Table 2.
Most common antimicrobial resistance patterns of fecal Escherichia coli isolates from Ontario small poultry flocks, by poultry species
| Poultry species | Antimicrobial resistance patternA | Number of antimicrobial classes in pattern (multidrug resistant)B | n (%)C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chicken (N = 358) | STR-TET | 2 (no) | 19 (5.31) |
| AMP-STR-TET | 3 (yes) | 22 (6.15) | |
| SSS-STR-TET | 3 (yes) | 6 (1.68) | |
| GEN-SSS-STR | 2 (no) | 6 (1.68) | |
| GEN-SSS-STR-TET | 3 (yes) | 5 (1.40) | |
| AMP-SSS-STR-STX-TET | 4 (yes) | 5 (1.40) | |
| Turkey (N = 27) | AMP-TET | 2 (no) | 3 (11.11) |
| STR-TET | 2 (no) | 2 (7.41) | |
| SSS-STR-TET | 3 (yes) | 2 (7.41) | |
| AMP-SSS-STR-STX-TET | 4 (yes) | 2 (7.41) | |
| AMP-CHL-CIP-NAL-SSS-STR-TET | 6 (yes) | 2 (7.41) | |
| Duck (N = 24) | SSS-STX-TET | 2 (no) | 2 (8.33) |
| Game bird (N = 24) | STR-TET | 2 (no) | 6 (25.00) |
| SSS-STR-TET | 3 (yes) | 2 (8.33) |
AResistance to 14 selected antimicrobials (including amoxicillin-clavulanic acid, ceftriaxone, cefoxitin, meropenem, azithromycin), as determined by a broth microdilution technique. GEN gentamicin, STR streptomycin, AMP ampicillin, SSS sulfisoxazole, STX trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, CHL chloramphenicol, CIP ciprofloxacin, NAL nalidixic acid, TET tetracycline
BAn isolate was defined as multidrug resistant if it was non-susceptible to at least one antimicrobial in ≥3 antimicrobial classes (Aminoglycosides: GEN, STR; β-Lactams: AMP; Folate biosysnthesis pathway inhibitors: SSS, STX; Phenicols: CHL; Quinolones: CIP, NAL; Tetracyclines: TET)
CNumber and percentage of isolates with each antimicrobial resistance pattern. For chicken, only patterns with ≥5 isolates are shown, and for other poultry species, only patterns with ≥2 isolates are shown