<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="review-article">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Vet. Sci.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Vet. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2297-1769</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2017.00126</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Veterinary Science</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Review</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacterial Poultry Pathogens: A Review</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Nhung</surname> <given-names>Nguyen Thi</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://frontiersin.org/people/u/465130"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Chansiripornchai</surname> <given-names>Niwat</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name><surname>Carrique-Mas</surname> <given-names>Juan J.</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1">&#x0002A;</xref>
<uri xlink:href="http://frontiersin.org/people/u/429750"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Programme</institution>, <addr-line>Ho Chi Minh City</addr-line>, <country>Vietnam</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Avian Health Research Unit, Chulalongkorn University</institution>, <addr-line>Bangkok</addr-line>, <country>Thailand</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>Centre for Tropical Medicine, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford</institution>, <addr-line>Oxford</addr-line>, <country>United Kingdom</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Edited by: Guillermo Tellez, University of Arkansas, United States</p></fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by"><p>Reviewed by: Lisa Bielke, The Ohio State University Columbus, United States; Christi Swaggerty, United States Department of Agriculture, United States</p></fn>
<corresp content-type="corresp" id="cor1">&#x0002A;Correspondence: Juan J. Carrique-Mas, <email>jcarrique-mas&#x00040;oucru.org</email></corresp>
<fn fn-type="other" id="fn001"><p>Specialty section: This article was submitted to Veterinary Infectious Diseases, a section of the journal Frontiers in Veterinary Science</p></fn>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>10</day>
<month>08</month>
<year>2017</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2017</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>4</volume>
<elocation-id>126</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>31</day>
<month>05</month>
<year>2017</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>25</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2017</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x000A9; 2017 Nhung, Chansiripornchai and Carrique-Mas.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2017</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Nhung, Chansiripornchai and Carrique-Mas</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"><p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p></license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<p>Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health threat, and antimicrobial usage and AMR in animal production is one of its contributing sources. Poultry is one of the most widespread types of meat consumed worldwide. Poultry flocks are often raised under intensive conditions using large amounts of antimicrobials to prevent and to treat disease, as well as for growth promotion. Antimicrobial resistant poultry pathogens may result in treatment failure, leading to economic losses, but also be a source of resistant bacteria/genes (including zoonotic bacteria) that may represent a risk to human health. Here we reviewed data on AMR in 12 poultry pathogens, including avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> (APEC), <italic>Salmonella</italic> Pullorum/Gallinarum, <italic>Pasteurella multocida, Avibacterium paragallinarum, Gallibacterium anatis, Ornitobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> (ORT), <italic>Bordetella avium, Clostridium perfringens, Mycoplasma</italic> spp., <italic>Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae</italic>, and <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic>. A number of studies have demonstrated increases in resistance over time for <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum, <italic>M. gallisepticum</italic>, and <italic>G. anatis</italic>. Among Enterobacteriaceae, APEC isolates displayed considerably higher levels of AMR compared with <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum, with prevalence of resistance over &#x0003E;80% for ampicillin, amoxicillin, tetracycline across studies. Among the Gram-negative, non-Enterobacteriaceae pathogens, ORT had the highest levels of phenotypic resistance with median levels of AMR against co-trimoxazole, enrofloxacin, gentamicin, amoxicillin, and ceftiofur all exceeding 50%. In contrast, levels of resistance among <italic>P. multocida</italic> isolates were less than 20% for all antimicrobials. The study highlights considerable disparities in methodologies, as well as in criteria for phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing and result interpretation. It is necessary to increase efforts to harmonize testing practices, and to promote free access to data on AMR in order to improve treatment guidelines as well as to monitor the evolution of AMR in poultry bacterial pathogens.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>antimicrobial resistance</kwd>
<kwd>antimicrobials</kwd>
<kwd>avian pathogens</kwd>
<kwd>poultry production</kwd>
<kwd>therapy</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<contract-num rid="cn01">110085/Z/15/Z</contract-num>
<contract-sponsor id="cn01">Wellcome Trust<named-content content-type="fundref-id">10.13039/100004440</named-content></contract-sponsor>
<counts>
<fig-count count="1"/>
<table-count count="7"/>
<equation-count count="0"/>
<ref-count count="132"/>
<page-count count="17"/>
<word-count count="14485"/>
</counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="S1" sec-type="introduction">
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a worldwide health concern (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">1</xref>). Over recent years a considerable body of evidence highlighting the contribution of antimicrobial usage (AMU) and AMR from animals to the overall burden of AMR has emerged (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">2</xref>). A contributing factor is the excessive use of antimicrobials in food animal production. The magnitude of usage is expected to increase considerably over coming years due to intensification of farming practices in much of the developing world (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">3</xref>). Much of our knowledge and assumptions on the prevalence and evolution of AMR in animal production systems relate to organisms that more often than not are commensal in poultry such as <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">4</xref>&#x02013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">6</xref>), <italic>Enterococcus</italic> spp., and <italic>Staphylococcus aureus</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">7</xref>) as well as foodborne zoonotic pathogens, such as non-typhoidal <italic>Salmonella</italic> (NTS) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">9</xref>) and <italic>Campylobacter</italic> spp. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">10</xref>). However, with some exceptions, relatively little is known on the prevalence and mechanisms of AMR in pathogenic bacteria in food animal production, including poultry.</p>
<p>Poultry is one of the most widespread food industries worldwide, and chicken is the most commonly farmed species, with over 90 billion tons of chicken meat produced per year (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">11</xref>). The main reasons are the relatively low production costs and the absence of cultural and religious restrictions for its consumption. A large diversity of antimicrobials are used to raise poultry in most countries (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>), mostly through the oral route, with the aim to prevent and to treat disease, but also to enhance growth and productivity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">14</xref>). A large number of such antimicrobials are considered to be of critical and high importance for human medicine (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>).</p>
<p>The indiscriminate use of antimicrobials in animal farming is likely to accelerate the development of AMR in pathogens, as well as in commensal organisms. In addition to the concerns due to the emergence of AMR in bacteria from poultry production, there are also human health concerns about the presence of antimicrobial residues in meat (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">16</xref>) and eggs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">17</xref>). Additionally, AMR in poultry pathogens is likely to lead to economic losses, derived from the expenditure on ineffective antimicrobials, as well as the burden of untreated poultry disease.</p>
<p>Here, we review and summarize data on phenotypic and genotypic resistance against antimicrobials among known poultry pathogens, in order to identify overall trends and highlight knowledge gaps and methodological issues. This review is intended to act as a baseline to compare country-specific data, as well as an incentive for further isolation and AMR testing of poultry bacterial pathogens using harmonized methodologies.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2" sec-type="methods">
<title>Methods</title>
<p>We used the &#x0201C;Web of Knowledge&#x0201D; (<uri xlink:href="http://www.webofknowledge.com">www.webofknowledge.com</uri>) engine to search for articles published between 2000 and December 2016 containing the terms &#x0201C;AMR&#x0201D; or &#x0201C;antimicrobial susceptibility&#x0201D; in combination with &#x0201C;poultry or chicken,&#x0201D; alongside each one of the following: &#x0201C;<italic>E. coli</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>S. pullorum</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>S. gallinarum</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Haemophilus paragallinarum</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Mannheimia haemolitica</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Gallibacterium anatis</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Mycoplasma</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Chlamydia psittaci</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Bordetella avium</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Mycobacterium avium</italic>,&#x0201D; &#x0201C;<italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic>,&#x0201D; and &#x0201C;<italic>Erysipelothrix rhusiophathiae</italic>.&#x0201D; Articles with information on &#x0201C;commensal&#x0201D; <italic>E. coli</italic> and NTS spp. were excluded. Also studies reporting on isolates from healthy animals or meat were excluded. We excluded papers covering bacteria isolated from wildlife and domestic pets.</p>
<p>From each publication containing phenotypic data on AMR, the following information was compiled (where available): (1) type of poultry production (poultry species, broiler chicken, layer chicken, and unspecified type); (2) country location; (3) year of sampling; (4) methodologies employed for AMR testing (including interpretative criteria); and (5) phenotypic resistance data. The prevalence of resistance against specific antimicrobials in individual studies was compiled in tabular form. For papers where dilution methods were used, the MIC50 (or Minimum Inhibitory Concentration required to inhibit the growth of 50% of organisms) were compiled, either as reported or inferred from the MIC distribution. For specific pathogens, AMR prevalence data were summarized by antimicrobial using the median and interquartile range (IQR) across studies. MIC50 data across studies were summarized using the median and IQR for pathogen-antimicrobial combinations investigated in at least three publications. Data summarizing prevalence of AMR was plotted for comparative purposes using spider charts using the <italic>fmsb</italic> package in R software (<uri xlink:href="http://www.r-project.org">www.r-project.org</uri>).</p>
<sec id="S2-1">
<title><italic>Escherichia</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>coli</italic></title>
<p><italic>Escherichia coli</italic> is a Gram-negative, facultative anaerobe bacterium of the Enterobacteriaceae family. Since <italic>E. coli</italic> is ubiquitous in the gastrointestinal tract of warm-blooded animals, it has been extensively used to monitor AMR in food animals (including poultry) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">18</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">19</xref>). In addition, some <italic>E. coli</italic> strains hosted by poultry are potential source of AMR genes that may transmit to humans (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">20</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">21</xref>).</p>
<p>Certain <italic>E. coli</italic> strains, designated as &#x0201C;avian pathogenic <italic>E. coli</italic>&#x0201D; (APEC) are causative agents of colibacillosis, one of the principal causes of morbidity and mortality in poultry worldwide (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">22</xref>). Only studies investigating APEC strains are included in this review, therefore excluding studies on <italic>E. coli</italic> from chicken enteric samples (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">23</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">24</xref>).</p>
