Next Article in Journal
The Restriction Activity Investigation of Rv2528c, an Mrr-like Modification-Dependent Restriction Endonuclease from Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Previous Article in Journal
Temperature-Driven Activated Sludge Bacterial Community Assembly and Carbon Transformation Potential: A Case Study of Industrial Plants in the Yangtze River Delta
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Microorganisms
Volume 12
Issue 7
10.3390/microorganisms12071455
microorganisms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Microbial Composition of Extracted Dental Alveoli in Dogs with Advanced Periodontitis

by
Laura Šakarnytė
1,
Raimundas Mockeliūnas
1,
Rita Šiugždinienė
1,
Lina Merkevičienė
1,2,
Marius Virgailis
1,
Jurgita Dailidavičienė
2,
Žaneta Štreimikytė-Mockeliūnė
1 and
Modestas Ruzauskas
1,2,*
1
Microbiology and Virology Institute, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, 44307 Kaunas, Lithuania
2
Department of Anatomy and Physiology, Veterinary Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, 44307 Kaunas, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Microorganisms 2024, 12(7), 1455; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071455
Submission received: 15 May 2024 / Revised: 13 July 2024 / Accepted: 16 July 2024 / Published: 17 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Molecular Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases in Animals)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Periodontitis is a serious gum infection that damages the soft tissue and destroys the bone supporting the teeth. The aim of the study was to investigate the microbiota using traditional microbiology plating and metagenomic sequencing of extracted tooth alveoli in dogs with severe periodontitis. Isolation of culturable microorganisms was performed as part of bacteriological testing to provide bacteriological diagnosis to veterinary surgeons. Metagenomic sequencing was performed using shotgun sequencing on the Illumina HiSeq system platform. The most prevalent species at sites of periodontal infection detected by metagenomic sequencing were Porphyromonas gulae, Prevotella spp., Tannerella forsythia, Porphyromonas crevioricanis, Porphyromonas cangingivalis, and Bacteroides heparinolyticus. Pasteurella, Streptococcus, and Neisseria were the most frequently isolated culturable bacteria from infected sites detected by traditional microbiologic methods. Metagenomic data revealed that these three genera accounted for only 1.6% of all microbiota at the sites of infection. Antimicrobial resistance patterns of the isolated bacteria included resistance to ampicillin, doxycycline, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, ciprofloxacin, colistin, cefotaxime, and chloramphenicol. Antimicrobial-resistant genes detected using shotgun sequencing also showed resistance to aminoglycosides and macrolides. Dogs with periodontal infections carry bacteria that can cause bite infections in humans as well as multi-resistant isolates. Therefore, treatment and prophylaxis or periodontal disease of dogs is important from a One Health perspective.

1. Introduction

One of the most prevalent and severe oral inflammatory diseases in dogs is periodontal disease (PD) [1]. It is caused by an accumulation of bacterial plaque on the teeth. Extensive analyses have focused on the prevalence, severity, and risk factors of canine PD, including poor oral care, diet, behavior, environmental factors, and genetic predisposition [2]. However, the causative pathogens remain controversial [3,4]. PD is currently recognized as a syndromic diagnosis rather than a distinct medical condition. It covers a spectrum of specific diagnoses, including gingivitis and periodontitis, with the term used to describe the presence of at least one of these conditions [5,6,7]. Existing data demonstrate that PD affects 44.0% to 63.6% of dogs [8,9].
Despite the high prevalence and significant impact of PD on animal health, there is limited published evidence on its epidemiology [10]. This may be partially because many cases of PD are managed completely in the primary care setting [11]. Moreover, according to published data, most causative agents of PD are Gram-negative anaerobic rods [12] which are difficult to culture. Therefore, the identification of aetiological agents in traditional bacteriology laboratories is limited [13].
Periodontitis is a more severe form of infection than gingivitis and occurs in deeper and more restricted dental areas, including the tooth apex and alveolus. Periodontitis develops when bacteria penetrate deeply into the tissues and surrounding periodontium [14]. In a few studies, Treponema denticola was considered the bacterial species most commonly associated with PD [15,16]. Kačirova et al. recently found that the same bacterial species were prevalent in both healthy dogs and dogs with PD. These bacteria included Treponema forsythia, Porphyromonas gulae, Treponema denticola, and Treponema putidum. Treponema putidum was positively correlated with both Porphyromonas gulae and Treponema forsythia, suggesting that it may be involved in the development of PD [4]. Other data suggest that PD and its pathogenesis are strongly associated with Porphyromonas spp., Tannerella forsythia, and Campylobacter rectus [17,18,19,20,21]. The wide range of data on various microorganisms implicated in PD demonstrates that the aetiological agents may vary based on geographic area, breed, investigation techniques, or the extensive area surrounding the teeth where both pathogenic and normal microbiota coexist. There is also a lack of data regarding how different strains of the same species within oral microbiomes can vary in pathogenicity, largely because the serotyping of oral microorganisms has been poorly investigated. The use of different methods (such as traditional bacteriology, polymerase chain reaction, and sequencing) for the detection of aetiological agents also contributes to the discrepancies among studies.
Although novel methods such as metagenomic sequencing enable active exploration of the microbiomes in animals, data regarding the microbial taxonomy in dogs with PD are usually restricted to the higher taxa without species determination. For example, Santibáñez et al. determined that PD was associated with a significant increase in Bacteroidetes and reductions in Actinobacteria and Proteobacteria compared with healthy dogs [22]. However, the obtained data lacked information regarding the increasing abundance of particular species, which could vary in pathogenicity and importance in the etiology of the disease. Similarly, Watanabe et al. recently detected Porphyromonas, Fusobacterium, Moraxella, Neisseria, Pasteurella, Actinomyces, and some other bacterial genera without more detailed data at the species level [23]. These same genera have also been detected in healthy dogs [24,25,26], complicating our understanding of the bacteria involved in the pathogenesis of PD and particularly of periodontitis. Moreover, most previous studies on the oral microbiota of dogs were based on 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing, in which a small region of a ribosomal sequence is amplified and sequenced [25]. For deeper insight, metagenomic shotgun sequencing (MGS) can be performed to investigate any part of the genome and provide more information about the microbial community with higher taxonomic resolution than 16S rRNA gene sequencing [25].
Antimicrobial resistance is a serious problem both in human and veterinary medicine. Since pet owners cannot escape close contact with their dogs, this problem requires a One Health approach, and monitoring of antimicrobial resistance in dogs should be performed [27]. Existing data show that antimicrobial-resistant bacteria can spread from dogs to their owners [28].
The aim of the study was to investigate the microbiota using traditional microbiology plating and metagenomic sequencing of extracted tooth alveoli in dogs with severe periodontitis. Antimicrobial resistance patterns were also investigated in isolated bacteria, as well as the genes encoding antimicrobial resistance.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Animals Involved in the Study

