Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T07:14:03.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An epidemiological study of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cattle and other animals by pyocine typing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Rose Mushin
Affiliation:
Kimron Veterinary Institute, Bet Dagan, Israel
G. Ziv
Affiliation:
Kimron Veterinary Institute, Bet Dagan, Israel
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The high incidence (80·1%) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa pyocine type 1 in bovine mastitis in Israel suggested some degree of selectivity under local conditions. Contrary to other reports, cattle and calves showed a high rate of faecal carriage of this organism. The water supply on farms was often contaminated. The presence of certain pyocine types in the udder, gut or water occasionally led to their transmission from one reservoir to another; however, many types did not seem to spread.

P. aeruginosa was found in association with infections in various animals and was present in many locations such as a mouse breeding house and a chick hatchery.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

References

REFERENCES

Brown, V. I. & Lowbury, E. J. L. (1965). Use of an improved cetrimide agar medium. Journal of Clinical Patthology 18, 752.Google ScholarPubMed
Csiszar, K. & Lanyi, B. (1970). Pyocine typing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: association between antigenic structure and pyocine type. Acta Microbiologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 17, 361.Google ScholarPubMed
Curtis, P. E. (1969). Pseudomonas aeruginosa contamination of warm water system used for pre-milking udder washing. Veterinary Record 84, 476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Editorial (1966). Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Lancet i, 1139.Google Scholar
Editorial (1969). Resistant Pseudomonas. Lancet ii, 473.Google Scholar
Gillies, R. R. & Govan, J. R. W. (1966). Typing of Pseudomonas pyocyanea by pyocine production. Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology 91, 339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Govan, J. R. W. & Gillies, R. R. (1969). Further studies in the pyocine typing of Pseudomonas pyocyanea. Journal of Medical Microbiology 2, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heckman, M. G., Babcock, J. B. & Rose, H. D. (1972). Pyocine typing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: clinical and epidemiological aspects. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 57, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoadley, A. W. & McCoy, E. (1968). Some observations on the ecology of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and its occurrence in the intestinal tract of animals. Cornell Veterinarian 58, 354.Google Scholar
King, E. O., Ward, M. K. & Raney, D. E. (1954). Two simple media for the demonstration of pyocyanin and fluorescin. Journal of Laboratory and Clinical Medicine 44, 301.Google ScholarPubMed
Matthews, P. R. J. & Fitzsimmons, W. M. (1964). The incidence and distribution of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in the intestinal tract of calves. Research in Veterinary Science 5, 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringen, L. M. & Drake, C. H. (1952). A Study of the incidence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from various natural sources. Journal of Bacteriology 64, 841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schalm, O. W., Carroll, E. J. & Jain, N. C. (1971). In Bovine Mastitis. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.Google Scholar
Shooter, R. A., Walker, K. A., Williams, V. R., Horgan, G. M., Parker, M. T., Asheshov, E. H. & Bullimore, J. F. (1966). Faecal carriage of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in hospital patients. Possible spread from patient to patient. Lancet ii, 1331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagg, J. R. & Mushin, R. (1971). Epidemiology of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in hospitals. 1. Pyocine typing of Ps. aeruginosa. The Medical Journal of Australia 1, 847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ziv, G., Mushin, R. & Tagg, J. R. (1971). Pyocine typing as an epidemiological marker in Pseudonomonas aeruginosa mastitis in cattle. Journal of Hygiene 69, 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar