↓ Skip to main content

Resistance to Biocides in Listeria monocytogenes Collected in Meat-Processing Environments

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Resistance to Biocides in Listeria monocytogenes Collected in Meat-Processing Environments
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01627
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniele Conficoni, Carmen Losasso, Enzo Cortini, Andrea Di Cesare, Veronica Cibin, Valerio Giaccone, Gianluca Corno, Antonia Ricci

Abstract

The emergence of microorganisms exerting resistance to biocides is a challenge to meat-processing environments. Bacteria can be intrinsically resistant to biocides but resistance can also be acquired by adaptation to their sub-lethal concentrations. Moreover, the presence of biocide resistance determinants, which is closely linked to antibiotic resistance determinants, could lead to co-selection during disinfection practices along the food chain, and select cross-resistant foodborne pathogens. The purpose of this work was to test the resistance of wild strains of Listeria monocytogenes, isolated from pork meat processing plants, toward benzalkonium chloride (BC), used as proxy of quaternary ammonium compounds. Furthermore, the expression of two non-specific efflux pumps genes (lde and mdrL) under biocide exposure was evaluated. L. monocytogenes were isolated from five processing plants located in the Veneto region (northeast of Italy) before and after cleaning and disinfection (C&D) procedures. A total of 45 strains were collected: 36 strains before and nine after the C&D procedures. Collected strains were typed according to MLST and ERIC profiles. Strains sampled in the same site, isolated before, and after the C&D procedures and displaying the same MLST and ERIC profiles were tested for their sensitivity to different concentrations of BC, in a time course assay. The expression of non-specific efflux pumps was evaluated at each time point by qPCR using tufA gene as housekeeping. A differential expression of the two investigated genes was observed: lde was found to be more expressed by the strains isolated before C&D procedures while its expression was dose-dependent in the case of the post C&D procedures strain. On the contrary, the expression of mdrL was inhibited under low biocidal stress (10 ppm BC) and enhanced in the presence of high stress (100 ppm BC). These findings suggests a possible role for C&D procedures to select L. monocytogenes persisters, pointing out the importance of dealing with the identification of risk factors in food plants sanification procedures that might select more tolerant strains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 96 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Master 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 26 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 21%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 8%
Engineering 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 34 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,867,424
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#13,861
of 24,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,286
of 315,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#244
of 423 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,942 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 315,882 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 423 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.