Next Article in Journal
Hydrocinnamic Acid and Perillyl Alcohol Potentiate the Action of Antibiotics against Escherichia coli
Next Article in Special Issue
Meropenem MICs at Standard and High Inocula and Mutant Prevention Concentration Inter-Relations: Comparative Study with Non-Carbapenemase-Producing and OXA-48-, KPC- and NDM-Producing Klebsiella pneumoniae
Previous Article in Journal
Penetration through Outer Membrane and Efflux Potential in Pseudomonas aeruginosa of Bulgecin A as an Adjuvant to β-Lactam Antibiotics
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Antibiotics
Volume 12
Issue 2
10.3390/antibiotics12020359
antibiotics-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

Occurrence of cfr-Positive Linezolid-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Non-aureus Staphylococcal Isolates from Pig Farms

by
Gi Yong Lee
and
Soo-Jin Yang
*
Department of Veterinary Microbiology, College of Veterinary Medicine and Research Institute for Veterinary Science, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Antibiotics 2023, 12(2), 359; https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020359
Submission received: 18 January 2023 / Revised: 6 February 2023 / Accepted: 8 February 2023 / Published: 9 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial Resistance Mechanisms: Occurrence, Dissemination, Detection and Treatment)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The emergence and spread of cfr-mediated resistance to linezolid in staphylococci have become a serious global concern. The acquisition of cfr confers multidrug resistance to phenicols, lincosamides, oxazolidinones, pleuromutilins, and streptogramin A (PhLOPSA phenotype). However, occurrence of cfr-positive and linezolid-susceptible staphylococci has been identified. To investigate the mechanism underlying linezolid susceptibility in cfr-positive Staphylococcus aureus and non-aureus staphylococci (NAS) isolates from pig farms in Korea. Eleven cfr-positive and linezolid-susceptible staphylococci were analyzed for mutations in domain V of 23S rRNA, ribosomal proteins (L3, L4, and L22), cfr open reading frames (ORFs), and cfr promoter regions. The effect of the cfr mutation (Q148K) on the PhLOPSA phenotype was determined using plasmid constructs expressing either the mutated (cfrQ148K) or nonmutated cfr genes. All 11 (six S. aureus and five NAS) cfr-positive and linezolid-susceptible isolates had a point mutation at position 442 in cfr ORFs (C to A) that resulted in the Q148K mutation. No mutations were detected in 23S rRNA, L3, L4, or L22. The Q148K mutation in Cfr is responsible for phenotypes susceptible to PhLOPSA antimicrobial agents. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the causal role of a single nucleotide mutation (Q148K) in cfr of S. aureus and NAS isolates in PhLOPSA resistance. Continued nationwide surveillance is necessary to monitor the occurrence and dissemination of mutations in cfr that affect resistance phenotypes in staphylococci of human and animal origin.

1. Introduction

Linezolid, the first member of oxazolidinones approved solely for use in humans, has been considered a last resort antimicrobial agent in treatment of serious infections caused by antimicrobial-resistant Gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) [1]. Because of its unique mode of action, which inhibits prokaryotic protein synthesis from a very early stage, and the synthetic nature of the drug, it was proposed that the development of resistance to linezolid is rare [2]. However, since the first report of linezolid resistance in a clinical isolate of MRSA in 2001 [1], the occurrence of linezolid-resistant S. aureus and non-aureus staphylococci (NAS) has been increased [3]. Moreover, although linezolid is strictly prohibited for use in livestock, the worldwide emergence of linezolid-resistant staphylococcal isolates has also been reported in various food-producing animals [4,5,6,7].
In staphylococci, linezolid resistance is mostly mediated by point mutations in the central loop of domain V region of the 23S rRNA [8,9]. As the primary target site of oxazolidinones, point mutations in these regions have previously been shown to be associated with the linezolid resistance phenotype [2]. In addition to the mutations in 23S rRNA, mutations in the genes encoding the 50S ribosomal proteins L3 (rplC), L4 (rplD), and L22 (rplV) at peptidyl transferase center (PTC) have been identified in linezolid-resistant bacteria [2,10].
Besides the point mutations in bacterial chromosomes, the transferable multidrug resistance gene cfr, encoding a 23S rRNA methyltransferase, has recently been reported [11,12]. The Cfr protein mediates methylation of the C8 carbon in the adenine residue at position 2503 (m8A2503, Escherichia coli numbering) in the 23S rRNA, resulting linezolid resistance [13]. Moreover, due to the proximal location of A2503 to the ribosomal binding sites of other antimicrobial agents targeting the bacterial 50S ribosome, the Cfr-mediated methylation in A2503 confers distinctive multidrug resistance (MDR) phenotypes to at least five classes of antimicrobial agents, including, phenicols, lincosamides, oxazolidinones, pleuromutilins, and streptogramin A (PhLOPSA) [14]. Since the first detection of cfr gene in a bovine isolate of Staphylococcus sciuri [11], carriage of cfr gene has been reported in various staphylococcal species in farm animals and farm environments [5,15,16]. In Korea, cfr-mediated linezolid resistance has also been identified in S. aureus and NAS isolates collected from pig farms and slaughterhouses [4,17,18].
Recently, it has been reported that staphylococcal isolates carrying the cfr gene failed to show resistance phenotype to linezolid [16,19,20,21,22,23]. In this study, S. aureus and NAS isolates that possess a cfr gene but are phenotypically susceptible to linezolid were identified in pigs and farm environments. Although the cfr-positive and linezolid-susceptible phenotypes have also been reported in C. difficile and E. faecalis [24,25,26], molecular mechanisms involved in the phenomenon are still unknown. Thus, to address the genotypic-phenotypic discrepancy in linezolid resistance in staphylococci, cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible S. aureus and NAS strains were analyzed for point mutations within the cfr open reading frame (ORF) and promoter sequences. Moreover, the impact of a point mutation in the cfr ORF on linezolid resistance was evaluated in a previously described plasmid system [27] expressing a point-mutated form of cfr gene derived from the cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible isolates.