All animals were patients at a veterinary clinic located in central Lithuania. According to the treatment history and questionnaire data, no antibiotics had been used for the dogs during the previous 48 months. No oral hygiene practices (e.g., teeth brushing) were applied to the tested dogs. The general health status was evaluated together with morphological and biochemical blood analyses according to the standard procedures of veterinary inspection. The dogs’ oral cavities were examined by a veterinary odontologist under general anesthesia using inhalant anesthesia protocols and sufficient pain control. In cases of suspected periodontitis, X-ray examinations were performed to evaluate the disease stage. Only dogs that had signs of advanced periodontitis (PD3–PD4), had periodontal pockets of at least 6 mm, had not been treated for at least 6 months, and had no home dental care were initially selected for further analysis. Dogs that required radical treatment (e.g., dental extraction) were finally selected according to the above-mentioned inclusion criteria, ensuring variety in age, sex, feeding type, neutering status, and breed. Dogs less than 1 year old were excluded from the experiment. In total, 30 dogs were selected. In all cases, 109 and/or 110 teeth were extracted, and a radiological examination confirmed bone loss in >50% of cases. The detailed characteristics of the dogs with PD involved in this study are presented in Table 1.
Prior to the commencement of the study, written informed consent was obtained from the owner of each dog. All procedures were performed according to the applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals. Ethics approval was obtained from the Bioethics Center, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania (approval number 2024-BEC3-T-005). All animals were from Kaunas County, located in the central part of Lithuania.

2.2. Preparation of Samples

Immediately after the extraction of teeth, two small sterile cotton swabs (Transwab; Medical Wire and Equipment Co., Ltd., Corsham, UK) were inserted into the dental alveoli. One swab was used for plating, and the other swab was stirred and suspended in a DNA/RNA Shield Collection Tube (Zymo Research, Irvine, CA, USA). Samples from each individual dog were obtained from a single alveolus, even when more than one tooth was extracted during the procedure. Thereafter, a pooled sample for next-generation sequencing was prepared by mixing equal parts of all alveolar solutions from the extracted teeth. The sample was placed into a 2 mL cryogenic tube and stored at −80 °C until DNA extraction and sequencing.

2.3. Plating and Identification of Culturable Bacteria

The samples from the periodontal alveoli were plated on universal media (Columbia agar with 5% horse blood and fastidious anaerobe agar with 5% horse blood; Liofilchem, Roseto degli Abruzzi, Teramo, Italy). The plates were incubated at 37 °C both in ambient air and anaerobically for up to 72 h. To obtain pure cultures, up to three most prevalent but different types of colonies were recultivated. Thereafter, DNA was extracted, and bacterial identification was performed with Sanger sequencing of 16S rRNA using the universal primers 27F and 515R as described previously [29].

2.4. Susceptibility Testing of Culturable Bacteria

Susceptibility testing of the culturable species with existing interpretative clinical breakpoints criteria (Enterobacteriaceae, Pasteurella, Neisseria, Streptococcus, and Staphylococcus) was performed using Mueller Hinton Agar supplemented with 5% sheep blood (Liofilchem, Italy). Minimum inhibitory concentrations were determined with E-test strips (Liofilchem, Italy). The following antimicrobials were used: ampicillin, doxycycline, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, gentamicin, erythromycin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, colistin, imipenem, and cefotaxime. Clinical breakpoints were used as interpretative criteria as recommended by the EUCAST [30].

2.5. Metagenomic Sequencing

DNA isolation, quality control, library preparation, and MGS were performed with a ZymoBIOMICS Targeted Sequencing Service for Microbiome Analysis (Zymo Research). DNA was extracted using a ZymoBIOMICS DNA Microprep Kit (Zymo Research). Libraries were prepared using a Nextera DNA Flex Library Prep Kit (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) with up to 100 ng DNA input in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions using internal dual-index 8 bp barcodes with Nextera adapters (Illumina). Thereafter, the libraries were quantified with TapeStation (Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA) and pooled in equal abundance. The final pool was quantified using a quantitative polymerase chain reaction. The final library was sequenced on an Illumina HiSeq system (Illumina).

2.6. Bioinformatics and Data Analysis

The Trimmomatic-0.33 software tool was used to trim raw sequence reads with the aim of removing low-quality fractions and adapters. Reads of <70 bp were removed. The microbial composition was profiled as described previously [31]. Microorganisms were identified using the full Genome Taxonomy Database (R07-RS207). Sequences were deposited in the National Center for Biotechnology Information database (access number PRJNA1099262).
Antimicrobial resistance gene identification was performed with the DIAMOND sequence aligner [32]. Reads with less than five DNA reads of the same gene were omitted to escape possible data bias.
All taxonomic ranks of microorganisms were counted as percentage amounts. The numbers of culturable bacterial species obtained using the plating method were evaluated by comparing their DNA reads with all the bacterial reads obtained by metagenomic sequencing.

3. Results

The culturable microorganisms isolated from the alveoli of extracted teeth of dogs using the plating technique are presented in Table 2.
Among the 47 isolates selected as predominant culturable microorganisms, 15 different genera were identified. The most prevalent were Pasteurella, Neisseria, and Streptococcus. Antimicrobial resistance patterns of the isolates included resistance to ampicillin, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, colistin, gentamicin, and doxycycline. No isolates resistant to carbapenems, aminoglycosides, and macrolides were detected. However, multi-resistant isolates (resistant to at least three different classes of antimicrobials) were detected. Those isolates included Neisseria weaveri, Streptococcus canis, and Proteus mirabilis.
Metagenomic sequencing from dogs with PD detected 15 different taxa at the phylum level. The most prevalent phylum was Bacteroidota (61.5%), followed by Actinomycetota (10.8%) and Firmcutes A (9.1%; Figure 1).
In total, 54 genera of bacteria with a prevalence of at least 0.1% and one phylum of the domain Archaea (Methanobacteriota) were detected using MGS (Table S1). The most prevalent genera were Porphyromonas (31.2%), Prevotella, (9.8%), Bacteroides (8.9%), Tannerella (5.6%), Peptostreptococcus (4.3%), and Porphyromonas (4.3%; Figure 2). Although Pasteurella was the most frequently detected genus from culturable isolates, the proportion of this genus among all microbiota detected by metagenomic sequencing was only 1.0%. The DNA content of the other most frequently detected culturable bacteria, Neisseria and Streptococcus, accounted for 0.6% of all detected microorganisms for each genus (Table S1).
In total, 113 microbial species were detected from the dental alveoli of dogs with periodontitis (Table S2), among which 21 species accounted for ≥1% of the total amount of bacteria (Figure 3).
The most prevalent species detected by MGS was Porphyromonas gulae, with a prevalence of 20.5%. The other most frequently detected species in dental alveoli were Prevotella sp. 003932845 (8.4%), Bacteroides pyogenes (5.8%), Tannerella forsythia (5.3%), Porphyromonas crevioricanis (4.4%), Porphyromonas gingivicanis (2.6%), Porphyromonas cangingivalis (2.6%), and Bacteroides heparinolyticus (2.2%).
The genes encoding antimicrobial resistance in the pooled samples of dogs determined using shotgun sequencing are presented in Table 3. The most frequently detected genes were associated with the resistance to tetracyclines and less frequently with macrolides, β-lactams, aminoglycosides, and colistin.

