Reference | Kim2005a (20004)

Effect of porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion culture on antimicrobial resistance in Escherichia coli from growing piglets.


Kim, L. M.; Gray, Jeffery T.; Bailey, J. Stan; Jones, Richard D.; Fedorka-Cray, Paula J. (United States of America)

Foodborne Pathogens and Disease (2005)

Reference


Sows were obtained from the University of Georgia’s (UGA) Swine Center for both trials. One week prior to farrowing, sows were moved to UGA’s Animal and Dairy Science Complex (ADSC) farrowing unit and randomly allotted to treatment groups. All sows were first parity PICa line 42 and were artificially inseminated with PIC 280 semen. Piglets within groups were cross-fostered up to 72 h post-farrowing as needed to adjust litter size and ensure maximum survival. The farrowing and grower facilities at ADSC were environmentally controlled and water was provided ad libitum for sows and piglets. At all times during the farrowing, lactation, and nursery phases, pigs from both groups were housed within the same rooms but on separate sides of a 6-ft concrete aisle. The pull-plug pit systems below the pens were also separate and each was drained and refilled weekly. Nonessential traffic in the animal room was eliminated, and personnel were minimized to four people who followed all precautions routinely throughout the course of the study. Control piglets were handled before those treated with PCE. At sampling, coveralls and gloves were used upon entry to the unit and changed between groups; boot covers were used when entering pens and changed between groups. At weaning, piglets were moved to the ADSC pig growth room by litter and sorted by weight and sex into pens of two to four piglets per pen (3 x 6 ft). Two replicate trials were conducted using piglets from different sows. Each trial was composed of two groups (up to 36 piglets per group). Treated piglets were orally dosed with PCE culture (1010 cfu/mL). Piglets in the control group were orally placebo-dosed with prereduced anaerobically sterilized brain heart infusion (BHI) broth (Remel, Lenexa, KS). Dosingintervals and amounts were as follows: 2 mL each within 6 h of birth and 18–24 h later; 5 mL each at weaning (day 21) and 18–24 h postwean.

Sows and piglets were sampled at dosing times and when feed type was changed for fecal E. coli, and recovery of six E. coli isolates per animal was attempted at each sampling. Piglets were weighed at birth and on days 7, 21 (weaning), 24, 31, and 41 (Table 1). Performance measurements included adjusted 21- day weights,c average daily gains, and feed efficiencies. Evaluation of health status including screening for parasites and detection of infectious diseases was also performed as needed. The farrowing and grower facilities were sampled for E. coli prior to each use. Ten to 12 drag swabs pre-moistened with phosphate buffered saline (PBS) were taken per site from crate dividers, mats, feeders, waterers, doors and aisleways, and placed in sterile Whirlpak™ bags prior to the addition of 20 mL of BHI broth (Difco, Detroit, MI). Scheduled fecal samples were taken for E. coli isolation from sows 7 days pre- to 21 days post-farrowing, and from piglets birth to 6 weeks of age. Mucosal scrapings for preparation of the PCE culture were harvested as previously described from a healthy 6-week-old, Salmonella free production piglet.

AST Method: None

Reference explicitly reports AST breakpoints: True

Reference reports using a MIC table: False

Is Excluded: False

Country Sub-Region Sub-Region Detail
United States of America Georgia (State) University of Georgia's Swine Centre
ID Note Resolution

Factors


Title Host Host Production Stage Description ROs
Treatment Swine Sows Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Apramycin use was 32 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Piglets Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Streptomycin use was 64 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Sows Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Tetracycline use 16 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Piglets Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Tetracycline use 16 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Sows Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Streptomycin use was 64 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Sows Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Ampicillin use was 32 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Piglets Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Ampicillin use was 32 micrograms/mL 1
Treatment Swine Piglets Farm Treatment group was the use of Porcine-derived mucosal competitive exclusion vs. control. Apramycin use was 32 micrograms/mL 1