<p>A total of 12 publications investigated phenotypic resistance in a total of 1,331 APEC isolates from diseased chickens, from Asia (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>&#x02013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>), Africa (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">30</xref>&#x02013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">32</xref>), the United States (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>), Spain (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">35</xref>), and Brazil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">36</xref>) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). All studies included APEC isolates from the chicken species, except one study that, in addition, included isolates from ducks and geese (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>). All studies were carried out using the disk diffusion test, except two where isolates were tested using microbroth dilution, and one that used the broth dilution test (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">1</xref>). Two studies reported the MIC distribution of investigated strains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>). A study on 100 APEC strains from Iran reported 99% resistant strains against colistin using the disk diffusion test (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>), but it is not clear what breakpoints were used. In addition, colistin resistance cannot be reliably estimated using disk sensitivity tests (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">37</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T1">
<label>Table 1</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of 12 phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of avian pathogenic <italic>E. coli</italic>.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="rows">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates (animal host)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation criteria</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>) (China)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2004&#x02013;2005</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">70 (chicken)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth dilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (83.0%), CEF (7.0%), CN (44.0%), S (42.0%), AK (12.0%), C (79.0% R), FFN (29.0%), OTC (100%), SXT (100%), ENR (83.0%), CIP (81.0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>) (China)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2007&#x02013;2014</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">243 (chickens, ducks geese)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-S22 (2012)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (81.1% R; 13.9% I), CTX (21.0% R; 1.0% I), CRO (18.0% R; 2.0% I), CAZ (10.0% R; 5.0% I), ETP (0%), ATM (15.0% R; 2.0% I), CN (28.0% R; 69.0% I), KA (31.0% R; 67.0% I), S (79.0% R; 5.0% I), AK (6.0% R; 2.0% I), TE (97.5% R), SXT (78.2% R), SMX (78.2% R), SSZ (80.7% R), CIP (63% R; 6% I), NA (82.3% R), C (48.0% R; 7.0% I), NIT (13.0% R; 24.0% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2001&#x02013;2003</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">445 (chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth micro dilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002) and NARMS (2003)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (40.0% R; 1.6% I), AMC (12.4% R; 11.9% I), CFN (22.2% R; 31.2% I), CEF (3.8% R; 1.8% I), TIC (30.1% R; 6.7% I), CN (44.0% R; 4.3%), SPC (51.5% R; 1.1% I), TIM (98.2% R; 1.1% I), FFN (12.8% R; 62.7% I), TE (79.3% R; 0.2% I), SXT (9.0% R), ENR (3.4% R; 8.3% I), DIF (8.3% R; 9.4% I), ORB (2.5% R; 5.6% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>) (Jordan)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not specified</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">18 (broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth micro dilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M7-A3 (1999)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMX (100%), CA (100%), CN (41.0%), SPC (47.0%), ERY (100%), FFN (53.0%), OTC (100%), DOX (100%), CIP (71.0%), ENR (76.0%), FOM (35.0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">30</xref>) (Zimbabwe)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2011&#x02013;2012</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">103 (chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-S17 (2007)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (94.1% R; 1% I), CLX (100% R), CN (1.0% R; 1.9% I), NEO (54.4% R; 37.9% I), TE (100% R), CIP (0% R; 0% I), C (36.9% R; 45.6% I), BAC (100% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>) (Egypt)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2014&#x02013;2016</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">116 (broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusiona</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-S20 (2010)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (100%), CTX (58.6%), CN (48.3%), KA (69.0%), S (50.0%), C (84.5%), TE (93.1%), SXT (58.6%), NA (84.5%), CIP (41.4%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">7</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">32</xref>) (Egypt)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2011</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">73 (broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A3 (2008)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (97.3%), AMC (35.6%), CFN (65.8%), FOX (61.6%), OXA (78.1%), CTT (60.3%), CTX (23.3%), CPD (21.9%), CO (19.2%), ATM (41.1%), S (93.2%), KA (89.0%), SPC (95.9%), CN (43.8%), C (79.5%), TE (95.9%), SXT (82.2%), NA (67.1%), CIP (15.1%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">8</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">36</xref>) (Brazil)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2012&#x02013;2014</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">15 (broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CASFM (document not specified)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMX (74.0%), AMC (13.0%), CFN (53.0%), CEF (40.0%), FOX (7.0%), CN (20.0%), NEO (7.0%), APR (0%), TE (40.0%), TMP (34.0%), SXT (34.0%), NA (77.0%), FLM (80.0%), ENR (40.0%), COL (0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">9</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">28</xref>)<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn2"><sup>b</sup></xref> (Iran)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not specified</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">100 (chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI (document not specified)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CFX (50.0% R; 34.0% I), CN (17.0% R; 2.0% I), OTC (96.0% R; 1.0% I), DOX (95.0% R; 2.0% I), SXT (89.0% R; 1.0% I), NA (100% R), CIP (91.0% R; 2.0% I), NOR (88.0% R; 3.0% I), COL (99.0% R; 1.0% S); LIP (53.0% R; 6.0% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">10</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">29</xref>) (Thailand)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2007&#x02013;2010</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">50 (chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (82.0% R; 18.0% I), AMX (86.0% R; 14.0% I), AMC (28.0% R; 14.0% I), CLX (72.0% R; 28.0% I), CN (24.0% R; 12.0% I), KA (28.0% R; 10.0% I), NEO (62.0% R; 28.0% I), ERY (80.0%; 20.0%), LCM (94.0% R; 6.0% I), LIP (30.0% R; 42.0% I), TIA (100% R), TIM (100% R), TYL (100% R), TE (32.0% R; 26.0% I), OTC (50.0% R; 8.0% I), DOX (30.0% R; 18.0% I), SXT (34.0% R; 6.0% I), ENR (24.0% R; 6.0% I), NOR (20.0% R; 10.0% I), COL (24.0% R; 10.0% I), FOM (8.0% R; 8.0% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">11</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">35</xref>) (Spain)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2012</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">22 (chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn1"><sup>a</sup></xref> broth microdilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">EUCAST (2015)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (78.0%), CTX (34.0%), CAZ (31.0%), FOX (13.0%), CFP (0%), S (69.0%), KA (19.0%), CN (16.0%), C (13.0%), FFN (6.0%), TE (91.0%), SXT (63.0%), TMP (59.0%), NA (88.0%), CIP (91.0%), COL (0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">12</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1998&#x02013;2002</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">80 (chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M100-S6 (1995), M2-A6 (1997), M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (11.2%), CEF (8.5%), CN (33.8%), AK (0%), SPC (88.8%), TE (67.5%), SDX (92.5%), SXT (5.0%), ENR (5.1%)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>In studies where intermediate susceptibility is given, results are presented as: R, resistant; I, intermediate resistant</italic>.</p>
<p><italic>CASFM, Comite De L&#x02019;antibiogramme De La Societe Francaise De Microbiologie; CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute; NCCLS, National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; EUCAST, European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; AK, amikacin; AMX, amoxicillin; AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; AMP, ampicillin; APR, apramycin; ATM, aztreonam; BAC, bacitracin; C, chloramphenicol; CA, clavulanic acid; CAZ, ceftazidime; CEF, ceftiofur; CFN, cephalothin; CFP, cefepime; CFX, cefuroxime; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLX, cephalexin; CN, gentamicin; COL, colistin; CPD, cefpodoxime; CRO, ceftriaxone; CTX, cefotaxime; CTT, cefotetan; DIF, difloxacin; DOX, doxycycline; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; ETP, ertapenem; FFN, florfenicol; FLM, flumequine; FOM, fosfomycin; FOX, cefoxitin; KA, kanamycin; LCM, lincomycin; LIP, lincospectin; NA, nalidixic acid; NEO, neomycin; NIT, nitrofurantoine; NOR, norfloxacin; ORB, orbifloxacin; OTC, oxytetracycline; OXA, oxacillin; S, streptomycin; SDT, sulfadiazine/trimethoprim; SDX, sulfadimethoxine; SDZ, sulfadiazine; SMX, sulfamethoxazole; SPC, spectinomycin; SSZ, sulfisoxazole; SXT, co-trimoxazole; TE, tetracycline; TIA, tiamulin; TIC, ticarcillin; TIM, tilmicosin; TMP, trimethoprim; TYL, tylosin</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn1"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>MIC distributions reported; disk concentrations reported</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn2"><p><italic><sup>b</sup>Excluded from summary estimates of resistance</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Results of phenotypic resistance in APEC are presented in Table S1 in Supplementary Material. Resistance levels of strains were: ampicillin (median 82.0%; IQR 59.0&#x02013;95.7%), amoxicillin (80.0%; IQR 43.0&#x02013;93.0%), ceftiofur (8.5%; IQR 5.4&#x02013;52.9%), streptomycin (69.0%; IQR 46.0&#x02013;86.0%), gentamicin (30.9%; IQR 18.5&#x02013;43.9%), kanamycin (31.0%, IQR 23.5&#x02013;79.0%), chloramphenicol (63.5%, IQR 36.9&#x02013;79.5%), florfenicol (20.9%; IQR 9.4&#x02013;41.0%), tetracycline (91.0%; IQR 53.7&#x02013;96.7%), co-trimoxazole (60.8%; IQR 34.0&#x02013;85.6%), nalidixic acid (83.0%, IQR 77.0&#x02013;88.0%), ciprofloxacin (67.0%; IQR 28.3&#x02013;86.0%), and enrofloxacin (32.0% IQR 5.1&#x02013;76.0%).</p>
<p>A study from China identified <italic>floR, cmlA, cat1, cat2</italic>, and <italic>cat3</italic> (genes associated with florfenicol and chloramphenicol resistance) among APEC strains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">25</xref>). In another study from the same country, the presence of class I integrons on isolates from the same country was strongly correlated with multi-drug resistance (93.3% MDR strains were positive for class 1 integron, compared with 12.5% among non-MDR strains) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">26</xref>).</p>
<p>In a study from Egypt integrons (mostly class 1) were detected in 29.3% isolates, and were associated with the presence of genes encoding for resistance to trimethoprim (<italic>dfrA1, dfrA5, dfrA7, dfrA12</italic>), streptomycin/spectinomycin (<italic>aadA1, aadA2, aadA5, aadA23</italic>), and streptothricin (<italic>sat2</italic>). Other, non-integron-associated resistance genes, included tetracycline (<italic>tet</italic>A and <italic>tet</italic>B), ampicillin (<italic>bla</italic><sub>TEM</sub>), chloramphenicol (<italic>cat1</italic>), kanamycin (<italic>aphA1</italic>), and sulfonamide (<italic>sul1</italic> and <italic>sul2</italic>). The S83L mutation in the <italic>gyrA</italic> gene (present in 23.2% isolates) was the most frequently genetic determinant of quinolone resistance, followed by <italic>qnrA, qnrB</italic>, and <italic>qnrS</italic> genes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>). A previous study on 73 APEC strains from the same country (of which 67.0% were nalidixic resistance, 15.1% ciprofloxacin resistance), plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance genes <italic>qnrA1, qnrB2, qnrS1</italic> were found in 64.0% isolates, and the fluoroquinolone-modifying acetyltransferase gene (<italic>aac</italic>(<italic>6_</italic>)<italic>-Ib-cr</italic>) in 7.0% isolates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">32</xref>). However, the study did not investigate quinolone resistance encoded by genetic mutations.</p>
<p>A study on 116 APEC isolates from broilers in Egypt showed a remarkably high percentage of ESBL-producing strains (58.6%). The <italic>bla</italic><sub>TEM</sub> and <italic>bla</italic><sub>CTX&#x02212;M&#x02212;1</sub> genes were the most prevalent genes in these strains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">31</xref>). In a study from Spain of 11 cephalosporin resistant isolates, 6 contained <italic>bla</italic><sub>CTX-M-14</sub>, 2 <italic>bla</italic><sub>SHV-12</sub>, 2 <italic>bla</italic><sub>CMY-2</sub>, and 1 <italic>bla</italic><sub>SHV-2</sub> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">35</xref>).</p>