4. Discussion

PD affects the periodontium, leading to gingivitis and/or periodontitis of varying severity [33]. Severe periodontitis (stages 3 and 4) is usually untreatable without radical measures; therefore, extraction of teeth is required to restore the general health status and welfare of the dog. In this study, we compared the results of microbiological examinations of alveoli from extracted teeth of dogs with severe periodontitis using both the plating technique (traditional bacteriology) and metagenomic sequencing to assess the differences between the two methods. Most previous studies of PD-associated infectious agents in dogs used either traditional or molecular methods to identify bacteria associated with PD. The following bacterial genera involved in the later stage of PD have been reported by authors studying PD using culturable methods: Veillonella, Bacterioides, Prevotella [34], Fusobacterium [35,36], and Porphyromonas [34,36,37]. Other authors have used specific primers to detect specific species associated with periodontitis, such as Porphyromonas gulae, Tannerella forsythia, or Treponema denticola [4,38]. In most studies, the plaque from teeth or samples from periodontal pockets was analyzed. Our study is novel in that both traditional and metagenomic methods were used to identify bacteria from the same site of infection, namely the alveoli, immediately after tooth extraction; this reduced the possibility of swab contamination by the external microbiota (which is abundant in the mouth). The data demonstrated that the most prevalent culturable bacteria were Pasteurella, Neisseria, and Streptococcus. Four different Pasteurella species (P. multocida, P. stomatis, P. canis, and P. dagmatis) were detected in the alveoli of extracted teeth, which may suggest their importance in the pathogenesis of canine PD. Pasteurella is an obligative pathogen in different animal species, but only Pasteurella multocida is predominant in most domesticated species of vertebrate animals. Some data have shown that in dogs, Pasteurella is associated with PD and advanced periodontitis, which can progress to more severe diseases such as meningoencephalitis or endocarditis [39,40]. Neisseria also shows variety at the species level; four species were identified in this study, namely N. animaloris, N. zoodegmatis, N. weaveri, and N. dumasiana. All these species are known to be prevalent in the oral microbiome of dogs, and they can cause infections after dog or cat bites [41,42,43]. Although this proves their pathogenicity, they still are considered part of the normal canine oral microbiota [24,26,44]. Streptococcus is also abundant in the oral microbiomes of animals. We isolated three species of Streptococcus: S. canis, S. minor, and S. fryi. Both S. canis and S. minor are known to be part of the canine oral microbiome but also are considered potential human pathogens associated with bite infections [45,46]. Data regarding S. fryi are scarce; this species was first isolated from dogs by [47]. Other culturable bacteria isolated from the extracted tooth alveoli of dogs include a few very well-known species of Enterobacteriaceae, Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, and some anaerobes frequently found in the oral canine microbiome, such as Porphyromonas macacae, Bacteroides pyogenes, and Fusobacterium polymorphum.
Metagenomic analysis of samples from the infected sites of extracted teeth demonstrated the highest prevalence of the phylum Bacteroidota (61.5%) among all 15 phyla. The clinical significance of Bacteroidota in carnivores is poorly understood. However, this phylum is known to be a core aspect of the human microbiome, playing roles in dietary glycan foraging, beneficial metabolite production, and immunity [48]. Notably, Bacteroidota contains some genera, such as Bacteroides, Prevotella, and Porphyromonas, that are well known to cause oral infections in both humans and dogs. At the genus level, the most prevalent genus is Porphyromonas, which accounts for >30% of the entire microbial composition. Although this genus, together with Tannerella, was previously reported to be predominant in dogs with PD [22], high numbers of these bacteria were also recently detected in the oral microbiome of healthy dogs [49]. This demonstrates that evaluating the prevalence of microorganisms at the genus level is not always specific enough, necessitating analysis at the species level or even strain/serotype level. The other most prevalent genera in the alveoli of extracted teeth were Prevotella, Bacteroides, Tannerella, and Peptostreptococcus. These genera of bacteria were previously described as those whose numbers increased in cases of PD or were mentioned as causative agents of PD together with several culturable bacteria, such as Neisseria sp., Corynebacterium sp., Pasteurella sp., and Moraxella sp. [22,50,51].
The oral microbiome of dogs is known to have the potential to cause bite infections in humans. Bacteria associated with bite infections detected in our study included Bacteroides pyogenes [52], Streptococcus canis, S. minor [45,46], and different Neisseria species [41,42,43]. The detection of this and other bacteria known to cause infections in humans after bites from dogs with periodontitis underscores the high risk of humans developing serious wound infections after being bitten by dogs with periodontal infections, especially when compared with healthy dogs. For this reason, hygienic measures and treatment of PD are very important not only for the health of dogs but also for the safety of their owners, family members, and community. Our investigations demonstrated a high prevalence of the latest PD stages in dog populations, meaning that dental hygiene in dogs is often neglected and that owners should pay attention to the prophylactic measures against this disease. According to other studies, tooth brushing, the application of different oral products, such as chemical plaque reduction products, enzymes, or derived herbal products, and the usage of specific diet and chew toys can reduce the risk of the development of PD in dogs [1].
Antimicrobial resistance data demonstrated that bacteria isolated from dogs with periodontitis were resistant to some classes of critically important antibiotics to humans. These antibiotics included third-generation cefalosporins, fluoroquinolones, and colistin. Phenotypical resistance detected in culturable Comparison of microbiota from the sites of infections with the microbiome of healthy dogs can help to understand the differences between pathogenic and normal oral canine microorganisms. Although the data about the oral microbiome of healthy dogs are still scarce, some studies revealed the normal composition of bacteria in healthy individuals. For example, Lisjak et al. [25] identified 67 bacterial species as core oral microbiota in dogs. The most prevalent species detected in their study were Porphyromonas cangingivalis, P. gulae, P. canorus, P. gingivicanis, Conchiformibius steedae, Nesseria weaveri, Frederiksenia canicola, Capnocytophaga cynodegmi, C. canimorsus, C. canis, and Bergeyella zoohelcum, which consisted of ≥1% of the oral microbiome of dogs. The other study has been performed recently by Šakarnytė with colleagues [49] in the same geographical area and using the same methods as those used in this study. In dogs without signs of periodontitis, they found Porphyromonas guleae, P. cangingivalis, P. canoris, Pauljensenia canis, P. gingivicanis, Corynebacterium canis, C. freiburgense, Neisseria dumasiana, Actinomyces wessii, and Lampropedia spp. as the most prevalent species. When comparing those species with bacteria isolated from extracted teeth alveoli, it is obvious that Prevotella sp. 003932845, Bacteroides pyogenes, Tannerella forsythia, Aminobacteriaceae sp., Porphyromonas crevioricanis, Peptostreptococcus canis, and Porphyromonas gingivalis had much higher percentage amounts in dogs with PD than in healthy individuals or those bacteria in healthy dogs were not detected at all. Therefore, these species can be associated with the pathogenesis of PD. Bacteria were overall similar to the genes encoding resistance detected by MGS. However, in culturable bacteria, we found no resistance to macrolides and aminoglycosides, which were genotypically detected in the total DNA of the samples. This can be explained by the fact that only a small part of the microbiomes was analyzed with traditional susceptibility testing and that molecular methods can provide more detailed information about the resistome in the infected area. Multi-resistant isolates were detected in the dogs during this study. Such resistant bacteria can be the reason for antimicrobial treatment failure in dogs and also pose a risk to other animals in contact with dog owners. These results are similar to the results obtained by some other authors, who found multi-resistant isolates in dogs that pose a risk to humans [27,53].

5. Conclusions

High abundance of Prevotella sp. 003932845, Tannerella forsythia, Porphyromonas crevioricanis, Porphyromonas cangingivalis, Bacteroides heparinolyticus, and Bacteroides pyogenes in dental alveoli of dogs with the third and fourth stage periodontal infections suggest that the above-mentioned bacteria can be potential causative agents of severe periodontitis. The most prevalent species at sites of periodontitis among culturable bacteria (Pasteurella, Streptococcus, and Corynebacterium) accounted for only 1.6% of all bacteria detected using metagenomics. It indicates that bacteriological diagnosis is not always able to provide a real-world view of the microbial variety at sites of infection. This could lead to an incorrect bacteriological diagnosis of aetiological agents and subsequent inappropriate selection of antimicrobials for treatment. Antimicrobial treatment, if required, should be performed only after susceptibility testing, as some of the canine isolates from dogs with periodontitis are resistant to different classes of antibiotics, including critically important ones. Dogs with periodontal infections carry bacteria that can cause bite infections in humans as well as multi-resistant isolates. Therefore, treatment and prophylaxis of periodontal disease in dogs is not only important for animal health but also from the perspective of a One Health approach.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/microorganisms12071455/s1, Table S1: distribution of bacterial genera in samples from dog dental alveoli with periodontal disease; Table S2: distribution of bacterial species in samples from dog dental alveoli with periodontal disease.

