Wild Birds as Drivers of <i>Salmonella</i> Braenderup and Multidrug Resistant Bacteria in Wetlands of Northern Italy

Smoglica, Camilla; Graziosi, Giulia; De Angelis, Damiano; Lupini, Caterina; Festino, Annarita; Catelli, Elena; Vergara, Alberto; Di Francesco, Cristina Esmeralda

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/6462849

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases

On this page

Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusions Data Availability Ethical Approval Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2024 | Article ID 6462849 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/6462849

Wild Birds as Drivers of Salmonella Braenderup and Multidrug Resistant Bacteria in Wetlands of Northern Italy

Camilla Smoglica,¹Giulia Graziosi,²Damiano De Angelis,¹Caterina Lupini,²Annarita Festino,¹Elena Catelli,²Alberto Vergara,¹and Cristina Esmeralda Di Francesco¹

Academic Editor: Long-Xian Zhang

Received11 Jul 2023

Revised27 Nov 2023

Accepted27 Dec 2023

Published12 Jan 2024

Abstract

In this study, the antimicrobial resistance profiles of bacterial strains obtained from wild avian species recovered in wetlands of Northern Italy were described. Cloacal swabs collected from 67 aquatic birds, hunted or found dead in two private hunting grounds, were submitted to microbiological investigations and antimicrobial susceptibility testing using the Vitek 2 system, while specific PCR protocols were applied to screen for genes associated with the resistance. One hundred fifty-seven bacterial strains were characterized. The most frequent isolates were Enterococcus faecalis (36/157; 22.9%) and Escherichia coli (23/157; 14.6%). Seventy-seven isolates (77/157; 49%) were resulted resistant to at least one antibiotic, and eight isolates (8/157; 5%) were classified as multidrug resistant bacteria. Resistance for critically important antibiotics (linezolid, vancomycin, carbapenems, third-generation cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones) was also described. Salmonella spp. was obtained from a Eurasian teal (Anas crecca), and it was subsequently analyzed by whole genome sequencing, revealing the serovar Salmonella Braenderup ST22. The phylogenetic analysis, performed with all ST22 described in 2021 and 2022, placed the strain under study in a large clade associated with human salmonellosis cases. These results suggest that migratory aquatic birds may be considered as relevant carriers of critically important antibiotic resistant bacteria and zoonotic food-borne pathogens potentially able to impact public health.

1. Introduction

The concept of One Health has its origins in ancient times. Specifically, the Greek physician Hippocrates emphasized the importance of the environment in ensuring overall health. In the 1800s, the German physician and pathologist Rudolf Virchow laid the foundation for the modern concept of One Health with his definition of the term “zoonosis” [1]. More recently, Calvin Schwabe, a veterinary epidemiologist, emphasized the role of veterinary medicine in ensuring human health with the term “One Medicine,” promoting the awareness that veterinary public health includes wildlife, domestic animals, and humans [1, 2].

In 2004, the Wildlife Conservation Society defined the principles of Manhattan to provide guidance for a global, One World, One Health approach to the prevention of epidemic/epizootic diseases and to maintain biodiversity, which is the foundation of ecosystem health [3].

Indeed, 60% of emerging infectious diseases that are reported globally are zoonoses and have originated in wildlife [4]. In this regard, the antibiotic resistance, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as one of the main challenges of the twenty-first century, has been investigated in wildlife, with an annual increase in scientific production of 7% from 1979 to 2019 [5].

In detail, the studies have mainly focused on the antibiotic susceptibility of Gram-negative bacteria such as Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. [5]. E. coli, being part of the gut microbiota and easily dispersed in different ecosystems, has been widely used as an indicator of antibiotic resistance contamination [5]. Indeed, the first antibiotic-resistant bacterium to be described in a wild animal was an E. coli isolated from a pigeon around 1975 [6].

Other bacterial species, such as Salmonella spp., have been studied in wildlife as potential food-borne pathogens [5]. Indeed, the first outbreak of salmonellosis in wild birds was described by Wilson and MacDonald in the 1960s and later studies to quantify the risk to humans and domestic animals have been carried out since then [7].

Several free-ranging species have been investigated on this topic of antibiotic resistance, and the most represented group of animals in scientific literature is wild birds [5]. Indeed, the migratory capacity of some species makes them able to create links between areas with different anthropogenic impact exploring long-distance routes [8]. However, few studies that include a phenotypic investigation of antibiotic resistance together with genetic analysis are available for wild aquatic birds. Considering the ecology of waterfowl and the specialization of some species as filter feeders, these animals can come into contact with pathogens present in the environment and with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Furthermore, hunted aquatic birds may be a human source of these pathogens or resistant bacteria through the consumption of raw or undercooked meat [9, 10].

Given the limited available data, the current study aimed to evaluate the presence of resistant Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and food-borne pathogens, such as Salmonella spp., in wild aquatic birds hunted or found dead in wetlands of Northern Italy, where numerous migratory species from different breeding grounds congregate seasonally.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Background and Sample Collection

A total of 67 wild aquatic birds hunted or found dead were included in this study, selected among 124 individuals sampled within the application of the National Avian Influenza (AI) Surveillance Plan 2021 (https://www.izsvenezie.it/documenti/temi/influenza-aviaria/piani-sorveglianza/piano-nazionale-influenza-aviaria-2021.pdf, accessed on October 2021) and the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689. Only individuals sampled within 6 hr from hunting and kept at +4°C or fresh carcasses were included in this study.

