1. Introduction
Bovine mastitis (BM) is one of the major concerns in dairy industry, causing considerable economic and financial losses worldwide [
1]. BM is the inflammation of mammary gland caused mainly by bacteria, fungi, some microscopic algal species, viruses, and occasionally by physical trauma [
2]. BM’s pathogenic agents consist of different of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, and are classified as contagious (e.g.,
Staphylococcus aureus,
Streptococcus agalactiae,
Mycoplasma spp.,
Corynebacterium bovis) or environmental (e.g.,
Escherichia coli,
Enterococcus spp., coagulase-negative
Staphylococcus,
Streptococcus uberis) [
1,
2]. Contagious pathogens live in the cow’s udder and teat skin and grow and colonize at the teat canal. Mastitis caused by contagious pathogens are often characterized by sub-clinical intramammary infections with no visible signs, increased somatic cell count and can be transmitted from cow-to-cow, particularly during milking. On the other hand, environmental mastitis pathogens are found in the cow’s environment and can enter the teat during milking or when the cow’s inherent or natural immunity becomes weak. Environmental pathogens are opportunistic microorganisms that cause clinical mastitis which can be easily noticed and detected, as characterized by evident swelling of the teat and with occasional pus included in the milk [
3,
4]. And among these pathogenic agents, the most related to both clinical and sub-clinical mastitis is
S. aureus [
5] which has also been noted to cause several human infections and, in turn, raises the concern of cross-infection between humans and animals through contaminated food and other factors. Although the risk of getting MRSA through pasteurized milk consumption is low, raw milk and milk products may still pose a threat to the public when exposed to viable bacteria [
5,
6].
The general measures applied to reduce infection and prevent spread of mastitis include improving sanitation (e.g., enhanced milking hygiene), teat disinfection after milking, and maintenance of milking machines [
1,
2]. However, these protocols can only reduce the degree of contamination and do not necessarily eliminate the existing infection. Treatment of active mastitis still relies greatly on antibiotics [
5,
6]. The continuous and extensive use of different antibiotics causes some bacterial strains like
S. aureus to become resistant against antimicrobial agents, particularly on β-lactams. Hence, the prevalence and rise of
S. aureus strains, coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) species, and other bacterial strains which have exhibited resistance to different antibiotics such as, penicillin, clindamycin, tetracycline, methicillin, mupirocin, and vancomycin over the years [
6,
7,
8], particularly in conventional farms. Consequently, organic farming has been introduced to combat the emergence of antibiotic-resistant mastitis pathogens. Organic livestock production practices ban the use of non-therapeutic antibiotics and growth promoters. Only when animal safety is endangered that antibiotics use is allowed, which is very seldom [
9]. However, there are still some instances where these antibiotic-resistant microorganisms are found in organic farms as well [
10]. In Korea, sales of antibiotics used in livestock doubled from 55 tons in 2011 to 97 tons in 2020 according to the 2020 National Antibiotics Use and Resistance and Monitoring, with the resistance level of livestock-isolated
S. aureus for penicillin, ampicillin, and oxacillin to be 69.4%, 57.7%, and 2.3%, respectively [
11].
Consumers are becoming more health-conscious and are leaning towards “organic” or naturally sourced food commodities. Increased awareness and concern for food safety and health issues drive the consumers to choose high quality products often labeled as organic, antibiotic-free, and animal welfare-approved milk products. Organic milk sales in Korea increased significantly from 5 billion won in 2008 to 104 billion won in 2020 [
12]. With the increasing demand for organic livestock products market, there is a need to check the safety of the said products.
As far as the authors know, only a few studies had been conducted that focus on the comparative antimicrobial resistance of bacterial isolates from conventional and organic dairy farms, and most of the milk samples used in these studies were taken from bulk tank milk samples, especially in South Korea. In this manuscript we tried to isolate S. aureus from pooled milk samples of cattle already infected with mastitis (clinical and sub-clinical) from conventional and organic farms in South Korea and checked for presence for MRSA and MuRSA, as well as their corresponding antimicrobial susceptibility.
