Analysis of antibiotic resistance determinants inProteus penneri

  • S. Lukomski
  • M. Pytlos
  • L. Serwecinska
  • Z. Sidorczyk
  • A. Jaworski
Notes

Abstract

The plasmid profiles of 65 strains ofProteus penneri were analyzed to determine whether resistance was determined chromosomally or by plasmids. Only seven strains harboured one to three plasmids, although these strains exhibited resistance to a wide range of antibiotics. Markers for ampicillin and tetracycline resistance could be transferred toEscherichia coli by transformation. Plasmids carried resistance to chloramphenicol in two strains and resistance to sulfonamides in one strain. The results showed that resistance is determined chromosomally rather than by plasmids, however the possibility that these bacteria may acquire resistance plasmids which change their antibiotic susceptibility pattern cannot be excluded.

Keywords

Sulfonamide Internal Medicine Ampicillin Tetracycline Chloramphenicol 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hickman FW, Steigerwalt AG, Farmer JJ, Brenner DJ Identification ofProteus penneri sp. nov., formerly known asProteus vulgaris biogroup 1. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1982, 15: 1097–1102.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Krajden S, Fuksa M, Lizewski W, Barton L, Lee A Proteus penneri and urinary calculi formation. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1984, 19: 541–542.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Krajden S, Fuksa M, Petrea C, Crisp LJ, Penner JL Expanded clinical spectrum of infections caused byProteus penneri. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1987, 25: 578–579.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Engler HD, Troy K, Bottone BJ Bacteremia and subcutaneous abscess caused byProteus penneri in a neutropenic host. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1990, 28: 1645–1646.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fuksa M, Krajden S, Lee A Susceptibilities of 45 clinical isolates ofProteus penneri. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 1984, 26: 419–420.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hawkey PM, Pedler SJ, Turner A Comparative in vitro activity of semisinthetic penicillins againstProteae. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 1983, 23: 619–621.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Piccolomini R, Cellini L, Allocati N, Girolamo Di A, Ravagnan G Comparative in vitro activities of 13 antimicrobial agents againstMorganella-Proteus-Providencia group bacteria from urinary tract infections. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 1987, 31: 1644–1647.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hawkey PM, Hawkey CA Comparative in vitro activity of quinolone carboxylic acids againstProteae. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1984, 14: 485–489.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grace ME, Gregory FJ, Hung PP, Fu KP Purification and properties of a beta-lactamase fromProteus penneri. Journal of Antibiotics 1986, 39: 938–942.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Birnboim HC, Doly J A rapid alkaline extraction procedure for screening recombinant plasmid DNA. Nucleic Acid Research 1979, 7: 1513–1523.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hawkey PM, Penner JL, Linton AH, Hawkey CA, Crisp LJ, Hinton M Specification, serotyping, antimicrobial sensitivity and plasmid content ofProteae from the environment of calf-rearing units in South West England. Journal of Hygiene, Cambridge 1986, 97: 405–417.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Konkoly Thege M, Nikolnikov S Characterization of multiply resistantProteus mirabilis isolates in Hungary. Acta Microbiologica Hungarica 1988, 35: 423–428.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Lukomski
    • 1
  • M. Pytlos
    • 1
  • L. Serwecinska
    • 1
  • Z. Sidorczyk
    • 1
  • A. Jaworski
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Microbiology and ImmunologyUniversity of LodzLodzPoland

Personalised recommendations