2. Results

2.1. Identification of cfr-Positive Linezolid-Susceptible Staphylococci in Pig Farms

As shown in Table 1, a total of 11 staphylococcal isolates that were susceptible to linezolid but positive for cfr gene were obtained from the pig farms. Of the 11 cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible isolates, six were methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) strains, all belonging to sequence type (ST) 398, and isolated from healthy pigs (SA16, SA17, SA18, and SA19) and farm environment (SA20 and SA21). The other five isolates were four different species of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), consisting of two S. epidermidis (SE9 and SE10) strains from pigs, two S. sciuri (SSC1 and SSC2) strains from farm environments, and one S. simulans (SSM1) from a pig. Except for the two methicillin-resistant S. sciuri strains, which had non-typeable SCCmec, all the other four CoNS were methicillin-susceptible isolates. MLST analyses revealed that the two S. epidermidis (SE9 and SE10) and one S. sciuri (SSC2) strains were ST570 and ST85, respectively. An MLST scheme has not yet been developed for S. simulans.
The six cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible ST398 MSSA strains displayed identical linezolid MIC of 2 mg/L, while cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible CoNS strains showed linezolid MIC range of 0.75 to 4 mg/L (Table 1). The SSM1 strain showed the lowest level of resistance to linezolid (MICs of 0.75 μg/mL) even with the carriage of cfr gene. All 11 cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible staphylococci were also carrying the fexA gene, which was correlated with the chloramphenicol resistance phenotype.

2.2. Genetic Assessment of cfr ORF and Its Promoter in LZD-Susceptible Staphylococci

Sequencing analyses of the cfr ORF revealed that all 11 cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible staphylococci had a single point mutation (C to A) at position 442 in the cfr gene versus the cfr sequences of linezolid-resistant staphylococci (SA2 and SE7 strains) (Supplementary Figure S1). This point mutation results in a glutamine-to-lysine substitution at position 148 (cfrQ148K). In contrast, analyses of cfr promoter sequences (523-bp regions upstream of the ATG start codon) revealed no differences between the linezolid-resistant and –susceptible staphylococci. Moreover, no mutations in domain V of 23S rRNA or ribosomal proteins (L3, L4, and L22) were identified in the 11 cfr-positive linezolid-sensitive staphylococci (Supplementary Table S2).

2.3. Impact of cfrQ148K on PhLOPSA Resistance Phenotype

As shown in Table 2, pRB474 constructs expressing either the point-mutated forms of cfr (cfrQ148K) or non-mutated cfr (wild-type cfr) were generated and then electroporated into the two linezolid-susceptible strains of RN4220 and ST398 MRSA SA100, which were negative for both cfr and fexA genes.
As expected, the cfr-positive SA12 strain showed resistant phenotype to linezolid (MIC of 16 mg/L) and all the other four classes of antimicrobial agents tested (Table 3). Complementation of the linezolid-susceptible S. aureus strains, RN4220 and ST398 MRSA SA100, with plasmids expressing the wild-type cfr resulted in 4-fold increase in linezolid MICs compared to those of the control strains carrying empty pRB474 plasmid (Table 3). In addition to the increase in linezolid MICs, expression of the wild-type cfr caused significant increases in phenicols, lincosamides, pleuromutilins, and streptogramins, leading to the PhLOPSA resistance phenotypes. However, similar to the RN4220 and ST398 MRSA strains bearing empty pRB474 plasmids, the two strains complemented with plasmids expressing cfrQ148K displayed susceptible or low-level resistance phenotypes to the five classes of antimicrobial agents.

2.4. Linezolid Population Analysis Profiles

For the two S. aureus strains (RN4220 and SA100) expressing the wild-type cfr, the linezolid population curves were significantly shifted to the right versus those for strains complemented with the empty plasmid or pRB4747::cfrQ148K gene (Figure 1A,B). Area-under-the curve (AUC) values for linezolid population analyses were ~7-fold less for the two strains expressing cfrQ148K gene than for the strains expressing the nonmutated cfr gene or carrying empty plasmids.

2.5. Genetic Environment of cfrQ148K

Four cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible staphylococcal strains (SA16, SA19, SE10, and SSC2) were selected for comparative analysis of the genetic regions harboring the cfrQ148K genes. Genome sequence data indicated that the all cfr-positive strains possessed 38-kb plasmids (pSA16, pSA19, pSE10-1, and pSSC2-1) carrying cfrQ148K genes. As shown in Figure 2, the identical structures of the cfrQ148K containing regions flanked by the Tn558 transposon elements were found on the pSA16, pSA19, pSE10-1, and pSSC2-1 plasmids. BLASTn analysis showed that the 10-kb cfr-carrying segments of S. aureus (SA16 and SA19), S. epidermidis (SE10), and S. sciuri (SSC2) strains shared 99.9% nucleotides sequence identities. The cfrQ148K harboring regions showed 99% nucleotide sequence identities with the previously reported wild-type cfr-carrying plasmid pSA12 (CP049977) of a linezolid-resistant ST398 MRSA strain SA12, except for sequence variations in transposon elements (tnpA and tnpB).
In addition, fexA genes flanked by the Tn558 transposon elements were co-located in the downstream of cfrQ148K. Genetic analysis revealed that the fexA genes identified in this study were 100% identical in nucleotide sequence identity to those in the pSA12.

3. Discussion

Although linezolid resistance in staphylococci still remains rare, recent studies demonstrated a worldwide increase in the occurrence of linezolid-resistant S. aureus and NAS [4,7,17]. Unlike the chromosomal mutations in genes encoding 23S rRNA or ribosomal L3 and L4 proteins of linezolid-resistant isolates [9,34], the transmissible nature of cfr-mediated linezolid resistance in staphylococci has raised a significant concern in terms of horizontal transfer of resistance within and between different species of staphylococci [4,17]. In particular, carriage of the cfr on transferable plasmids and/or colocalization with insertion sequence (IS) elements has been reported in staphylococcal isolates of various animal and human origins [3,34]. Recently, the occurrence of cfr-mediated linezolid resistance in livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA) and CoNS isolates obtained from pig farms and slaughterhouses was identified in Korea [4,17,18]. Whole genome sequence analyses of the linezolid-resistant LA-MRSA and CoNS isolates revealed that the cfr genes were located on plasmids and were usually associated with mobile genetic elements, such as transposons and conjugative elements [4,15,17,35].
In the current study, 11 cfr-positive but linezolid-susceptible staphylococci were identified in pig farms in Korea. As shown in Table 1, except for two methicillin-resistant S. sciuri isolates, 9 of the 11 cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible isolates were methicillin-susceptible staphylococci. Sequencing analyses of the cfr ORFs in these isolates revealed a specific point mutation of cfrQ148K. Although recently published studies have also described cfr-positive but linezolid-susceptible S. aureus [19,20,21,22,36] or NAS strains [16,23], the molecular genetic mechanism of the linezolid-susceptible phenotype in these strains has not yet been elucidated [2]. A recent study from Italy described a frameshift mutation within the chromosomal cfr gene (lack of adenine residue at position 379) in a cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible ST398 LA-MRSA of porcine origin [36]. Although we identified the cfrQ148K mutation in previously published sequences of the MRSA strain SR153 [21] and S. haemolyticus strains VB5326 and VB19548 [34], the present study is the first to report the Q148K mutation in cfr ORF in association with a linezolid-susceptible phenotype in cfr-positive S. aureus and NAS isolates. Analyses of the cfr promoter regions in the 11 cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible staphylococci showed no variation in sequences compared to those of SA2, SA3, and SE7 isolates, suggesting that the linezolid-susceptible phenotype was not attributed to changes in transcription of cfr by cis-acting elements.
Next, as shown in Table 3, the effect of the Q148K mutation in cfr ORF on susceptibility to PhLOPSA antimicrobial agents was determined. The incorporation of wild-type cfr into the complementation plasmid, pRB474, resulted in increased MICs of all the five classes of PhLOPSA antimicrobials in RN4220 and SA100 strains. In contrast, expression of cfrQ148K from the same plasmid was unable to increase MICs to any of the PhLOPSA antibiotics, indicating that the Q148K mutation in the cfr ORF is responsible for the linezolid-susceptible phenotype identified in the 11 cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible staphylococci. In addition, there were significant leftward shifts in linezolid population analysis AUCs in the S. aureus strains expressing CfrQ148K compared to the strains expressing wild-type Cfr (Figure 1A,B). Unlike the PhLOPSA antibiotics, susceptibility to tetracycline and vancomycin was unaffected by the expression of wild-type cfr or cfrQ148K, confirming the specific effect of cfr on PhLOPSA agents. The impact of the Q148K mutation in cfr on PhLOPSA phenotype is likely to be similar in NAS strains. However, attempts to electroporate the pRB474 constructs expressing wild-type cfr and cfrQ148K into S. epidermidis or S. sciuri isolates were unsuccessful because of the much lower frequency of transformation in CoNS than in S. aureus strains [37].
WGS analyses of cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible S. aureus (SA16 and SA19) and NAS strains (S. epidermidis SE10, and S. sciuri SSC2) revealed the location of cfrQ148K genes on 38-kb plasmids (pSA16, pSA19, pSE10-1, and pSSC2-1) in these strains (Figure 2), which showed >99% nucleotide sequence similarity. These results indicate that the plasmids possessing cfrQ148K gene can be transmitted among staphylococci in the pig farm environments via horizontal transfer. Moreover, these plasmids showed >99% nucleotide sequence homology to the previously reported 38-kb plasmid, pSA12 [4], suggesting that the wild-type cfr and cfrQ148K genes are located on the same plasmid backbone.
In line with the report by LaMarre et al., which reported low fitness cost of the cfr [38], there was no difference in growth rates between the S. aureus strains carrying the wild-type cfr and cfrQ148K (Supplementary Figure S2).
Moreover, all 11 linezolid-susceptible staphylococci were positive for fexA. Previous studies from our laboratory and others reported that the cfr and fexA genes are frequently colocalized on a transferable plasmid [3,4,7,17,35]. In this study, WGS analyses also confirmed co-localization of fexA and cfrQ148K on a transferable plasmid, indicating that fexA may contribute to the maintenance of the cfrQ148K-carrying plasmid under antibiotic selective pressure in pig farms. Although there was no significant difference in fitness costs between the wild-type cfr and cfrQ148K without antibiotic selective pressure, future research is warranted to investigate effect of the mutation on long-term stability and transmissibility of the resistant plasmids, especially under selective pressure. Recently, the Q148K mutation within cfr ORF was detected in a linezolid-susceptible clinical MRSA isolate [21], suggesting that continuous monitoring on occurrence of cfrQ148K and other cfr variants in staphylococci originated from human and animal is necessary. It should be recognized that our data in this study were generated from a limited number of staphylococcal isolates. Moreover, molecular mechanisms involved in resistance to other antibiotics were not included in this study. Nonetheless, this is the first to report the mechanisms underlying linezolid susceptibility in cfr-positive livestock-associated staphylococci isolated from pig farms in Korea.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Bacterial Strains

Previous studies from our laboratory revealed the emergence of cfr-mediated linezolid resistance in livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA) and NAS strains isolated from pig farms in Korea [4,17]. In a retrospective investigation of the prevalence of cfr among staphylococci on pig farms from 2017 to 2021, cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible S. aureus (n = 6) and NAS isolates (two S. epidermidis, two S. sciuri, and one S. simulans) were identified in a same pig farm. The staphylococcal isolates used in this study are listed in Table 1. Three linezolid-resistant S. aureus (SA2, SA3, and SA12) and one S. epidermidis (SE7) isolates were selected from the recently described staphylococcal strains isolated from pig farms [4,17].
All staphylococcal isolates were identified by using matrix-assisted laser desorption/deionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS; Daltonics, Bremen, Germany) [39] and tuf gene sequencing (Bionics, Seoul, Korea) methods [40].
All S. aureus and NAS isolates were cultured in Mueller-Hinton broth (Difco Laboratories, Detroit, MI, USA) or tryptic soy broth (Difco Laboratories) for each assay. All isolates were stored at −75 °C until used for each experiment.
For genotypic analyses of the S. aureus, S. epidermidis, and S. sciuri isolates, multilocus sequence typing (MLST) was performed as described previously [41,42,43]. The seven alleles of staphylococci were PCR-amplified, sequenced, and aligned to the MLST database (http://pubmlst.org/, accessed on 1 November 2022). For methicillin-resistant staphylococci, the presence of mecA and staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) types were determined as previously described [44,45].

