Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Salmonella isolates from cattle in feedlots

David A. Dargatz United States Department of Agriculture-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Fort Collins, CO 80521.

Search for other papers by David A. Dargatz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, PhD, DACT
,
Paula J. Fedorka-Cray USDA-Animal Research Service, Richard Russell Research Center, Athens, GA 30605.

Search for other papers by Paula J. Fedorka-Cray in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 PhD
,
Scott R. Ladely USDA-Animal Research Service, Richard Russell Research Center, Athens, GA 30605

Search for other papers by Scott R. Ladely in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MS
,
Kathleen E. Ferris USDA-APHIS National Veterinary Services Laboratories, Ames, IA, 50010.

Search for other papers by Kathleen E. Ferris in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MS
,
Alice L. Green United States Department of Agriculture-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health, Fort Collins, CO 80521.

Search for other papers by Alice L. Green in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MS
, and
Marcia L. Headrick Center for Veterinary Medicine, FDA, Rockville, MD 20855.

Search for other papers by Marcia L. Headrick in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MPH, DACVPM

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Salmonella isolates from feedlot cattle.

Design—Cross-sectional study.

Sample Population—263 Salmonella isolates.

Procedures—Fecal samples were collected from the floor of 2 pens in each of 100 feedlots. Two hundred eighty Salmonella isolates were recovered after bacteriologic culture from 38 pens. Of these, 263 isolates were available for antimicrobial susceptibility testing to 16 antimicrobials, using microbroth dilution breakpoint plates.

Results—Less than 5% of isolates were resistant to any of the antimicrobials tested, with the exception of sulfamethoxazole (15; 5.7%) and tetracycline (61; 23.2%). Most isolates (197; 74.9%) were susceptible to all antimicrobials tested, whereas 18 (6.8%) were resistant to 2 or more antimicrobials. The percentage of isolates with resistance to any antimicrobial varied by serotype. The percentage of isolates resistant to various antimicrobials was not related to concurrent use of antimicrobials in the feed.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—With the exception of tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole, resistance of Salmonella isolates to any of the antimicrobials was uncommon. Most isolates were susceptible to all antimicrobials tested. Antimicrobial resistance was not related to the presence of antimicrobials in the ration being fed at the time of sample collection. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:268–272)

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Salmonella isolates from feedlot cattle.

Design—Cross-sectional study.

Sample Population—263 Salmonella isolates.

Procedures—Fecal samples were collected from the floor of 2 pens in each of 100 feedlots. Two hundred eighty Salmonella isolates were recovered after bacteriologic culture from 38 pens. Of these, 263 isolates were available for antimicrobial susceptibility testing to 16 antimicrobials, using microbroth dilution breakpoint plates.

Results—Less than 5% of isolates were resistant to any of the antimicrobials tested, with the exception of sulfamethoxazole (15; 5.7%) and tetracycline (61; 23.2%). Most isolates (197; 74.9%) were susceptible to all antimicrobials tested, whereas 18 (6.8%) were resistant to 2 or more antimicrobials. The percentage of isolates with resistance to any antimicrobial varied by serotype. The percentage of isolates resistant to various antimicrobials was not related to concurrent use of antimicrobials in the feed.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—With the exception of tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole, resistance of Salmonella isolates to any of the antimicrobials was uncommon. Most isolates were susceptible to all antimicrobials tested. Antimicrobial resistance was not related to the presence of antimicrobials in the ration being fed at the time of sample collection. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:268–272)

Advertisement