Sampling activities were conducted from October 2021 to January 2022 in two private hunting grounds (Figure 1) of the province of Bologna, Emilia-Romagna region, Northern Italy. These sites were selected due to numerous overwintering waterfowl species that congregate and intermingle with resident populations of wild birds. AI surveillance activities were performed on the behalf of the Local Health Authority A.U.S.L. of Imola (BO) by sampling birds provided by local hunters or found dead by local ornithologists. Game species were hunted according to the National Hunting Law 157/1992, without the necessity of any additional permits. Cloacal swabs (CS) were collected from each animal using single sterile wooden swabs immersed in BPW, transported at +4°C and immediately processed.

2.2. Bacteria Isolation and Antibiotic Susceptibility Test

The isolates were obtained through a nonselective enrichment process of CS for 24 hr at 37°C with buffered peptone water (BPW) (Liofilchem, Italy), followed by subculture using the streak plating technique on MacConkey agar (Liofilchem, Italy) at 37°C for 18–24 hr and Slanetz–Bartley agar (Liofilchem, Italy) at 37°C for 48 hr [12, 13]. After the aforementioned procedures, 1–2 colonies were subcultured to obtain pure cultures for further analysis.

In addition, the detection of Salmonella spp. was performed by enrichment and plating out on selective media. Specifically, 100 μl of nonselective enrichment of CS were incubated in 10 ml Rappaport Vassiliadis broth (Liofilchem, Italy) at 41°C for 24 hr. Afterward, aliquots of cultures were spread onto xylose lysine deoxycholate agar (Liofilchem, Italy), and the plates were incubated at 37°C for 24−48 hr [14].

The species identification of colonies and the antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed using a Vitek 2 system (Biomerieux, France) and MIC Test strip (Liofilchem, Italy). The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing breakpoints were applied when available; otherwise, CLSI breakpoints were used instead [15, 16].

The antimicrobial susceptibility patterns were determined for a variety of bacteria and antibiotics, with consideration given to the main antimicrobial classes used in veterinary medicine and molecules that are critically important for human medicine, according to European Medicines Agency and WHO guidelines [17, 18]. Gram-negative isolates were tested for 14 antimicrobials: ampicillin, piperacillin/tazobactam, cefotaxime, ceftazidime, ertapenem, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL), meropenem, amikacin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, tigecycline, tetracyclines, nitrofurantoin, colistin, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. Susceptibility testing of Enterococcus spp. was performed for vancomycin, teicoplanin, linezolid, quinupristin/dalfopristin, gentamicin, kanamycin, streptomycin, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, daptomycin, tetracyclines, tigecycline, and nitrofurantoin. The susceptibility of Streptococcus spp. to ampicillin, benzylpenicillin, cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, chloramphenicol, clindamycin, erythromycin, gentamycin, levofloxacin, linezolid, moxifloxacin, rifamycin, teicoplanin, tetracycline, tigecycline, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole was evaluated. Finally, susceptibility of Staphylococcus spp. was performed for benzylpenicillin, cefoxitin screening, ceftaroline, clindamycin, daptomycin, erythromycin, fusidic acid, gentamicin, levofloxacin, linezolid, mupirocin, oxacillin, rifampicin, teicoplanin, tetracycline, tigecycline, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, and vancomycin.

2.3. Whole Genome Sequencing and Phylogenetic Analysis

Considering that Salmonella spp. is a zoonotic and indicator bacterium investigated in annual European Reports on antibiotic resistance in humans, animals, and food [19, 20], the Salmonella isolate identified in this study was analyzed by whole genome sequencing.

Total genomic DNA from single selected colony was extracted using MagPurix 12A Nucleic Acid Extraction System (Zinexts Life Science Corp., Taipei, Taiwan).

The Nextera XT kit (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) was used to prepare the DNA library, and sequences were obtained via the MiSeq instrument (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA) with a 2 × 300 paired-end run with double indexing. The Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA) was utilized to validate the library, while the Qubit 2.0 Fluorometer (Invitrogen, Waltham, USA) was used to quantify the starting material and library. All bioinformatics analyses were performed using the designed pipeline on the public ARIES Galaxy server [21], including quality checks, and trimming of the raw reads by FastQC v0.11.9 and Trimmomatic v0.36. Contigs were assembled from the trimmed data using SPAdes [22], followed by the tool “Filter SPAdes repeats.” In silico identification of acquired antimicrobial resistance genes, virulence genes, plasmids, and clonal analysis were carried out using dedicated tools (MLST v.2.0, ResFinder v.3.2, Virulence Finder v.2021-03-01.1, Plasmid Finder v.2020.11.19, ABRICATE, SISTR) available at the Center for Genomic Epidemiology (http://www.genomicepidemiology.org/) and by the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool suite (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi).

The freely available computational tool, PHASTER [23], was used to identify prophages and analyze the genomes in March 2023. Furthermore, a further analysis was performed on the putative plasmid contigs assembled using plasmid SPAdes v.3.15.0 [24] and annotated using the Rapid Annotations using Subsystems Technology (RAST) server [25].

In addition, raw reads were uploaded to EnteroBase (http://enterobase.warwick.ac.uk/species/index/senterica) under accession Barcode SAL_QB2921AA.

Phylogeny of Salmonella was examined by performing a search in Enterobase to identify all Salmonella isolates with the same sequence type (http://enterobase.warwick.ac.uk/species/senterica/search_strains) and GrapeTree was used to construct a rapid neighbor joining (RapidNJ) minimum spanning tree based on the core genome multi-locus sequence typing (cgMLST) V1 + hierarchical clustering (HierCC) V1 scheme in EnteroBase [26, 27].