<p>A recent study on a large collection (980) of APEC isolates from several countries identified the plasmid-mediated <italic>mcr-1</italic> colistin resistance gene in 8 isolates from China (of 31 tested) and 4 from Egypt (of 20 tested). Most such strains were multi-resistance to 10 or more antimicrobials (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">38</xref>).</p>
<p>A study on APEC isolates from Jordan investigated the most effective synergistic effects of combinations of 11 antimicrobials by calculation of a fractional inhibitory concentration index of checkerboard titrations. The combinations of amoxicillin&#x02013;clavulanic acid, ciprofloxacin&#x02013;fosfomycin, oxytetracycline&#x02013;erythromycin, oxytetracycline&#x02013;florfenicol, amoxicillin&#x02013;gentamicin, oxytetracycline&#x02013;spectinomycin, and spectinomycin&#x02013;erythromycin were the most effective <italic>in vitro</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">27</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-2">
<title><italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum</title>
<p><italic>Salmonella</italic> Pullorum/Gallinarum are biovars within the genus <italic>S. enterica</italic> subspecies <italic>enterica</italic> within the family Enterobacteriaceae. They are the etiological agents of pullorum disease (<italic>S</italic>. Pullorum) and fowl typhoid (<italic>S</italic>. Gallinarum), two septicemic diseases widely common in much of the world, though they have been eradicated from commercial poultry operations in many developed countries (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">39</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">40</xref>).</p>
<p>Eight publications investigated phenotypic resistance in a total of 780 <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum isolates from Korea (four publications) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>&#x02013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">44</xref>), India (two) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">45</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">46</xref>), Brazil (one) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">47</xref>), and China (one) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">48</xref>) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">2</xref>). All studies used the disk diffusion test, except one study where agar dilution was used (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">44</xref>), and one where both tests were used (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T2">
<label>Table 2</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of 7 phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum from poultry.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="rows">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates (bacterial spp.)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>) (Korea)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1995&#x02013;2001</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">258 (SG)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion test<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref>; agar diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn4"><sup>b</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M31-A (2000)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (13.0%), AMC (3.9%), CN (43.4%), KA (69.6%), TE (74.8%), OTC (77.9%), SXT (1.5%), COL (0.4%), ENR (6.5%), CIP (10.9%), NOR (52.5%), OFL (82.6%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">43</xref>) (Korea)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2010&#x02013;2012</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">26 (SG)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion test<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-s22 (2012)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (0%), CFZ (0%), AMC (0%), CFN (0%), FOX (0%), CTX (0%), IMP (0%), CN (0%), S (0% R; 88.5% I), AK (0%), ERY (100% R), TE (0%), SXT (0%), C (0%), CIP (0%), ENR (0%), NOR (0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">44</xref>) (Korea)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2002&#x02013;2007</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">105 (SG)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Agar dilution test</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002), CLSI<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5"><sup>c</sup></xref> (2006), DAMR (2006)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (41.9% R), AMX (24.8% R), S (54.3% R), CN (45.7% R), NEO (7.8% R), TE (16.2% R), SMX (36.2% R), NA (98.1% R), ENR (10.5% R; 83.8% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">47</xref>) (Brazil)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2006&#x02013;2013</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">32 (SP/SG)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002); CLSI M100-S23 (2013)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMC (0%), CTX (0%), IMP (0%), CAZ (0%), CFP (0%), ETP (0%), CEF (0%), TE (6.3% R), C (0%), FFN (0%), SXT (1%), NA (37.5%), CIP (34.4%), ENR (25.0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top"/>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">47</xref>) (Brazil)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2006&#x02013;2013</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">18 (SP)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">As above</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMC (0%), CTX (0%), IMP (0%), CAZ (0%), CFP (0%), ETP (0%), CEF (0%), ETP (0%), TE (0%), C (0%), FFN (0%), SXT (0%), NA (38.9%), CIP (33.3%), ENR (5.6%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">48</xref>) (China)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1962&#x02013;2010</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">337 (SP)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-S22 (2012)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (34.4%), CAB (25.5%), CFM (46.6%), CTX (2.4%), S (61.7%), CN (5.3%), KA (3.9%), SPC (45.0%), C (4.1%), TE (58.7%), SMX (52.8%), TMP (82.8%), SXT (49.4%), NA (69.0%), CIP (4.5%), NIT (26.4%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">45</xref>) (India)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">4 (SG)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-S25 (2013)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP&#x02013;SBT (0%), AMC (0%), CRO (0%), AK (0%), S (0%), CN (0%), TE (0%), DOX (0%), ERY (0%), AZI (0%), C (0%), SXT (0%), CIP (0%), ENR (0%), COL (0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">7</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">46</xref>) (India)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2009&#x02013;2010</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">12 (SG)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn3"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk manufacturer</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (8.3% R; 33.4% I), AMC (0% R; 8.3% I), CLX (0% R; 41.7% I), CN (0% R; 8.3% I), KA (0% R; 66.7% I), NEO (0% R; 58.3% I), TE (16.7% R; 83.3% I), ERY (100% R), C (0% R; 33.4% I), SXT (0% R; 33.4% I), NA (75.2% R; 33.4% I), ENR (0% R; 25.0% I), CIP (0% R; 16.7% I), OFL (0% R; 25.0% I), COL (0% R; 16.7% I)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>In studies where intermediate susceptibility is given, results are presented as: R, fully resistant; I, intermediate resistant; SP, S. Pullorum; SG, S. Gallinarum</italic>.</p>
<p><italic>CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute; DAMR, Danish Integrated Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring and Research Program Use of Antimicrobial Agents and Occurrence of Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacteria from Food Animals, Foods and Humans in Denmark. ISSN 1600-2032; NCCLS, National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; AMP, ampicillin; AMP-SBT, ampicillin&#x02013;sulbactam; AMX, amoxicillin; AK, amikacin; AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; AZI, azithromycin; C, chloramphenicol; CAB, carbenicillin; CAZ, ceftazidime; CEF, ceftiofur; CFM, cefamandole; CFN, cephalothin; CFP, cefepime; CFZ, cefazolin; CN, gentamicin; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLX, cephalexin; COL, colistin; CRO, ceftriaxone; CTX, cefotaxime; DOX, doxycycline; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; ETP, ertapenem; FFN, florfenicol; FOX, cefoxitin; IMP, imipenem; KA, kanamycin; NA, nalidixic acid; NEO, neomycin; NIT, nitrofurantoine; NOR, norfloxacin; OFL, ofloxacin; OTC, oxytetracycline; S, streptomycin; SMX, sulfamethoxazole; SMZ, sulfamethoxazole; SPC, spectinomycin; SXT, co-trimoxazole; TE, tetracycline; TMP, trimethoprim</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn3"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>Disk concentrations reported</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn4"><p><italic><sup>b</sup>MIC50 reported</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn5"><p><italic><sup>c</sup>Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; sixteenth informational supplement</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Overall levels of phenotypic resistance were: ampicillin (median 13.0%; IQR 4.1&#x02013;38.1%), amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid (0%; IQR 0&#x02013;0%), cefotaxime (0%; IQR 0&#x02013;1.2%), streptomycin (27.0%; IQR 0&#x02013;58.0%), gentamicin (2.6%; 0&#x02013;43.4%), chloramphenicol (0%; IQR 0&#x02013;0%), tetracycline (11.2%; IQR 0&#x02013;37.7%), co-trimoxazole (0%; IQR 0&#x02013;1%), nalidixic acid (69.0%; IQR 38.2&#x02013;86.6%), ciprofloxacin (2.0%; 0&#x02013;33.0%), enrofloxacin (2.8%; IQR 0&#x02013;10.5%).</p>
<p>A study from Korea reported an increase over time in phenotypic resistance among <italic>S</italic>. Gallinarum isolates: whereas in 1995 all isolates were fully susceptible to 12 antimicrobials, except for tetracyclines (&#x0003E;83% resistance), by 2001, levels of resistance were: ampicillin (87.0%), gentamicin (56.6%), kanamycin (30.4%), enrofloxacin (93.5%), ciprofloxacin (89.1%), norfloxacin (47.5%), and ofloxacin (17.4%) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">41</xref>). Over the same period, the MIC range for enrofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, norfloxacin, ofloxacin also increased considerably, in parallel with an increase in the rate of mutations of the <italic>gyrA</italic> (from 5.6 to 89.1%) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">42</xref>).</p>
<p>A further study from the same country unexpectedly identified <italic>S</italic>. Gallinarum in table eggs from healthy chicken layer flocks (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">43</xref>). Surprisingly, isolates were pan-susceptible for most antimicrobials except for streptomycin (88.5% were intermediate resistance).</p>
<p>A study of 42 quinolone resistant strains identified the substitution of a Ser to a Phe or Tyr at position 83 in the <italic>gyrA</italic> gene among 71.0% of isolates. The study identified three different class 1 integrons among 57 sulfonamide resistant strains, containing resistance genes <italic>aadA</italic> (52.6%), <italic>aadB</italic> (12.3%), or <italic>aadB-aadA</italic>. In addition, isolates harboring the integron containing <italic>aadB</italic>-<italic>aadA</italic> displayed resistance to aminoglycosides, as well as increased resistance to fluoroquinolones. As in the case of <italic>E. coli</italic> strains, it is suspected that integrons are largely responsible for multi-drug resistance; clonal expansion and horizontal gene transfer may have contributed to the spread of AMR integrons in these organisms (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">49</xref>).</p>
<p>A study of 337 <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum strains from China showed a consistent increase in resistance between 1962 and 2010. Resistance levels against 11 of 16 antimicrobials tested was significantly greater among int1(&#x0002B;) than int1(&#x02212;) isolates, and resistance levels to cefamandole, trimethoprim and co-trimoxazole were significantly higher for biofilm-positive types compared with the biofilm-negative groups (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">48</xref>). Recently, full genome sequencing of a multi-drug resistant <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum isolate from China has been published, and included two prophages, the ST104 and prophage-4 (Fels2) previously found in <italic>E. coli</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">50</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-3">
<title><italic>Pasteurella</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>multocida</italic></title>
<p><italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> is a Gram-negative, non-motile, facultative anaerobic bacterium of the Pasteurellaceae family. It is the causative agent of fowl cholera, a disease that often manifests as acute fatal septicemia in adult birds, although chronic, and asymptomatic infections also occur (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">51</xref>).</p>
<p>A total of eight publications have investigated phenotypic resistance in <italic>P. multocida</italic> isolates, including studies from the United States (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">52</xref>), Brazil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">53</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">54</xref>), India (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">55</xref>), Indonesia (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">56</xref>), Hungary (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">57</xref>), and Egypt (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">58</xref>) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">3</xref>). Four studies investigated isolates originating exclusively from the chicken species, and the other four included isolates from ducks, geese, Muscovy ducks, pheasants, and quails, in addition to chicken isolates. Five studies used disk diffusion, and three the broth microdilution technique.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T3">