Author Contributions

L.Š.: conceptualization, investigations, methodology, writing original draft, review, editing. R.M.: visualization, formal analysis, resources. R.Š.: statistics, investigations. L.M.: methodology, investigations. M.V.: investigations. J.D.: writing—review and editing. Ž.Š.-M.: ethodology, investigations. M.R.: methodology, writing—review and editing, supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by the Research Council of Lithuania (P-MIP-24-25 “Application of novel diagnostic tools to reduce antimicrobial resistance in veterinary medicine”).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The animal study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences (protocol code 2024-BEC3-T-005, 15-02-2024).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Materials. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Cunha, E.; Tavares, L.; Oliveira, M. Revisiting periodontal disease in dogs: How to manage this new old problem? Antibiotics 2022, 11, 1729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Wallis, C.; Holcombe, L.J. A review of the frequency and impact of periodontal disease in dogs. J. Small Anim. Pract. 2020, 61, 529–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Özavci, V.; Erbas, G.; Parin, U.; Yüksel, H.T.; Kirkan, S. Molecular detection of feline and canine periodontal pathogens. Vet. Anim. Sci. 2019, 8, 100069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Kačírová, J.; Sondorová, M.; Maďari, A.; Styková, E.; Mucha, R.; Nemcová, R.; Marečáková, N.; Farbáková, J.; Maďar, M. Detection of periodontal pathogens from dental plaques of dogs with and without periodontal disease. Pathogens 2022, 11, 480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Niemiec, B.A. Veterinary Periodontology; John Wiley & Sons: Ames, IA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bellows, J.; Berg, M.L.; Dennis, S.; Harvey, R.; Lobprise, H.B.; Snyder, C.J.; Stone, A.E.S.; Van de Wetering, A.G. 2019 AAHA dental care guidelines for dogs and cats. J. Am. Anim. Hosp. Assoc. 2019, 55, 49–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ruparell, A.; Wallis, C.; Haydock, R.; Cawthrow, A.; Holcombe, L.J. Comparison of subgingival and gingival margin plaque microbiota from dogs with healthy gingiva and early periodontal disease. Res. Vet. Sci. 2021, 136, 396–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Butković, V.; Šehič, M.; Stanin, D.; Šimpraga, M.; Capak, D.; Kos, J. Dental diseases in dogs: A retrospective study of radiological data. Acta Vet. BRNO 2001, 70, 203–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kortegaard, H.E.; Eriksen, T.; Baelum, V. Periodontal disease in research beagle dogs—An epidemiological study. J. Small Anim. Pract. 2008, 49, 610–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. O‘Neill, D.G.; Mitchell, C.E.; Humphrey, J.; Church, D.B.; Brodbelt, D.C.; Pegram, C. Epidemiology of periodontal disease in dogs in the UK primary-care veterinary setting. J. Small Anim. Pract. 2021, 62, 1051–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Bartlett, P.C.; van Buren, J.W.; Neterer, M.; Zhou, C. Disease surveillance and referral bias in the veterinary medical database. Prev. Vet. Med. 2010, 94, 264–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Harvey, C.E. Periodontal disease in dogs. Etiopathogenesis, prevalence, and significance. Vet. Clin. N. Am. Small Anim. Pract. 1998, 28, 1111–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Davis, I.J.; Bull, C.; Horsfall, A.; Morley, I.; Harris, S. The unculturables: Targeted isolation of bacterial species associated with canine periodontal health or disease from dental plaque. BMC Microbiol. 2014, 14, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Gasner, N.S.; Schure, R.S. Periodontal disease. In StatPearls [Internet]; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK554590/ (accessed on 10 May 2024).
  15. Nordhoff, M.; Rühe, B.; Kellermeier, C.; Moter, A.; Schmitz, R.; Brunnberg, L.; Wieler, L.H. Association of Treponema spp. with canine periodontitis. Vet. Microbiol. 2008, 127, 334–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dashper, S.G.; Seers, C.A.; Tan, K.H.; Reynolds, E.C. Virulence factors of the oral spirochete Treponema denticola. J. Dent. Res. 2011, 90, 691–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Nomura, R.; Shirai, M.; Kato, Y.; Murakami, M.; Nakano, K.; Hirai, N.; Mizusawa, T.; Naka, S.; Yamasaki, Y.; Matsumoto-Nakano, M.; et al. Diversity of fimbrillin among Porphyromonas gulae clinical isolates from Japanese dogs. J. Vet. Med. Sci. 2012, 74, 885–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Fiorillo, L.; Cervino, G.; Laino, L.; D’Amico, C.; Mauceri, R.; Tozum, T.F.; Gaeta, M.; Cicciù, M. Porphyromonas gingivalis, periodontal and systemic implications: A systematic review. Dent. J. 2019, 7, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Gawron, K.; Wojtowicz, W.; Łazarz-Bartyzel, K.; Łamasz, A.; Qasem, B.; Mydel, P.; Chomyszyn-Gajewska, M.; Potempa, J.; Mlynarz, P. Metabolomic status of the oral cavity in chronic periodontitis. In Vivo 2019, 33, 1165–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Iwashita, N.; Nomura, R.; Shirai, M.; Kato, Y.; Murakami, M.; Matayoshi, S.; Kadota, T.; Shirahata, S.; Ohzeki, L.; Arai, N.; et al. Identification and molecular characterization of Porphyromonas gulae fimA types among cat isolates. Vet. Microbiol. 