Antimicrobial resistance genes and virulence gene encoding intimin in Escherichia coli and Enterococcus isolated from wild rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) in Tunisia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spread of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria in wildlife must be viewed as a major concern with serious implications for human and animal health.Escherichia coliand enterococcal isolates were recovered from faecal samples of 49 wild rabbits(Oryctolagus cuniculus)on specific media and were characterised using biochemical and molecular tests. For all isolates, antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed, and resistance genes were detected by PCR. Molecular typing of isolates was carried out by pulsed-field gel-electrophoresis, andE. colistrains were also tested for the presence of intimin (eae) gene characteristic of rabbit enteropathogenicE. coli.A total of 34E. coliand 36 enterococci [E. hirae(52.8%) andE. faecalis(47.2%)] were obtained. ForE. coli, resistance to tetracycline (94%), streptomycin (62%), ciprofloxacin (47%), trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole (35%) and chloramphenicol (6%) was observed. Resistance to third-generation cephalosporins was detected in oneE. colistrain that carried theblaCMY-2andblaTEM-1genes. Class 1 integrons were detected in eight isolates. For enterococci, resistance to tetracycline (63.9%), erythromycin (30.5%), streptomycin (18.2%), and chloramphenicol (5.5%) was detected. Thetet(M)+tet(L),erm(B) and ant (6)-Ia genes were identified in thirteen, seven and three resistantEnterococcusstrains, respectively. Molecular typing showed a high diversity among our strains. Wild rabbits could represent a reservoir ofE. coli, and enterococci carrying antimicrobial resistance genes andE. coliadditionally carrying theeaegene of enteropathogenic pathotypes could both contaminate the environment. our finding seems to represent the first report ofeae-positiveE. coliin wild rabbits.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".