this variant was identified for the first time in South America in a P. aeruginosa isolate in 2005 (Doi et al., 2007). Interestingly, E. aerogenes D3 was isolated in 2006, indicating that this variant has spread amongst Enterobacteriaceae in Brazil since its first report (Doi et al., 2007).

Table 2.

Resistance gene repertoire identified using ResFinder, ARDB, and NCBI annotation pipeline.

Protein Reference Sequence C10 D2 D3 E9
ENZYMES
16S rRNA (adenine(1518)-N(6)/adenine(1519)-N(6))-dimethyltransferase (KsgA) WP_003829609.1 AW170_18245 AYK88_16575 A1Q75_18030 A1J85_13160
16S rRNA (guanine(1405)-N(7))-methyltransferase RmtD WP_019726361.1 A1Q75_26170
AacA4 family aminoglycoside N(6')-acetyltransferase (AacA4) WP_014839929.1 P19650.1 AW170_26985 AYK88_26865 AYK88_26940 A1Q75_26315 A1J85_26740
Aminoglycoside N(3)-acetyltransferase III (AacC3) P0A255.1 AW170_26910 AYK88_26960
ANT(3″)-Ia family aminoglycoside nucleotidyltransferase AadA WP_014325834.1 AW170_26955 AYK88_26945 A1Q75_26045 A1Q75_26310 A1J85_26670 A1J85_26735
Chloramphenicol acetyltransferase III (Cat3) P00484.1 AW170_27070 AYK88_27075
Class A beta-lactamase - Beta-lactamase CTX-M-6 O65976.1 AW170_27050 AYK88_27040 A1Q75_26225
Class A beta-lactamase - TEM family WP_010331504.1 WP_000027063.1 AW170_26915 AW170_27230 AYK88_27065 AYK88_27140 A1Q75_26300 A1J85_24665 A1J85_26820
Class A beta-lactamase - TEM family WP_001398207.1 AW170_26970
Class B beta-lactamase - Ribonuclease Z (metallo-beta-lactamase superfamily) WP_004890624.1 AW170_13355 AYK88_10035 A1Q75_10920 A1J85_17515
Class C beta-lactamase - CMY/LAT/MOX/ACT/MIR/FOX family WP_008453751.1 AW170_05580 AYK88_04475 A1Q75_09705 A1J85_14245
Class D beta-lactamase - Beta-lactamase OXA-2 P0A1V8.1 AW170_26980 AYK88_26870
Class D beta-lactamase - oxacillinase-carbenicillinase (OXA-9) WP_004153119.1 AW170_26960 AYK88_26950 A1Q75_26305 A1J85_26730
Dihydropteroate synthase type-1 (SulI) P0C002.1 AW170_27105 AYK88_26880 A1Q75_26340 A1J85_26680
Sulfonamide-resistant dihydropteroate synthase Sul2 WP_001043267.1 A1Q75_26185
Trimethoprim-resistant dihydrofolate reductase DfrA WP_001611015.1 A1Q75_26055 A1J85_26660
Undecaprenyl-diphosphatase (BacA) WP_012907642.1 AW170_01035 AYK88_19635 A1Q75_21735 A1J85_01030
Qnr family quinolone resistance pentapeptide repeat protein WP_017111199.1 AW170_27090 AYK88_27095 A1Q75_26320
TRANSPORTERS
Aminoglycoside/multidrug transporter subunit AcrD WP_005121895.1 AW170_13975 AYK88_09410 A1Q75_11550 A1J85_16890
Bcr/CflA family multidrug efflux MFS transporter WP_004202891.1 AW170_03270 AYK88_06790 A1Q75_02780 A1J85_21475
Bcr/CflA family multidrug efflux MFS transporter WP_008804003.1 AW170_13100 AYK88_10285 A1Q75_10670 A1J85_23465
Chloramphenicol efflux MFS transporter CmlA5 WP_012300772.1 A1Q75_26050 A1J85_26665
Macrolide ABC transporter permease/ATP-binding protein MacB WP_004147781.1 AW170_08470 AYK88_01580 A1Q75_06815 A1J85_05705
Macrolide transporter subunit MacA WP_008805838.1 AW170_08465 AYK88_01585 A1Q75_06820 A1J85_05700
MATE family efflux transporter, multidrug efflux protein WP_003857645.1 AW170_03255 AYK88_06805 A1Q75_02765 A1J85_21460
Membrane protein, Multidrug resistance efflux pump EmrA WP_009307711.1 AW170_03350 AYK88_06710 A1Q75_02860 A1J85_21555
MexE family multidrug efflux RND transporter periplasmic adaptor WP_004121017.1 AW170_01795 AYK88_08270 A1Q75_01550 A1J85_20240
MexE family multidrug efflux RND transporter periplasmic adaptor subunit, multidrug efflux system transporter AcrA WP_004129915.1 WP_015585499.1 AW170_06375 AW170_10590 AYK88_03675 AYK88_11425 A1Q75_08905 A1Q75_13105 A1J85_15040 A1J85_10280
MexX family efflux pump subunit, multidrug efflux system transporter AcrA WP_014906857.1 AW170_00035 AYK88_20640 A1Q75_20735 A1J85_00030
Multidrug ABC transporter ATP-binding protein WP_000422210.1 AW170_13185 AYK88_10200 A1Q75_10755 A1J85_23550
Multidrug efflux RND transporter permease subunit WP_004901494.1 AW170_10595 AYK88_11430 A1Q75_13110 A1J85_10285
Multidrug efflux RND transporter permease subunit OqxB WP_015367127.1 AW170_01800 AYK88_08265 A1Q75_01555 A1J85_20245
Multidrug efflux RND transporter permease subunit, multidrug efflux protein AcrB WP_017899940.1 WP_015571248.1 AW170_00030 AW170_06370 AYK88_20645 AYK88_03680 A1Q75_20730 A1Q75_08910 A1J85_00025 A1J85_15035
Multidrug resistance protein D (EmrD) WP_008806760.1 AW170_10405 AYK88_11240 A1Q75_12920 A1J85_10095
Multidrug resistance protein MdtB WP_020244584.1 AW170_12610 AYK88_10840 A1Q75_10110 A1J85_23005
Multidrug resistance protein MdtC Q7ACM1.1 AW170_12615 AYK88_10845 A1Q75_10105 A1J85_23000
Multidrug resistance protein MdtH WP_017900739.1 AW170_09790 AYK88_00255 A1Q75_01100 A1J85_19845
Multidrug transporter, multidrug efflux system protein EmrA WP_009308476.1 AW170_15715 AYK88_14045 A1Q75_16525 A1J85_03195
Outer membrane channel protein TolC WP_015369648.1 AW170_01095 AYK88_19575 A1Q75_21795 A1J85_01090
Outer membrane component of tripartite multidrug resistance system, putative outer membrane efflux protein MdtP WP_015369857.1 AW170_16750 AYK88_15075 A1Q75_15485 A1J85_02150
QacE family quaternary ammonium compound efflux SMR transporter WP_000679416.1 AW170_27110 AYK88_26875 A1Q75_26335 A1J85_26675
Quaternary ammonium compound-resistance protein SugE WP_001597468.1 AW170_19990 AYK88_18310 A1Q75_19995 A1J85_18375
Tetracycline efflux MFS transporter Tet(D) WP_001039466.1 A1Q75_26055 -