4.2. DNA Isolation and cfr Sequencing

PCR amplification of the cfr ORF and the cfr promoter region (523 bp upstream of ATG start codon) was carried out using the specific primer pair cfr-F (5′-GCGAAATGGCTCAATTTTCA-3′) and cfr-R (5′-TTCCACCCAGTAGTCCATTCA-3′) based on the sequence information of a cfr-harboring plasmid pSA12 (GenBank accession no. CP049977). DNA sequencing of the PCR product was performed at Bionics (Seoul, Korea). The presence of fexA gene, which encodes the florfenicol-chloramphenicol exporter, was determined in all isolates as described before [46].

4.3. Sequencing of 23S rRNA and Ribosomal Protein Genes

The presence of the previously described linezolid resistance-associated mutations in 23S rRNA or ribosomal proteins L3 (rplC), L4 (rplD) and L22 (rplV) [47] were determined by sequencing analyses using specific primer sets (Supplementary Table S1). S. aureus ATCC 25923 (GenBank accession CP009361), S. epidermidis ATCC 12228 (GenBank accession AE015929), S. sciuri NCTC 12103 (GenBank accession LS483305) and S. simulans NCTC 11046 (GenBank accession LS483313) were used as references for the primer design and sequencing analyses.

4.4. Genetic Manipulations and cfr Cloning

Genomic DNA samples from staphylococci were prepared as previously before [48]. Plasmid DNA was extracted from Escherichia coli and S. aureus using PureYieldTM plasmid miniprep kit (Promega, Madison, WI, USA). The preparation of competent cells and transformation of E. coli DH5α were performed as described before [49]. Electroporation of plasmid DNA into staphylococcal isolates was performed as described previously [50,51]. Briefly, 100 µL of electro-competent S. aureus cells were mixed with 1 µg of the plasmids, transferred into 1 mm electroporation cuvettes (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA), and kept on ice for 15 min. After application of electropulse at 2.3–2.5 kV, resistance 100 Ω, and capacity 25 µF, 1 mL of fresh TSB was added, and the cells were cultured at 37 °C for 1 h. The cells were then spread on tryptic soy agar (Difco Laboratories) plates containing chloramphenicol (10 µg/mL) and putative transformants were selected.
For the in trans complementation constructs, nonmutated and point mutated cfr ORFs were PCR-amplified with primers cfr-HindIII (5′-CCCAAGCTTGCAAATTGTGAAAGGATGAAA-3′) and cfr-XbaI (5′-CCCTCTAGATCCACCCAGTAGTCCATTCA-3′) using purified DNA samples from SA12 and SA16 strains, respectively (Table 2). The PCR products were then cloned into the HindIII and XbaI sites of the pRB474 expression vector [30], which places expression of the cloned crf gene under the control of vegII promoter (Table 2). DNA sequences of the cfr ORFs ligated into pRB474 were confirmed by sequencing analyses and enzyme digestions.

4.5. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Antimicrobial susceptibility assays were performed according to the standard disc diffusion method described in the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines [31,32]. The antimicrobial agents used were ampicillin (10 μg), cefoxitin (30 μg), chloramphenicol (30 μg), ciprofloxacin (5 μg), clindamycin (2 μg), erythromycin (15 μg), gentamicin (10 μg), mupirocin (200 μg), quinupristin/dalfopristin (15 μg), rifampin (5 μg), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (1.25–23.73 μg), and tetracycline (30 μg). The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of florfenicol, chloramphenicol, clindamycin, linezolid, tetracycline, tiamulin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, and vancomycin was determined by the broth microdilution method or E-test® (bioMérieux, Durham, NC, USA). Reference strains, S. aureus ATCC 25923 and ATCC 29213, were included for all disc diffusion and broth microdilution assays. The breakpoints for resistance to the antimicrobial agents were determined according to the CLSI documents, M100 [32], VET08 [31], and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) [33].

4.6. Population Analysis

Population analyses were carried out using linezolid as previously described with minor modifications [52]. Briefly, staphylococcal inoculum of ~108 CFU/mL was plated onto Mueller-Hinton Agar (MHA) supplemented with different concentrations of linezolid (0.125, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 µg/mL). The range of linezolid concentrations tested was selected to encompass sublethal to lethal linezolid levels based on the linezolid MIC data. After incubation at 37 °C for 24 h, visible colonies on the plates were counted. At least three independent assays were performed for each strain.

4.7. Whole Genome Sequencing Analysis

Whole genome sequence (WGS) data of cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible staphylococci were generated using a combination of Oxford Nanopore MinION (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Oxford, UK) and Illumina iSeq (Illumina Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Sequencing data were assembled de novo using Unicycler v.0.5.0. Functional annotation of assembled genome was carried out using the Prokka (v1.14.6) and Rapid Annotation in Subsystem Technology server tool. Integrative data from ResFinder (https://cge.cbs.dtu.dk/services/ResFinder/, accessed on 10 November 2022) of the Center for Genomic Epidemiology and the Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database were used to confirm the presence and location of cfr genes. To analyze the cfr-containing regions, comparative sequence analyses were conducted on the strains sequenced in this study and the previously reported cfr-carrying plasmid pSA12 in a linezolid-resistant ST398 LA-MRSA strain SA12 (GenBank accession no. CP049977) [4].
The complete genome sequences of four cfr-positive staphylococci were deposited in the NCBI database: S. aureus SA16 strain (GenBank accession no. CP092999-CP093000) and SA19 strain (GenBank accession no. CP110318-CP110319); S. epidermidis SE10 strain (GenBank accession no. CP110320-CP110322); and S. sciuri SSC2 strain (GenBank accession no. CP093001-CP093009), respectively.

