Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 4 Phenotypic and genotypic antimicrobial resistance profiles of STEC isolates

From: Prevalence, virulence potential, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis profiling of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli strains from cattle

Antimicrobial class Phenotypic profiles Genotypic profiles
Antimicrobiala No. of STEC isolatesb (%) Antimicrobial resistance genec No. of STEC isolates (%)
STEC O157 STEC non-O157b STEC O157 STEC non-O157
Β-lactams Ampicillin 0 (0.0) 4 (14.3) ampC 35 (100.0) 28 (100.0)
Cefotaximed 0 (0.0) 1 (3.6) Bla TEM 0 (0.0) 11 (36.3)
Tetracycline Tetracycline 0 (0.0) 5 (17.9) tetB 0 (0.0) 4 (14.3)
    tetC 0 (0.0) 3 (10.7)
    tetE 34 (97.1) 0 (0.0)
  1. a All STEC showed susceptibility on chloramphenicol, imipenem, amikacin, amoxicillin–clavulanic acid, ceftazidime, gentamicin, nalidixic acid, trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole, ceftriaxone, aztreonam, and cefpodoxime on standard disk-diffusion test
  2. b Antimicrobial resistance profiles were tested for 35 and 28 STEC O157 and non-O157 strains, respectively
  3. c Antimicrobial resistance genes of tetA, tetD, tetG, cat, cml, bla OXA , bla CMY , and qnr were not detected from all STEC isolates
  4. d Four STEC O157 and five non-O157 showed intermediate resistance to cefotaxime