2.4. Detection of Antibiotic Resistance Genes

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used to screen for genes associated with resistance to beta-lactams (bla_TEM, bla_SHV, bla_CTX-M, bla_CMY-1, and bla_CMY-2), carbapenems (bla_IMP, bla_OXA-48-like, bla_NDM, and bla_KPC), colistin (mcr-1, mcr-2, mcr-3, mcr-4, and mcr-5), tetracyclines (tetA, tetB, tetC, tetL, tetM, and tetK), sulfonamides (sul1, sul2, and sul3), and aminoglycosides (aacC1, aac3, aacA4, aphA6, armA, rmtB, rmtC, and rmtF) in Gram-negative isolates, with the exception of Salmonella isolate, as previously described [13]. The PCR protocols for Gram-positive isolates were conducted to detect genes associated with resistance to quinupristin/dalfopristin (vgA, msrC, vatD, vgbB, vgbA, ermB, and vatE), vancomycin (vanA, vanB, vanC1, vanC2, vanD, vanG, vanM, and vanN), linezolid (cfr, cfrB, cfrD, optrA, and poxtA), nitrofurantoin (nfsA, nfsB), tetracyclines (tetA, tetB, tetC, tetL, tetK, and tetM), macrolides (ermA, ermB, ermC, ermTR, and mefA/E), quinolones (gyrA), and beta-lactams (PBP1a, PBP2x, and PBP2b), as previously described [13].

3. Results

A total of 39 Eurasian teals (Anas crecca), 16 Northern shoveler (Spatula clypeata), six Northern lapwings (Vanellus vanellus), three graylag geese (Anser anser), one mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), one gadwall (Mareca strepera), and one spotted redshank (Tringa erythropus) were sampled. Of these, 65.7% (44/67) were identified as females and 34.3% (23/67) as males (Figure 2(a)). According to age classes as defined by trained ornithologists, 58% (39/67) of the birds were aged as adults, and 42% (28/67) were juveniles (first calendar year) (Figure 2(b)). All the samples used for this study resulted negative for AI.

(a)

(b)

Bacteriological investigations allowed to isolate 157 strains from 67 CS collected from the abovementioned population of interest. Table 1 and Figure 3 summarize all the bacterial strains detected and the animal species involved.

In detail, 80 isolates were Gram-negative, while 77 isolates were Gram-positive (Figure 4).

The most frequent isolates were Enterococcus faecalis (36/157; 22.9%) and E. coli (23/157; 14.6%). Overall, 77 isolates (77/157; 49%) showed phenotypic resistance to at least one antibiotic, and eight isolates (8/157; 5%) were classified as multi-drug resistant (MDR) bacteria showing resistance to at least three different classes of antibiotics. In addition, 12 Gram-negative (12/80; 15%) and seven (7/77; 9%) Gram-positive bacteria were found to be resistant to at least one critically important antibiotic. Among them, seven bacteria were MDR too. The details concerning the phenotypic and genotypic profiles are reported in Tables 2–4.

Whole genome sequencing has allowed to describe the serovar Salmonella Braenderup ST22 (Barcode: SAL_QB2921AA) with a single plasmid, which was identified as an IncI1. The plasmid sequence contained the mediator of hyperadherence YidE and resistance factors to copper, mercury, and zinc (CcmF, CcmH, CopD, CopC, CueO, and ZitB). In addition, ABRIcate identified the chromosomally located antibiotic resistance gene aac(6^′)-Iaa, which is reported to confer resistance to amikacin and tobramycin [28].

Eleven prophages were detected by the PHASTER web server and two of these were classified as intact. No resistance or virulence genes were identified within the prophage’s sequences.

The phylogenetic relationship with all ST22 sourced in 2021 and 2022 showed SAL_QB2921AA belonged to large clade of isolates, of which the vast majority (351/666; 52.7%) were associated with human salmonellosis cases. Additionally, other isolates were identified from poultry (48/666; 7.2%), environment (plant, soil, or water) (46/666; 6.9%), livestock (36/666; 5.4%), food (8/666; 1.2%), wild animals (8/666; 1.2%), and companion animals (1/666;0.1%) (Figure 5). SAL_QB2921AA was placed in a cluster containing 78 isolates from the United States of America (USA), France, United Kingdom (UK), and Mexico. In detail, the isolates from France and UK were associated with human samples, while the isolates from Mexico were identified from environmental samples, and the isolates from USA were linked to livestock, poultry, wild animals, and other unspecified source types. The most closely related isolate (SAL_XC6709AA_AS) showed eight cgMLST allelic differences to SAL_QB2921AA, and it was detected from unspecified source type in North America during 2022.

Figure 5

Phylogenetic tree showing the relatedness of Salmonella enterica serovar Braenderup isolate SAL_QB2921AA and Salmonella Braenderup ST22 isolates identified in Enterobase and collected during 2021 and 2022. GrapeTree was used to construct a rapid neighbor-joining (RapidNJ) minimum spanning tree based on the core genome multi-locus sequence typing (cgMLST) V1 + hierarchical clustering (HierCC) V1 scheme. The SAL_QB2921AA isolate is highlighted with a red circle with the cluster circled in black. The source type of each isolate is written on node and where is not available is indicated wit ND. Scale bar indicates the number of cgMLST allelic differences.

4. Discussion

The results of our study provide additional information on antibiotic resistant bacteria isolated from wild aquatic birds in Italy. In detail, this report provides the first phenotypic and genotypic analysis combined to describe antibiotic resistance in Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria isolated from hunted wild aquatic birds, such as graylag goose (A. anser), gadwall (M. strepera), Northern shovelers (S. clypeata), and Northern lapwing (V. vanellus). Indeed, similar available studies are mainly focused on Eurasian teal (A. crecca), mallard (A. platyrhynchos), and other families of wild birds (Columbidae, Corvidae, Falconidae, Stringidae, and Laridae) [29–37]. Additionally, the investigations carried out in abovementioned studies are mostly focused on phenotypic or genotypic analysis of E. coli and/or Enterococcus spp.

E. coli isolates identified in this study involve waterfowl for which no data on resistant bacteria are present in the literature, namely gadwall (S. clypeata), Eurasian teal (A. crecca), and graylag goose (A. anser). Comparing the results hereby obtained for E. coli with those of other manuscripts focused on aquatic birds, the same phenotypic resistance to cefoxitin and ESBL was found in specimens recovered from a rehabilitation center in Northern Italy and from carcasses examined in Netherlands, while colistin-resistant isolates have previously been described only in strains from free-living animals in Poland and Spain [30, 34, 37, 38]. The resistance to piperacillin/tazobactam reported in this study has not been documented in other E. coli strains isolated from wild aquatic birds surveyed elsewhere. Information regarding piperacillin/tazobactam resistance in E. coli is of interest considering that this molecule is used for empirical treatments of various infections in human medicine and resistant strains have been increasing in recent years [39]. Regarding the resistance genes related to the phenotypic resistance described and identified in this study, the bla_TEM gene has been reported in studies involving aquatic bird species performed with culture-independent methods in the USA and Australia [40, 41], while bla_CMY-1, mcr-3, and mcr-4 have been described for the first time in the category of animals under investigation. These aforementioned genes have previously been described in other species of domestic and wild animals, as well as in various water sources [42–48].

Regarding the Enterobacterales strains other than E. coli and the Pseudomonadales strains identified in the study, it was possible to describe profiles of colistin resistance for the first time in water bird species not including seagulls. The resistance to third-generation cephalosporins and carbapenems, documented in this study, has been described in wild bird species other than those studied, in animals sampled in a wildlife recovery center in Spain and in various studies investigating the role of gulls and white storks as reservoirs of antibiotic resistance [35, 38, 49]. Indeed, the related carbapenem resistance genes described in this study have also been previously documented in gulls in Spain [32].

Additionally, it was possible to describe resistance profiles not yet reported in aquatic birds. In a recent study conducted on animals of a wildlife recovery center in Southern Italy, resistance profiles of Serratia spp., Citrobacter spp., Enterobacter spp., and Pseudomonas spp. were described [50]. In our study, it was also possible to characterize other species such as Aeromonas sobria, Aeromonas hydro/caviae, Leclercia adecarboxylata, and Acinetobacter lwoffii. Aeromonas spp. is a bacterial species of interest given its emergence as a food-borne pathogen implicated in human gastroenteritis and extraintestinal diseases [51]. Furthermore, Aeromonas spp. has previously been discovered in food, animals, and birds, and it has been described in surface water in Italy [13, 51, 52]. Indeed, the aquatic environment is considered a potential vehicle for human infections with aeromonads [51].

Leclercia adecarboxilata has been also defined as an emerging human pathogen with the potential to cause severe infection in immunocompromised patients [53]. In this view, the resistance profile of this bacterium isolated in aquatic context appears to be relevant.

A. lwoffii was previously described in a variety of environments (i.e., animals, human skin and gut, and water sources) [54] and has been increasingly reported as a hospital pathogen responsible of septicemia, pneumonia, meningitis, urinary tract infections, skin and wound infections, and gastroenteritis [55, 56].

Regarding the results on Enterococci, the resistance to vancomycin, beta-lactams, and lincosamides reported in this study has been previously described in different wild birds from Australia, Sweden, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Italy [35, 57–62]. On the contrary, for the first time, the linezolid resistance and the related optrA gene were described in isolates from hunted aquatic birds. The optrA gene was first identified in E. faecalis and E. faecium strains from humans and food-producing animals in China [63]. However, the optrA gene has also been detected in E. gallinarum and E. hirae of human origin in China and from pigs in Italy [63]. The dispersion of transferable oxazolidinone resistance genes among enterococci of different ecosystems poses a serious problem to human health [64].

On this topic, another transferable poxtA oxazolidinone resistance gene, previously described in methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated in Italy [63], has been hereby identified in a phenotypically resistant Staph. lentus. This isolate was found to be MDR, as were other strains, including Streptococcus thoraltensis and Streptococcus alactolyticus.

The Staphylococcus lentus (part of the Staphylococcus sciuri group) is an uncommon and opportunistic pathogen, being associated with urinary tract infections in humans, mink (Mustela vison), and companion animals [65–67]. It has recently been described in a case of pyometra in wild European hedgehogs, and it has been reported in the feces of wild turkeys [68, 69].

Streptococcus thoraltensis and S. alactolyticus have previously been described in feces of rabbits and in humans with infections without any relevant antibiotic resistance profiles [70–72].

Another interesting finding is the presence of vancomycin resistance associated with vanG and vanM genes, providing new information on this occurrence in Northern Italy. Indeed, the van operons most investigated in previous studies are vanA and vanB [73].

In light of these findings, taking a more comprehensive view of intestinal bacterial species, including not only E. coli, E. faecium, and E. faecalis, could allow to obtain a broader understanding of resistance profiles in the aquatic niches. Indeed, aquatic systems have been defined as major transmission routes between wildlife and humans [74, 75]. Therefore, investigating resistance profiles in aquatic birds, including migratory birds, can provide information regarding environmental contamination from emerging and relevant resistant bacteria for public health, as shown by the data reported in this study.

In this way, it has been possible to identify resistance profiles related to critically important antibiotics for human medicine (linezolid, vancomycin, carbapenems, third-generation cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones), which are considered the last resources for treating of multiresistant bacteria [17]. These types of resistance have been identified in MDR bacteria and in microorganisms that are included in the WHO’s list of priority pathogens (carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales and third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales), as similarly observed for seagulls [35].