5. Conclusions

In the current study, we identified the occurrence of cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible S. aureus and NAS on pig farms in Korea. Our results suggest that (i) the Q148K mutation within the cfr ORF can recapitulate the linezolid-susceptible phenotype observed in the six ST398 MSSA and five CoNS strains (two S. epidermidis, two S. sciuri, and one S. simulans) collected from pigs and pig farm environments, (ii) the Q148K mutation in cfr confers susceptibilities to all the five classes of PhLOPSA antimicrobial agents; and (iii) in addition to the cfr-mediated linezolid resistance, ST398 MSSA and NAS isolates likely acquire cfrQ148K-containing plasmids through intra- or inter-species interactions.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/antibiotics12020359/s1, Table S1: Primer sets for 23S rRNA and ribosomal proteins in staphylococci. Table S2: Sequence alignments of 23S rRNA and ribosomal proteins in staphylococci. Figure S1: Sequence analysis of the cfr ORF and its promoter region in (A) cfr-positive linezolid-resistant and (B) cfr-positive linezolid-susceptible strains. Black letters indicate promoter sequences. Red letters with underlines indicate cfr ORF sequences. Blue letters indicate a point mutation (C to A) at position 442 in the cfr ORF. Figure S2: Growth rates of S. aureus strains expressing wild-type cfr and cfrQ148K. Measurement of OD600nm (A,C) and viable cell counts (B,D).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.Y.L. and S.-J.Y.; methodology, G.Y.L. and S.-J.Y.; investigation, G.Y.L.; resources, S.-J.Y.; writing—original draft preparation, G.Y.L.; writing—review and editing, S.-J.Y.; supervision, S.-J.Y.; project administration, G.Y.L.; funding acquisition, S.-J.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by Research of Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Project No. 2020ER540500 and 2021ER220100)].