Although the four isolates showed carbapenem-resistance, no carbapenemase gene was identified using molecular detection or in silico analysis. Hence, it is likely that these isolates employ alternative mechanisms to counter carbapenem effects. Various multidrug efflux transporters were found in the genomes described here (Table 2). They belong to four superfamilies: the major facilitator superfamily (MFS), multidrug and toxic compound extrusion (MATE), ATP-binding cassette (ABC) and resistance-nodulation-cell division (RND). RND type of transporters has been often associated with multidrug resistance of Gram-negative bacteria (Nikaido, 1998). In particular, the RND type genes forming the AcrA-AcrB-TolC efflux pump were found in multiple copies in our isolates (Table 2). Experimental evolution studies of E. aerogenes under successive imipenem exposure reported alterations in membrane permeability with complete loss of porins (e.g., Omp35 and Omp36) and overexpression of AcrAB-TolC efflux pumps (Bornet et al., 2003; Thiolas et al., 2005; Lavigne et al., 2012). As a result of efflux pump expression, the E. aerogenes isolates showed resistance to carbapenems and other antibiotics, especially fluoroquinolones (Bornet et al., 2003; Thiolas et al., 2005; Lavigne et al., 2012). Given the multiple copies of genes encoding efflux pumps in our isolates, it is possible that an increased expression of AcrAB-TolC efflux pumps could contribute to the observed carbapenem-resistant profiles.