The resistance results can be interpreted as arising from the ecological behavior of the species involved. Indeed, ducks filter water and sediments to trap plant and animal material. It is possible that ducks ingest large numbers of bacteria while dabbling, as previously suggested by other authors [40].

In this regard, wild birds have been defined as potential carriers not only of antibiotic-resistant bacteria but also of other relevant or zoonotic pathogens that can affect animals, humans, and the environment [76–78]. In many studies, they have been investigated for the presence of food-borne pathogens, such as Salmonella spp., in their intestines [31].

Salmonella spp. has previously been described in various species of free-living birds in Germany, Spain, and Poland, as well as in species housed in rehabilitation centers in Italy [29, 50, 79, 80]. The presence of Salmonella spp. has also been investigated in healthy game birds in UK [9], as well as in healthy migratory birds, including hunted waterfowl in Finland, Spain, Bulgaria, and Texas [31, 33, 81, 82]. The SAL_QB2921AA isolate identified in this study is the only Salmonella Braenderup ST22 isolate sourced from aquatic birds available in literature. A similar strain was recently investigated by European Food Safety Authority for a multicountry outbreak presumed to be linked to imported melons in Europe during 2021 [83]. However, the phylogenetic analysis of our isolate revealed a closer correlation with other isolates identified in USA during an outbreak involving 75 people, but with potential foods linked to illness still unknown (https://www.fda.gov/food/outbreaks-foodborne-illness/investigations-foodborne-illness-outbreaks). These results underscore the importance of providing useful genetic information that can allow to identify possible routes of pathogen spread in the environment [84]. In fact, migratory species have been considered relevant for their ability to cover long distances and link different countries and environments [5, 74]. As hypothesized for antibiotic-resistant bacteria, the ability of these animals to be carriers of food-borne pathogens is closely linked to their ecological behavior. Eurasian teal (A. crecca), the hunted species in which Salmonella ST22 was isolated, is a long-distance migratory dabbling duck that moves along the Black Sea-Mediterranean flyway for breeding in Siberia and Northern Europe and wintering in Western Europe, including Italy [85]. It usually inhabits low-anthropized wetlands, such as the ones of the study area, where it can encounter also pathogenic bacteria spread from inefficiently treated municipal sewage or agricultural practices [86]. This further highlights the potential health risks for hunters and consumers related to the consumption of wild game meat, as previously suggested by other authors [9, 33]. Good hygiene during game bird handling, storing the game bird meat frozen, and proper heat treatment before consuming remain important measures to reduce the risk of human exposure to food-borne diseases [33].

5. Conclusions

The migratory aquatic birds may serve as a relevant carrier of critically important antibiotic resistant bacteria and zoonotic food-borne pathogens which may have a potential impact on public health [33, 87]. The results of this study provide new data about the environmental contamination of antimicrobial resistance and food-borne pathogens useful for public health specialists.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Ethical Approval

The activities were carried out in accordance with the National Avian Influenza Surveillance Plan 2021 (https://www.izsvenezie.it/documenti/temi/influenza-aviaria/piani-sorveglianza/piano-nazionale-influenza-aviaria-2021.pdf, accessed on 23 October 2021) and the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/689. Birds were hunted according to the National Hunting Law 157/1992, without the necessity of any additional permits. Sampling activities were conducted under the veterinary authority of the A.U.S.L of Imola (BO).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

