Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
http://vdi.sagepub.com/ Prevalence and Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Salmonellae Isolates from Reptiles in Taiwan
Chun-Yu Chen, Wan-Ching Chen, Shih-Chien Chin, Yen-Hsueh Lai, Kwong-Chung Tung, Chien-Shun Chiou, Yuan-Man Hsu and Chao-Chin Chang J VET Diagn Invest 2010 22: 44 DOI: 10.1177/104063871002200107 The online version of this article can be found at: http://vdi.sagepub.com/content/22/1/44
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Additional services and information for Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation can be found at: Email Alerts: http://vdi.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://vdi.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Introduction Salmonella are mainly considered to be food-borne pathogens transmitted through consumption of contaminated meat, eggs, vegetables, and fruits.2,19,26,35,37 Pets, including reptiles, have been shown to be a source of infection in humans.31,33,36,39,41 The disease usually causes abdominal cramps and self-limiting diarrhea. However, serious complications may occur, especially among children less than 10 years of age, elderly people, and immunocompromised patients.30 In recent years, reports of salmonellosis from reptile reservoirs have gained more attention, especially in the United States,1,6,7 where it has been estimated that 1.4 million human cases with Salmonella infections and approximately 600 associated deaths occur annually.21 Due to the increasing
From the Graduate Institute of Microbiology and Public Health, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan (C-Y Chen, Chang), the Department of Safety Health and Environmental Engineering, Central Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taichung, Taiwan (W-C Chen), Taipei Zoo, Taipei, Taiwan (Chin, Lai), the Department of Veterinary Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan (Tung), The Third Branch Office, Centers for Disease Control, Taichung, Taiwan (Chiou), and the Department of Biological Science and Technology, College of Life Sciences, China Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan (Hsu). 1 Corresponding Author: Chao-Chin Chang, 250 Kuo-Kuang Road, Graduate Institute of Microbiology and Public Health, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung 402, Taiwan. changcc@dragon.nchu.edu.tw 44
popularity and variety of exotic reptiles as pets in recent years, more human clinical cases with reptileassociated Salmonella infection have been identified. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that over 50,000 cases of reptileassociated salmonellosis occurred in 1996.22 The results from a previous study23 further suggested that reptile and amphibian exposure is associated with about 74,000 Salmonella infections in the United States every year. According to results of Salmonella surveillance in the United States during 19871997,25 7 out of the top 20 serovars were reptile-associated Salmonella serovars, including S. IV 48:g,z51:(previously S. Marina), S. Flint (now known as S. IV 50:z4,z23:-), S. Kintambo, S. Wassenaar (now known as S. IV 50:g,z51:-), S. Ealing, S. Carrau, and S. Abaetetuba. Recently, Salmonella infection in humans and animals has become an important issue in Taiwan, and antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella infections have been identified.8,13,20 According to a previous report,20 the leading 4 Salmonella serovars recovered from human patients were S. Typhimurium, S. Enteritidis, S. Stanley, and S. Schwarzengrund. Furthermore, multi-antimicrobialresistant S. Choleraesuis has gained much attention in Taiwan.8,10,12,13 Although these serovars are mainly food-borne pathogens, pet exposure could be also considered as another way of transmission. Pet reptiles are increasingly popular in Taiwan. However, there have been
45
no epidemiological studies conducted in these animals concerning their colonization and excretion of zoonotic pathogens. In pet reptiles, limited information has been reported with regard to antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella worldwide. A previous study32 in Trinidad indicated that 100%, 66.7%, 66.7%, and 33.3% of the Salmonella isolates from reptiles were resistant to streptomycin, cephalothin, neomycin, and gentamycin, respectively. The current study was thus conducted to determine the epidemiological patterns of Salmonella colonization in reptiles collected from various sources in Taiwan. Materials and methods
