Staphylococcus aureus, a Gram-positive bacterium, poses a significant threat to public health and food safety due to its virulence and its ability to develop antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Moreover, ...S. aureus can form biofilms in food environments, making it difficult to eradicate and pose a major challenge in foodborne illness prevention. The study aimed to investigate the biofilm-forming capabilities and AMR profiles of 107 S. aureus isolates derived from milk, chicken meat, and chicken eggs. Further, the study compared the biofilm formation tendencies between multi-drug resistant (MDR) and non-MDR S. aureus isolates. Additionally, the research explored the antibacterial and anti-biofilm properties of Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus casei, focusing on their aggregation and co-aggregation effects with S. aureus. Around 70.10% of S. aureus isolates were found to be resistant to at least three antibiotic classes. The biofilm assay revealed that 16.82% isolates were strong biofilm formers. The MDR isolates displayed a strong biofilm-forming ability (i.e., 18.67%) and a higher prevalence of biofilm-associated genes i.e., icaA (53.33%) and icaD (44.0%) compared to non-MDR isolates. The LAB strain, L. rhamnosus exhibited a 29.06 mm mean antibacterial inhibition zone, an average reduction of 48.19% in biofilm growth, 55.46% auto-aggregation, and 40.61% co-aggregation with S. aureus. Similarly, L. casei demonstrated a 21.80 mm mean antibacterial inhibition zone, an average reduction of 31.56% in biofilm growth, 45.23% auto-aggregation, and 36.81% co-aggregation with S. aureus isolates. This study provides valuable insights into the biofilm formation of MDR S. aureus and underscores the potential of L. rhamnosus and L. casei as bio-control agents. These findings highlight the necessity for additional research into the mechanisms through which LAB strains inhibit pathogenic biofilms and their potential applications in enhancing food safety.
Out of all emerging infectious diseases, approximately 75% are of zoonotic origin, with their source often traced back to animals. The emergence of zoonoses is driven by a complex interplay between ...anthropogenic, genetic, ecological, socioeconomic, and climatic factors. This intricate web of influences poses significant challenges for the prediction and prevention of zoonotic outbreaks. Effective coordination and collaboration among the animal, human, and environmental health sectors are essential for proactively addressing major zoonotic diseases. Despite advancements in surveillance and diagnostic practices, the emergence of zoonoses continues to be a pressing global concern. Therefore, prioritizing zoonotic disease surveillance is of paramount importance as part of a comprehensive disease prevention and containment strategy. Furthermore, evaluating existing surveillance systems provides insights into the challenges faced, which can be mitigated through implementation of One Health principles involving relevant stakeholders. To initiate multisectoral partnerships, it is crucial to identify the priorities and core themes of surveillance systems with equitable inputs from various sectors. Strengthening surveillance, promoting data sharing, enhancing laboratory testing capabilities, and fostering joint outbreak responses in both the human and animal health sectors will establish the necessary infrastructure to effectively prevent, predict, detect, and respond to emerging health threats, thereby reinforcing global health security. This review assesses existing surveillance approaches by offering an overview of global agencies engaged in monitoring zoonoses and outlines the essential components required at the human-animal-environment interface for designing comprehensive surveillance networks. Additionally, it discusses the key steps necessary for executing effective zoonotic disease surveillance through a One Health approach, while highlighting the key challenges encountered in establishing such a robust surveillance system.Out of all emerging infectious diseases, approximately 75% are of zoonotic origin, with their source often traced back to animals. The emergence of zoonoses is driven by a complex interplay between anthropogenic, genetic, ecological, socioeconomic, and climatic factors. This intricate web of influences poses significant challenges for the prediction and prevention of zoonotic outbreaks. Effective coordination and collaboration among the animal, human, and environmental health sectors are essential for proactively addressing major zoonotic diseases. Despite advancements in surveillance and diagnostic practices, the emergence of zoonoses continues to be a pressing global concern. Therefore, prioritizing zoonotic disease surveillance is of paramount importance as part of a comprehensive disease prevention and containment strategy. Furthermore, evaluating existing surveillance systems provides insights into the challenges faced, which can be mitigated through implementation of One Health principles involving relevant stakeholders. To initiate multisectoral partnerships, it is crucial to identify the priorities and core themes of surveillance systems with equitable inputs from various sectors. Strengthening surveillance, promoting data sharing, enhancing laboratory testing capabilities, and fostering joint outbreak responses in both the human and animal health sectors will establish the necessary infrastructure to effectively prevent, predict, detect, and respond to emerging health threats, thereby reinforcing global health security. This review assesses existing surveillance approaches by offering an overview of global agencies engaged in monitoring zoonoses and outlines the essential components required at the human-animal-environment interface for designing comprehensive surveillance networks. Additionally, it discusses the key steps necessary for executing effective zoonotic disease surveillance through a One Health approach, while highlighting the key challenges encountered in establishing such a robust surveillance system.