E. aerogenes is an emergent nosocomial pathogen with a diversity of mechanisms to circumvent antimicrobial activity. Here we reported the phenotypic screens, genome sequencing, and prediction of putative resistance gene repertoires of four multidrug-resistant E. aerogenes isolated between 2006 and 2012. The data reported here may help understand the biochemistry, evolution, and epidemiology of this important pathogen. The material provided in this work may be used in future comparative genomics and molecular epidemiology studies aiming to clarify the resistance profiles and dynamics of multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae species.

Data access

The genome sequence of E. aerogenes C10, E. aerogenes D2, E. aerogenes D3 and E. aerogenes E9 have been deposited in DDBJ/EMBL/GenBank under the accession numbers LUTZ00000000, LSOH00000000, LUTT00000000, and LULD00000000, respectively. Data are available in FASTA, annotated GenBank flat file and ASN.1 formats. The respective genome versions described in this paper are LUTZ01000000, LSOH01000000, LUTT01000000, and LULD01000000. Sequencing reads (fastq format) of each isolate were deposited in Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under the accession numbers SRP083774 (E. aerogenes C10), SRP083784 (E. aerogenes D2), SRP083785 (E. aerogenes D3), and SRP083786 (E. aerogenes E9). Users can download the data for research purposes, citing the present manuscript as original reference.

Author contributions

AG, NV, JP, LD, and TV conceived the idea and designed the study. JP performed the sample collections and wet lab experiments. AG and NV carried out the genome analysis. AG, NV, JP, LD, and TV interpreted the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final version of this manuscript.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ; E-26/110.236/2011 and E-26/102.259/2013). This research was partially supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). NV postdoctoral fellowship is funded by a partnership between CNPq and NIH. TV is a recipient of an established investigator fellowship award from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). We thank Bruker Corporation of Brazil for performing the MALDI-TOF assay and the staff of the Life Sciences Core Facility (LaCTAD), from State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), for library preparation and genome sequencing.