Sample collection From September 2005 through April 2006, a total of 476 samples were collected by convenience sampling, including 418 cloacal swabs obtained from smuggled pet reptiles kept in Taipei Zoo (Taipei, Taiwan), 20 fecal samples of pet reptiles from pet shops, and 38 fecal samples of reptiles presented to the Veterinary Teaching Hospital, National Chung Hsing University (Taichung, Taiwan). At the time of the sampling, information with regard to health status, whether the animals showed signs of diarrhea, was obtained through the records offered by the Zoo, by veterinarians in the hospital, or by direct inspection in pet shops. Clinical manifestations reported for ill animals included nasal discharge, ocular discharge, anorexia, hepatitis, or parasite infection. According to diet patterns, the animals were categorized as carnivorous, omnivorous, and herbivorous. In the study area, not all pet shops could be investigated, and only pet reptiles from pet shops where owners provided permission were sampled and further investigated. Cultivation, identification, and serotyping of Salmonella isolates Cultivation of bacteria from the cloacal swabs or fecal samples was performed according to procedures by International Organization for Standardization 6579 (http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber5 40377) with minor modifications. Each cloacal swab was first soaked in 4.5 ml of buffered peptone watera for transportation. The swabs were then incubated at 37uC for 1824 hr with 3.5 relative centrifugal force (rcf ) mild shaking. Five hundred microliters of the incubated product were transferred from each tube into 4.5 ml of Rappaport Vassiliadis R10 (RV) brotha and incubated for 1824 hr at 42uC. One loopful of the incubated broth was streaked onto duplicate plates of xyloselysinedeoxycholate (XLD) agara and SalmonellaShigella (SS) agar.a The plates were incubated at 37uC for 1824 hr. Simultaneously, 30 ml of incubated RV broth were inoculated onto the surface of the modified semi-solid RV (MSRV) medium.a The plates were incubated at 42uC for 1824 hr and examined for growth and development of a migration zone. When a migration zone was observed, specimens sampled from the rim of the migration zone in the MSRV plates were subcultured onto
XLD and SS agars and then incubated at 37uC for 1824 hr. For the identification of suspected Salmonella isolates, subculture from a single colony pick was used for the agglutination reaction using polyvalent somatic (O) antiserab for Salmonella.32 Only isolates with a positive result by agglutination test were tentatively confirmed to be Salmonella. The Salmonella isolates were stored at 280uC after subculture on XLD agar for further serotyping and testing of antimicrobial resistance. Salmonella isolates were serotyped with specific O- and H-antisera,b,c and serovar identification was carried out according to the principles of the KauffmannWhite scheme.4,29 Antimicrobial susceptibility test All the Salmonella isolates were tested for antimicrobial susceptibility to a panel of 12 antimicrobials by agar disc diffusion test on MuellerHinton II agar,d following the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines. The following antibiotic discse were used in this study: ampicillin (AMP), 10 mg; cephalothin (KF), 30 mg; chloramphenicol (C), 30 mg; ciprofloxacin (CIP), 5 mg; enrofloxacin (ENR), 5 mg; gentamicin (CN), 10 mg; nalidixic acid (NA), 30 mg; nitrofurantoin (F), 300 mg; norfloxacin (NOR), 10 mg; streptomycin (S), 10 mg; trimethoprimsulfamethoxazole (SXT), 25 mg; and tetracycline (TE), 30 mg. The isolates were classified as susceptible (S), intermediate (I), or resistant (R) following the zone diameter standards by the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.38 Escherichia coli ATCC15922 was utilized for internal quality control. Statistical analysis For each categorical group, percentage of Salmonella isolation or antimicrobial resistance was calculated. To test if percentages among different categorical groups were statistically different, chi-square (x2) test or Fishers exact test (when the expected number of observations was less than 5) was performed using SAS version 9.1 for Windows.f A P-value less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
Results
Isolation
Overall, Salmonella organisms were isolated from 147 (30.9%) of 476 reptiles investigated, and a total of 358 isolates were obtained. The use of both XLD agar and SS agar plates for Salmonella isolation resulted in the recovery of more than 1 isolate from some reptile samples. The isolation rates were 69.7% (23/33), 62.8% (27/43), and 24.3% (97/400) in snakes, lizards, and turtles, respectively. The prevalence in turtles was significantly lower than that of snakes (odds ratio: 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.060.32) or lizards (odds ratio: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.090.38).