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Tsiodras, S.; Gold, H.S.; Sakoulas, G.; Eliopoulos, G.M.; Wennersten, C.; Venkataraman, L.; Moellering, R.C.; Ferraro, M.J. Linezolid resistance in a clinical isolate of Staphylococcus aureus. Lancet 2001, 358, 207–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Schwarz, S.; Zhang, W.; Du, X.D.; Kruger, H.; Feßler, A.T.; Ma, S.; Zhu, Y.; Wu, C.; Shen, J.; Wang, Y. Mobile oxazolidinone resistance genes in Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2021, 34, e0018820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Bender, J.; Strommenger, B.; Steglich, M.; Zimmermann, O.; Fenner, I.; Lensing, C.; Dagwadordsch, U.; Kekule, A.S.; Werner, G.; Layer, F. Linezolid resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus epidermidis from German hospitals and characterization of two cfr-carrying plasmids. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2015, 70, 1630–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lee, G.Y.; Kim, G.B.; Yang, S.J. Co-occurrence of cfr-mediated linezolid-resistance in ST398 LA-MRSA and non-aureus staphylococci isolated from a pig farm. Vet. Microbiol. 2022, 266, 109336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ruiz-Ripa, L.; Belles-Belles, A.; Fernandez-Fernandez, R.; Garcia, M.; Vilaro, A.; Zarazaga, M.; Torres, C. Linezolid-resistant MRSA-CC398 carrying the cfr gene, and MRSA-CC9 isolates from pigs with signs of infection in Spain. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2021, 131, 615–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Timmermans, M.; Bogaerts, B.; Vanneste, K.; De Keersmaecker, S.C.J.; Roosens, N.H.C.; Kowalewicz, C.; Simon, G.; Argudin, M.A.; Deplano, A.; Hallin, M.; et al. Large diversity of linezolid-resistant isolates discovered in food-producing animals through linezolid selective monitoring in Belgium in 2019. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2021, 77, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cuny, C.; Arnold, P.; Hermes, J.; Eckmanns, T.; Mehraj, J.; Schoenfelder, S.; Ziebuhr, W.; Zhao, Q.; Wang, Y.; Feßler, A.T.; et al. Occurrence of cfr-mediated multiresistance in staphylococci from veal calves and pigs, from humans at the corresponding farms, and from veterinarians and their family members. Vet. Microbiol. 2017, 200, 88–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Gu, B.; Kelesidis, T.; Tsiodras, S.; Hindler, J.; Humphries, R.M. The emerging problem of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2013, 68, 4–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tewhey, R.; Gu, B.; Kelesidis, T.; Charlton, C.; Bobenchik, A.; Hindler, J.; Schork, N.J.; Humphries, R.M. Mechanisms of linezolid resistance among coagulase-negative staphylococci determined by whole-genome sequencing. Mbio 2014, 5, e00894-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Stefani, S.; Bongiorno, D.; Mongelli, G.; Campanile, F. Linezolid resistance in staphylococci. Pharmaceuticals 2010, 3, 1988–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Schwarz, S.; Werckenthin, C.; Kehrenberg, C. Identification of a plasmid-borne chloramphenicol-florfenicol resistance gene in Staphylococcus sciuri. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2000, 44, 2530–2533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Toh, S.M.; Xiong, L.; Arias, C.A.; Villegas, M.V.; Lolans, K.; Quinn, J.; Mankin, A.S. Acquisition of a natural resistance gene renders a clinical strain of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus resistant to the synthetic antibiotic linezolid. Mol. Microbiol. 2007, 64, 1506–1514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Tsai, K.; Stojkovic, V.; Noda-Garcia, L.; Young, I.D.; Myasnikov, A.G.; Kleinman, J.; Palla, A.; Floor, S.N.; Frost, A.; Fraser, J.S.; et al. Directed evolution of the rRNA methylating enzyme Cfr reveals molecular basis of antibiotic resistance. Elife 2022, 11, e70017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Long, K.S.; Poehlsgaard, J.; Kehrenberg, C.; Schwarz, S.; Vester, B. The Cfr rRNA methyltransferase confers resistance to phenicols, lincosamides, oxazolidinones, pleuromutilins, and streptogramin A antibiotics. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006, 50, 2500–2505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ruiz-Ripa, L.; Feßler, A.T.; Hanke, D.; Sanz, S.; Olarte, C.; Mama, O.M.; Eichhorn, I.; Schwarz, S.; Torres, C. Coagulase-negative staphylococci carrying cfr and PVL genes, and MRSA/MSSA-CC398 in the swine farm environment. Vet. Microbiol. 2020, 243, 108631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Wang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Wang, J.; Wu, C.; Shen, Z.; Fu, X.; Yan, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Schwarz, S.; Shen, J. Distribution of the multidrug resistance gene cfr in Staphylococcus species isolates from swine farms in China. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2012, 56, 1485–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Lee, G.Y.; Seong, H.J.; Sul, W.J.; Yang, S.J. Genomic information on linezolid-resistant sequence-type 398 livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from a pig. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2021, 18, 378–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kang, H.Y.; Moon, D.C.; Mechesso, A.F.; Choi, J.H.; Kim, S.J.; Song, H.J.; Kim, M.H.; Yoon, S.S.; Lim, S.K. Emergence of cfr-mediated linezolid resistance in Staphylococcus aureus isolated from pig carcasses. Antibiotics 2020, 9, 769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Gales, A.C.; Deshpande, L.M.; de Souza, A.G.; Pignatari, A.C.; Mendes, R.E. MSSA ST398/t034 carrying a plasmid-mediated Cfr and Erm (B) in Brazil. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2015, 70, 303–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kehrenberg, C.; Cuny, C.; Strommenger, B.; Schwarz, S.; Witte, W. Methicillin-resistant and -susceptible Staphylococcus aureus strains of clonal lineages ST398 and ST9 from swine carry the multidrug resistance gene cfr. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2009, 53, 779–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Wu, D.; Wang, H.; Zhu, F.; Jiang, S.; Sun, L.; Zhao, F.; Yu, Y.; Chen, Y. Characterization of an ST5-SCCmec II-t311 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strain with a widespread cfr-positive plasmid. J. Infect. Chemother. 2020, 26, 699–705. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  22. Li, S.; Zhao, L.; Zheng, B.; Shen, P.; Ji, J.; Lv, J.; Li, L.; Xiao, Y. Identification and characterization of cfr-positive Staphylococcus aureus isolates from community-onset infectious patients in a county hospital in China. J. Med. Microbiol. 2015, 64, 910–915. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  23. Sun, C.; Zhang, P.; Ji, X.; Fan, R.; Chen, B.; Wang, Y.; Schwarz, S.; Wu, C. Presence and molecular characteristics of oxazolidinone resistance in staphylococci from household animals in rural China. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2018, 73, 1194–1200. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  24. Bender, J.K.; Fleige, C.; Klare, I.; Fiedler, S.; Mischnik, A.; Mutters, N.T.; Dingle, K.E.; Werner, G. Detection of a cfr (B) variant in German Enterococcus faecium clinical isolates and the impact on linezolid resistance in Enterococcus spp. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0167042. [Google Scholar]