References

  1. Angiuoli S. V., Gussman A., Klimke W., Cochrane G., Field D., Garrity G., et al. (2008). Toward an online repository of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for (meta)genomic annotation. OMICS 12, 137–141. 10.1089/omi.2008.0017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boetzer M., Henkel C. V., Jansen H. J., Butler D., Pirovano W. (2011). Scaffolding pre-assembled contigs using SSPACE. Bioinformatics 27, 578–579. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq683 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolger A. M., Lohse M., Usadel B. (2014). Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics 30, 2114–2120. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu170 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bornet C., Chollet R., Malléa M., Chevalier J., Davin-Regli A., Pagés J. M., et al. (2003). Imipenem and expression of multidrug efflux pump in Enterobacter aerogenes. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 301, 985–990. 10.1016/S0006-291X(03)00074-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bosi C., Davin-Regli A., Bornet C., Mallea M., Pages J. M., Bollet C. (1999). Most Enterobacter aerogenes strains in France belong to a prevalent clone. J. Clin. Microbiol. 37, 2165–2169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Boucher H. W., Talbot G. H., Bradley J. S., Edwards J. E., Gilbert D., Rice L. B., et al. (2009). Bad bugs, no drugs: no ESKAPE! An update from the infectious diseases society of America. Clin. Infect. Dis. 48, 1–12. 10.1086/595011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Carvalhaes C. G., Picão R. C., Nicoletti A. G., Xavier D. E., Gales A. C. (2010). Cloverleaf test (modified Hodge test) for detecting carbapenemase production in Klebsiella pneumoniae: be aware of false positive results. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 65, 249–251. 10.1093/jac/dkp431 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen H., Zhang Y., Chen Y. G., Yu Y. S., Zheng S. S., Li L. J. (2009). Sepsis resulting from Enterobacter aerogenes resistant to carbapenems after liver transplantation. HBPD INT 8, 320–322. Available online at: http://www.hbpdint.com/EN/Y2009/V8/I3/320# [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Chen Y. G., Zhang Y., Yu Y. S., Qu T. T., Wei Z. Q., Shen P., et al. (2008). In vivo development of carbapenem resistance in clinical isolates of Enterobacter aerogenes producing multiple beta-lactamases. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 32, 302–307. 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2008.02.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. CLSI (2015a). Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria that Grow Aerobically, 10th Edn. CLSI document M7-A10. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. [Google Scholar]
  11. CLSI (2015b). Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing 25th Informational Supplement. CLSI document M100-S25. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. [Google Scholar]
  12. Davin-Regli A., Pagés J. M. (2015). Enterobacter aerogenes and Enterobacter cloacae; versatile bacterial pathogens confronting antibiotic treatment. Front. Microbiol. 6:392. 10.3389/fmicb.2015.00392 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Diene S. M., Merhej V., Henry M., El Filali A., Roux V., Robert C., et al. (2013). The rhizome of the multidrug-resistant Enterobacter aerogenes genome reveals how new “killer bugs” are created because of a sympatric lifestyle. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 369–383. 10.1093/molbev/mss236 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Doi Y., de Oliveira Garcia D., Adams J., Paterson D. L. (2007). Coproduction of novel 16S rRNA methylase RmtD and metallo-beta-lactamase SPM-1 in a panresistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolate from Brazil. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 51, 852–856. 10.1128/AAC.01345-06 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dumarche P., De Champs C., Sirot D., Chanal C., Bonnet R., Sirot J. (2002). TEM derivative-producing Enterobacter aerogenes strains: dissemination of a prevalent clone. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46, 1128–1131. 10.1128/AAC.46.4.1128-1131.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Eucast (2013). Eucast Guidelines for Detection of Resistance Mechanisms and Specific Resistances of Clinical and/or Epidemiological Importance. Version 1.0, December, 2013. Available online at: http://www.eucast.org/fileadmin/src/media/PDFs/EUCAST_files/Resistance_mechanisms/EUCAST_detection_of_resistance_mechanisms_v1.0_20131211.pdf
  17. Eucast (2016). Eucast Breakpoint Tables for Interpretation of MICs and Zone Diameters. Version 6.0, May, 2016. Available online at: http://www.eucast.org
