Skip to main content
Log in

Salmonella, Campylobacter and Enterococcus spp.: Their Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles and their Spatial Relationships in a Synoptic Study of the Upper Oconee River Basin

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Microbial Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rivers may serve as reservoirs for enteric organisms. Very little is known about the boundaries of microbial communities in moving bodies of water so this study was undertaken to find the limits of distribution of some bacteria, focusing on enteric organisms. The presence of Salmonella, Campylobacter, and Enterococcus spp. and the antimicrobial resistance phenotypes carried by these organisms was evaluated for the Upper Oconee River basin, a small river in the lower Piedmont of northeastern Georgia, USA. Samples were obtained from 83 sites during a 3-h period on a spring day (April 2005) in an approximately 30 × 20 km region. Campylobacter spp. was isolated at 12 sites. The Campylobacter isolates from three sites were resistant to tetracycline. Of the five short-variable region (SVR) subtypes of Campylobacter that were found, three were found at more than one site, two types were found twice, and one subtype was found three times. Enterococcus was isolated at 71 sites. E. casseliflavus was the most common species. Based on species identification and antimicrobial resistance patterns, 24 types of Enterococcus were found. Salmonella was isolated from 62 sites. Of the 19 Salmonella serovars that were isolated, serovar Muenchen accounted for about 20% of the isolates. The next three most common serovars isolated, Rubislaw, Hartford, and Give, accounted for about 44% of the river isolates. Antimicrobial resistance profiling offered limited differentiation of Salmonella isolates because only seven isolates were resistant to any antimicrobial. The sites at which Salmonella, Campylobacter, or Enterococcus were isolated did not correlate with each other or with the total coliform number or Escherichia coli count for the site. However, isolates of some of the same species and type occurred in clusters that were restricted to areas within 5 to 6 km.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Clesceri LS, Greenberg AE, Eaton AD (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 20th edn. APHA, AWWA, WEF, Washington, DC

  2. Coyne MS, Blevins RL (1995) In: Steele K (ed) Animal water and land-water interface. Lewis Publishers, pp 77–87

  3. Davison J (1999) Plasmid 42:73–91

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dargatz DA, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Ladely SR, Kopral CA, Ferris KE, Headrick ML (2003) J Appl Microbiol 95:753–761

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dean DM, Foran ME (1992) J Soil Water Conserv 47:368–369

    Google Scholar 

  6. Edwards DR, Daniels TC (1992) Bioresour Technol 33:9–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Englen MD, Fedorka-Cray PJ (2002) Lett Appl Microbiol 35:353–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Geohring LD, Wright PE, Steenhuis TS (1998) In: Brown L (ed) Drainage in the 21st century: food production and the environment. ASAE Publication No. 02-98, ASAE, St. Joseph, MI, pp 1–8

  9. George BA, Fagerber DJ (1984) Am J Vet Res 45:2336–2341

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Giddens J, Barnett AP (1980) J Environ Qual 9:518–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Howell JM, Coyne MS, Cornelius PL (1995) J Environ Qual 24:411–419

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hunter PR (2003) J Appl Microbiol 94:37S–46S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jackson CR, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Barrett JB (2004) J Clin Microbiol 42:3558–3565

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Koenraad PMF, Rombouts FM, Notermans SHW (1997) Water Environ Res 69:52–63

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Meinersmann RJ, Helsel LO, Fields PI, Hiett KL (1997) J Clin Microbiol 35:2810–2814

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Meinersmann RJ, Phillips RW, Hiett KL, Fedorka-Cray P (2005) Appl Environ Microbiol 71:6368–6374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Morris CE, Bardin M, Berge O, Frey-Klett P, Fromin N, Girardin H, Guinebretière M-H, Lebaron P, Thiéry JM, Troussellier M (2002) Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 66:592–616

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. NCCLS (2002) Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilution susceptibility tests for bacteria isolated from animals. Wayne, PA

  19. NCCLS (2003) Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. Wayne, PA

  20. Ng E, Wilkins R, Perras A (1993) How far is it to the nearest hospital facility? Calculating distances using the Statistics Canada Postal Code Conversion File. Health Reports (Statistics Canada, Catalogue 82-003) vol. 5, pp 179–188

  21. Oda Y, Wanders W, Huisman LA, Meijer WG, Gottschal JC, Forney LJ (2002) Appl Environ Microbiol 68:3467–3477

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Riedl S, Ohlsen K, Werner G, Witte W, Hacker J (2000) Antimicrob Agents Chemother 44:3189–3192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarkar S (2006) In: Edward N. Zalta (ed) “Ecology”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2006 Edition), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2006/entries/ecology/>

  24. Sikorski J, Nevo E (2005) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:15924–15929

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Skelly C, Weinstein P (2003) Environ Health Perspect 111:19–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stern NJ, Wojton B, Kwiatek K (1992) J Food Prot 55:514–517

    Google Scholar 

  27. Vail JH, Morgan R, Merino CR, Gonzales F, Miller R, Ram JL (2003) J Environ Qual 32:368–373

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Vandamme P, Pot B, Gillis M, de Vos P, Kersters K, Swings J (1996) Microbiol Rev 60:407–438

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Walker SE, Mostaghimi S, Dillaha TA, Woest FE (1990) ASAE Trans 33:807

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wang G, Clark CG, Taylor TM, Pucknell C, Barton C, Price L, Woodward DL, Rodgers FG (2002) J Clin Microbiol 40:4744–4747

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the volunteers of the Upper Oconee Watershed Network (UOWN) for their help in the collection of water samples. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. J. Meinersmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meinersmann, R.J., Berrang, M.E., Jackson, C.R. et al. Salmonella, Campylobacter and Enterococcus spp.: Their Antimicrobial Resistance Profiles and their Spatial Relationships in a Synoptic Study of the Upper Oconee River Basin. Microb Ecol 55, 444–452 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-007-9290-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-007-9290-6

Keywords

Navigation