<label>Table 3</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of 8 phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of <italic>P. multocida</italic> from poultry.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="rows">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates (host species)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">55</xref>) (India)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">94 (chicken), 22 (duck), 4 (quail), 2 (turkey), 1 (goose)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk manufacturer</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (49.6% R; 43.9% I), AMP (23.6% R; 22.8% I), CAB (59.3% R; 26.0% I), CN (23.6% R; 20.3% I), S (32.5% R; 44.7% I), AK (55.5% R; 19.5% I), C (6.5% R; 19.5% I), ERY (50.4% R; 49.6% I), LCM (2.4% R; 35.8% I), TE (24.4% R; 43.1% I), OTC (8.1% R; 30.1% I), DOX (25.2% R; 17.9% I), SDZ (100% R), TMP (39.0% R; 9.8% I), SXT (31.7% R; 13.8% I), CIP (8.9% R, 40.6% I), ENR (8.1% R; 20.3% I), NOR (8.1% R; 30.1% I), RIF (44.5% R; 25.2%), NIT (34.1% R; 26.0% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">56</xref>) (Indonesia)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1998&#x02013;1999</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">9 (chicken)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not indicated</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (0% R), CN (11.1% R, 11.1% I), S (22% R, 66.7% I), ERY (22% R, 77.8% I), LCM (100% R), TE (55.6%R; 11.1% I), DOX (11.1% R, 11.1% I), SDZ (100% R), TMP (0% R), ENR (22.2% R, 11.1% I), BAC (44.4% R, 33% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">53</xref>) (Brazil)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">56 (chicken, turkey)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A3 (2008)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMX (1.8%), CEF (1.8%), CN (1.8%), ERY (5.4%), ENR (23.8%), TE (12.5%), SQN (76.8%), SXT (19.6%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">58</xref>) (Egypt)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">10 (chicken)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M31-A2 (2006)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMX (100%), S (0%), FFN (0%), TE (100%), DOX (40%), SXT (0%), CIP (0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2001&#x02013;2003</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">80 (chicken)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002), NARMS (2006)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMC (1.2% R), AMP (1.2% R), TIC (0% R), CFN (1.2% R), CEF (1.2% R), CN (2.5% R), SPC (1.2% R), TIM (2.5% R), FFN (1.2% R), TE (6.2% R), SXT (0% R), ENR (1.2% R), DIF (1.2% R), ORB (1.2% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">57</xref>) (Hungary)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2005&#x02013;2008</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">7 (geese), 7 (duck), 1 (muscovy duck), 3 (turkey), 1 (chicken), 1 (pheasant)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M2-A8 (2003)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (0% R), CQN (0% R), APR (15.0% R; 40.0% I), NEO (15.0% R), ERY (0% R; 40.0% I), TUL (0% R), C (0% R), FFN (0% R), TE (15.0% R; 5% I), DOX (0% R; 5% I), FLM (40.0% R), ENR (0% R), OXO (40.0% R), SXT (20.0% R), COL (0% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">7</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">54</xref>) (Brazil)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">99 (chicken), 13 (Japanese quail)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn6"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A3 (2008)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (3.4% R), CFN (1.6% R), AK (1.6% R), TE (5.1% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">8</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">52</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2006&#x02013;2011</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">207 (chicken)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (16.0% R; 16.0% I), AMX (5.0% R; 2.0% I), CEF (3.0% R; 2.0% I), NEO (2.0% R; 9.0% I), CN (6.0% R; 15.0% I), ERY (18.0% R; 78.0% I), TYL (97.0% R; 2.0% I), CLD (97.0% R; 3.0% I), FFN (2.0% R; 4.0% I), TE (9.0% R; 5.0% I), DOX (1.0% R; 0% I), OTC (9.0% R; 5.0% I), STZ (5.0% R; 3.0% I), SDX (9.0% R; 6.0% I), SXT (2.0% R; 2.0% I), ENR (1.0% R; 6.0% I)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>In studies where intermediate susceptibility is given, results are presented as: R, fully resistant; I, intermediate resistant</italic>.</p>
<p><italic>CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute; NCCLS, National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; AK, amikacin; AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; AMP, ampicillin; AMX, amoxicillin; APR, apramcyn; BAC, bacitracin; C, chloramphenicol; CAB, carbenicillin; CEF, ceftiofur; CFN, cephalotin; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLD, clindamycin; CN, gentamicin; COL, colistin; CQN, cefquinome; DIF, difloxacin; DOX, doxycycline; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; FFN, florphenicol; FLM, flumequine; LCM, lincomycin; NEO, neomycin; NOR, norfloxacin; NIT, nitrofurantoine; ORB, orbifloxacin; OTC, oxytetracycline; OXO, oxolinic acid; PEN, penicillin; RIF, rifampicin; S, streptomycin; SDZ, sulfadiazine; SDX, sulfadimethoxine; SPC, spectinomycin; SQN, sulfaquinoxaline; STZ, sulfathiazole; SXT, co-trimoxazole; TE, tetracycline; TIC, ticarcillin; TIM, tilmicosin; TMP, trimethoprim; TYL, tylosin; TUL, tulathromycin</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn6"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>MIC distributions reported; disk concentrations reported</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>In total, 617 isolates were tested in such studies. Overall levels of phenotypic resistance were: ampicillin (median 2.3%; IQR 0.6&#x02013;13.5%), gentamicin (4.3%; IQR 1.8&#x02013;11.1%), erythromycin (18.0%; IQR 2.7&#x02013;64.1%), florfenicol (0.6%; IQR 0&#x02013;1.6%), tetracycline (13.8%; IQR 7.6&#x02013;40.0%), co-trimoxazole (10.8%; IQR 0&#x02013;20.0%), and enrofloxacin (4.7%; IQR 1.0&#x02013;22.0%). A study on 120 isolates from poultry in India showed 100% resistance against sulfadiazine, a drug most often used in the field to treat fowl cholera in that country. Only resistance against chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, norfloxacin, enrofloxacin, gentamicin, and lincomycin, was observed in &#x0003C;10% isolates, remaining the only effective therapeutic alternatives (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">55</xref>). However, the authors did not provide the interpretation criteria, other than &#x0201C;provided by the disk manufacturer.&#x0201D; In another study of 56 poultry isolates from Brazil, levels of resistance were highest for sulfonamides (sulfaquinoxaline) (&#x0007E;77%); in contrast levels of resistance against &#x003B2;-lactams (amoxicillin, ceftiofur), aminoglycosides (gentamicin), and macrolides (erythromycin) were &#x0003C;6%. In a study from the United States of 80 isolates, resistance was less than 7% against all antimicrobials. In comparison with <italic>E. coli</italic> and <italic>Salmonella</italic> isolates, <italic>P. multocida</italic> isolates from poultry were found to be much more susceptible to the antimicrobials tested (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">33</xref>).</p>
<p>Studies on isolates from pigs, cattle, and poultry in Europe have shown that resistance in <italic>P. multocida</italic> is generally mediated by small (4&#x02013;7&#x02009;kb size) plasmids (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">59</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">60</xref>). A larger plasmid (pVM111) has also been shown to contain multiple genes conferring resistance against tetracyclines, sulfonamides, and streptomycin resistance (<italic>tetR-tet</italic>(H), <italic>sul2</italic>, and <italic>strA</italic>), supporting the hypothesis that the spread of resistance is due to horizontal transfer of plasmids rather than clonal dissemination. It is not known whether this explains the relatively lower prevalence of AMR in <italic>P. multocida</italic> compared with other Gram-negative bacteria (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">61</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-4">
<title><italic>Avibacterium</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>paragallinarum</italic></title>
<p><italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic> (previously <italic>H. paragallinarum</italic>) is a capsulated, rod-shaped, Gram-negative facultative anaerobe bacterium of the Pasteurellaceae family. It is the etiological agent of infectious coryza, an acute disease of the upper respiratory tract of chickens worldwide (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B62">62</xref>).</p>
<p>A total of seven publications investigated phenotypic resistance in 143&#x02009;<italic>A. paragallinarum</italic> isolates from diseased flocks in Asia (India, Thailand, Indonesia, Taiwan) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">63</xref>&#x02013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">67</xref>), Africa (Uganda) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">68</xref>), and the Americas (Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Panama) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>). All studies used the disk diffusion test, except one where broth microdilution (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">64</xref>), and one where agar dilution (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">68</xref>) tests were used (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">4</xref>). Initial MIC interpretative criteria (breakpoints) of resistance for <italic>A. paragallinarum</italic> were provided by Fales et al. (1986) and cited by Blackall (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">4</xref>). Overall levels of phenotypic resistance for the main antimicrobials tested were: ampicillin (median 38.9%; IQR 5.9&#x02013;60%), neomycin (77.4%; IQR 56.2&#x02013;100%), streptomycin (72.7%; IQR 62.1&#x02013;88.9%), erythromycin (77.8%; IQR 69.8&#x02013;86.3%), co-trimoxazole (44.1%; IQR 19.6&#x02013;67.0%).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T4">
<label>Table 4</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of 7 phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of <italic>A. paragallinarum</italic> from poultry.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="rows">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">63</xref>) (Indonesia)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1991&#x02013;1999</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">14</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn7"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS (1984)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (7.1% R), NEO (71.4% R), S (78.6% R), ERY (78.6% R), OTC (57.1% R), DOX (35.7% R), SXT (21.4% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">64</xref>) (Taiwan)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1990&#x02013;2003</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">18</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth micro dilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (38.9% R), NEO (83.3% R), S (88.9% R), ERY (77.8% R), SXT (83.3% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">68</xref>) (Uganda)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">5</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Agar dilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (60% R), NEO (0%), S (60% R), C (0%), TE (80% R), SMX (60% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn8"><sup>b</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">65</xref>) (Thailand)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1990&#x02013;2009</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">18</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A3 (2008)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (27.8% R; 27.8% I), CLX (100%), AMP (33.3% R; 5.5% I), AMX (27.8%), AMC (0%), CEF (27.8%), NEO (100%); CN (5.5% R; 11.1% I), SPC (11.1%), ERY (77.8% R; 16.7% I), TYL (0% R; 5.5% I), LCM (100%), OTC (55.6% R; 5.5% I), DOX (38.9% R; 11.1%), SXT (66.7%), ENR (27.8% R; 11.1% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">5<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn8"><sup>b</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">66</xref>) (Thailand)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1990&#x02013;2009</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">18</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth micro dilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn7"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M100-S21 (2011) and (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">8</xref>)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (5.6% R), AMX (0%), CEF (5.6% R), ERY (66.7% R), CN (55.6% R), S (66.7% R), SPC (50% R), OTC (72.2% R), DOX (66.7% R), SXT (66.7% R), CIP (66.7% R), ENR (50% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>) (Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Panama)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">66</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn7"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">65</xref>)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (26.0% R), AMC (4.7% R), AMP (5.9% R), S (62.1% R), CN (46.8% R), NEO (56.2% R), KA (24.5% R), ERY (73.0% R), LCM (81.5% R), TE (37.8% R), SXT (19.6% R), COL (22.8% R), FOM (1.6% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">7</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">67</xref>) (India)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not given</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (100% R), AMC (0%), NEO (100% I), S (100% I), C (0%), TE (100% R), OTC (100% R), DOX (100% R), SXT (0%), FUR (100% I), ENR (0%), CIP (0%), PEF (0%)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>In studies where intermediate susceptibility is given, results are presented as: R, fully resistant; I, intermediate resistant</italic>.</p>
