Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36077976›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022

Phenotypic and Genotypic Analysis of Antimicrobial Resistance in

Yohannes E Messele, Mauida Alkhallawi, Tania Veltman, Darren J Trott, Joe P McMeniman, Stephen P Kidd, Wai Y Low, Kiro R Petrovski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Genotypic Profiling of Virulence and Antibiotic Resistance Genes ofInternational journal of microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Phylogenetic Analysis ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yohannes E MesseleThe Davies Livestock Research Centre, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1815-1416
Mauida AlkhallawiThe Australian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1386-6527
Tania VeltmanThe Australian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1613-7506
Darren J TrottThe Australian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Joe P McMenimanMeat & Livestock Australia, Level 1, 40 Mount Street, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia.
Stephen P KiddThe Australian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Wai Y LowThe Davies Livestock Research Centre, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0749-765X
Kiro R PetrovskiThe Davies Livestock Research Centre, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4016-2576
The University of Adelaide · AUMeat & Livestock Australia · AU

Funding

Meat & Livestock Australia B.FLT.3003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profile of fecal Escherichia coli isolates from beef cattle (n = 150) at entry and exit from an Australian feedlot. Sample plating on MacConkey agar and Brilliance ESBL agar differentiated generic from extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing E. coli, respectively. Resistance profiles were determined by minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) testing and further analyzed by whole-genome sequencing (WGS). At entry, the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance to amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, ampicillin, streptomycin, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole was very low (0.7%, each). At the exit, the resistance prevalence was moderate to tetracycline (17.8%) and low to ampicillin (5.4%), streptomycin (4.7%), and sulfisoxazole (3.9%). The most common AMR genes observed in phenotypically resistant isolates were tet(B) (43.2%), aph(3″)-Ib and aph(6)-Id (32.4%), blaTEM-1B, and sul2 (24.3%, each), which are responsible for resistance to tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, β-lactams, and sulfonamides, respectively. The ESBL-producing E. coli were recovered from one sample (0.7%) obtained at entry and six samples (4.0%) at the exit. The ESBL-producing E. coli harbored blaTEM (29.7%), blaCTX m(13.5%), and blaCMY (5.4%). The resistance phenotypes were highly correlated with resistance genotypes (r ≥ 0.85: p < 0.05). This study demonstrated that E. coli isolated from feedlot beef cattle can harbour AMR genes, but the low incidence of medically important resistance reflected the prudent antimicrobial use in the Australian industry.

Indexed as

antimicrobial resistance genesantimicrobial resistance surveillancecattle feedlotcattle slaughterhousemultidrug resistance

Identifiers

PMID36077976
PMCPMC9454709
OpenAlexW4294343735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.