Serotyping
The most frequently isolated Salmonella was serogroup B (24.0%). Other serogroups of Salmonella included serogroup I (11.5%), C2 (8.1%), and C1
46 Table 1.
Chen et al. The comparison of percentages (number of isolates) of Salmonella serovars in turtles, lizards, and snakes in Taiwan (%).*
Salmonella serovar Turtle (225 isolates) Lizard (74 isolates) Snake (59 isolates)
S. Abaetetuba S. Abony S. Adelaide S. Adeoyo S. Agbeni S. Ago S. Aqua S. Bareilly S. Bredeney S. Canastel S. Cerro S. Cotham S. Cubana S. Fayed S. Gatow S. Harburg S. Heron S. Herzliya S. Hull S. Hvittingfoss S. Infantis S. Java (now known as S. Paratyphi B var. L(+) tartrate+) S. Kisarawe S. Kokomlemle S. Litchfield S. Muenchen S. Newport S. Othmarschen S. Panama S. Parera S. Pomona S. Poona S. Reading S. Rubislaw S. Saintpaul S. Stanley S. Treforest S. Typhimurium S. Typhimurium var. Copenhagen S. Urbana S. Uzaramo S. 4,[5],12:i:S. 9+,12+:-:1,5 S. II 50:b:z6 Untypable * 5 no isolate.
1.8 (4) 1.8 (4) 4.0 (9) 0.9 (2) 0.9 (2) 12.4 (28) 0.9 (2) 4.4 (10) 0.4 (1) 13.3 (30) 1.8 (4) 1.8 (4) 0.9 (2) 1.8 (4) 2.7 (6) 1.3 (3) 4.0 (9) 8.0 (18) 6.2 (14) 3.1 (7) 6.2 (14) 0.4 (1) 20.9 (47)
2.7 (2) 5.4 (4) 2.7 (2) 13.5 (10) 2.7 (2) 8.1 (6) 2.7 (2) 2.7 (2) 1.4 (1) 2.7 (2) 1.4 (1) 1.4 (1) 5.4 (4) 1.4 (1) 8.1 (6) 5.4 (4) 32.4 (24)
10.2 (6) 1.7 (1) 3.4 (2) 6.8 (4) 10.2 (6) 11.9 (7) 11.9 (7) 3.4 (2) 6.8 (4) 3.4 (2) 3.4 (2) 27.1 (16)
(5.9%). Although serovars could not be determined for 87 isolates due to the limited spectrum of specific O- and H-antisera, a total of 44 different Salmonella serovars were identified in reptiles (Table 1). Moreover, 15.0% (22/147) of reptiles were co-colonized with different Salmonella serovars. Overall, the most common Salmonella serovars were S. Heron (8.9%), S. Bredeney (7.8%), S. Typhimurium (5.0%), and S. Treforest (5.0%). It was further observed that the distribution of various Salmonella serovars was different in snakes, lizards, and turtles (Table 1).
The results are listed in Table 2. The isolation prevalences were 66.0% (31/47), 42.9% (42/98), and 21.7% (68/313) in the carnivorous, omnivorous, and herbivorous reptiles, respectively. Such a difference was statistically significant (P , 0.05). In carnivorous animals, the most common serovars were S. Newport (8.9%) and S. Othmarschen (8.9%), followed by S. Muenchen (7.6%), S. Aqua (7.6%), S. Stanley (5.1%), S. Java (now known as S. Paratyphi B var. L(+) tartrate+; 5.1%), S. Poona (5.1%), and S. Ago (5.1%).
Salmonella serovars in reptiles in Taiwan Table 2. Risk factors associated with Salmonella infection.
Isolation prevalence P-value{
47
Risk factor{
Diet pattern Carnivorous Omnivorous Herbivorous Living environment Aqua turtle Tortoise Health status Healthy Ill
66.0% (31/47) 42.9% (42/98) 21.7% (68/313) 40.3% (29/72) 20.8% (68/327) 30.0% (112/373) 34.0% (35/103)
,0.05
,0.05
NS*
* NS 5 not significant. { Not all animals investigated have information of listed risk factors. { P-value was calculated by chi-square test.