4. Discussion
In this study, higher counts of suspected
S. aureus were isolated from BM milk in organic farms (89 colonies) than from the conventional farm (74 colonies) samples. Tikofsky et al. [
9] also found more
S. aureus isolated from milk samples from organic farms (144) than conventional farms (117) in US. Roesch et al. [
17] observed a similar trend with more
S. aureus and other mastitis pathogens isolated from organic farms (93) than conventional farms (65) in Switzerland. Sato et al. [
18] also discovered more
S. aureus from organic farms than conventional farms in Wisconsin (73 and 64, respectively). However, dairy herds in Denmark showed an opposite trend with slightly higher
S. aureus isolate count in conventional farms than organic farms at 77 and 75, correspondingly [
18]. The higher
S. aureus isolate count found in organic farms could be due to the fact these farms have very limited use of antibiotics, which is only for emergency cases when the cattle’s life is in danger [
9,
10]. Use of non-therapeutic antibiotics and growth promoters are prohibited in organic farms, except for critical situations wherein animal safety is compromised that antibiotics use is allowed [
9,
10,
19]. Even so, CoPS isolates were present in more than half of the conventional farm samples (4 out of 6) compared to organic farm samples (3 out of 7). This result was confirmed by the M-PCR amplification and shown through the agarose gel electrophoresis wherein some the organic farm milk isolates did not contain the
nuc gene marker of
S. aureus but were positive for the coagulase activity. It is also because of the restricted use of antimicrobials in organic farms that more varied species of microorganisms thrive in organic farms [
9,
17,
18,
19].
For antimicrobial susceptibility testing, conventional CoPS isolates were found to be significantly more resistant against ampicillin, oxacillin, erythromycin, and tetracycline than the organic CoPS isolates. Similar observations were noted in a study on MRSA from organic and conventional herds in Germany and their corresponding antimicrobial resistance wherein conventional farm isolates exhibited higher resistance against the penicillin (100%), cefoxitin (100%), tetracycline (97.2%), erythromycin (44.4%), gentamicin (11.1%), and chloramphenicol (8.3%) [
20]. Ray et al. [
21] checked the antimicrobial susceptibility of
Salmonella from milk samples and discovered that conventional farm isolates were more resistant against streptomycin and sulfamethoxazole.
Antibiotic use had long been linked to the subsequent rise of antimicrobial resistance, in which the resistance strengthens or compounds with each exposure to the antimicrobial substance due to selective pressure [
22,
23,
24]. The most widely used antimicrobials for the treatment of mastitis are β-lactam compounds such as ampicillin and oxacillin [
2,
25,
26] and Korea is no exception to this practice [
11]. β-lactams function as an antimicrobial agent by inactivating the enzymes called penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs) through covalent bonding. PBPs are critical to the cell cycle-related, morphogenetic synthesis of cell wall peptidoglycan. Accordingly, β-lactams can effectively inhibit the transpeptidation of PBPs, disturb the cross-linking of the bacterial peptidoglycan and, in turn, result to weakening of the cell wall, freeing the cytoplasmic contents, and eventual cell death when exposed to an appropriate concentration [
27,
28,
29,
30]. However, this antimicrobial activity can be bypassed due to the expression of a unique PBP, known as PBP2a, which has low affinity for all β-lactam antibiotics and can be found in MRSA [
26,
29,
30]. PBP2a does not easily attach to the β-lactams and cannot be inactivated. And since it has similar structural motifs as the innate PBPs 1-4 in
S. aureus, it can keep transpeptidation, support the cross-linking of peptidoglycan and allow the survival of MRSA [
29,
30]. On the other hand, erythromycin and tetracycline were not allowed for consumption in cattle livestock industry in Korea but similar compounds as erythromycin (spiramycin and tylosin, which belonged to macrolides antibiotics), and tetracycline (chlortetracycline and oxytetracycline) were used instead [
11]. The topmost sold antibiotic classes for use in livestock and fisheries in Korea are the following: β-lactams > tetracyclines > phenicols > macrolides > sulfonamides > aminoglycosides [
11].
Although resistance levels were less than 50% for most antimicrobials, the implication of multidrug resistance was evident in both types of farm isolates. A considerably higher count of multi-drug resistant CoPS isolates was found in conventional farms than in organic farm samples. Microbial isolates resistant to three or more classes of antimicrobials were classified as “multidrug-resistant” [
31]. This could also be attributed to the regular exposure of infected cattle in conventional farms to antibiotics as one of their treatment methods for BM. However, the exposure parameters like dose, administration route, and dose frequency, were not specified as antibiotic usage was difficult to monitor and quantify in especially in conventional farms [
18]. Grobbel et al. [
31] investigated and compared the antimicrobial resistance of
Escherichia coli from organic and conventional poultry farms in Germany where they found that conventional farm isolates were resistant to three or more antibiotics. Meissner et al. [
10], on the other hand, noted an almost similar percentage of multidrug-resistant isolates of extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing
E. coli from conventional and organic pig fattening farms.
The isolates from organic farms 2 and 3 (OF2 and OF3) that did not contain the
nuc gene could belong to other CoPS species but further tests are needed to done to properly identify them. Aside from
S. aureus, the other Staphylococcus spp. that exhibit coagulase activity are the following:
S. intermedius,
S. schleiferi subsp.
coagulans,
S. hyicus,
S. lutrae,
S. delhini, and
S. pseudintermedius, which also demonstrate antibiotic resistance and biofilm formation [
32,
33]. CoPS are opportunistic pathogens, meaning they can easily adapt accordingly to their surroundings or hosts, causing a lot of potent virulence factors [
32].