  18. Galdbart J. O., Lémann F., Ainouz D., Féron P., Lambert-Zechovsky N., Branger C. (2000). TEM-24 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacter aerogenes: long-term clonal dissemination in French hospitals. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 6, 316–323. 10.1046/j.1469-0691.2000.00092.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Goshi S., Taneike I., Nakagawa S., Kojio S., Tamura Y., Ohara T., et al. (2002). DNA analysis of nosocomial infection by Enterobacter aerogenes in three cases of septicaemia in Japan. J. Hosp. Infect. 51, 221–225. 10.1053/jhin.2002.1255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Higgins P. G., Poirel L., Lehmann M., Nordmann P., Seifert H. (2009). OXA-143, a novel carbapenem-hydrolyzing class D beta-lactamase in Acinetobacter baumannii. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 53, 5035–5038. 10.1128/AAC.00856-09 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kaufmann M. E. (1998). Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, in Molecular Bacteriology: Protocols and Clinical Applications, eds Woodford N., Johnson A. P. (Totowa, NJ: Humana Press Inc; ), 33–51. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kuai S., Shao H., Huang L., Pei H., Lu Z., Wang W., et al. (2014). KPC-2 carbapenemase and DHA-1 AmpC determinants carried on the same plasmid in Enterobacter aerogenes. J. Med. Microbiol. 63, 367–370. 10.1099/jmm.0.054627-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Lavigne J. P., Sotto A., Nicolas-Chanoine M. H., Bouziges N., Bourg G., Davin-Regli A., et al. (2012). Membrane permeability, a pivotal function involved in antibiotic resistance and virulence in Enterobacter aerogenes clinical isolates. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 18, 539–545. 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03607.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lavigne J. P., Sotto A., Nicolas-Chanoine M. H., Bouziges N., Pagés J. M., Davin-Regli A. (2013). An adaptive response of Enterobacter aerogenes to imipenem: regulation of porin balance in clinical isolates. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 41, 130–136. 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.10.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Liu B., Pop M. (2009). ARDB–Antibiotic Resistance Genes Database. Nucleic Acids Res. 37, D443–D447. 10.1093/nar/gkn656 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Loiwal V., Kumar A., Gupta P., Gomber S., Ramachandran V. G. (1999). Enterobacter aerogenes outbreak in a neonatal intensive care unit. Pediatr. Int. 41, 157–161. 10.1046/j.1442-200X.1999.4121033.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Naas T., Cuzon G., Villegas M. V., Lartigue M. F., Quinn J. P., Nordmann P. (2008). Genetic structures at the origin of acquisition of the beta-lactamase bla KPC gene. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 52, 1257–1263. 10.1128/AAC.01451-07 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Narayan S. A., Kool J. L., Vakololoma M., Steer A. C., Mejia A., Drake A., et al. (2009). Investigation and control of an outbreak of Enterobacter aerogenes bloodstream infection in a neonatal intensive care unit in Fiji. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 30, 797–800. 10.1086/598240 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Nikaido H. (1998). Antibiotic resistance caused by gram-negative multidrug efflux pumps. Clin. Infect. Dis. 27(Suppl. 1), S32–S41. 10.1086/514920 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Nogueira Kda S., Conte D., Maia F. V., Dalla-Costa L. M. (2015). Distribution of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase types in a Brazilian tertiary hospital. Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 48, 162–169. 10.1590/0037-8682-0009-2015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Nogueira Kda S., Paganini M. C., Conte A., Cogo L. L., Taborda de Messias Reason I., da Silva M. J., et al. (2014). Emergence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase producing Enterobacter spp. in patients with bacteremia in a tertiary hospital in southern Brazil. Enferm. Infecc. Microbiol. Clin. 32, 87–92. 10.1016/j.eimc.2013.02.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Nordmann P., Poirel L., Carrër A., Toleman M. A., Walsh T. R. (2011). How to detect NDM-1 producers. J. Clin. Microbiol. 49, 718–721. 10.1128/JCM.01773-10 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Payne D. J., Thomson C. J. (1998). Molecular approaches for the detection and identification of β-lactamases, in Molecular Bacteriology: Protocols and Clinical Applications, eds Woodford N., Johnson A. P. (Totowa, NJ: Humana Press Inc; ), 495–512. [Google Scholar]
