No change in avilamycin (Surmax® Premix) minimum inhibitory concentration for <i>Clostridium perfringens</i> isolates recovered from poultry up to 7 years post-approval in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clostridium perfringens, the causative agent of necrotic enteritis (NE) in chickens, has an enormous economic impact on global broiler production. The non-medically important antibiotic avilamycin was approved in Canada in 2014 to prevent and control NE in broiler chickens. OBJECTIVES: To compare avilamycin susceptibility in C. perfringens isolates collected pre- and 7 years post-avilamycin approval in Canada and determine the avilamycin resistance mutation frequency rate in C. perfringens. METHODS: The MICs of avilamycin were determined for 89 strains of C. perfringens recovered from clinically relevant NE field cases pre-avilamycin approval between 2003 and 2013 (n = 50) and post-avilamycin approval between 2014 and 2021 (n = 39) across Canada. For determining the mutant prevention concentration (MPC) of avilamycin for C. perfringens strains, a strain with avilamycin MIC of 1 mg/L was randomly selected. RESULTS: MIC studies showed no difference in avilamycin susceptibility in pre-avilamycin and post-avilamycin isolates (MIC50/90: pre-avilamycin approval 2/2 mg/L and post-avilamycin approval 1/2 mg/L). The MPC was 8 × MIC (8 mg/L) for the selected strain. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the susceptibility of C. perfringens strains to avilamycin was not impacted by its continued use in the 7 years following its approval in Canada. Avilamycin, a non-medically important antibiotic, poses no threat to human health regarding cross-resistance or co-selection of other medically important antibiotics. These factors make avilamycin an appropriate choice for continued use in broiler chickens to prevent and control NE without increased antimicrobial resistance concerns.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".