2019, 229, 100–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Maruyama, N.; Mori, A.; Shono, S.; Oda, H.; Sako, T. Evaluation of changes in periodontal bacteria in healthy dogs over 6 months using quantitative real-time PCR. Pol. J. Vet. Sci. 2018, 21, 127–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Santibáñez, R.; Rodríguez-Salas, C.; Flores-Yáñez, C.; Garrido, D.; Thomson, P. Assessment of Changes in the Oral Microbiome That Occur in Dogs with Periodontal Disease. Vet. Sci. 2021, 8, 291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Watanabe, A.; Okada, J.; Niwa, R.; Inui, Y.; Ito, K.; Shimokawa, Y.; Kihira, M. Profiling of bacterial communities associated with periodontal disease severity in dog subgingival plaque. bioRxiv 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ruparell, A.; Inui, T.; Staunton, R.; Wallis, C.; Deusch, O.; Holcombe, L.J. The canine oral microbiome: Variation in bacterial populations across different niches. BMC Microbiol. 2020, 20, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Lisjak, A.; Correa Lopes, B.; Pilla, R.; Nemec, A.; Suchodolski, J.S.; Tozon, N. A Comparison of the oral microbiota in healthy dogs and dogs with oral tumors. Animals 2023, 13, 3594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Portilho, F.V.R.; Nóbrega, J.; de Almeida, B.O.; Mota, A.R.; de Paula, C.L.; Listoni, F.J.P.; Bosco, S.M.G.; Oliveira, A.L.; Cunha, M.L.R.S.; Ribeiro, M.G. Microbial complexity of oral cavity of healthy dogs identified by mass spectrometry and next-generation sequencing. Animals 2023, 13, 2467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Pomba, C.; Rantala, M.; Greko, C.; Baptiste, K.E.; Catry, B.; van Duijkeren, E.; Mateus, A.; Moreno, M.A.; Pyörälä, S.; Ružauskas, M.; et al. Public health risk of antimicrobial resistance transfer from companion animals. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2017, 72, 957–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Jin, M.; Osman, M.; Green, B.A.; Yang, Y.; Ahuja, A.; Lu, Z.; Cazer, C.L. Evidence for the transmission of antimicrobial resistant bacteria between humans and companion animals: A scoping review. One Health 2023, 17, 100593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Ruzauskas, M.; Siugzdiniene, R.; Klimiene, I.; Virgailis, M.; Mockeliunas, R.; Vaskeviciute, L.; Zienius, D. Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus haemolyticus in companion animals: A cross-sectional study. Ann. Clin. Microbiol. Antimicrob. 2014, 13, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint Tables for Interpretation of MICs and Zone Diameters. Version 14.0. 2024. Available online: http://www.eucast.org (accessed on 5 July 2024).
  31. Buchfink, B.; Xie, C.; Huson, D.H. Fast and sensitive protein alignment using DIAMOND. Nat. Meth. 2015, 12, 59–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Brown, C.T.; Irber, L. sourmash: A library for MinHash sketching of DNA. J. Open Source Softw. 2016, 1, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Niemiec, B.A. Periodontal disease. Top. Companion Anim. Med. 2008, 23, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Domingues, L.M.; Alessi, A.C.; Schoken-Iturrino, R.P.; Dutra, L.S. Microbiota saprófitaassociada à doença periodontal em cães. é Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec. 1999, 51, 329–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Murray, P.; Prakobphol, A.; Lee, T.; Hoover, C.; Fisher, S. Adherence of oral streptococci to salivary glycoproteins. Infect. Immun. 1992, 60, 31–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Braga, C.; Rezende, C.; Pestana, A.; Carmo, L.; Costa, J.; Silva, L.; Assis, L.; Lima, L.; Farias, L.; Carvalho, M. Isolamento e Iden tificação da microbiota periodontal decães da raça pastor alemão. Ciência Rural 2005, 35, 385–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Katsura, H.; Tsukiyama, R.; Suzuky, A.; Kobayashi, M. In vitro antimicrobialactivities of bakuchiol ag ainst oral microorganisms. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2001, 45, 3009–3013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Senhorinho, G.N.; Nakano, V.; Liu, C.; Song, Y.; Finegold, S.M.; Avila-Campos, M.J. Detection of Porphyromonas gulae from subgingival biofilms of dogs with and without periodontitis. Anaerobe 2011, 17, 257–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Tun, A.E.; Benedicenti, L.; Galban, E.M. Pasteurella multocida meningoencephalomyelitis in a dog secondary to severe periodontal disease. Clin. Case Rep. 2018, 6, 1137–1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Kern, Z.T.; Swartley, O.M.; Neupane, P.; Balakrishnan, N.; Breitschwerdt, E.B. Pasteurella canis infective endocarditis in a dog. Vet. Microbiol. 