<p><italic>CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute; NCCLS, National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; AMP, ampicillin; AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; AMX, amoxicillin; C, chloramphenicol; CEF, ceftiofur; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CLX, cephalexin; CN, gentamicin; COL, colistin; DOX, doxycycline; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; FOM, fosfomycin; FUR, furazolidone; KA, kanamycin; LCM, lincomycin; NEO, neomycin; OTC, oxytetracycline; PEN, penicillin; S, streptomycin; SMX, sulfamethoxazole; SPC, spectinomycin; SXT, co-trimoxazole; TE, tetracycline; TYL, tylosin</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn7"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>MIC distributions reported; disk concentrations reported</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn8"><p><italic><sup>b</sup>Same strain collection (year of study provided by the author as a personal communication)</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>A comparison of results between the disk diffusion method (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">65</xref>) and the broth microdilution (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">66</xref>) on the same panel (18 isolates) from Thailand revealed important discrepancies in the interpretation of results, notably for ampicillin (33.3% disk diffusion vs. 5.6% broth microdilution), amoxicillin (27.8 vs. 0%), ceftiofur (27.8 vs. 5.6%), enrofloxacin (27.8 vs. 50.0%), and spectinomycin (11.1 vs. 50.0%).</p>
<p>A study on isolates from Latin American countries (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">5</xref>) showed the lowest level of resistance against co-trimoxazole (potentiated sulfonamide). However, the authors remind that sulfonamides should be administered with caution in poultry given their low safety margin and the presence of residues in meat and eggs for a relatively longer period (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">13</xref>).</p>
<p>A study of four <italic>A. paragallinarum</italic> isolates in Tanzania detected genes associated with streptomycin (<italic>strA</italic>), ampicillin (<italic>bla</italic><sub>TEM</sub>), tetracycline (<italic>tetC</italic> and <italic>tetA</italic>), and sulfamethoxazole (sul2) resistance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">68</xref>). In a study of 18 isolates from Taiwan about 72% isolates contained plasmids pYMH5 and pA14 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">64</xref>). Sequencing data indicated that pYMH5 encodes functional streptomycin-, sulfonamide-, kanamycin-, and neomycin-resistance genes (<italic>sul2, strA, mbeCy, aphA1</italic>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-5">
<title><italic>Gallibacterium</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>anatis</italic></title>
<p><italic>Gallibacterium anatis</italic> biovar haemolytica is a Gram-negative bacterium of the Pasteurellaceae family. The organism is known to colonize the upper respiratory tract and lower reproductive tract of chickens, but also been experimentally shown to induce clinical infection (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">69</xref>). <italic>G. anatis</italic> has previously been misclassified as <italic>M. haemolytica, P. hemolytica, P. anatis</italic>, and <italic>Actinobacillus salpingitidis</italic>, but was recently classified as a new genus (<italic>Gallibacterium</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">70</xref>). Surveillance data from the state of Mississippi (US) confirmed a progressive increase in confirmed cases of <italic>G. anatis</italic> from 2006 to 2011. By 2011, the annual number of confirmed cases of disease (28) was comparable with those of fowl cholera (32) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">52</xref>). A total of three studies have investigated phenotypic resistance in <italic>G. anatis</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">52</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B71">71</xref>). However, in one of them, these isolates were identified as <italic>M. haemolytica</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>). However, in the absence of specific breakpoints published, one study only indicated the mean inhibition zone of isolates, indicating that isolates showed maximum sensitivity to norfloxacin (32&#x02009;mm) and minimum (16&#x02009;mm) to erythromycin (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B71">71</xref>). Generally, levels of resistance were higher than those observed for <italic>P. multocida</italic> and <italic>A. paragallinarum</italic> (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">5</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T5">
<label>Table 5</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of two phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of <italic>G. anatis</italic> and <italic>M. haemolytica</italic> from poultry.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="rows">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>) (United States)<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn9"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1998&#x02013;1992</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">92</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn10"><sup>b</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (92.4%), AMP (5.4%), CEF (0%), CN (1.1%), AK (0%), SPC (73.9%), ERY (100%), CLD (100%), TE (93.5%), SDX (85.4%), SXT (0.9%), ENR (1.3%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">52</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2006&#x02013;2011</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">84</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (70.0% R), AMX (36.0% R; 21.0% I), CEF (3.0% R; 7.0% I), S (21.0% R; 4.0% I), NEO (14.0% R; 22.0% I), CN (4.0% R; 3.0% I), NOV (100% R), ERY (43.0% R; 57.0% I), TYL (100% R), CLD (97.0% R), SPC (0% R; 89.0% I), FFN (3.0% R; 11.0% I), TE (90.0% R; 3.0% I), OTC (83.0% R; 3.0% I), STZ (8.0% R; 10.0% I), SDX (43.0% R; 14.0% I), SXT (3.0% R; 14.0% I), ENR (4.0% R; 3.0% I)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>In studies where intermediate susceptibility is given, results are presented as: R, fully resistant; I, intermediate resistant</italic>.</p>
<p><italic>CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute; NCCLS, National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; AK, amikacin; AMP, ampicillin; AMX, amoxicillin; CEF, ceftiofur; CLD, clindamycin; CN, gentamicin; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; FFN, florfenicol; NEO, neomycin; NOV, novobiocin; OTC, oxytetracycline; PEN, penicillin; S, streptomycin; SDX, sulfadimethoxine; SPC, spectinomycin; STZ, sulfathiazole; SXT, co-trimoxazole; TE, tetracycline; TYL, tylosin</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn9"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>Strains identified as M. haemolytica</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn10"><p><italic><sup>b</sup>MIC distributions reported;.disk concentrations reported</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-6">
<title><italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> (ORT)</title>
<p><italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> is a Gram-negative, rod-shaped bacterium that causes respiratory disease in turkeys, chickens, and other avian species. It was first identified in turkeys in the 1990s (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B72">72</xref>). Establishing the antibiotic sensitivity of this pathogen is difficult because of its complex growth requirements. ORT is known to be often resistant to many antimicrobials, and therefore only isolates from wild birds are likely to display the highest degree of susceptibility; therefore, antimicrobial susceptibility results in these isolates have often been used to compare with those from poultry isolates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B73">73</xref>).</p>
<p>Four studies investigated phenotypic resistance on ORT isolates from the Netherlands (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B74">74</xref>), Belgium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B75">75</xref>), Hungary (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">76</xref>), and the Unites States (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B77">77</xref>) in a total of 600 isolates. The overall prevalence of resistance of such studies were: ampicillin (median 40.0%; IQR 11.3&#x02013;100%), ceftiofur (63.0%; IQR 50.0&#x02013;100%), tetracycline (21.0%; IQR 20.0&#x02013;61.0%), co-trimoxazole (89.0%; IQR 25.0&#x02013;97.0%), and enrofloxacin (70.8%; IQR 33.4&#x02013;93.6%) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T6">6</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T6">
<label>Table 6</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of 7 phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of <italic>S</italic>. <italic>Ornitobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> (ORT) and <italic>B. avium</italic> from poultry.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates (host type)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><bold>(A) Summary of prevalence of phenotypic resistance of ORT from poultry</bold></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">76</xref>) (Hungary)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2009&#x02013;2013</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">36 (turkeys, chickens, pigeons)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn11"><sup>a</sup></xref>, broth micro dilution, for AMX, DOX, and ERY<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn11"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-S1 (2004), CLSI M100-S21 (2011)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (30.0% R; 46.7% I), AMP (40.0% R; 23.3% I), AMX (40.0% R; 23.3% I), CEF (63.3% R; 0% I), CN (100% R; 0% I), SPC (0% R; 0% I), C (0% R; 0% I), OTC (20.0% R; 20.0% I), DOX (30.0% R; 16.5% I), ERY (66.7% R; 3.3% I), LCM (70.0% R; 0% I), TIM (13.3% R; 0% I), SUL (60.0% R; 30.0% I), SXT (25.0% R; 33.3% I), NA (100% R), CIP (0% R; 70.0% I), ENR (16.7% R; 63.3% I), COL (76.7% R; 13.3% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><hr/></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B77">77</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1996&#x02013;2002</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">124 (turkeys)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">NCCLS M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (33.9%), AMP (11.3%), CEF (50.0%), CN (86.3%), ERY (0.8%), SPC (18.2%), TE (21.0%), SDM (99.2%), SCP (40.0%), SXT (96.8%), ENR (50.0%), CLD (0%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><hr/></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B75">75</xref>) (Belgium)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1995&#x02013;1998</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">45 (broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth dilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn11"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Resistant strains had MICs over three two-fold dilution steps compared with reference strains</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (100%), CEF (100%), TYL (97.8%), TIM (95.5%), LCM (100%), DOX (80.0%), TIA (0%), SPI (95.5%), ENR (95.6%), FLM (93.3%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><hr/></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B74">74</xref>) (Netherlands)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1996&#x02013;1999</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">395 (broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Agar dilution; Agar gel diffusion test; E-test<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn12"><sup>b</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Provided by the manufacturer</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMX (63.2%), TE (60.9%), SXT (89.3%), ENR (91.6%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><hr/></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><bold>(B) Summary of prevalence of phenotypic resistance of <bold><italic>B. avium</italic></bold> from poultry</bold></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1998&#x02013;2002</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">4 (turkeys)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (0%), CN (0%), NEO (0%), TE (0%), SXT (0%), ERY (100% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><hr/></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">76</xref>) (Hungary, Germany)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">1985&#x02013;2012</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">13 (turkeys), 2 (chickens), 1 (duck), 1 (goose), 1 (partridge), 1 (unknown)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn11"><sup>a</sup></xref>, broth microdilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn11"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CLSI M31-A2 (2002)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (52.6% R; 47.4% I), AMP (0% R; 47.3% I), AMX (0% R; 15.8% I), CEF (100%), CN (0% R; 