In omnivorous animals, the most frequent serovar was Salmonella 4,[5],12:i:- (15.6%), and other common serovars included S. Typhimurium (13.3%) and S. Cotham (11.1%). In herbivorous animals, the most frequent serovar was S. Heron (17.5%), followed by S. Bredeney (14.0%) and S. Treforest (10.5%). The prevalence in turtles was significantly higher than that in tortoises (40.3% vs. 20.8%, odds ratio 5 2.57, P , 0.05). There was no significant difference of prevalence of Salmonella colonization between animals with and without obvious clinical manifestations. Among sick animals, individuals with diarrhea were more likely to excrete Salmonella organisms in feces than animals without diarrhea (55.6% vs. 31.9%, odds ratio: 2.67, 95% CI: 0.5712.96, P . 0.05).
Antimicrobial susceptibility testing
was found that 24 (6.9%) isolates were resistant to 4 or more different antimicrobial agents tested in the current study. The highest resistance percentages were related to streptomycin (14.7%, 51/347) and tetracycline (9.2%, 32/347). After comparing the antimicrobial resistance percentages in different animal orders, the percentage of streptomycin resistance remained the highest in turtles, lizards, and snakes (Table 3). More kinds of antimicrobial resistance were observed in isolates from turtles, as compared with those from lizards and snakes (Table 3). Furthermore, 7.3% of the Salmonella isolates from turtles were resistant to cephalothin. Nalidixic acid resistance was present only in isolates from turtles (9.2%). Among the Salmonella serovars recovered from reptiles that are related to human infections in Taiwan, it was observed that S. Typhimurium isolates were resistant to a wide range of antimicrobials tested, as compared with resistance exhibited by S. Heron, S. Bredeney, S. Treforest, and S. 4,[5],12:i:- isolates (Table 4). The percentage of streptomycin resistance present in S. Typhimurium isolates reached 83%, and 61% of S. Typhimurium isolates were resistant to cephalothin. Discussion To the authors knowledge, this is the first investigation of prevalence of Salmonella colonization in pet reptiles in Taiwan. The results indicated high prevalence (30.9%) of Salmonella colonization in these animals, especially in snakes (69.7%) and lizards (62.8%). This observation was in accordance with previous findings.1416,18,24,34 The prevalence of Salmonella infection in turtles varies in different studies, ranging from 2.6% to 72.2%.18,24,27 In the current study, Salmonella was recovered from 24.3% of the turtles tested. Seasonal behaviors, such as hibernation, have been speculated to result in a low isolation
Except for 11 Salmonella isolates that contained major contamination problems, antimicrobial susceptibility testing by disk diffusion test was conducted on 347 isolates. As shown in Table 3, although the overall resistance percentages were not very high, it
Table 3.
Antimicrobial resistance prevalence of 347 Salmonella isolates obtained from 476 animals.
Resistant (%)/intermediate (%)
Antimicrobial agent
Overall (N 5 347)
Turtle (N 5 218)
Lizard (N 5 73)
Snake (N 5 56)
Ampicillin Cephalothin Chloramphenicol Ciprofloxacin Enrofloxacin Gentamicin Nalidixic acid Nitrofurantoin Norfloxacin Streptomycin Trimethoprimsulfamethoxazole Tetracycline
6.9/0.0 4.6/0.0 6.3/0.3 0.0/0.0 0.3/0.3 3.2/0.0 5.8/0.9 4.6/2.6 0.0/0.3 14.7/23.1 4.6/0.0 9.2/0.3
7.3/0.0 7.3/0.0 7.3/0.5 0.0/0.0 0.5/0.5 5.0/0.0 9.2/1.4 5.5/3.2 0.0/0.5 11.5/20.6 6.4/0.0 8.7/0.5
2.7/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 2.7/0.0 0.0/0.0 16.4/41.1 2.7/0.0 5.5/0.0
10.7/0.0 0.0/0.0 10.7/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 3.6/3.6 0.0/0.0 25.0/8.9 0.0/0.0 16.1/0.0
48 Table 4.
Chen et al. Antimicrobial resistance of the top 5 Salmonella serovars identified from 347 Salmonella isolates in 476 animals.