  25. Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Schwarz, S.; Wang, S.L.; Chen, L.R.; Wu, C.M.; Shen, J.Z. Investigation of a multiresistance gene cfr that fails to mediate resistance to phenicols and oxazolidinones in Enterococcus faecalis. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2014, 69, 892–898. [Google Scholar]
  26. Fang, L.X.; Duan, J.H.; Chen, M.Y.; Deng, H.; Liang, H.Q.; Xiong, Y.Q.; Sun, J.; Liu, Y.H.; Liao, X.P. Prevalence of cfr in Enterococcus faecalis strains isolated from swine farms in China: Predominated cfr-carrying pCPPF5-like plasmids conferring “non-linezolid resistance” phenotype. Infect. Genet. Evol. 2018, 62, 188–192. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  27. Yang, S.J.; Mishra, N.N.; Rubio, A.; Bayer, A.S. Causal role of single nucleotide polymorphisms within the mprF gene of Staphylococcus aureus in daptomycin resistance. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2013, 57, 5658–5664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Hanahan, D. Studies on transformation of Escherichia coli with plasmids. J. Mol. Biol. 1983, 166, 557–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kreiswirth, B.N.; Lofdahl, S.; Betley, M.J.; Oreilly, M.; Schlievert, P.M.; Bergdoll, M.S.; Novick, R.P. The toxic shock syndrome exotoxin ttructural gene is not detectably transmitted by a prophage. Nature 1983, 305, 709–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bruckner, R. A series of shuttle vectors for Bacillus subtilis and Escherichia coli. Gene 1992, 122, 187–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI). VET01S Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria Isolated from Animals, 5th ed.; Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  32. Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI). M100 Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, 32nd ed.; Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute: Wayne, PA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  33. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). Breakpoint Tables for Interpretation of MICs and Zone Diameters, Version 11.0; European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: Växjö, Sweden, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  34. Bakthavatchalam, Y.D.; Vasudevan, K.; Neeravi, A.; Perumal, R.; Veeraraghavan, B. First draft genome sequence of linezolid and rifampicin resistant Staphylococcus haemolyticus. Jpn. J. Infect. Dis. 2020, 73, 296–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Li, S.M.; Zhou, Y.F.; Li, L.; Fang, L.X.; Duan, J.H.; Liu, F.R.; Liang, H.Q.; Wu, Y.T.; Gu, W.Q.; Liao, X.P.; et al. Characterization of the multi-drug resistance gene cfr in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains isolated from animals and humans in China. Front. Microbiol. 2018, 9, 2925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Fioriti, S.; Coccitto, S.N.; Morroni, G.; Simoni, S.; Cinthi, M.; Magi, G.; Sante, L.D.; Alvarez-Suarez, J.M.; Mingoia, M.; Giovanetti, E.; et al. Detection of a chromosomal truncated cfr gene in a linezolid-susceptible LA-MRSA ST398 isolate of porcine origin, Italy. J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2021, 26, 199–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Monk, I.R.; Foster, T.J. Genetic manipulation of staphylococci-breaking through the barrier. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2012, 2, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. LaMarre, J.M.; Locke, J.B.; Shaw, K.J.; Mankin, A.S. Low fitness cost of the multidrug resistance gene cfr. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2011, 55, 3714–3719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Dubois, D.; Leyssene, D.; Chacornac, J.P.; Kostrzewa, M.; Schmit, P.O.; Talon, R.; Bonnet, R.; Delmas, J. Identification of a variety of Staphylococcus species by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2010, 48, 941–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Hwang, S.M.; Kim, M.S.; Park, K.U.; Song, J.; Kim, E.C. tuf gene sequence analysis has greater discriminatory power than 16S rRNA sequence analysis in identification of clinical Isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2011, 49, 4142–4149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Schauer, B.; Szostak, M.P.; Ehricht, R.; Monecke, S.; Fessler, A.T.; Schwarz, S.; Spergser, J.; Krametter-Frotscher, R.; Loncaric, I. Diversity of methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp. and methicillin-resistant Mammaliicoccus spp. isolated from ruminants and New World camelids. Vet. Microbiol. 2021, 254, 109005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Thomas, J.C.; Vargas, M.R.; Miragaia, M.; Peacock, S.J.; Archer, G.L.; Enright, M.C. Improved multilocus sequence typing scheme for Staphylococcus epidermidis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2007, 45, 616–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Enright, M.C.; Day, N.P.; Davies, C.E.; Peacock, S.J.; Spratt, B.G. Multilocus sequence typing for characterization of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible clones of Staphylococcus aureus. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2000, 38, 1008–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kondo, Y.; Ito, T.; Ma, X.X.; Watanabe, S.; Kreiswirth, B.N.; Etienne, J.; Hiramatsu, K. Combination of multiplex PCRs for staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec type assignment: Rapid identification system for mec, ccr, and major differences in junkyard regions. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2007, 51, 264–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Naccache, S.N.; Callan, K.; Burnham, C.A.; Wallace, M.A.; Westblade, L.F.; Dien Bard, J.; Staphylococcus Ad Hoc Working Group of the CLSI Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Subcommittee. Evaluation of oxacillin and cefoxitin disk fiffusion and microbroth dilution methods for detecting mecA-mediated beta-lactam resistance in contemporary Staphylococcus epidermidis isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2019, 57, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Kehrenberg, C.; Schwarz, S. Distribution of florfenicol resistance genes fexA and cfr among chloramphenicol-resistant Staphylococcus isolates. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006, 50, 1156–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Ruiz-Ripa, L.; Fessler, A.T.; Hanke, D.; Eichhorn, I.; Azcona-Gutierrez, J.M.; Alonso, C.A.; Perez-Moreno, M.O.; Aspiroz, C.; Belles, A.; Schwarz, S.; et al. Mechanisms of linezolid resistance among clinical Staphylococcus spp. in Spain: Spread of methicillin- and linezolid-resistant S. epidermidis ST2. Microb. Drug Resist. 2021, 27, 145–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Dyer, D.W.; Iandolo, J.J. Rapid isolation of DNA from Staphylococcus aureus. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1983, 46, 283–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Inoue, H.; Nojima, H.; Okayama, H. High efficiency transformation of Escherichia coli with plasmids. Gene 1990, 96, 23–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Schenk, S.; Laddaga, R.A. Improved method for electroporation of Staphylococcus aureus. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1992, 73, 133–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Schneewind, O.; Missiakas, D. Genetic manipulation of Staphylococcus aureus. Curr. Protoc. Microbiol. 2014, 32, 9C.3.1–9C.3.19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ikeda-Dantsuji, Y.; Hanaki, H.; Nakae, T.; Takesue, Y.; Tomono, K.; Honda, J.; Yanagihara, K.; Mikamo, H.; Fukuchi, K.; Kaku, M.; et al. Emergence of linezolid-resistant mutants in a susceptible-cell population of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2011, 55, 2466–2468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Antibiotics 12 00359 g001 550