Biofilms pose a serious public health hazard with a significant economic impact on the food industry. The present scoping review is designed to analyse the literature published during 2001–2020 on ...biofilm formation of microbes, their detection methods, and association with antimicrobial resistance (if any). The peer‐reviewed articles retrieved from 04 electronic databases were assessed using PRISMA‐ScR guidelines. From the 978 preliminary search results, a total of 88 publications were included in the study. On analysis, the commonly isolated pathogens were Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella spp., Escherichia coli, Bacillus spp., Vibrio spp., Campylobacter jejuni and Clostridium perfringens. The biofilm‐forming ability of microbes was found to be influenced by various factors such as attachment surfaces, temperature, presence of other species, nutrient availability etc. A total of 18 studies characterized the biofilm‐forming genes, particularly for S. aureus, Salmonella spp., and E. coli. In most studies, polystyrene plate and/or stainless‐steel coupons were used for biofilm formation, and the detection was carried out by crystal violet assays and/or by plate counting method. The strain‐specific significant differences in biofilm formation were observed in many studies, and few studies carried out analysis of multi‐species biofilms. The association between biofilm formation and antimicrobial resistance was not clearly defined. Further, viable but non‐culturable form of the foodborne pathogens is posing an unseen (by conventional cultivation techniques) but potent threat to the food safety. The present review recommends the need for carrying out systematic surveys and risk analysis of biofilms in food chain to highlight the evidence‐based public health concerns, especially in regions where microbiological food hazards are quite prevalent.
The present study assessed the prevalence, virulence characteristics, antimicrobial resistance and biofilm-forming ability of E. coli and S. aureus recovered from egg samples in Ludhiana, Punjab. A ...total of 393 samples from hatcheries (n = 238), retail shops (n = 94), and households (n = 61) were collected. The prevalence of E. coli was observed as 11.70% and 9.16% for S. aureus. A total of 41.30% of E. coli isolates were positive for aggR gene and 52.17% were for fimA gene; while 36.11% of the S. aureus isolates were positive for coa gene. A high proportion of E. coli (76.10%) and S. aureus (69.44%) isolates were resistant toward ≥3 tested antibiotic classes. A total of 39.13% of E. coli isolates were moderate biofilm former, whereas the majority of the S. aureus (41.67%) were weak biofilm former. No significant difference regarding biofilm formation was observed between MDR and non-MDR isolates of E. coli and S. aureus. Biofilm genes viz., fimC and crl were reported in 43.47% and 80.43% of E. coli isolates, respectively; while icaA and icaD genes were reported in 58.34% and 47.22% of S. aureus isolates, respectively. A strong metabolic activity among 52.17% of E. coli and 41.66% of S. aureus isolates was observed using XTT assay. The present study highlights the need for applied food safety measures across the egg production chain of the region to prevent the development of MDR strains and biofilms.
Abstract The study investigates the efficacy of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains ( Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus casei ) in combating Escherichia coli biofilms by determining ...antibacterial, anti‐biofilm activity, auto‐aggregation, and co‐aggregation assay. The study included 115 E. coli isolates from milk ( n = 36), chicken meat ( n = 33), and chicken eggs ( n = 46). Among 115 E. coli isolates, 22.61% were strong biofilm formers. The LAB strain, L. rhamnosus exhibited a 28.47 mm mean antibacterial inhibition zone, an average reduction of 51.22% in biofilm growth, 55.46% auto‐aggregation, and 41.57% co‐aggregation with E. coli . Similarly, L. casei demonstrated a 21.55 mm mean antibacterial inhibition zone, an average reduction of 36.74% in biofilm growth, 45.23% auto‐aggregation, and 38.74% co‐aggregation with E. coli isolates. Both strains individually and in combination demonstrate substantial reductions in biofilm growth, with L. rhamnosus observed to be more effective than L. casei. Scanning electron microscopy provides valuable insights into the structural aspects of the probiotic impact on diminishing E. coli biofilm. Probiotics' ability to auto‐aggregate and co‐aggregate with pathogenic strains serves as an initial screening method for identifying suitable probiotic bacteria. In conclusion, the results underscore the efficacy of specific LAB strains in combating E. coli biofilm formation. This study provides a basis for future investigations into LAB's capacity to mitigate biofilm‐related hurdles and strengthen microbial management protocols within food processing settings or relevant food substrates.
To summarize, bacterial biofilm plays a key role in antimicrobial resistance development. ...the choice of antimicrobials must be significant and effective, as some of them may act as agonists and ...actually enhance the biofilm activity, while others may disrupt it. Bacteriophages Bacteriocins Quorum-sensing inhibitors such as paraoxonases (which destroy quorum-sensing signal molecules) Essential oils such as cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, citral, or thymol (which reduce bacterial biofilms from various surfaces) Biosurfactants such as lichenysin (can be added to industrial detergents) Enzymatic disruptions (use of detergents containing proteases, glycosidases, or DNase) Steel surface modification (by coating with silver, copper, or zinc nanoparticles, or by using the novel antibiofilm polymers with lysozyme or bacteriocins) High hydrostatic pressure Non-thermal plasma to reduce and eliminate pathogens from food environments.5 A "hurdle approach" combines two or more techniques for biofilm control and could prove more effective for tackling biofilm growth in a food processing environment. A better understanding of the characteristics of biofilm formation by microorganisms in the food processing chain is essential for the prevention and control of contamination in food processing environments. ...the development of standard cleaning and disinfection programs, hygienic design for equipment and utensils to prevent and control biofilm, and the subsequent monitoring of their effectiveness should be given priority.
PDF