Resistant (%)/intermediate (%) Antimicrobial agent S. Heron (N 5 32) S. Bredeney (N 5 26) S. Typhimurium (N 5 18) S. Treforest (N 5 18) S. 4,[5],12:i:(N 5 13)
Ampicillin Cephalothin Chloramphenicol Ciprofloxacin Enrofloxacin Gentamicin Nalidixic acid Nitrofurantoin Norfloxacin Streptomycin Trimethoprimsulfamethoxazole Tetracycline
0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 3.1/3.1 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0
0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/3.8 7.7/23.1 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0
83.3/0.0 61.1/0.0 83.3/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 61.1/0.0 61.1/0.0 27.8/44.4 0.0/0.0 83.3/0.0 61.1/0.0 83.3/0.0
0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/5.6 0.0/0.0 11.1/27.8 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0
0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 15.4/46.2 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0
rate of Salmonella in turtles.18 Nevertheless, a previous study14 observed that low isolation rate of Salmonella in turtles (10.3%) could also be obtained in summer. It was considered that season of sampling could be one of the factors associated with the prevalence of Salmonella colonization in turtles. The majority of the study subjects were convenience samples collected from the smuggled pet reptiles housed in the Taipei Zoo. Therefore, information with regard to imported countries was unavailable. As different prevalence of Salmonella colonization can be seen in animals across different geographical locations, serovars identified in the present study could not be reasonably compared with data from other countries. For example, a U.S. study25 identified that the top 7 reptile-associated Salmonella serovars in the United States were Salmonella IV 48:g,z51:-, S. Flint (now known as S. IV 50:z4,z23:-), S. Kintambo, S. Wassenaar (now known as S. IV 50:g,z51:-), S. Ealing, S. Carrau, and S. Abaetetuba, which did not correlate with the top 4 serovars found in the present study. In the current investigation, a total of 44 different Salmonella serovars were identified. Of major importance, S. Heron, S. Bredeney, S. Typhimurium, and S. Treforest, which are recovered from human cases with Salmonella infections in Taiwan, were the top 4 Salmonella serovars identified in reptiles. Similar to the previous findings, the present study indicated that 15.0% (22/147) of reptiles were co-colonized with different Salmonella serovars.18,39 According to the co-infection prevalence and using combinations of culture media for Salmonella isolation in the present study, it may imply that 1 serovar dominates most of the animals. Nevertheless, it will be of major interest to understand whether reptiles with co-infection are more likely to excrete Salmonella in the environment, and to threaten human health.
In the present study, except for 4 isolates, the majority of the salmonellae belonged to Salmonella enterica subspecies II; the remaining ones belonged to S. enterica subsp. enterica. These results differed from observations reported in other studies, which found mainly S. enterica subsp. II, IIIa, IIIb, IV, VI, and S. bongori associated with cold-blooded animals and their living environment.5 Although the reason for such a discrepancy is still unclear, S. enterica subsp. enterica was found to be common in reptiles in several studies.15,18,24,28 The present research findings may imply that reptiles could play a role as important vectors for Salmonella species commonly associated with human disease, and further research needs to be conducted to determine if water treatment and food handling could be associated with this observation. It has been suggested that the distribution of Salmonella in reptiles may reflect their living environments.24 In the present study, the isolation rate of Salmonella in aqua turtles was significantly higher than that in tortoises. Salmonella has high survival rates in aquatic environments and is frequently isolated from water sources.3,9,11,40 A previous study further indicated that Salmonella can persist in living environments for up to 10 months.17 Therefore, if the water is contaminated with Salmonella, it could be a source for Salmonella transmission in aquatic animals, and eventually to humans. Although the overall resistance prevalence was not very high (014.7%), S. Typhimurium was the serovar with the widest range of antimicrobial resistance. High resistance percentages (61.183.3%) in S. Typhimurium were observed to ampicillin, chloramphenicol, gentamicin, streptomycin, trimethoprim sulfamethoxazole, and tetracycline, which are all traditional antimicrobial agents used clinically in humans. Cephalothin is frequently used for the treatment of bacterial infection with multidrug
49
resistance; however, 61.1% of the S. Typhimurium isolates were resistant to cephalothin. This result is similar to a previous report,32 which showed 66.7% of Salmonella isolates resistant to cephalothin in reptiles. Although none of the S. Typhimurium isolates in reptiles were resistant to fluoroquinolones, such as norfloxacin, enrofloxacin, and ciprofloxacin, 61.1% of them were resistant to nalidixic acid. It is of major importance that nalidixic acid resistance was present only in turtles. As the majority of reptile-associated Salmonella cases have been from contact with turtles in the United States, such resistance could impact the treatment of human cases associated with turtle exposure in Taiwan. In the current study, serovars for 24.3% of the isolates could not be determined. Although the authors laboratory has the capacity to identify most known Salmonella serovars, the result may imply the limited spectrum of specific O- and H-antisera in the authors laboratory for identification of all serotypes. It is reasonable to consider that unrecognized serovars can be identified in reptiles. These untypable isolates are likely to be uncommon serovars, and will need to be further identified. According to a study conducted in Japan,24 although biochemical confirmation was done for Salmonella isolates in reptiles, 58 of the 112 Salmonella isolates tested were untypable with commercial antisera. These reasons could explain the percentage of untypable isolates in the present study. Based on these observations, it was concluded that raising reptiles as pets could be a possible source for Salmonella infections in humans and may eventually threaten human health due to antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella. The results offer valuable information to educate people who are raising or are considering raising reptiles as pets and can be applied in future risk assessment of Salmonella infection in humans. Acknowledgements
This project was supported by grant NSC 94-2313-B005-047 from the National Science Council, Taiwan. The authors greatly appreciate the major assistance from the Taipei Zoo, Taipei, Taiwan, for collecting reptile specimens.