Figure 1. Linezolid population analyses in cfr transformants of RN4220 (A) and SA100 (B) strains. AUC values of RN4220 and SA100 strains expressing the wild-type cfr were 44.12 ± 1.48 and 45.69 ± 0.48, respectively. AUC values of RN4220 and SA100 strains expressing cfrQ148K were 5.95 ± 0.03 and 5.90 ± 0.04, respectively.
Figure 1. Linezolid population analyses in cfr transformants of RN4220 (A) and SA100 (B) strains. AUC values of RN4220 and SA100 strains expressing the wild-type cfr were 44.12 ± 1.48 and 45.69 ± 0.48, respectively. AUC values of RN4220 and SA100 strains expressing cfrQ148K were 5.95 ± 0.03 and 5.90 ± 0.04, respectively.
Antibiotics 12 00359 g001
Antibiotics 12 00359 g002 550
Figure 2. The schematic presentation of cfrQ148K harboring regions in staphylococci strains. The cfrQ148K genes are located on 38-kb plasmids (pSA16, pSA19, pSE10-1, and pSSC2-1) of staphylococci strains. Different colored arrows indicate that different genes with the direction of transcription; red arrows represent cfr genes; yellow arrows represent fexA genes; green arrows represent IS elements; blue arrows represent orf138 genes; gray arrows represent transposon elements. Shaded regions indicate nucleotide sequence identities ranging from 95% to 100%.
Figure 2. The schematic presentation of cfrQ148K harboring regions in staphylococci strains. The cfrQ148K genes are located on 38-kb plasmids (pSA16, pSA19, pSE10-1, and pSSC2-1) of staphylococci strains. Different colored arrows indicate that different genes with the direction of transcription; red arrows represent cfr genes; yellow arrows represent fexA genes; green arrows represent IS elements; blue arrows represent orf138 genes; gray arrows represent transposon elements. Shaded regions indicate nucleotide sequence identities ranging from 95% to 100%.
Antibiotics 12 00359 g002
Table
Table 1. Genetic characteristics and antimicrobial resistant profiles of cfr-positive staphylococci isolated from pig farms.
Table 1. Genetic characteristics and antimicrobial resistant profiles of cfr-positive staphylococci isolated from pig farms.
SpeciesStrain 1OriginMLST-SCCmecMethicillin
Resistance 2		Antimicrobial Resistance 3PositivityMICs
(mg/L) 4		Reference
cfrfexALZD
CoPS S. aureusSA2PigST398-VMRAMP-CEF-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-LZD-SYN-TET-TIA++12[17]
SA3PigST398-VMRAMP-CEF-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-LZD-SYN-TET-TIA++12[4]
SA12Environ.ST398-VMRAMP-CEF-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-LZD-SYN-TET-TIA++16[4]
SA16PigST398MSAMP-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-TET-TIA++2In this study
SA17PigST398MSAMP-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-TET-TIA++2In this study
SA18PigST398MSAMP-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-TET-TIA++2In this study
SA19PigST398MSAMP-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-TET-TIA++2In this study
SA20Environ.ST398MSAMP-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-TET-TIA++2In this study
SA21Environ.ST398MSAMP-CHL-CIP-CLI-ERY-GEN-TET-TIA++2In this study
CoNS S. epidermidisSE7PigST570MSAMP-CHL-CLI-ERY-GEN-LZD-SYN-TET-TIA++48[4]
SE9PigST570MSAMP-CHL-CLI-ERY-GEN-SYN-TIA++2In this study
SE10PigST570MSAMP-CHL-CLI-TIA++4In this study
S. sciuriSSC1Environ.NT-NTMRAMP-CEF-CHL-CLI-SYN-TET-TIA++2In this study
SSC2Environ.ST85-NTMRAMP-CEF-CHL-CLI-TET-TIA++4In this study
S. simulansSSM1Pig-MSCHL-CLI-GEN-TIA++0.75In this study
1 SA2, SA3, SA12, and SE7 strains were cfr-positive linezolid-resistant staphylococci reported in previous studies. 2 MR, methicillin resistance; MS, methicillin susceptibility. 3 AMP, ampicillin; CEF, cefoxitin; CHL, chloramphenicol; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLI, clindamycin; ERY, erythromycin; GEN, gentamicin; LZD, linezolid; SYN, quinupristin/dalfopristin; TET, tetracyclin; and TIA, tiamulin. 4 MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration. CoPS, coagulase-positive staphylococci; CoNS, coagulase-negative staphylococci; NT, non-typeable.
Table
Table 2. Stains and plasmids used in this study.
Table 2. Stains and plasmids used in this study.
Strain or PlasmidGenotypic and Phenotypic CharacteristicsReference
E. coli
 DH5αF-Φ80lacZΔM15 Δ(lacZYA-argF) U169 recA1 endA1 hsdR17(rk−, mk+) phoA supE44 thi-1 gyrA96 relA1 λ-;
Host stain for transformation of plasmid constructs		[28]
S. aureus
 RN42208325-4, laboratory strain; accepts for foreign DNA[29]
 SA12ST398-SCCmec V MRSA strain carrying cfr; LZDr[4]
 SA16ST398 MSSA strain carrying cfrQ148K; LZDsIn this study
 SA100ST398-SCCmec V MRSA; cfr and fexA-negative, LZDsIn this study
Plasmid
 pRB474E. coli-S. aureus shuttle vector; AMPr and CHLr[30]
 pRB474::cfrThe wild-type cfr from SA12 cloned into pRB474In this study
 pRB474::cfrQ148KPoint-mutated cfr from SA16 cloned into pRB474In this study
AMPr, ampicillin resistance; CHLr, chloramphenicol resistance; and LZDs, linezolid susceptibility.
Table
Table 3. PhLOPSA resistance phenotypes of cfr-carrying staphylococci and transformants.
Table 3. PhLOPSA resistance phenotypes of cfr-carrying staphylococci and transformants.
Antimicrobial Agents
(MIC)		MICs
(mg/L) 1
SA12 2SA16 3RN4220RN4220
(pRB474)		RN4220
(pRB474::cfr)		RN4220
(pRB474::cfrQ148K)		SA100SA100
(pRB474)		SA100
(pRB474::cfr)		SA100
(pRB474::cfrQ148K)
Florfenicol (>8)1282568825616882568
Chloramphenicol (≥32)256256163225632163225632
Clindamycin (≥4)2562560.1250.1252560.1250.1250.1252560.125
Linezolid (≥8)16222822282
Tiamulin (>2)1282560.50.51280.5112561
Quinupristin/dalfopristin (>4)>3220.380.3820.380.380.3820.5
Vancomycin (≥16)11.511111.51.51.51.5
Tetracycline (≥16)>256>2560.250.250.250.25>256>256>256>256
1 MICs of Staphylococcus spp. indicate chloramphenicol, clindamycin, linezolid, quinupristin/dalfopristin, vancomycin, and tetracycline in CLSI [31,32], and florfenicol and tiamulin in EUCAST [33]. 2,3 SA12 and SA16 indicate staphylococci strains carrying cfr and cfrQ148K, respectively.
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

Lee, G.Y.; Yang, S.-J. Occurrence of cfr-Positive Linezolid-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Non-aureus Staphylococcal Isolates from Pig Farms. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 359. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020359

AMA Style

Lee GY, Yang S-J. Occurrence of cfr-Positive Linezolid-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Non-aureus Staphylococcal Isolates from Pig Farms. Antibiotics. 2023; 12(2):359. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020359

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Gi Yong, and Soo-Jin Yang. 2023. "Occurrence of cfr-Positive Linezolid-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Non-aureus Staphylococcal Isolates from Pig Farms" Antibiotics 12, no. 2: 359. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020359

APA Style

Lee, G. Y., & Yang, S. -J. (2023). Occurrence of cfr-Positive Linezolid-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus and Non-aureus Staphylococcal Isolates from Pig Farms. Antibiotics, 12(2), 359. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12020359

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