Two isolates from conventional farm 2 were confirmed to have the
mecA gene which is a known determining factors of methicillin resistance [
7,
16]. MRSA contains the
mecA gene which is responsible for encoding PBP 2a [
27,
29]. This result was further confirmed with the antimicrobial resistance. On the other hand, the
mupA gene, which is a determinant of mupirocin resistance [
7], was not detected in any of the conventional and organic farm isolates. Mupirocin is an antibiotic that could effectively inhibit bacterial synthesis and has high antimicrobial activity against
S. aureus [
8,
34]. Mupirocin acts as an antimicrobial by binding to the enzyme isoleucyl-transfer RNA synthetase preventing isoleucine incorporation during bacterial protein synthesis, which makes it effective against MRSA and some methicillin-resistant CoNS [
7,
8,
34].
The presence of mupirocin-resistant isolate was investigated to check for any possibility of inter-host-adapted (human-to-cattle and vice versa) variants of
S. aureus. Different serovars of host-adapted
S. aureus could develop through host-switching and gene acquisition, loss and diversification [
5]. Nonetheless, this non-detection of
mupA gene in any of the isolates could imply that mupirocin and other mupirocin-related compounds could still be effective against
S. aureus that would be isolated from conventional and organic dairy farms in South Korea.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, H.J.P., T.A.N., and I.S.N.; methodology, H.J.P. and T.A.N.; validation, T.A.N., H.J.P., S.H.B. and I.S.N.; formal analysis, H.J.P., T.A.N., S.J.K.; investigation, H.J.P., T.A.N., S.J.K.; resources, S.H.B. and I.S.N.; data curation, H.J.P. and T.A.N.; writing—original draft preparation, H.J.P. and T.A.N.; writing—review and editing, T.A.N.; visualization, T.A.N.; supervision, I.S.N. and S.H.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Figure 1.
Antibiotic resistance (%) of S. aureus isolated from bovine mastitis (BM) milk in conventional and organic dairy farms (n = number of coagulase-positive Staphylococcus isolates tested). Antimicrobial substances used were ampicillin (AMP), oxacillin (OX), gentamicin (CN), teicoplanin (TEC), vancomycin (VA), erythromycin (E), chloramphenicol (C), ciprofloxacin (CIP), and tetracycline (TE). Asterisk (*) denoting significant difference (p < 0.05) between conventional and organic farm samples.
Figure 1.
Antibiotic resistance (%) of S. aureus isolated from bovine mastitis (BM) milk in conventional and organic dairy farms (n = number of coagulase-positive Staphylococcus isolates tested). Antimicrobial substances used were ampicillin (AMP), oxacillin (OX), gentamicin (CN), teicoplanin (TEC), vancomycin (VA), erythromycin (E), chloramphenicol (C), ciprofloxacin (CIP), and tetracycline (TE). Asterisk (*) denoting significant difference (p < 0.05) between conventional and organic farm samples.
Figure 2.
Percent isolate (%) classification of coagulase-positive Staphylococcus (CoPS) isolates from bovine mastitis milk in conventional and organic dairy farms according to the number of antimicrobial substances resistant against (n = number of CoPS isolates tested). Antimcrobial agents tested were ampicillin, oxacillin, gentamicin, teicoplanin, vancomycin, erythromycin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, and tetracycline. Asterisk (*) denoting significant difference (p < 0.05) between conventional and organic farm samples.
Figure 2.
Percent isolate (%) classification of coagulase-positive Staphylococcus (CoPS) isolates from bovine mastitis milk in conventional and organic dairy farms according to the number of antimicrobial substances resistant against (n = number of CoPS isolates tested). Antimcrobial agents tested were ampicillin, oxacillin, gentamicin, teicoplanin, vancomycin, erythromycin, chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, and tetracycline. Asterisk (*) denoting significant difference (p < 0.05) between conventional and organic farm samples.
Figure 3.
Agarose gel visualization of M-PCR detecting mecA, mupA, and nuc genes in bovine mastitis milk S. aureus isolates from organic farms (Lanes 2-18; OF1, OF2, OF3 are organic farms 1, 2, and 3, respectively) with negative template control (Lane 19; no dna template added), and nuc gene control Staphylococcus aureus (Lane 1).
Figure 3.
Agarose gel visualization of M-PCR detecting mecA, mupA, and nuc genes in bovine mastitis milk S. aureus isolates from organic farms (Lanes 2-18; OF1, OF2, OF3 are organic farms 1, 2, and 3, respectively) with negative template control (Lane 19; no dna template added), and nuc gene control Staphylococcus aureus (Lane 1).
Figure 4.
Agarose gel visualization of M-PCR detecting mecA, mupA, and nuc genes in bovine mastitis milk S. aureus isolates from conventional farms (Lanes 2-12; CF1, CF2, CF3, CF4 are conventional farms 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively) with negative template control (Lane 13; no dna template added), and nuc gene control Staphylococcus aureus (Lane 1).
Figure 4.
Agarose gel visualization of M-PCR detecting mecA, mupA, and nuc genes in bovine mastitis milk S. aureus isolates from conventional farms (Lanes 2-12; CF1, CF2, CF3, CF4 are conventional farms 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively) with negative template control (Lane 13; no dna template added), and nuc gene control Staphylococcus aureus (Lane 1).
Table 1.
Class, concentrations, and inhibition zones of antibiotics that were used in this study.
Table 1.
Class, concentrations, and inhibition zones of antibiotics that were used in this study.
Compound Class |
Antibiotic Name |
Code |
Disc concentration (ug) |
Zone diameter (mm) |
R†
|
I†
|
S†
|
β-lactams |
Ampicillin |
AMP |
10 |
15 |
16-21 |
22 |
Oxacillin |
OX |
10 |
17 |
18-24 |
25 |
Aminoglycosides |
Gentamicin |
CN |
10 |
18 |
19-27 |
28 |
Glycopeptides |
Teicoplanin |
TEC |
30 |
14 |
15-21 |
22 |
|
Vancomycin |
VA |
30 |
16 |
17-21 |
22 |
Macrolides |
Erythromycin |
E |
15 |
21 |
22-30 |
31 |
Phenicols |
Chloramphenicol |
C |
10 |
18 |
19-26 |
27 |
Quinolones |
Ciprofloxacin |
CIP |
5 |
21 |
22-30 |
31 |
Tetracyclines |
Tetracycline |
TE |
30 |
23 |
24-30 |
31 |
Table 2.
Primers used in PCR amplification of S. aureus isolates from bovine mastitis milk in conventional and organic farms.
Table 2.
Primers used in PCR amplification of S. aureus isolates from bovine mastitis milk in conventional and organic farms.
Target gene |
Primer |
Oligonucleotide Sequence (5' - 3') |
Amplicon Size (bp) |
mecA |
mecA 1 |
GTAGAAATGACTGAACGTCCGATAA |
310 |
|
mecA 2 |
CCAATTCCACATTGTTTCGGTCTAA |
|
nuc |
nuc 1 |
GCGATTGATGGTGATACGGTT |
279 |
|
nuc 2 |
AGCCAAGCCTTGACGAACTAAAGC |
|
mupA |
mupA 1 |
TATATTATGCGATGGAAGGTTGG |
457 |
|
mupA 2 |
AATAAAATCAGCTGGAAAGTGTTG |
|
Table 3.
Antimicrobial resistance (number and % of resistant isolate) of coagulase-positive Staphylococcus from conventional and organic farms.
Table 3.
Antimicrobial resistance (number and % of resistant isolate) of coagulase-positive Staphylococcus from conventional and organic farms.
Antibiotic Name |
Code |
Conventional Farm (n=11) |
Organic Farm (n=17) |
Total (n=28) |
Number |
% |
Number |
% |
Number |
% |
Ampicillin |
AMP |
9 |
81.8 |
2 |
11.8 |
11 |
39.3 |
Oxacillin |
OX |
4 |
36.4 |
0 |
0.0 |
4 |
14.3 |
Gentamicin |
CN |
4 |
36.4 |
9 |
52.9 |
13 |
46.4 |
Teicoplanin |
TEC |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
Vancomycin |
VA |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
Erythromycin |
E |
5 |
45.5 |
1 |
5.9 |
6 |
21.4 |
Chloramphenicol |
C |
2 |
18.2 |
2 |
11.8 |
4 |
14.3 |
Ciprofloxacin |
CIP |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
0 |
0.0 |
Tetracycline |
TE |
9 |
81.8 |
4 |
23.5 |
13 |
46.4 |