References
1. Ackman DM, Drabkin P, Birkhead G, Cieslak P: 1995, Reptile-associated salmonellosis in New York State. Pediatr Infect Dis J 14:955959. 2. Badrinath P, Sundkvist T, Mahgoub H, Kent R: 2004, An outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis phage type 34a infection associated with a Chinese restaurant in Suffolk, United Kingdom. BMC Public Health 4:40. 3. Baudart J, Lemarchand K, Brisabois A, Lebaron P: 2000, Diversity of Salmonella strains isolated from the aquatic environment as determined by serotyping and amplification of the ribosomal DNA spacer regions. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:15441552. 4. Brenner FW: 1998, Modified Kauffmann-White scheme. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA. 5. Brenner FW, Villar RG, Angulo FJ, et al.: 2000, Salmonella nomenclature. J Clin Microbiol 38:24652467. 6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): 1992, Iguana-associated salmonellosisIndiana, 1990. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 41:3839. 7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): 1992, Lizard-associated salmonellosisUtah. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 41:610611. 8. Chang CC, Lin YH, Chang CF, et al.: 2005, Epidemiologic relationship between fluoroquinolone-resistant Salmonella enterica serovar Choleraesuis strains isolated from humans and pigs in Taiwan (1997 to 2002). J Clin Microbiol 43:27982804. 9. Chao W, Ding R, Chen R: 1987, Survival of pathogenic bacteria in environmental microcosms. Zhonghua Min Guo Wei Sheng Wu Ji Mian Yi Xue Za Zhi 20:339348. 10. Chen YH, Peng CF, Tsai JJ, et al.: 1999, Epidemiological study of human salmonellosis during 19911996 in southern Taiwan [in Chinese]. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 15:127136. 11. Cherry WB, Hanks JB, Thomason BM, et al.: 1972, Salmonellae as an index of pollution of surface waters. Appl Microbiol 24:334340. 12. Chiu CH, Lin TY, Ou JT: 1999, Predictors for extraintestinal infections of non-typhoidal Salmonella in patients without AIDS. Int J Clin Pract 53:161164. 13. Chiu CH, Wu TL, Su LH, et al.: 2002, The emergence in Taiwan of fluoroquinolone resistance in Salmonella enterica serotype Choleraesuis. N Engl J Med 346:413419. 14. Corrente M, Madio A, Friedrich KG, et al.: 2004, Isolation of Salmonella strains from reptile faeces and comparison of different culture media. J Appl Microbiol 96:709715. 15. de Sa IVA, Solari CA: 2001, Salmonella in Brazilian and imported pet reptiles. Brazilian J Microbiol 32:293297. 16. Ebani VV, Cerri D, Fratini F, et al.: 2005, Salmonella enterica isolates from faeces of domestic reptiles and a study of their antimicrobial in vitro sensitivity. Res Vet Sci 78:117121. 17. Friedman CR, Torigian C, Shillam PJ, et al.: 1998, An outbreak of salmonellosis among children attending a reptile exhibit at a zoo. J Pediatr 132:802807. 18. Geue L, Lo schner U: 2002, Salmonella enterica in reptiles of German and Austrian origin. Vet Microbiol 84:7991. 19. Krause G, Terzagian R, Hammond R: 2001, Outbreak of Salmonella serotype Anatum infection associated with unpasteurized orange juice. South Med J 94:11681172. 20. Lauderdale TL, Aarestrup FM, Chen PC, et al.: 2006, Multidrug resistance among different serotypes of clinical Salmonella isolates in Taiwan. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 55:149155. 21. Mead PS, Slutsker L, Dietz V, et al.: 1999, Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis 5:607625.