M. A. Barrett and S. A. Osofsky, “One Health: interdependence of people, other species, and the planet,” in Jekel’s Epidemiology, Biostatistics, Preventive Medicine, and Public Health, D. L. Katz, J. G. Elmore, D. M. G. Wild, and S. C. Lucan, Eds., pp. 364–377, Elsevier/Saunders, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 4th edition, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Zinsstag, E. Schelling, D. Waltner-Toews, and M. Tanner, “From “one medicine” to “one health” and systemic approaches to health and well-being,” Preventive Veterinary Medicine, vol. 101, no. 3-4, pp. 148–156, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Food and Agriculture Organization, World Animal Health Organisation, World Health Organization, United Nation System Influenza Coordination, United Nation Children’s Funds, and World Bank, ““One World, One Health”: a strategic framework for reducing risks of infectious diseases at the animal-human-ecosystems interface,” 2008.
View at: Google Scholar
K. E. Jones, N. G. Patel, M. A. Levy et al., “Global trends in emerging infectious diseases,” Nature, vol. 451, pp. 990–993, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. T. Torres, J. Carvalho, M. V. Cunha, E. Serrano, J. D. Palmeira, and C. Fonseca, “Temporal and geographical research trends of antimicrobial resistance in wildlife—a bibliometric analysis,” One Health, vol. 11, Article ID 100198, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Bonnedahl and J. D. Järhult, “Antibiotic resistance in wild birds,” Upsala Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 113–116, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Tizard, “Salmonellosis in wild birds,” Seminars in Avian and Exotic Pet Medicine, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 50–66, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Bauer and B. J. Hoye, “Migratory animals couple biodiversity and ecosystem functioning worldwide,” Science, vol. 344, no. 6179, Article ID 1242552, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Horigan, R. H. Davies, L. A. Kelly, G. C. Mead, R. M. Irvine, and R. R. L. Simons, “A qualitative risk assessment of the microbiological risks to consumers from the production and consumption of uneviscerated and eviscerated small game birds in the UK,” Food Control, vol. 45, pp. 127–137, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. M. Dini, G. Graziosi, C. Lupini, E. Catelli, and R. Galuppi, “Migratory wild birds as potential long-distance transmitters of Toxoplasma gondii infection,” Pathogens, vol. 12, no. 3, Article ID 478, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. D. Team, “QGIS geographic information system,” 2016, Open Source Geospatial Foundation, (accessed on 10 December 2022) http://qgis.org/.
View at: Google Scholar
World Organisation for Animal Health, OIE Standards, Guidelines and Resolutions on Antimicrobial Resistance and the Use of Antimicrobial Agents, World Organization for Animal Health, Paris, France, 2020.
C. Smoglica, A. Vergara, S. Angelucci et al., “Antibiotic-resistant bacteria dissemination in the wildlife, livestock, and water of Maiella National Park, Italy,” Animals, vol. 13, no. 3, Article ID 432, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
World Organisation for Animal Health, “Salmonellosis,” in Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals, World Organisation for Animal Health, Paris, France, Eleventh edition, 2022.
View at: Google Scholar
European Committee on Antimicriobial Susceptibility Testing, “Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters,” 2021.
View at: Google Scholar
Clinical & Laboratory Standard Institute, Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA, USA, 27th edition, 2017.
World Health Organization, “List of critically important antimicrobials for human medicine (WHO CIA List),” 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
European Medicine Agency, “Categorisation of antibiotics used in animals promotes responsible use to protect public and animal health,” 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
European Food Safety Authority and Control and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, “The European Union One Health 2021 Zoonoses Report,” EFSA Journal, vol. 20, no. 12, Article ID e07666, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
European Food Safety Authority and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, “The European Union summary report on antimicrobial resistance in zoonotic and indicator bacteria from humans, animals and food in 2020/2021,” EFSA Journal, vol. 21, no. 3, Article ID e07867, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Knijn, V. Michelacci, M. Orsini, and S. Morabito, “Advanced research infrastructure for experimentation in genomicS (ARIES): a lustrum of galaxy experience,” BioRxiv, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Bankevich, S. Nurk, D. Antipov et al., “SPAdes: a new genome assembly algorithm and its applications to single-cell sequencing,” Journal of Computational Biology, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 455–477, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Arndt, J. R. Grant, A. Marcu et al., “PHASTER: a better, faster version of the PHAST phage search tool,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 44, no. W1, pp. W16–W21, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Antipov, N. Hartwick, M. Shen, M. Raiko, A. Lapidus, and P. A. Pevzner, “plasmidSPAdes: assembling plasmids from whole genome sequencing data,” Bioinformatics, vol. 32, no. 22, pp. 3380–3387, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. K. Aziz, D. Bartels, A. A. Best et al., “The RAST server: rapid annotations using subsystems technology,” BMC Genomics, vol. 9, no. 1, Article ID 75, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Zhou, N.-F. Alikhan, M. J. Sergeant et al., “GrapeTree: visualization of core genomic relationships among 100,000 bacterial pathogens,” Genome Research, vol. 28, no. 9, pp. 1395–1404, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Zhou, N.-F. Alikhan, K. Mohamed, Y. Fan, The Agama Study Group, and M. Achtman, “The EnteroBase user’s guide, with case studies on Salmonella transmissions, Yersinia pestis phylogeny, and Escherichia core genomic diversity,” Genome Research, vol. 30, pp. 138–152, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Salipante and B. G. Hall, “Determining the limits of the evolutionary potential of an antibiotic resistance gene,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 653–659, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Botti, F. V. Navillod, L. Domenis et al., “Salmonella spp. and antibiotic-resistant strains in wild mammals and birds in north-western Italy from 2002 to 2010,” Veterinaria Italiana, vol. 49, pp. 195–202, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