0% I), SPC (0% R; 0% I), ERY (57.9% R; 32.1% I), LCM (100% R), TIM (5.2% R; 0% I), C (0% R; 73.7% I), DOX (0% R; 0% I), OTC (0% R; 10.5% I), SUL (0% R; 0% I), SXT (15.8% R; 0% I), CIP (0% R; 31.6% I), NA (26.3% R; 47.4% I), ENR (15.8% R; 84.2% I), COL (0% R; 0% I)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="7"><hr/></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B85">85</xref>) (United States)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Before 2011</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">12 (turkeys)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Levels of resistance defined in relation to the maximum dose for each antimicrobial</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">CTX (16.7% R; 0% I), CRO (8.3% R; 41.7% I), IMP (8.3% R; 0% I), TIC (8.3% R; 16.7% I), CAB (8.3% R; 0% I), AMP/SBM (0% R; 58.3% I), TIC/CA (0% R; 8.3% I), ATM (83.3% R; 16.7% I), TOB (8.3% R; 0% I), C (0% R; 25.5% I), TE (16.7% R; 0% I), SXT (25.0% R; 0% I), SSZ (41.7% R; 0% I), CIP (0% R; 33.0% I), LOM (8.3% R; 25.0% I), LEV (0% R; 8.3% I)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute; NCCLS, National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards; AMP, ampicillin; AMP/SBM, ampicillin&#x02013;sulbactam; AMX, amoxicillin; ATM, aztreonam; C, chloramphenicol; CAB, carbenicillin; CEF, ceftiofur; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CN, gentamicin; CLD, clindamycin; COL, colistin; CTX, cefotaxime; CRO, ceftriaxone; DOX, doxycycline; IMP, imipenem; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; FLM, flumequine; LCM, lincomycin; LEV, levofloxacin; LOM, lomefloxacin; NA, nalidixic acid; NEO, neomycin; OTC, oxytetracycline; PEN, penicillin; SBM, sulbactam; SCP, sulfachloropyridazine; SPC, spectinomycin; SUL, sulfonamide (unspecified); SPI, spiramycin; SXT, co-trimoxazole; SSZ, sulfisoxazole; SUL, sulfonamides (unspecified type); TIC, ticarcillin; TOB, tobramycin; TE, tetracycline; TIA, tiamulin; TIM, tilmicosin; TYL, tylosin</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn11"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>Disk concentrations given; MIC distribution reported; disk concentrations reported</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn12"><p><italic><sup>b</sup>MICs provided for multi-resistant strains</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>A study determined MICs for 10 antimicrobials of 10 Mexican ORT isolates alongside 10 previously characterized strains. MIC values greater than 128&#x02009;mg/mL were recorded for gentamicin, fosfomycin, trimethoprim, sulfamethazine, sulfamerazine, sulfaquinoxaline, and sulfachloropyridazine were identified among isolates. Field reports from that country confirmed that the use of gentamicin or fosfomycin had no effect when used in therapy in infected flocks, and based on these results, the authors recommended that amoxicillin, enrofloxacin, or oxytetracycline as drugs of choice (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B78">78</xref>). A study from China reported that small-colony variants, had overall higher MICs levels compared with their wild-type counterparts. Differences were also found with regards to other phenotypic characteristics, but not in their genotype (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B79">79</xref>).</p>
<p>A study investigated the mechanisms of enrofloxacin resistance after experimental inoculation and treatment of turkey flocks, and found that mutations in <italic>gyrA</italic> commonly developed after a single treatment, and it was associated with an increase in MIC (increase in MIC from 0.03 to 0.25&#x02009;mg/mL), among field isolates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B80">80</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-7">
<title><italic>Bordetella</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>avium</italic></title>
<p><italic>Bordetella avium</italic> is a Gram-negative, strictly aerobic bacterium, of the family Alcaligenaceae. It is the etiological agent of turkey coryza, a respiratory disease of economic importance to the turkey industry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B81">81</xref>). In addition, the organism can however also colonize a range of wild and domestic birds (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B82">82</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83">83</xref>). In addition, <italic>B. avium</italic> organism is considered to be zoonotic, since it has been isolated from human patients with respiratory disease (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84">84</xref>).</p>
<p>A total of three studies investigated phenotypic resistance in a total of 50 <italic>B. avium</italic> isolates, 1 by disk diffusion (from the United States) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>), 1 by broth microdilution (United States) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B85">85</xref>), and 1 using both (Europe) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">76</xref>) (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T6">6</xref>). In all three studies, turkey isolates were investigated. However, one study also included chicken and pigeon isolates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">76</xref>). Interpretation of results in both studies was based on criteria &#x0201C;for fastidious Gram-negative bacteria&#x0201D; (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">34</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76">76</xref>). However, in one study, the prevalence of resistance was determined in relation to the observed MICs for the antimicrobials tested (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B85">85</xref>).</p>
<p>A study on farmed cockatiel chicks affected with lockjaw syndrome (characterized by anorexia, sneezing, coughing, nasal discharge, and swollen infraorbital sinuses) investigated 10 isolates by disk diffusion. Isolates were sensitive to ampicillin, amoxicillin, penicillin, ceftiofur, enrofloxacin, norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, florfenicol, and co-trimoxazole, whereas resistance to lincomycin and sulfadimethoxine were common to all of the isolates, and four strains showed resistance to tetracycline (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B86">86</xref>).</p>
<p>An experiment investigated transfer of a 12&#x02013;13&#x02009;kb plasmid (pRAM) coding for tetracycline and sulfonamide resistance to a receptor strain. Partial DNA sequence analysis of pRAM revealed two genes for conjugation, similar to P-type conjugative transfer ATPase, TrbB, and TrbC of <italic>Enterobacter aerogenes</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B85">85</xref>). There is lack of data on additional mechanisms of resistance of this poultry pathogen.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-8">
<title><italic>Clostridium</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>perfringens</italic></title>
<p><italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> is a Gram-positive, rod-shaped, anaerobic, spore-forming bacterium commonly found in the intestinal tract of poultry, animals, and the environment. Under certain conditions, the bacterium can multiply, causing necrotic enteritis, and cholangiohepatitis, two diseases that are responsible for heavy losses in the broiler and turkey industry worldwide (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B87">87</xref>).</p>
<p>A total of seven publications have investigated phenotypic resistance in 564 <italic>C. perfringens</italic> isolates from Belgium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B88">88</xref>), Scandinavia (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B89">89</xref>), Egypt (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B90">90</xref>), Korea (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B91">91</xref>), Brazil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">92</xref>), and Canada (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B93">93</xref>). All studies investigated chicken isolates, except one that also included isolates from turkey species (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">92</xref>).</p>
<p>Agar dilution and broth microdilution methods were used in three and two publications, respectively. In all studies, the MIC distribution of tested strains was provided. In additional to conventional antibacterial antimicrobials, a number of studies have investigated resistance against antimicrobials commonly used as growth promoters (bacitracin, avilamycin, virginiamycin) in addition to coccidiostats (i.e., salinomycin, monensin) that are also known to have activity against <italic>Clostridium</italic> spp. in the gut (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94">94</xref>).</p>
<p>The calculated MIC50 levels for: erythromycin 2&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL (IQR 2.0&#x02013;5.0), tetracycline (8&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 4.5&#x02013;8), bacitracin (8&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 1&#x02013;128), avilamycin (0.25&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 0.25&#x02013;2.0), naransin (0.25 8&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; 0.06&#x02013;0.25), salinomycin 0.5&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL (0.12&#x02013;0.5), and monensin (0.63&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; 0.25&#x02013;1.0). Susceptibility cut-offs were determined based on the observed distribution of MICs. In addition, two studies used disk diffusion methods. However, in one publication, interpretation guidelines were not provided (Table <xref ref-type="table" rid="T7">7</xref>). Overall levels of resistance were: tetracycline (median 66.6%; IQR 41.8&#x02013;70.7%), lincomycin (62.4%; IQR 33.6&#x02013;81.6%), erythromycin (17.5%; IQR 0.6&#x02013;100%), bacitracin (7.5%; IQR 3.0&#x02013;56.0%), ampicillin (median 0%; IQR 0&#x02013;3.5%), and florfenicol (0%; IQR 0&#x02013;1.0%).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="T7">
<label>Table 7</label>
<caption><p>Summary of results of 8 phenotypic studies on antimicrobial resistance of <italic>C. perfringens</italic> from poultry.</p></caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="rows">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Reference (country)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Year of study</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">No. isolates (host type)</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Testing method</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Interpretation</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Phenotypic resistance</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">1</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B88">88</xref>) (Belgium)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2002</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">44 (healthy broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Agar dilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Based on observation of MIC distributions</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMX (0% R), TYL (0% R), LCM (63.3% R), CTC (65.9% R), OTC (65.9% R), FLA (0% R), AVI (0% R), NAR (0% R), MAD (0% R), SAL (0% R), LAS (0% R), MON (0% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">2</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B93">93</xref>) (Brazil)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not specified</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">55 (healthy broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Agar dilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Based on observation of MIC distributions</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (0% R), LCM (3.6% R; 7.3% I), TE (41.8% R; 18.2% I), BAC (49.1% R; 43.6% I), NAR (0% R), MON (0%), AVI (0% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">3</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">92</xref>) (Canada)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2005</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">100 (diseased chickens)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Based on observation of MIC distributions</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (0%), CLD (0%), BAC (64%), VIR (25%), ERY (2%), FFN (0%), TE (62%), MET (1%)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top"/>
<td align="left" valign="top"/>
<td align="left" valign="top"/>