  34. Perez-Perez F. J., Hanson N. D. (2002). Detection of plasmid-mediated AmpC beta-lactamase genes in clinical isolates by using multiplex PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol. 40, 2153–2162. 10.1128/JCM.40.6.2153-2162.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Piagnerelli M., Carlier E., Deplano A., Lejeune P., Govaerts D. (2002). Risk factors for infection and molecular typing in patients in the intensive care unit colonized with nosocomial Enterobacter aerogenes. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 23, 452–456. 10.1086/502084 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Poirel L., Le Thomas I., Naas T., Karim A., Nordmann P. (2000). Biochemical sequence analyses of GES-1, a novel class A extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, and the class 1 integron In52 from Klebsiella pneumoniae. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 44, 622–632. 10.1128/AAC.44.3.622-632.2000 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Poirel L., Walsh T. R., Cuvillier V., Nordmann P. (2011). Multiplex PCR for detection of acquired carbapenemase genes. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 70, 119–123. 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.12.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Pradel E., Pagés J. M. (2002). The AcrAB-TolC efflux pump contributes to multidrug resistance in the nosocomial pathogen Enterobacter aerogenes. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46, 2640–2643. 10.1128/AAC.46.8.2640-2643.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Pulcrano G., Pignanelli S., Vollaro A., Esposito M., Iula V. D., Roscetto E., et al. (2016). Isolation of Enterobacter aerogenes carrying bla and bla genes recovered from a hospital Intensive Care Unit. APMIS 124, 516–521. 10.1111/apm.12528 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Qin X., Yang Y., Hu F., Zhu D. (2014). Hospital clonal dissemination of Enterobacter aerogenes producing carbapenemase KPC-2 in a Chinese teaching hospital. J. Med. Microbiol. 63, 222–228. 10.1099/jmm.0.064865-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Rapp R. P., Urban C. (2012). Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemases in Enterobacteriaceae: history, evolution, and microbiology concerns. Pharmacotherapy 32, 399–407. 10.1002/j.1875-9114.2012.01035.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Rice L. B. (2008). Federal funding for the study of antimicrobial resistance in nosocomial pathogens: no ESKAPE. J. Infect. Dis. 197, 1079–1081. 10.1086/533452 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Salso S., Culebras E., Andrade R., Picazo J. J. (2003). Outbreak of TEM-24-producing Enterobacter aerogenes in a Spanish hospital. Microb. Drug Resist. 9, 299–305. 10.1089/107662903322286517 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Skold O. (2001). Resistance to trimethoprim and sulfonamides. Vet. Res. 32, 261–273. 10.1051/vetres:2001123 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Tenover F. C., Arbeit R. D., Goering R. V., Mickelsen P. A., Murray B. E., Persing D. H., et al. (1995). Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33, 2233–2239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Thiolas A., Bollet C., La Scola B., Raoult D., Pagés J. M. (2005). Successive emergence of Enterobacter aerogenes strains resistant to imipenem and colistin in a patient. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 49, 1354–1358. 10.1128/AAC.49.4.1354-1358.2005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Tuon F. F., Scharf C., Rocha J. L., Cieslinsk J., Becker G. N., Arend L. N. (2015). KPC-producing Enterobacter aerogenes infection. Braz. J. Infect. Dis. 19, 324–327. 10.1016/j.bjid.2015.01.003 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Vardakas K. Z., Tansarli G. S., Rafailidis P. I., Falagas M. E. (2012). Carbapenems versus alternative antibiotics for the treatment of bacteraemia due to Enterobacteriaceae producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 67, 2793–2803. 10.1093/jac/dks301 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Wong M. R., Del Rosso P., Heine L., Volpe V., Lee L., Kornblum J., et al. (2010). An outbreak of Klebsiella pneumoniae and Enterobacter aerogenes bacteremia after interventional pain management procedures, New York City, 2008. Reg. Anesth. Pain Med. 35, 496–499. 10.1097/AAP.0b013e3181fa1163 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Woodford N. (2010). Rapid characterization of beta-lactamases by multiplex PCR. Methods Mol. Biol. 642, 181–192. 10.1007/978-1-60327-279-7_14 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Yigit H., Anderson G. J., Biddle J. W., Steward C. D., Rasheed J. K., Valera L. L., et al. (2002). Carbapenem resistance in a clinical isolate of Enterobacter aerogenes is associated with decreased expression of OmpF and OmpC porin analogs. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46, 3817–3822. 10.1128/AAC.46.12.3817-3822.2002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Zankari E., Hasman H., Cosentino S., Vestergaard M., Rasmussen S., Lund O., et al. (2012). Identification of acquired antimicrobial resistance genes. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 67, 2640–2644. 10.1093/jac/dks261 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Zerbino D. R., Birney E. (2008). Velvet: algorithms for de novo short read assembly using de Bruijn graphs. Genome Res. 18, 821–829. 10.1101/gr.074492.107 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Frontiers in Microbiology are provided here courtesy of Frontiers Media SA

RESOURCES