Table 4.
Antimicrobial resistance profiles identified among Enterococcus spp. isolated from rectal faecal samples obtained at entry and exit from an Australian feedlot.
| Antimicrobial Classes | Total No. of Isolates (%) | Resistance Pattern (No. of Isolates) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Entry (104) | Exit (144) | Entry | Exit | |
| All susceptible | 26 (25.00) | 4 (2.78) | 26 | 4 |
| 1 | 50 (48.08) | 44 (30.56) | LIN (38) | LIN (38) |
| DAP (6) | NIT (6) | |||
| CIP (3) | ||||
| TGC (2) | ||||
| TET (1) | ||||
| 2 | 18 (17.31) | 55 (38.19) | DAP-LIN (11) | LIN-NIT (28) |
| CIP-NIT (1) | LIN-Q/D (9) | |||
| CIP-TET (1) | CIP-LIN (1) | |||
| DAP-NIT (1) | DAP-NIT (7) | |||
| LIN-TIG (3) | DAP-LIN (7) | |||
| LIN-Q/D (1) | CIP-NIT (1) | |||
| LIN-TET (1) | ||||
| ERY-LIN-TYL (1) | ||||
| 3 | 8 (7.69) | 31 (21.53) | DAP-LIN-NIT (6) | LIN-NIT-Q/D (10) |
| CIP-LIN-NIT (1) | CIP-LIN-NIT (3) | |||
| DAP-LIN-TET (1) | CIP-DAP-NIT (3) | |||
| CIP-NIT-TIG (1) | ||||
| DAP-LIN-TET (2) | ||||
| DAP-LIN-Q/D (1) | ||||
| DAP-LIN-NIT (8) | ||||
| NIT-STR-TET (1) | ||||
| LIN-NIT-TET (1) | ||||
| ERY-LIN-TIG-TYL (1) | ||||
| 4 | 2 (1.92) | 9 (6.25) | CIP-DAP-LIN-Q/D (1) | DAP-LIN-NIT-TET (1) |
| ERY-LIN-Q/D-TET-TYL (1) | KAN-LIN-NIT-Q/D (2) | |||
| DAP-ERY-LIN-NIT (1) | ||||
| CIP-DAP-LIN-NIT (1) | ||||
| LIN-NIT-Q/D-TET (1) | ||||
| ERY-LIN-Q/D-TET-TYL (2) | ||||
| ERY-LIN-NIT-TET-TYL (1) | ||||
| 5 | 1 (0.69) | CIP-DAP-LIN-NIT-Q/D (1) | ||
| Non-MDR | 68 (65.4) | 99 (68.8) | ||
| MDR | 11 (10.6) | 41 (28.5) | ||
| Resistance | 79 (76.0) | 140 (96.3) | ||
CIP, Ciprofloxacin; DAP, Daptomycin; ERY, Erythromycin; KAN, Kanamycin; LIN, Lincomycin; NIT, Nitrofurantoin; Q/D, Quinupristin/dalfopristin; STR, Streptomycin; TET, Tetracycline; TIG, Tigecycline; TYL, Tylosine tartrate.