K. Veldman, P. van Tulden, A. Kant, J. Testerink, and D. Mevius, “Characteristics of cefotaxime-resistant Escherichia coli from wild birds in the Netherlands,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, vol. 79, no. 24, pp. 7556–7561, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Najdenski, T. Dimova, M. M. Zaharieva et al., “Migratory birds along the Mediterranean–Black Sea flyway as carriers of zoonotic pathogens,” Canadian Journal of Microbiology, vol. 64, no. 12, pp. 915–924, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Jarma, M. I. Sánchez, A. J. Green et al., “Faecal microbiota and antibiotic resistance genes in migratory waterbirds with contrasting habitat use,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 783, Article ID 146872, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Sauvala, E. Woivalin, R. Kivistö et al., “Hunted game birds—carriers of foodborne pathogens,” Food Microbiology, vol. 98, Article ID 103768, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Skarżyńska, C. M. Zaja, A. Bomba et al., “Antimicrobial resistance glides in the sky-free-living birds as a reservoir of resistant Escherichia coli with zoonotic potential,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 12, Article ID 656223, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Zeballos-Gross, Z. Rojas-Sereno, M. Salgado-Caxito, P. Poeta, C. Torres, and J. A. Benavides, “The role of gulls as reservoirs of antibiotic resistance in aquatic environments: a scoping review,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 12, Article ID 703886, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Martín-Maldonado, S. Vega, A. Mencía-Gutiérrez et al., “Urban birds: an important source of antimicrobial resistant Salmonella strains in central Spain,” Comparative Immunology, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, vol. 72, Article ID 101519, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Prandi, A. Bellato, P. Nebbia et al., “Antibiotic resistant Escherichia coli in wild birds hospitalised in a wildlife rescue centre,” Comparative Immunology, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, vol. 93, Article ID 101945, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
U. Höfle, J. Jose Gonzalez-Lopez, M. C. Camacho et al., “Foraging at solid urban waste disposal sites as risk factor for cephalosporin and colistin resistant Escherichia coli carriage in white storks (Ciconia ciconia),” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 11, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. M. Ortiz de la Rosa, Á. Rodríguez-Villodres, M. A. Gimeno Gascón, G. Martín-Gutiérrez, J. M. Cisneros, and J. A. Lepe, “Rapid detection of piperacillin-tazobactam resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli,” Microbiology Spectrum, vol. 11, no. 2, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. R. Marcelino, M. Wille, A. C. Hurt et al., “Meta-transcriptomics reveals a diverse antibiotic resistance gene pool in avian microbiomes,” BMC Biology, vol. 17, no. 1, Article ID 31, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Zhao, R. Sun, P. Yu, and P. J. J. Alvarez, “High levels of antibiotic resistance genes and opportunistic pathogenic bacteria indicators in urban wild bird feces,” Environmental Pollution, vol. 266, Article ID 115200, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Chen, J. Zhang, J. Wang et al., “Newly identified colistin resistance genes, mcr-4 and mcr-5, from upper and lower alimentary tract of pigs and poultry in China,” PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 3, Article ID e0193957, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Tuo, Y. Yang, X. Tao et al., “The prevalence of colistin resistant strains and antibiotic resistance gene profiles in Funan river, China,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 9, Article ID 3094, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. E. Di Francesco, C. Smoglica, F. Profeta et al., “Research note: detection of antibiotic-resistance genes in commercial poultry and turkey flocks from Italy,” Poultry Science, vol. 100, no. 5, Article ID 101084, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Migura-Garcia, J. J. González-López, J. Martinez-Urtaza et al., “mcr-Colistin resistance genes mobilized by IncX4, IncHI2, and IncI2 plasmids in Escherichia coli of pigs and white stork in spain,” Frontiers in Microbiology, vol. 10, Article ID 3072, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Smoglica, A. Vergara, S. Angelucci et al., “Resistance patterns, mcr-4 and OXA-48 genes, and virulence factors of Escherichia coli from apennine chamois living in sympatry with domestic species, Italy,” Animals, vol. 12, no. 2, Article ID 129, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Valiakos and I. Kapna, “Colistin resistant mcr genes prevalence in livestock animals (swine, bovine, poultry) from a multinational perspective: a systematic review,” Veterinary Sciences, vol. 8, no. 11, Article ID 265, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Hutinel, D. G. J. Larsson, and C. F. Flach, “Antibiotic resistance genes of emerging concern in municipal and hospital wastewater from a major Swedish city,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 812, Article ID 151433, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Darwich, A. Vidal, C. Seminati et al., “High prevalence and diversity of extended-spectrum β-lactamase and emergence of OXA-48 producing Enterobacterales in wildlife in Catalonia,” PLoS One, vol. 14, no. 8, Article ID e0210686, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. P. Russo, A. Minichino, A. Gargiulo et al., “Prevalence and phenotypic antimicrobial resistance among ESKAPE bacteria and enterobacterales strains in wild birds,” Antibiotics, vol. 11, no. 12, Article ID 1825, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. A. Abd El-Ghany, “A review on aeromoniasis in poultry: a bacterial disease of zoonotic nature,” The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2023.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Ottaviani, C. Parlani, B. Citterio et al., “Putative virulence properties of Aeromonas strains isolated from food, environmental and clinical sources in Italy: a comparative study,” International Journal of Food Microbiology, vol. 144, no. 3, pp. 538–545, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. R. Spiegelhauer, P. F. Andersen, T. H. Frandsen, R. L. M. Nordestgaard, and L. P. Andersen, “Leclercia adecarboxylata:a case report and literature review of 74 cases demonstrating its pathogenicity in immunocompromised patients,” Infectious Diseases, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 179–188, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. J. Doughari, P. A. Ndakidemi, I. S. Human, and S. Benade, “The ecology, biology and pathogenesis of Acinetobacter spp.: an overview,” Microbes and Environments, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 101–112, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. F. Turton, J. Shah, C. Ozongwu, and R. Pike, “Incidence of Acinetobacter species other than A. baumannii among clinical isolates of Acinetobacter: evidence for emerging species,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 1445–1449, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. L. Rakitin, A. Y. Ermakova, A. V. Beletsky, M. Petrova, A. V. Mardanov, and N. V. Ravin, “Genome analysis of Acinetobacter lwoffii strains isolated from permafrost soils aged from 15 thousand to 1.8 million years revealed their close relationships with present-day environmental and clinical isolates,” Biology, vol. 10, no. 9, Article ID 871, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Cagnoli, F. Bertelloni, P. Interrante, R. Ceccherelli, M. Marzoni, and V. V. Ebani, “Antimicrobial-resistant Enterococcus spp. in wild avifauna from Central Italy,” Antibiotics, vol. 11, no. 7, Article ID 852, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Stępień-Pyśniak, T. Hauschild, A. Nowaczek, A. Marek, and M. Dec, “Wild birds as a potential source of known and novel multilocus sequence types of antibiotic-resistant Enterococcus faecalis,” Journal of Wildlife Diseases, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 219–228, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Stępień-Pyśniak, T. Hauschild, M. Dec, A. Marek, and R. Urban-Chmiel, “Clonal structure and antibiotic resistance of Enterococcus spp. from wild birds in Poland,” Microbial Drug Resistance, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 1227–1237, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. León-Sampedro, R. Del Campo, M. Rodriguez-Baños et al., “Phylogenomics of Enterococcus faecalis from wild birds: new insights into host-associated differences in core and accessory genomes of the species,” Environmental Microbiology, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 3046–3062, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Santos, N. Silva, G. Igrejas et al., “Dissemination of antibiotic resistant Enterococcus spp. and Escherichia coli from wild birds of Azores Archipelago,” Anaerobe, vol. 24, pp. 25–31, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Radhouani, P. Poeta, A. Gonçalves, R. Pacheco, R. Sargo, and G. Igrejas, “Wild birds as biological indicators of environmental pollution: antimicrobial resistance patterns of Escherichia coli and enterococci isolated from common buzzards (Buteo buteo),” Journal of Medical Microbiology, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 837–843, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Schwarz, W. Zhang, X.