<td align="left" valign="top">50 (diseased turkeys)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Based on observation of MIC distributions</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (0% R), CLD (2.0% R), BAC (60.0% R), VIR (8.0% R), ERY (0% R), FFN (0% R), TE (88.0% R), MET (0% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">4</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B91">91</xref>) (Korea)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2010&#x02013;2012</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">17 (chickens, turkeys, wild birds) (suspect of necrotic enteritis)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Not provided</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">PEN (0% R), AMP (0% R), AMC (0% R), CFN (0% R), CEF (0% R), FOX (0% R), S (100% R), NEO (100% R), CN (100% R), CLD (55.0% R), ERY (5.0% R), C (0% R), FFN (0% R), TE (45.0% R), SXT (5.0% R), SSZ (5.0% R), BAC (12.0% R), APR (100% R), COL (100% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">6</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B89">89</xref>) (Sweden, Denmark, Norway)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2000&#x02013;2001</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">102 (broilers layers and turkeys) (unknown status)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Broth microdilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Based on observed MIC distributions</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (0% R), NAR (0% R), ERY (100% I), OTC (38.3% R), VIR (3% R), BAC (6.0% R), AVI (100% I), VAN (0% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">7</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B90">90</xref>) (Egypt)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2009&#x02013;2010</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">125 (broilers) (unknown status)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Disk diffusion<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">BSAC guidelines (2011)<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn14"><sup>b</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (7.0% R), AMX (7.0% R), S (100% R), CN (100% R), NEO (93.0% R), SPC (50.0% R), ERY (100% R), LCM (100% R), PEF (94.0% R), SXT (98.0% R), OXA (100% R), SPI (100% R), FOM (2.0% R), FFN (2.0% R), CED (3.0% R), COL (94.0% R)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">8</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B95">95</xref>) Belgium</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">2007</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">71 (healthy broilers)</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Agar dilution<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn13"><sup>a</sup></xref></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Based on observed MIC distributions</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">AMP (0% R), ERY (0% R), LCM (61.5% R), TYL (0% R), TE (66.6% R), FFN (0% R), ENR (0% R), BAC (0% R)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p><italic>AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; AMP, ampicillin; AMX, amoxicillin; APR, apramycin; AVI, avilamycin; BAC, bacitracin; C, chloramphenicol; CED, cefradine; CEF, ceftiofur; CFN, cephalothin; CLD, clindamycin; CN, gentamicin; COL, colistin; CTC, chlortetracycline; ENR, enrofloxacin; ERY, erythromycin; FFN, florfenicol; FLA, flavomycin; FOM, fosfomycin; FOX, cefoxitin; MET, metronidazole; LAS, lasalocid; LCM, lincomycin; MAD, maduramycin; MON, monensin; NAR, naransin; NEO, neomycin; OTC, oxytetracycline; OXA, oxalinic acid; PEF, pefloxacin; PEN, penicillin; S, streptomycin; SAL, salinomycin; SPI, spiramycin; SPC, spectinomycin; SSZ, sulfisoxazole; SXT, sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim; TE, tetracycline; TYL, tylosin; VAN, vancomycin; VIR, virginiamycin</italic>.</p>
<fn id="tfn13"><p><italic><sup>a</sup>MIC distribution reported; disk concentrations given</italic>.</p></fn>
<fn id="tfn14"><p><italic><sup>b</sup>Intermediate strains were considered susceptible</italic>.</p></fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>A study from Belgium on isolates collected during 2007 found high (60&#x02013;70%) levels of resistance against lincomycin and tetracycline, but susceptibility to six other antimicrobials tested. However, the authors found no evidence of increases in the prevalence resistance against these antimicrobials compared with the earlier period 1980&#x02013;2004 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B95">95</xref>).</p>
<p>A study from Taiwan reported MIC50 values of erythromycin and lincomycin for <italic>C. perfringens</italic> isolated from intestinal samples with severe lesions were significantly higher compared with those with mild lesions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B96">96</xref>). However, a study from Korea compared resistance patterns between isolates from healthy and sick flocks, and found no difference (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B91">91</xref>). Studies on <italic>C. perfringens</italic> isolates from Canadian chickens and turkeys had overall higher levels of resistance against bacitracin and virginiamycin compared with bovine and porcine isolates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92">92</xref>), but not for other antimicrobials tested.</p>
<p>Studies in Belgium and Scandinavia have identified <italic>tetP(B), tet(M), tetA(P)</italic>, and <italic>tetB(P) genes</italic> among tetracycline resistant isolates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B88">88</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B89">89</xref>). Genes <italic>lnu(A)</italic> and <italic>lnu(B)</italic> genes associated with low-level resistance against lincomycin have identified in strains from Belgium (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B88">88</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S2-9">
<title><italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp.</title>
<p><italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. are Mollicutes bacteria that lack a cell wall around their membrane. <italic>M. gallisepticum</italic> (MG) infection is particularly important as a cause of respiratory disease and decreased meat and egg production in chickens and turkeys worldwide. Other species such as <italic>M. synoviae</italic> (MS) <italic>M. meleagridis</italic>, and <italic>M.&#x02009;iowae</italic> can also cause disease in poultry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B97">97</xref>).</p>
<p>Since <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. are fastidious organisms, routine methods based on isolation and phenotypic testing of resistance are not practicable. <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. are unaffected by many common antibiotics that target cell wall synthesis. Antimicrobials commonly used to treat <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. infections include tetracyclines, macrolides (tylosin, tilmicosin), and more recently, fluoroquinolones (enrofloxacin, difloxacin), and pleuromutilins (tiamulin).</p>
<p>A total of five studies have determined MICs among a total of 145 MG and 43 MS field strains, all using broth microdilution. Studies were carried out in Israel (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B98">98</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99">99</xref>), Jordan (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B100">100</xref>), Iran (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B101">101</xref>), and Thailand (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102">102</xref>). One study compared MIC results using broth microdilution, agar dilution, and E-test methods (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B98">98</xref>). MIC data were not converted into prevalence of resistance due to the lack of published standards. For those antimicrobials included in at least three studies, the median MIC50 values (and IQRs) were, in decreasing order: erythromycin (8.8&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 0.05&#x02013;128), chlortetracycline (2.73&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 1.0&#x02013;4.0), enrofloxacin (1.48&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 0.26&#x02013;11.31), tylosin (0.125&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 0.015&#x02013;0.33), and doxycycline (0.062&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL; IQR 0.015&#x02013;0.2).</p>
<p><italic>In vitro</italic> studies involving passages in sub-inhibitory concentrations of antimicrobials have shown resistance to macrolides can be quickly acquired among poultry <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp., whereas resistance to enrofloxacin develops more gradually. No resistance to tiamulin or oxytetracycline could be evidenced in MG or MS after 10 passages, whereas <italic>M. iowae</italic> resistant mutants were obtained. <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. mutants that became resistant to tylosin were also resistant to erythromycin, whereas mutants made resistant to erythromycin were not always resistant to tylosin (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B103">103</xref>).</p>
<p>A study on MG and MS isolated from chickens and turkeys in Israel collected during 2005&#x02013;2006 indicated a reduction in susceptibility against fluoroquinolones (enrofloxacin and difloxacin) compared with archived strains (1997&#x02013;2003) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B98">98</xref>). Similarly, a study from Jordan compared MICs in isolates collected from 2004 to 2005 vs. strains collected during 2007&#x02013;2008 confirmed a significant increase in MIC against 8 (erythromycin, tilmicosin, tylosin, ciprofloxacin, enrofloxacin, chlortetracycline, doxycycline) of 13 antimicrobials tested (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B100">100</xref>). A study on 20 MG isolates from Thailand where MG isolates were further characterized into groups (A, B, C, D, U) by random amplification of polymorphic DNA reported the lowest MICs for doxycycline, tiamulin, and tylosin among all tested drugs. Some MG isolates low-level resistant to josamycin and were resistant to enrofloxacin and erythromycin (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102">102</xref>).</p>
<p>Tiamulin (pleuromutilin) has been found in general to be a useful drug in the treatment and control of <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. infection. However, administering tiamulin to flocks medicated with ionophore antimicrobials is not recommended, since it may lead to toxicity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B104">104</xref>).</p>
<p>Fluoroquinolone resistance in <italic>Mycoplasma</italic> spp. is of great concern, since enrofloxacin is often the drug of choice to treat infections in poultry. However, a study showed that treatment with enrofloxacin did not succeed in eradicating infection from flocks subjected to experimental infection (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B105">105</xref>).</p>
<p>Resistant mutants of MG were selected <italic>in vitro</italic> by passaging have been shown to be due to amino acid substitutions in the <italic>gyrA, gyrB, parC</italic>, and <italic>parE</italic> genes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B106">106</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B107">107</xref>). A study on 93 strains from several countries indicated that MG strains with substitutions in the quinolone resistance-determining regions (QRDRs) of both <italic>gyrA</italic> and <italic>parC</italic> are resistant to enrofloxacin, however in 10% strains with such substitutions did not show a clear correlation with the MIC. The authors concluded that this may limit the applicability of a gene-based assay to detect fluoroquinolone resistance in this avian pathogen (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B108">108</xref>).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="S3">
<title>Other Pathogens</title>
<p><italic>Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae</italic> is a Gram-positive, non-spore-forming, non-acid-fast, and bacillus. The organism was first identified as a human pathogen late in the nineteenth century, causing erisipeloid, a generalized cutaneous form, as well as a septicemic form often associated with endocarditis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B109">109</xref>). The organism may cause severe disease outbreaks in a range of species including poultry and pigs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B110">110</xref>). There are no published guidelines on interpretation of MIC or diffusion tests for <italic>E. rhusiopathiae</italic> and data on AMR from poultry isolates are very limited. A study in Sweden determined the MIC on 45 isolates from poultry, pigs, emus, and red mites using the broth microdilution. Although data were not presented separately by species, most isolates had a similar resistance pattern. For most of the antimicrobial agents tested, including penicillin and oxytetracycline, the MICs were low. In contrast, the aminoglycosides gentamicin, neomycin, and streptomycin had uniformly MIC levels that were greater than or equal to the highest concentration tested (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B111">111</xref>).</p>
<p><italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> is a Gram-negative, non-motile, non-spore-forming, and rod-shaped bacterium that can infect domestic ducks, geese, turkeys, and other avian species. In ducks, it causes infectious serositis, air-saculitis, meningitis, salpingitis, or septicemia with high mortality rates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B112">112</xref>). A total of five studies investigated MICs on 481 <italic>R. anatipestifer</italic> strains, three from China (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B113">113</xref>&#x02013;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115">115</xref>), India (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B116">116</xref>), and one from Taiwan (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B117">117</xref>). All studies have used agar dilution method, except for one that used the disk diffusion test (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B113">113</xref>) and one where the method was not indicated (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B116">116</xref>). Based on MIC90 values, the five most potent antibacterials from Taiwan were (in descending order): penicillin, ceftiofur, cephalothin, chloramphenicol, flumequine, and kanamycin, nalidixic acid, nitrofurantoin, amikacin, ampicillin, gentamicin, lincomycin, spectinomycin, streptomycin, tetracycline, and trimethoprim (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B117">117</xref>).</p>
