Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16000800›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2005

Effects of subtherapeutic administration of antimicrobial agents to beef cattle on the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter hyointestinalis.

G D Inglis, T A McAllister, H W Busz, L J Yanke, D W Morck, M E Olson, R R Read

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Tetracycline ResistantMicroorganisms · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Antimicrobial usage and resistance in beef production.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2016
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G D InglisAgriculture & Agri-Food Canada Research Centre, 5403 1st Avenue S, Lethbridge, AB T1J 4B1, Canada. inglisd@agr.gc.ca
T A McAllister
H W Busz
L J Yanke
D W Morck
M E Olson
R R Read
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada · CAUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The influence of antimicrobial agents on the development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Campylobacter isolates recovered from 300 beef cattle maintained in an experimental feedlot was monitored over a 315-day period (11 sample times). Groups of calves were assigned to one of the following antimicrobial treatments: chlortetracycline and sulfamethazine (CS), chlortetracycline alone (Ct), virginiamycin, monensin, tylosin phosphate, and no antimicrobial agent (i.e., control treatment). In total, 3,283 fecal samples were processed for campylobacters over the course of the experiment. Of the 2,052 bacterial isolates recovered, 92% were Campylobacter (1,518 were Campylobacter hyointestinalis and 380 were C. jejuni). None of the antimicrobial treatments decreased the isolation frequency of C. jejuni relative to the control treatment. In contrast, C. hyointestinalis was isolated less frequently from animals treated with CS and to a lesser extent from animals treated with Ct. The majority (> or =94%) of C. jejuni isolates were sensitive to ampicillin, erythromycin, and ciprofloxacin, but more isolates with resistance to tetracycline were recovered from animals fed Ct. All of the 1,500 isolates of C. hyointestinalis examined were sensitive to ciprofloxacin. In contrast, 11%, 10%, and 1% of these isolates were resistant to tetracycline, erythromycin, and ampicillin, respectively. The number of animals from which C. hyointestinalis isolates with resistance to erythromycin and tetracycline were recovered differed among the antimicrobial treatments. Only Ct administration increased the carriage rates of erythromycin-resistant isolates of C. hyointestinalis, and the inclusion of CS in the diet increased the number of animals from which tetracycline-resistant isolates were recovered. The majority of C. hyointestinalis isolates with resistance to tetracycline were obtained from cohorts within a single pen, and most of these isolates were recovered from cattle during feeding of a forage-based diet as opposed to a grain-based diet. The findings of this study show that the subtherapeutic administration of tetracycline, alone and in combination with sulfamethazine, to feedlot cattle can select for the carriage of resistant strains of Campylobacter species. Considering the widespread use of in-feed antimicrobial agents and the high frequency of beef cattle that shed campylobacters, the development of AMR should be monitored as part of an on-going surveillance program.

Indexed as

Drug Resistance, BacterialAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCampylobacter hyointestinalisCampylobacter InfectionsCampylobacter jejuniCattleCattle DiseasesMaleMeatMicrobial Sensitivity TestsPrevalenceAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID16000800
PMCPMC1169002
OpenAlexW1994735886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.