2019, 229, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Anderson, B.M.; Steigerwalt, A.G.; O‘Connor, S.P.; Hollis, D.G.; Weyant, R.S.; Weaver, R.E.; Brenner, D.J. Neisseria weaveri sp. nov., formerly CDC group M-5, a gram-negative bacterium associated with dog bite wounds. J. Clin. Microbiol. 1993, 31, 2456–2466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Heydecke, A.; Andersson, B.; Holmdahl, T.; Melhus, A. Human wound infections caused by Neisseria animaloris and Neisseria zoodegmatis, former CDC Group EF-4a and EF-4b. Infect. Ecol. Epidemiol. 2013, 3, 20312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Cobiella, D.; Gram, D.; Santoro, D. Isolation of Neisseria dumasiana from a deep bite wound infection in a dog. Vet. Dermatol. 2019, 30, 556-e168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Foster, G.; Whatmore, A.M.; Dagleish, M.P.; Malnick, H.; Gilbert, M.J.; Begeman, L.; Macgregor, S.K.; Davison, N.J.; Roest, H.J.; Jepson, P.; et al. Forensic microbiology reveals that Neisseria animaloris infections in harbour porpoises follow traumatic injuries by grey seals. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 14338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Taniyama, D.; Abe, Y.; Sakai, T.; Kikuchi, T.; Takahashi, T. Human case of bacteremia caused by Streptococcus canis sequence type 9 harboring the scm gene. IDCases 2017, 7, 48–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Tré-Hardy, M.; Saussez, T.; Yombi, J.C.; Rodriguez-Villalobos, H. First case of a dog bite wound infection caused by Streptococcus minor in human. N. Microbes N. Infect. 2016, 14, 49–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Tomida, J.; Sauer, S.; Morita, Y.; Ezaki, T.; Kuwamura, Y. Streptococcus fryi sp. nov., a novel species with Lancefield group M antigens. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2011, 314, 95–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Oliphant, K.; Ali, M.; D’souza, M.; Hughes, P.D.; Sulakhe, D.; Wang, A.Z.; Xie, B.; Yeasin, R.; Msall, M.E.; Andrews, B.; et al. Bacteroidota and Lachnospiraceae integration into the gut microbiome at key time points in early life are linked to infant neurodevelopment. Gut Microbes 2021, 13, 1997560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Šakarnytė, L.; Šiugždinienė, R.; Žymantienė, J.; Ruzauskas, M. Comparison of oral microbial composition and determinants encoding antimicrobial resistance in dogs and their owners. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 1554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Tavares, M.D.O.; dos Reis, L.D.; Lopes, W.R.; Schwarz, L.V.; Rocha, R.K.M.; Scariot, F.J.; Echeverrigaray, S.; Delamare, A.P.L. Bacterial community associated with gingivitis and periodontitis in dogs. Res. Vet. Sci. 2023, 162, 104962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Niemiec, B.A.; Gawor, J.; Tang, S.; Prem, A.; Krumbeck, J. The bacteriome of the oral cavity in healthy dogs and dogs with periodontal disease. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2021, 83, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Lau, J.S.Y.; Korman, T.M.; Yeung, A.; Streitberg, R.; Francis, M.J.; Graham, M. Bacteroides pyogenes causing serious human wound infection from animal bites. Anaerobe 2016, 42, 172–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Kaspar, U.; von Lützau, A.; Schlattmann, A.; Roesler, U.; Köck, R.; Becker, K. Zoonotic multidrug-resistant microorganisms among small companion animals in Germany. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0208364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Microorganisms 12 01455 g001
Figure 1. Microorganisms at a phylum level detected using MGS in dental alveoli of dogs with periodontal disease. * Euryarchaeota.
Figure 1. Microorganisms at a phylum level detected using MGS in dental alveoli of dogs with periodontal disease. * Euryarchaeota.
Microorganisms 12 01455 g001
Microorganisms 12 01455 g002
Figure 2. Most prevalent genera of bacteria detected in alveoli of extracted teeth from dogs with periodontal disease. Only genera with a prevalence of at least 1% among the total reads are presented.
Figure 2. Most prevalent genera of bacteria detected in alveoli of extracted teeth from dogs with periodontal disease. Only genera with a prevalence of at least 1% among the total reads are presented.
Microorganisms 12 01455 g002
Microorganisms 12 01455 g003
Figure 3. The most prevalent species detected in dental pockets of dogs with severe periodontitis.
Figure 3. The most prevalent species detected in dental pockets of dogs with severe periodontitis.
Microorganisms 12 01455 g003
Table 1. Dogs with advanced periodontal disease in the present study.
Table 1. Dogs with advanced periodontal disease in the present study.
Dog NumberAge, YearsSex 1Weight, kgNutrition TypePD Level 2CI Level 3PedigreeBreedNeutered
110M3.4MixPD43NoYorkshire terrierYes
211F14.6MixPD43NoMixed breedYes
37F18.4RawPD33YesMittelschnauzerNo
412M28.0MixPD33NoMixed breedYes
510M6.3MixPD33NoMixed breedYes
610F9.3MixPD33NoMixed breedYes