-D. Du et al., “Mobile oxazolidinone resistance genes in gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria,” Clinical Microbiology Reviews, vol. 34, no. 3, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Rodríguez-Lucas, J. Fernández, X. Vázquez et al., “Detection of the optrA gene among polyclonal linezolid-susceptible isolates of Enterococcus faecalis recovered from community patients,” Microbial Drug Resistance, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 773–779, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Schwarz, “Emerging chloramphenicol resistance in Staphylococcus lentus from mink following chloramphenicol treatment: characterisation of the resistance genes,” Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 41, no. 1-2, pp. 51–61, 1994.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Stepanović, I. Dakić, D. Morrison et al., “Identification and characterization of clinical isolates of members of the Staphylococcus sciuri group,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 956–958, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Smoglica, G. Evangelisti, C. Fani et al., “Antimicrobial resistance profile of bacterial isolates from urinary tract infections in companion animals in Central Italy,” Antibiotics, vol. 11, no. 10, Article ID 1363, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Garcês, P. D. Poeta, V. Soeiro et al., “Pyometra caused by staphylococcus lentus in a wild European hedgehog (Erinaceus europaeus),” Journal of Wildlife Diseases, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 724–727, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. R. DeBoer, D. M. Slaughter, R. D. Applegate, R. J. Sobieski, and S. S. Crupper, “Antimicrobial susceptibility of staphylococci isolated from the faeces of wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo),” Letters in Applied Microbiology, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 382–386, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. D. Hai, P. N. Son, N. Thi Thu Huong, N. Thanh Binh, L. Thi Viet Hoa, and N. Manh Dung, “A case of Streptococcus thoraltensis bacteremia and prosthetic valve endocarditis in a 68-year-old Vietnamese man,” American Journal of Case Reports, vol. 21, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Wazir, M. Grewal, A. G. Jain, and G. Everett, “Streptococcus thoraltensis bacteremia: a case of pneumonia in a postpartum patient,” Cureus, vol. 11, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Borø, C. A. McCartney, T. J. Snelling, H. J. Worgan, and N. R. McEwan, “Isolation of Streptococcus thoraltensis from rabbit faeces,” Current Microbiology, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 357–360, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Gorrie, C. Higgs, G. Carter, T. P. Stinear, and B. Howden, “Genomics of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium,” Microbial Genomics, vol. 5, no. 7, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Vittecoq, S. Godreuil, F. Prugnolle et al., “Antimicrobial resistance in wildlife,” Journal of Applied Ecology, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 519–529, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. G. H. Taylor, D. W. Verner-Jeffreys, and C. Baker-Austin, “Aquatic systems: maintaining, mixing and mobilising antimicrobial resistance?” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 278–284, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
O. M. Smith, A. Edworthy, J. M. Taylor et al., “Agricultural intensification heightens food safety risks posed by wild birds,” Journal of Applied Ecology, vol. 57, no. 11, pp. 2246–2257, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Graziosi, E. Catelli, A. Fanelli, and C. Lupini, “Infectious bursal disease virus in free-living wild birds: a systematic review and meta-analysis of its sero-viroprevalence on a global scale,” Transboundary and Emerging Diseases, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 2800–2815, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Graziosi, C. Lupini, and E. Catelli, “Disentangling the role of wild birds in avian metapneumovirus (aMPV) epidemiology: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Transboundary and Emerging Diseases, vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 3285–3299, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Millán, G. Aduriz, B. Moreno, R. A. Juste, and M. Barral, “Salmonella isolates from wild birds and mammals in the Basque Country (Spain),” Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’OIE, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 905–911, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Fischer, S. Schmoger, S. Jahn, R. Helmuth, and B. Guerra, “NDM-1 carbapenemase-producing Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica serovar Corvallis isolated from a wild bird in Germany,” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, vol. 68, no. 12, pp. 2954–2956, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Antilles, A. Sanglas, and M. Cerdà-Cuéllar, “Free-living waterfowl as a source of zoonotic bacteria in a dense wild bird population area in northeastern Spain,” Transboundary and Emerging Diseases, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 516–521, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. K. Grigar, K. J. Cummings, and S. C. Rankin, “Prevalence of Salmonella among waterfowl along the Texas Gulf coast,” Zoonoses and Public Health, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 689–692, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control Authority and European Food Safety Authority, “Multi-country outbreak of Salmonella Braenderup ST22, presumed to be linked to imported melons,” EFSA Supporting Publications, vol. 18, no. 7, Article ID 6807E, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Ramey and C. A. Ahlstrom, “Antibiotic resistant bacteria in wildlife: perspectives on trends, acquisition and dissemination, data gaps, and future directions,” Journal of Wildlife Diseases, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Lebarbenchon, F. Albespy, A. L. Brochet et al., “Spread of avian influenza viruses by common teal (Anas crecca) in Europe,” PLoS One, vol. 4, no. 10, Article ID e7289, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. P. S. Cabral, “Water microbiology. Bacterial pathogens and water,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 3657–3703, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Pławińska-Czarnak, K. Wódz, L. Piechowicz et al., “Wild Duck (Anas platyrhynchos) as a source of antibiotic-resistant Salmonella enterica subsp. diarizonae O58—the first report in Poland,” Antibiotics, vol. 11, no. 4, Article ID 530, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2024 Camilla Smoglica et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

287

Downloads

206

Citations