MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402541904 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.184

489 Antibiotic Resistance of cecal <i>Escherichia coli</i> isolates from Lohmann LSL lite pullets and laying hens fed omega-3 fatty acids or yeast bioactives, reared at different spacing allowance

2024· article· en· W4402541904 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Kibaba Waliaula, Elijah G. Kiarie, Moussa S. Diarra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEscherichia coliAntibioticsAnimal scienceFood scienceMicrobiologyVeterinary medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Poultry diets provide components that alter gut microbiota composition. We investigated antimicrobial resistance (AMR) phenotypes of E. coli isolates from ceca digesta of pullets and hens reared at different spacing allowance (SA) and dietary source of omega-3 fatty acids (N-3 FA) and yeast bioactives (YB) from placement to 17 wk of age (woa). A total of 2,632-day old chicks were placed in cages at two SA (24 cages each): High SA (HSA, 348 cm2/bird; ~50 birds/cage) and Low SA (LSA, 284 cm2/bird; ~68 birds/cage). Birds were fed corn and soybean-based diets (C), C + 3% co-extruded full fat flaxseed and pulse mixture (N-3 FA) and C + 0.05% YB processed with β-1,3-glucan hydrolase. At 4, 16 and 35 woa, ceca samples were collected to isolate E. coli using Chromocult agar. Their susceptibility to 14 antibiotics were determined by automated Sensititre system according to CLSI and CIPARS guidelines to determine their antimicrobial susceptibility profile. Number of antibiotics resistant E. coli isolates were analyzed using general linear mixed model procedure of SAS with diets, SA, sampling age and associated interactions as fixed factors. Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to determine the relationship between these treatments, and differences between treatments were considered significant at P < 0.05. Out of 428 presumptive E. coli isolated, 153 of 428 isolates (35.7%) were resistant to one antimicrobial class but no resistance against ciprofloxacin, azithromycin and nalidixic acid were detected. The prevalence of antimicrobial resistant E. coli decreased as the birds aged from wk 4–35 (P < 0.05). At wk 4 (P = 0.002) and 16 (P = 0.011), the least prevalence of ampicillin (AMP) resistance was in ceca digesta from N-3 FA-fed birds. At 35 woa, no AMP and cefoxitin (FOX) resistance were detected in birds fed YB (Table 2). At 16 woa, the prevalence of streptomycin resistance was greater in N-3 FA-fed than in YB-fed birds (P = 0.02), which was less than control-fed birds. Of the 428 isolates, 59 (13.8%) were resistant to more than two antimicrobial classes, with most from TIO-FOX-AMP-TET and STR-SULF-TET. At wk-4, SA had a significant effect on multiple resistance spectrum with LSA having the lowest MDR E. coli (P = 0.02) mainly from N-3 FA-fed pullets. This study showed an overall low AMR prevalence which decreases with age of the bird. This study is the first to report that feed additives (N-3 FA or YB) influence the AMR profile of cecal E. coli in pullets and layers. Prevalence of AMP resistance was least in N-3 FA-fed birds, whereas least STEP- and SULF resistance was observed in YB-fed birds. Our next study would help understand the molecular and evolutionary aspect of this resistant E. coli and their potential to cause colibacillosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology→French-language works237,207→