712M4.0DryPD33NoYorkshire terrierYes
86M14.0MixPD32YesFrench bulldogNo
99M37.0MixPD33YesBobtailNo
107M10.0DryPD32YesWest Highland terrierNo
117M13.0DryPD33YesFrench bulldogYes
1212F12.0MixPD33NoBeagleYes
136F12.3DryPD33NoFrench bulldogNo
1410M5.5MixPD32NoMixed breedNo
1510M1.7WetPD43YesRussian toy terrierYes
1612M2.1WetPD43YesRussian toy terrierNo
1715F2.5WetPD43NoRussian toy terrierYes
189M11.0WetPD43NoMixed breedYes
197F12.0WetPD33NoMixed breedYes
207F3.0MixPD43NoPomeranianYes
215F4.2MixPD33NoRussian toy terrierNo
227M5.2MixPD43NoMixed breedYes
239F4.0DryPD33NoMalteseNo
2413F8.5MixPD43YesFrench bulldogNo
2515M11.0WetPD43YesEnglish cocker spanielYes
2610M5.3MixPD43YesPomeranianYes
2710F7.4MixPD32NoMixed breedYes
285F2.4MixPD33YesPomeranian Yes
2912F4.2DryPD33YesYorkshire terrierYes
309F5.8MixPD33YesShih TzuNo
1 M, male; F, female; 2 PD, periodontal disease; 3 CI, clinical attachment.
Table 2. Culturable bacterial species identified and their phenotypic antimicrobial resistance patterns.
Table 2. Culturable bacterial species identified and their phenotypic antimicrobial resistance patterns.
Isolate
Number		PD Stage *Species Identified Using
NCBI Database **		Antimicrobial
Resistance Profile
1PD4Actinomyces sp. canine oral taxon n
2PD4Neisseria animalorisCip
3PD4Neisseria weaveriCip, Chlor, Amp
4PD3Serratia sp.Ctx
5PD3Pasteurellaceae sp.Cip
6PD3Neisseria dumasiana-
7PD3Pasteurella canis-
8PD3Staphylococcus pseudintermedius-
9PD3Pasteurellaceae sp.-
10PD3Streptococcus canisDoxyy, Sxt, Amp
11PD3Pasteurella stomatis-
12PD3Leucobacter sp. canine oral taxon n
13PD3Proteus mirabilisCip, Sxt, Chlor, Amp
14PD3Glaesserella parasuis n
15PD3Pasteurella canis-
16.PD3Pasteurellaceae sp.-
17PD3Pasteurella multocida-
18PD3Pasteurella multocida-
19PD3Neisseria animalorisCip
20PD4Neisseria animaloris-
21PD4Neisseria animalorisCip
22PD4Streptococcus minor-
23PD3Neisseria zoodegmatis-
24PD3Franklinella schreckenbergeri n
25PD3Neisseria animaloris-
26PD3Pasteurella dagmatis-
27PD4Neisseria zoodegmatis-
28PD4Streptococcus minor-
29PD4Pasteurella stomatis-
30PD4Pasteurella multocidaCip, Sxt
31PD4Streptococcus fryi-
32PD4Neisseria animaloris-
33PD3Pasteurella canis-
34PD3Pasteurella dagmatis-
35PD3Rahnella aquatilis-
37PD3Proteus mirabilisAmp, Cip
38PD3Peptostreptococcus sp. n
39PD3Proteus mirabilisAmp, Cip, Col, Ctx
40PD3Glaesserella parasuis n
41PD3Streptococcus canisDoxy
42PD3Streptococcus canis-
43PD3Porphyromonas macacae n
44PD3Bacteroides pyogenes n
45PD4Fusobacterium polymorphum n
46PD3Pasteurella canis-
47PD3Neisseria animalorisChlor, Amp
* PD, periodontal disease; ** NCBI, National Center for Biotechnology Information; -—resistance not detected; n—susceptibility testing not performed; Amp—ampicillin; Cip—ciprofloxacin; Sxt—sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim; Doxy—doxycycline; Chlor—chloramphenicol; Col—colistin; Ctx—cefotaxime.
Table 3. Genes encoding antimicrobial resistance detected in samples of dogs with PD.
Table 3. Genes encoding antimicrobial resistance detected in samples of dogs with PD.
Antimicrobial ClassGenes Encoding Resistance
β-lactamsClass D beta-lactamase OXA-347
TetracyclinesTetracycline resistance ribosomal protection protein Tet(M)
Tetracycline resistance ribosomal protection protein Tet(O)
Tetracycline resistance ribosomal protection protein Tet(32)
Tetracycline resistance ribosomal protection protein Tet(W) tetracycline resistance ribosomal protection protein Tet(Q)
Macrolides and lincosamides23S rRNA (adenine(2058)-N(6))-methyltransferase Erm(F)
23S rRNA (adenine(2058)-N(6))-methyltransferase Erm(39) macrolide efflux
MFS transporter Mef(En2)
AminoglycosidesAminoglycoside 6-adenylyltransferase AadE
Aminoglycoside 6-adenylyltransferase AadS
ColistinPhosphoethanolamine--lipid A transferase MCR-1.6
Phosphoethanolamine--lipid A transferase MCR-1.11
Different classes (lincomycin, clindamycin, dalfopristin, and tiamulin)ABC-F type ribosomal protection protein Lsa(C)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Šakarnytė, L.; Mockeliūnas, R.; Šiugždinienė, R.; Merkevičienė, L.; Virgailis, M.; Dailidavičienė, J.; Štreimikytė-Mockeliūnė, Ž.; Ruzauskas, M. Microbial Composition of Extracted Dental Alveoli in Dogs with Advanced Periodontitis. Microorganisms 2024, 12, 1455. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071455

AMA Style

Šakarnytė L, Mockeliūnas R, Šiugždinienė R, Merkevičienė L, Virgailis M, Dailidavičienė J, Štreimikytė-Mockeliūnė Ž, Ruzauskas M. Microbial Composition of Extracted Dental Alveoli in Dogs with Advanced Periodontitis. Microorganisms. 2024; 12(7):1455. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071455

Chicago/Turabian Style

Šakarnytė, Laura, Raimundas Mockeliūnas, Rita Šiugždinienė, Lina Merkevičienė, Marius Virgailis, Jurgita Dailidavičienė, Žaneta Štreimikytė-Mockeliūnė, and Modestas Ruzauskas. 2024. "Microbial Composition of Extracted Dental Alveoli in Dogs with Advanced Periodontitis" Microorganisms 12, no. 7: 1455. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071455

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop