Swine colibacillosis: global epidemiologic and antimicrobial scenario
Swine pathogenic infection caused by Escherichia coli, known as swine colibacillosis, represents an epidemiological challenge not only for animal husbandry but also for health authorities. To note, virulent E. coli strains might be transmitted, and also cause disease, in humans. In the last decades,...
Saved in:
Published in | Antibiotics (Basel) Vol. 12; no. 4; pp. 1 - 19 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Switzerland
Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
30.03.2023
MDPI AG MDPI |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Swine pathogenic infection caused by Escherichia coli, known as swine colibacillosis, represents an epidemiological challenge not only for animal husbandry but also for health authorities. To note, virulent E. coli strains might be transmitted, and also cause disease, in humans. In the last decades, diverse successful multidrug-resistant strains have been detected, mainly due to the growing selective pressure of antibiotic use, in which animal practices have played a relevant role. In fact, according to the different features and particular virulence factor combination, there are four different pathotypes of E. coli that can cause illness in swine: enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) that comprises edema disease E. coli (EDEC) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC), enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC), and extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC). Nevertheless, the most relevant pathotype in a colibacillosis scenario is ETEC, responsible for neonatal and postweaning diarrhea (PWD), in which some ETEC strains present enhanced fitness and pathogenicity. To explore the distribution of pathogenic ETEC in swine farms and their diversity, resistance, and virulence profiles, this review summarizes the most relevant works on these subjects over the past 10 years and discusses the importance of these bacteria as zoonotic agents.
This work was financially supported by the Project PTDC/CVT-CVT/4620/2021, funded by FEDER funds through COMPETE2020–Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalização (POCI) and by national funds (PIDDAC) through FCT/MCTES. It was also supported by: LA/P/0045/2020 (ALiCE), UIDB/00511/2020 and UIDP/00511/2020 (LEPABE), funded by national funds through FCT/MCTES (PIDDAC). In addition, this work was also funded by FCT (Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology), under strategic projects UIDP/CVT/00772/2020 (CECAV) and LA/P/0059/2020 (AL4AnimalS); and under the scope of the strategic funding of UIDB/04469/2020 unit (CEB). J.C. also thanks FCT for the CEEC Individual (2022.06886.CEECIND). |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 ObjectType-Review-3 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 2079-6382 2079-6382 |
DOI: | 10.3390/antibiotics12040682 |