Fecal carriage of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in swine and cattle at slaughter in Switzerland

During the past decade, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae have become a matter of great concern in human medicine. ESBL-producing strains are found in the community, not just in hospital-associated patients, which raises a question about possible reservoirs. Recent studies describe the occurrence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in meat, fish, and raw milk; therefore, the impact of food animals as reservoirs for and disseminators of such strains into the food production chain must be assessed. In this pilot study, fecal samples of 59 pigs and 64 cattle were investigated to determine the occurrence of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in farm animals at slaughter in Switzerland. Presumptive-positive colonies on Brilliance ESBL agar were subjected to identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing including the disc diffusion method and E-test ESBL strips. As many as 15.2% of the porcine and 17.1% of the bovine samples, predominantly from calves, yielded ESBL producers. Of the 21 isolated strains, 20 were Escherichia coli, and one was Citrobacter youngae. PCR analysis revealed that 18 strains including C. youngae produced CTX-M group 1 ESBLs, and three strains carried genes encoding for CTX-M group 9 enzymes. In addition, eight isolates were PCR positive for TEM beta-lactamase, but no bla(SHV) genes were detected. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis showed a high genetic diversity within the strains. The relatively high rates of occurrence of ESBLproducing strains in food animals and the high genetic diversity among these strains indicate that there is an established reservoir of these organisms in farm animals. Further studies are necessary to assess future trends.

Comparison of real-time PCR assays for detection, quantification, and differentiation of campylobacter jejuni and campylobacter coli in broiler neck skin samples

We tested the use of multiplex real-time PCR for detection and quantification of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli on broiler carcass neck skin samples collected during 2008 from slaughterhouses in Switzerland. Results from an established TaqMan assay based on two different targets (hipO and ceuE for C. jejuni and C. coli, respectively) were corroborated with data from a newly developed assay based on a single-nucleotide polymorphism in the fusA gene, which allows differentiation between C. jejuni and C. coli. Both multiplex real-time PCRs were applied simultaneously for direct detection, differentiation, and quantification of Campylobacter from 351 neck skin samples and compared with culture methods. There was good correlation in detection and enumeration between real-time PCR results and quantitative culture, with real-time PCR being more sensitive. Overall, 251 (71.5%) of the samples were PCR positive for Campylobacter, with 211 (60.1%) in the hipO-ceuE assays, 244 (69.5%) in the fusA assay, and 204 (58.1%) of them being positive in both PCR assays. Thus, the fusA assay was similarly sensitive to the enrichment culture (72.4% positive); however, it is faster and allows for quantification. In addition, real-time PCR allowed for species differentiation; roughly 60% of positive samples contained C. jejuni, less than 10% C. coli, and more than 30% contained both species. Real-time PCR proved to be a suitable method for direct detection, quantification, and differentiation of Campylobacter from carcasses, and could permit time-efficient surveillance of these zoonotic agents.

Escherichia coli producing CMY-2 β-lactamase in bovine mastitis milk

An Escherichia coli isolate producing the CMY-2 β-lactamase was found in the milk of a cow with recurrent subclinical mastitis. The isolate was resistant to the antibiotics commonly used for intramammary mastitis treatment, such as penicillins, cephalosporins, β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations, aminoglycosides, tetracyclines, and sulfonamides. This is the first report of a plasmid-mediated AmpC-producing Enterobacteriaceae in bovine milk.

Campylobacter spp., Yersinia enterocolitica, and Salmonella enterica and their simultaneous occurrence in German fattening pig herds and their environment.

Campylobacter spp., Salmonella enterica, and Yersinia enterocolitica are common causes of foodborne infections in humans with pork as a potential source. Monitoring programs at farm level are, to date, only implemented for S. enterica, while epidemiological knowledge of the other two pathogens is still lacking. This study aimed to assess the pathogen load (in the pigs' environment) in fattening pig herds, their simultaneous occurrence, and the occurrence of Campylobacter spp. and Y. enterocolitica in herds in different Salmonella risk categories. In 50 fattening pig herds in northern Germany, four pooled fecal samples and 10 swab samples from the pigs' direct environment (pen walls, nipple drinkers), indirect environment (hallways, drive boards), and flies and rodent droppings were collected from each herd and submitted for cultural examination. Campylobacter spp. were detected in 38.1% of fecal, 32.7% of direct environment, 5.3% of indirect environment, and 4.6% of flies/pests samples collected, and Y. enterocolitica in 17.1, 8.1, 1.2, and 3.1% and S. enterica in 11.2, 7.7, 4.1, and 1.5%, respectively. For Campylobacter spp., Y. enterocolitica, and S. enterica, 80, 48, and 32% of herds were positive, respectively; 22 herds were positive for both Campylobacter spp. and Y. enterocolitica, 12 for Campylobacter spp. and S. enterica, and 7 for Y. enterocolitica and S. enterica. There was no significant association between the pathogens at herd level. Campylobacter spp. and Y. enterocolitica were found more often in samples from the low Salmonella risk category (odds ratio, 0.51; confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.73, and 0.3, 0.17 to 0.57), and this was also the case for Y. enterocolitica at herd level (odds ratio, 0.08; confidence interval, 0.02 to 0.3). This study provides evidence that the pigs' environment should be accounted for when implementing control measures on farms against Campylobacter spp. and Y. enterocolitica. An extrapolation from the current Salmonella monitoring to the other two pathogens does not seem feasible.

Antibiotic resistance and phylogenetic characterization of Acinetobacter baumannii strains isolated from commercial raw meat in Switzerland.

The spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria through food has become a major public health concern because some important human pathogens may be transferred via the food chain. Acinetobacter baumannii is one of the most life-threatening gram-negative pathogens; multidrug-resistant (MDR) clones of A. baumannii are spreading worldwide, causing outbreaks in hospitals. However, the role of raw meat as a reservoir of A. baumannii remains unexplored. In this study, we describe for the first time the antibiotic susceptibility and fingerprint (repetitive extragenic palindromic PCR [rep-PCR] profile and sequence types [STs]) of A. baumannii strains found in raw meat retailed in Switzerland. Our results indicate that A. baumannii was present in 62 (25.0%) of 248 (CI 95%: 19.7 to 30.9%) meat samples analyzed between November 2012 and May 2013, with those derived from poultry being the most contaminated (48.0% [CI 95%: 37.8 to 58.3%]). Thirty-nine strains were further tested for antibiotic susceptibility and clonality. Strains were frequently not susceptible (intermediate and/or resistant) to third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins for human use (i.e., ceftriaxone [65%], cefotaxime [32%], ceftazidime [5%], and cefepime [2.5%]). Resistance to piperacillin-tazobactam, ciprofloxacin, colistin, and tetracycline was sporadically observed (2.5, 2.5, 5, and 5%, respectively), whereas resistance to carbapenems was not found. The strains were genetically very diverse from each other and belonged to 29 different STs, forming 12 singletons and 6 clonal complexes (CCs), of which 3 were new (CC277, CC360, and CC347). RepPCR analysis further distinguished some strains of the same ST. Moreover, some A. baumannii strains from meat belonged to the clonal complexes CC32 and CC79, similar to the MDR isolates responsible for human infections. In conclusion, our findings suggest that raw meat represents a reservoir of MDR A. baumannii and may serve as a vector for the spread of these pathogens into both community and hospital settings.

The WTO and Food Security: What’s Wrong with the Rules?

The WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) is the predominant multilateral legal framework governing agricultural trade. The objective of the AoA is to liberalise trade in agriculture through reductions in tariffs, domestic support and export subsidies. The AoA has not, however, ‘levelled the playing field’ and has not resulted in the equitable distribution of food, particularly for the poorer developing countries. On the other hand, support for small farmers does not ensure food security for the poor. While food security has no simple solutions such as “free trade is good for you”, reform proposals for trade rules which only address agricultural policy instruments fail to account for consumer and other interests: neither tariff reductions and subsidy disciplines, nor safeguards and other measures of producer protection can automatically increase food security. Rather, what is needed is the full and proper implementation of a number of commitments which the international community has already entered into in various human rights treaties, but which even the envisaged results of the now failed Doha Round negotiations could not ensure without revisiting relevant multilateral trade and investment rules.

Foreign Direct Investment in Agriculture: Land Grab or Food Security Improvement?

“Large-scale acquisition of land by foreign investors” is the correct term for a process where the verdict of guilt is often quicker than the examination. But is there something really new about land grab except in its extent? In comparison with colonial and post-colonial plantation operations, should foreign investors today behave differently? We generally accept coffee and banana exports as pro-growth and pro-development, just as for cars, beef and insurance. What then is wrong with an investment contract allowing the holder to buy a farm and to export wheat to Saudi Arabia, or soybeans and maize as cattle feed to Korea, or to plant and process sugar cane and palm oil into ethanol for Europe and China? Assuming their land acquisition was legal, should foreigners respect more than investment contracts and national legislation? And why would they not take advantage of the legal protection offered by international investment law and treaties, not to speak of concessional finance, infrastructure and technical cooperation by a development bank, or the tax holidays offered by the host state? Remember Milton Friedman’s often-quoted quip: “The business of business is business!” And why would the governments signing those contracts not know whether and which foreign investment projects are best for their country, and how to attract them? This chapter tries to show that land grab, where it occurs, is not only yet another symptom of regulatory failures at the national level and a lack of corporate social responsibility by certain private actors. National governance is clearly the most important factor. Nonetheless, I submit that there is an international dimension involving investor home states in various capacities. The implication is that land grab is not solely a question whether a particular investment contract is legal or not. This chapter deals with legal issues which seem to have largely escaped the attention of both human rights lawyers and, especially, of investment lawyers. I address this fragmentation between different legal disciplines, rules, and policies, by asking two basic questions: (i) Do governments and parliaments in investor home countries have any responsibility in respect of the behaviour of their investors abroad? (ii) What should they and international regulators do, if anything?

Human and ecological risk assessment of a crop protection chemical: a case study with the azole fungicide epoxiconazole.

Conventional risk assessments for crop protection chemicals compare the potential for causing toxicity (hazard identification) to anticipated exposure. New regulatory approaches have been proposed that would exclude exposure assessment and just focus on hazard identification based on endocrine disruption. This review comprises a critical analysis of hazard, focusing on the relative sensitivity of endocrine and non-endocrine endpoints, using a class of crop protection chemicals, the azole fungicides. These were selected because they are widely used on important crops (e.g. grains) and thereby can contact target and non-target plants and enter the food chain of humans and wildlife. Inhibition of lanosterol 14α-demethylase (CYP51) mediates the antifungal effect. Inhibition of other CYPs, such as aromatase (CYP19), can lead to numerous toxicological effects, which are also evident from high dose human exposures to therapeutic azoles. Because of its widespread use and substantial database, epoxiconazole was selected as a representative azole fungicide. Our critical analysis concluded that anticipated human exposure to epoxiconazole would yield a margin of safety of at least three orders of magnitude for reproductive effects observed in laboratory rodent studies that are postulated to be endocrine-driven (i.e. fetal resorptions). The most sensitive ecological species is the aquatic plant Lemna (duckweed), for which the margin of safety is less protective than for human health. For humans and wildlife, endocrine disruption is not the most sensitive endpoint. It is concluded that conventional risk assessment, considering anticipated exposure levels, will be protective of both human and ecological health. Although the toxic mechanisms of other azole compounds may be similar, large differences in potency will require a case-by-case risk assessment.

The story of Community preference for food security

"Préférence communautaire" is an in-built notion of the CAP since its inception with the Treaty of Rome (1957). Its’ simple objective laid down at the Stresa Conference in 1958 is to prefer community produce over imports wherever possible, while at the same time promoting agricultural exports and FDI (“vocation exportatrice de l’Europe”). Does this contrast or correlate with the notion of “food sovereignty” which originated in 1996 as a notion of small farmer self-sufficiency (Via Campesina), and which now has found its way into the official EC discourse? Recent CAP reforms indeed seem to continue banking on border protection and on the occasional export subsidy. Nonetheless, coming together with claims to mitigate climate change, “food sovereignty” à la CAP fails to acknowledge efficiency losses at home and negative spillover effects on the right to food of food exporting developing countries. This chapter asks whether new non-tariff and domestic support measures are just new wine in the old cask of fortress Europe, together with the FDI promotion instruments of the FED and others. Might the increasing dynamics and new challenges of agricultural trade and investment lead to lower market and production shares for European farms? It concludes that in the medium term the WTO Green Box has the only legal and effective tools to promote EU agriculture and food.