↓ Skip to main content

Survival capabilities of Escherichia coli O26 isolated from cattle and clinical sources in Australia to disinfectants, acids and antimicrobials

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Survival capabilities of Escherichia coli O26 isolated from cattle and clinical sources in Australia to disinfectants, acids and antimicrobials
Published in
BMC Microbiology, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12866-017-0963-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Salma A. Lajhar, Jeremy Brownlie, Robert Barlow

Abstract

After E. coli O157, E. coli O26 is the second most prevalent enterohaemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) serotype identified in cases of foodborne illness in Australia and throughout the world. E. coli O26 associated foodborne outbreaks have drawn attention to the survival capabilities of this organism in a range of environments. The aim of the present study was to assess the ability of E. coli O26 to survive the effects of disinfectants, acids and antimicrobials and investigate the possible influence of virulence genes in survival and persistence of E. coli O26 from human and cattle sources from Australia. Initial characterization indicated that E. coli O26 are a genetically diverse group that were shown to belong to a number of pathotypes. Overall, 86.4% of isolates were susceptible to all antimicrobials tested with no significant differences in resistance observed between pathotypes. A representative subset of isolates (n = 40) were selected to determine their ability to survive disinfectants at proposed industry working concentrations and acid stress. Profoam, Kwiksan 22, and Topactive DES. were able to inhibit the growth of 100% of isolates. The remaining three disinfectants (Dairy Chlor 12.5%, Envirosan and Maxifoam) were not effective against the subset of 40 E. coli O26. Finally, elevated MICs (1,024 to 4,096 μg/ml) of acetic, propionic, lactic, and citric acids were determined for the majority of the isolates (85%). Australian E. coli O26 isolates belong to a range of pathotypes that harbor differing virulence markers. Despite this, their response to antimicrobials, disinfectants and acids is similar confirming that stress response appears unrelated to the presence of EHEC virulence markers. Notwithstanding, the tolerance to disinfectants and the elevated acid MICs for EHEC and the other E. coli O26 pathotypes examined in this study may contribute to bacterial colonization on food contact surfaces and subsequent foodborne illness caused by this pathogen.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 4 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 10 33%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 6 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,988,026
of 11,689,928 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#831
of 1,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,818
of 245,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#21
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,689,928 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,640 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 245,771 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.