50
Chen et al. 32. Seepersadsingh N, Adesiyun AA: 2003, Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella spp. in pet mammals, reptiles, fish aquarium water, and birds in Trinidad. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health 50:488493. 33. Srikantiah P, Lay JC, Hand S, et al.: 2004, Salmonella enterica serotype Javiana infections associated with amphibian contact, Mississippi, 2001. Epidemiol Infect 132:273281. 34. Strohl P, Tilly B, Fre my S, et al.: 2004, Prevalence of Salmonella shedding in faeces by captive chelonians. Vet Rec 154:5658. 35. Tauxe RV: 1997, Emerging foodborne diseases: an evolving public health challenge. Emerg Infect Dis 3:425434.. 36. Van Immerseel F, Pasmans F, De Buck J, et al.: 2004, Cats as a risk for transmission of antimicrobial drug-resistant Salmonella. Emerg Infect Dis 10:21692174. 37. Wells JM, Butterfield JE: 1997, Salmonella contamination associated with bacterial soft rot of fresh fruits and vegetables in the marketplace. Plant Dis 81:867872. 38. Wikler MA, Low DE, Cockerill FR, et al.: 2007, Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests: approved standard, 9th ed. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA. 39. Willis C, Wilson T, Greenwood M, Ward L: 2002, Pet reptiles associated with a case of salmonellosis in an infant were carrying multiple strains of Salmonella. J Clin Microbiol 40:48024803. 40. Winfield MD, Groisman EA: 2003, Role of nonhost environments in the lifestyles of Salmonella and Escherichia coli. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:36873694. 41. Woodward DL, Khakhria R, Johnson WM: 1997, Human salmonellosis associated with exotic pets. J Clin Microbiol 35:27862790.
22. Meehan SK: 1996, Swelling popularity of reptiles leads to increase in reptile-associated salmonellosis. J Am Vet Med Assoc 209:531.. 23. Mermin J, Hutwagner L, Vugia D, et al.: 2004, Reptiles, amphibians, and human Salmonella infection: a populationbased, case-control study. Clin Infect Dis 38:S253261. 24. Nakadai A, Kuroki T, Kato Y, et al.: 2005, Prevalence of Salmonella spp. in pet reptiles in Japan. J Vet Med Sci 67:97101. 25. Olsen SJ, Bishop R, Brenner FW, et al.: 2001, The changing epidemiology of Salmonella: trends in serotypes isolated from humans in the United States, 19871997. J Infect Dis 183:753761. 26. Pang T, Bhutta ZA, Finlay BB, Altwegg M: 1995, Typhoid fever and other salmonellosis: a continuing challenge. Trends Microbiol 3:253255. 27. Pasmans F, Van Immerseel F, Heyndrickx M, et al.: 2003, Host adaptation of pigeon isolates of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Typhimurium variant Copenhagen phage type 99 is associated with enhanced macrophage cytotoxicity. Infect Immun 71:60686074. 28. Pfleger S, Benyr G, Sommer R, Hassl A: 2003, Pattern of Salmonella excretion in amphibians and reptiles in a vivarium. Int J Hyg Environ Health 206:5359. 29. Popoff MY, Bockemuhl J, Gheesling LL: 2004, Supplement 2002 (no. 46) to the Kauffmann-White scheme. Res Microbiol 155:568570. 30. Salyers AA, Whitt DD: 1994, Salmonella infections. In: Bacterial pathogenesis: a molecular approach, ed. Salyers AA, Whitt DD, pp. 229243. ASM Press, Washington, DC. 31. Sanyal D, Douglas T, Roberts R: 1997, Salmonella infection acquired from reptilian pets. Arch Dis Child 77:345346.