Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of antimicrobial use and resistant E. coli frequencies in poultry, pigs, and beef cattle

From: Antimicrobial use and resistance in Escherichia coli from healthy food-producing animals in Guadeloupe

  Farmers antimicrobial use   Resistant E. coli isolates
Poultry
(n = 6)
Pig
(n = 11)
Beef cattle
(n = 16)
P   ESBL E. coli poultry
(n = 10)
n-ESBL E. coli poultry
(n = 13)
P ESBL E. coli pigs
(n = 11)
n-ESBL E. coli pigs
(n = 146)
P ESBL E. coli beef cattle
(n = 11)
n-ESBL E. coli beef cattle
(n = 74)
P
n, (%)      n, (%)          
TET 2 (33.3) 6 (54.5) 12 (100.0) 0.003 TET 5 (50.0) 8 (61.5) NS 6 (54.5) 86 (58.9) NS 9 (81.8) 6 (8.1) < 0.001
β-lacta 0 (0.0) 6 (54.5) 2 (16.7) 0.035 AMP 10 (100.0) 8 (61.5) NS 11 (100.0) 21 (14.4) < 0.001 11 (100.0) 9 (12.2) < 0.001
SM 0 (0.0) 5 (45.5) 2 (16.7) NS SM 4 (40.0) 6 (46.2) NS 6 (54.5) 68 (46.6) NS 8 (72.7) 22 (29.7) 0.025
SXT 5 (83.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) < 0.001 SXT 3 (30.0) 5 (38.5) NS 8 (72.7) 20 (13.7) < 0.001 7 (63.6) 4 (5.4) < 0.001
QN 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) NS NAL 1 (10.0) 2 (15.4) NS 0 (0.0) 3 (2.1) NS 1 (9.1) 1 (1.4) NS
C3G 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) NS COX 10 (100.0) 0 (0.0) < 0.001 11 (100.0) 0 (0.0) < 0.001 11 (100.0) 0 (0.0) < 0.001
  1. TET tetracyclines, SM streptomycin, SXT trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole, QN quinolones, AMP ampicillin, NAL nalidixic acid, COX cefotaxime
  2. aPenicillins such as ampicillin and amoxicillin