<p>A study from China investigated MICs and mutant prevention concentrations (MPC) for four antimicrobials (ceftiofur, cefquinome, florfenicol, and tilmicosin) 98 and 7 isolates from ducks and geese, respectively. Although the highest MIC values were reported for florfenicol and tilmicosin (both 1&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL), followed by ceftiofur (0.063&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL) and cefquinome (0.031&#x02009;&#x000B5;g/mL), the difference between MIC and MPC values suggested that cefquinome was the drug that presented the highest risk of selecting mutant strains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B114">114</xref>). Another study from the same country investigated antimicrobial susceptibility among 224 duck isolates, and interpreted results by observing distribution of inhibition zones using WhoNet software. Fifty percent of the isolates were resistant against ceftazidime, aztreonam, cefazolin, cefepime, cefuroxime, oxacillin, penicillin G, rifampicin, and co-trimoxazole. The authors inoculated a multi-resistant isolate with high virulence to inoculate to experimental groups, followed by subcutaneous treatment with different antimicrobial drugs. Results suggest a good correlation in the mortality with disk sensitivity results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B113">113</xref>).</p>
<p>The antimicrobial susceptibility against 23 antimicrobial agents was investigated in 103 <italic>R. anatipestifer</italic> isolates obtained from Chinese ducks during 2008 and 2010 using agar dilution. The MIC50 and MIC90 values of streptomycin, kanamycin, gentamicin, apramycin, amikacin, neomycin, nalidixic acid, and sulfadimidine were relatively higher than for ampicillin and florfenicol (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115">115</xref>).</p>
<p>A study from China has identified the presence of genes and integrons coding for resistance against &#x003B2;-lactamase, aminoglycoside, resistance genes, chloramphenicol, florfenicol, tetracycline, and sulfonamide resistance genes in variable frequencies. Mutation analysis of the QRDRs of identified mutations in <italic>gyrA</italic> responsible for quinolone resistance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115">115</xref>). Molecular studies have focused on the identification of macrolide resistance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B118">118</xref>). Another study demonstrated the role of efflux pumps in multi-resistance in <italic>R. anatipestifer</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B119">119</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S4">
<title>Summary of AMR Phenotypic Data for Main Pathogens</title>
<p>Overall median phenotypic results across studies for six pathogens for which there are sufficient phenotypic data are presented in Figure <xref ref-type="fig" rid="F1">1</xref>. Among Enterobacteriaceae, <italic>E. coli</italic> displayed consistently higher levels of resistance against most antimicrobials tested compared with <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum. Median levels of resistance against ampicillin, amoxicillin, and tetracycline and doxycycline were all &#x0003E;70%. Levels of resistance against ciprofloxacin, neomycin, and chloramphenicol ranged between 50 and 70%, and for gentamicin, florfenicol, and enrofloxacin ranged between 20 and 50%. In contrast, among <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum, observed resistance levels were less than 20% for all antimicrobials, except for amoxicillin (24.8%). Among organisms with the family Pasteurellaceae, <italic>A. paragallinarum</italic> had the highest levels of resistance, with resistance levels greater than 70% for erythromycin and tetracycline, and resistance levels against penicillin, gentamicin, co-trimoxazole, and enrofloxacin were in the 20&#x02013;50% region. In contrast, for <italic>P. multocida</italic>, the highest level of resistance was observed for erythromycin (18%), and levels of resistance against all other antimicrobials were &#x0003C;15%. Notably, ORT isolates had high levels of AMR: over 70% resistance for enrofloxacin, gentamicin, and co-trimoxazole, between 50 and 70% for ceftiofur and amoxicillin, and between 20 and 50% resistance against penicillin, ampicillin, erythromycin, and tetracycline. Among <italic>B. avium</italic> isolates, the levels of resistance against cephalosporin, penicillin, erythromycin, and enrofloxacin were &#x0003E;50%, but &#x0003C;25% for all other antimicrobials tested. Phenotypic resistance data from all studies has been compiled in Excel and are available in Table S1 in Supplementary Material.</p>
<fig id="F1" position="float">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption><p>Summary data on prevalence of phenotypic resistance among in common bacterial poultry pathogens (<italic>E. coli, S. pullorum/gallinarum, P. multocida, A. paragallinarum, O. rhinotracheale</italic>, and <italic>B. avium</italic>). AMC, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid; AMP, ampicillin; C, chloramphenicol; CEF, ceftiofur; CIP, ciprofloxacin; CN, gentamicin; DOX, doxycycline; ENR, enrofloxacin, ERY, erythromycin; FFN, florfenicol; NEO, neomycin; PEN, penicillin; SXT, co-trimoxazole; TE, tetracycline.</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fvets-04-00126-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="S5" sec-type="discussion">
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>We reviewed 70 publications published since the year 2000 containing phenotypic/genotypic data on AMR in poultry pathogens. This figure is relatively modest, compared with 196 publications returned from a search of titles including [<italic>Salmonella</italic> OR <italic>Campylobacter</italic>], AND [poultry OR chickens] AND [antimicrobial resistance OR antimicrobial susceptibility] over the same period, and 76 publications resulting from a search where [<italic>Salmonella</italic> OR Campylobacter] are replaced with [<italic>Escherichia coli</italic> OR <italic>Enterococcus</italic>]. A total of 13/70 (18.6%) of the reviewed publications were not indexed in MEDLINE (the bibliographic citation database of NLM&#x02019;s PubMed system) (<uri xlink:href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed</uri>), probably reflecting less stringent publication criteria for some of these journals.</p>
<p>There are important gaps in the knowledge on AMR in important zoonotic pathogens such as <italic>C. psittaci</italic> and <italic>M. avium</italic> detected from sick poultry. Data from isolates from human patients with chlamydiasis indicate a high prevalence of macrolide and tetracycline resistance, both of which are extensively used in poultry production (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B120">120</xref>). AMR in <italic>M. avium</italic> infections is also of great concern, because often drug regimens commonly used for treating tuberculosis in humans are not effective (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B121">121</xref>). However, most antimicrobials used to treat human cases of <italic>M. avium</italic> infection are not normally used in animal production.</p>
<p>Our data suggest very variable phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility results for the same organisms across studies, which is likely to reflect differences in both AMU patterns and in testing methodologies. However, in spite of this variability, there are trends for specific organisms, suggesting that the development of AMR may also have a biological basis. Studies on isolates from healthy animals have shown that <italic>E. coli</italic> has a higher propensity to develop resistance compared with <italic>Salmonella</italic> spp. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B122">122</xref>).</p>
<p>It would be expected that situations of high usage levels of antimicrobials for disease prophylaxis and growth promotion may give advantage to the transmission of organisms with higher levels of resistance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B123">123</xref>). However, data on disease incidence of bacterial pathogens are generally missing except in a few countries, where laboratory-confirmed diagnostic surveillance data are regularly published (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B124">124</xref>).</p>
<p>Currently, among the international organizations, only the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) has developed protocols for susceptibility testing of certain bacteria of animal origin and determination of interpretive criteria. The CLSI document &#x0201C;Performance Standards For Antimicrobial Disk and Dilution Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria Isolated from Animals&#x0201D; (3rd Edition) (VET01S) contains interpretative data for Enterobacteriaceae, <italic>P. aeruginosa, P. multocida</italic>, although the standards have been validated on veterinary isolates of non-poultry origin (except for enrofloxacin in Enterobacteriaceae). However, no international-approved standards are yet available for the other pathogens listed in this review. Furthermore, for most animal pathogens, the relationship between the phenotypic data (inhibition zone, MICs) and the chances of treatment success are yet to be established.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, in a considerable number of studies information on the testing methodology and interpretation criteria for antimicrobial susceptibility testing was insufficient. In some few cases, information on the interpretation criteria was entirely omitted. Furthermore, the data available has not been necessarily generated using harmonized methods, thereby limiting comparability across studies. A web-based platform available to researchers and practitioners that include AMR data on poultry pathogens (including testing methodologies and results, either MIC or inhibition zones) would be desirable so that field testing data could be compared with results from other areas. Such initiatives focused on animal pathogens are already taking place in the European Union with initiatives such as VetPath and Germ-Vet (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B125">125</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B126">126</xref>), with the capacity to be integrated into national surveillance systems of AMR, provided that appropriate statistical methods are used to ensure the representativeness of isolates included (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B127">127</xref>).</p>
<p>Studies have shown increases in resistance over time for <italic>S</italic>. Pullorum/Gallinarum, MG, and <italic>G. anatis</italic>. However, the absence of large collections of pathogens investigated for AMR over time is a limitation for establishing the evolution of AMR. Studies on larger collection of <italic>E. coli</italic> strains have conclusively demonstrated increases in resistance over time against most antimicrobials in the United States (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">4</xref>).</p>
<p>Control of bacterial diseases in poultry often relies on the use of prophylactic antimicrobial treatment at different critical points during the rearing period. Given the observed prevalence of AMR it would be expected that in cases where the pathogen is resistant, the use of certain antimicrobials would result in treatment failure. It would be desirable to identify the burden of disease for each pathogen in each country, and if the disease burden justifies it, implement prophylactic vaccination. Except for <italic>G. anatis</italic> and <italic>C. perfringens</italic>, vaccines against most bacterial diseases with AMR data presented here have been developed and are available in many countries. However, most vaccination programs are strongly biased toward the prevention of viral diseases. In recent times, more research has been emerging on the potential value of using plant extracts to control bacterial diseases in poultry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B128">128</xref>).</p>
<p>There is a consensus among the scientific community that excessive AMU in food animal (including poultry) production should be restrained to limit the impact of AMR on human health (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B129">129</xref>). In addition to these concerns, AMR in poultry pathogens will inevitably result in treatment failure of poultry diseases, therefore leading to increased pathogen transmission, and production losses. The magnitude of economic losses due to untreated disease has yet to be estimated, but could theoretically be calculated by integrating disease incidence, AMR, and country-wide treatment data.</p>
<p>In order to allow comparability of results across studies, we suggest that in the future, at the very least, all published studies on AMR in poultry pathogens should report the MIC frequency distributions (for dilution tests), disk concentration, as well as disk diffusion zones (for diffusion tests). Ideally, studies should always attach their raw data as an appendix. These distributions will enable the determination of resistance percentages, once any new interpretive criteria are made available (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B130">130</xref>).</p>
<p>In most countries, worldwide farming is conducted without veterinary supervision, and a wide range of antimicrobials is normally available to farmers &#x0201C;over the counter.&#x0201D; Prudent use practices should include restricting the access for use of antimicrobials that are considered to be important for human medicine in animal production (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">15</xref>). Such restrictions are only currently being enforced only in a number of industrialized countries (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">12</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B131">131</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B132">132</xref>). Measures such as education on good farming practices, limiting the availability of antimicrobials, and building up a knowledge base on the AMR profile of poultry pathogens will encourage responsible AMU, contributing to reduce treatment failure of poultry diseases, therefore helping reduce associated economic losses.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S6" sec-type="author-contributor">
<title>Author Contributions</title>
<p>JC-M conceived the idea, provided the structure, wrote the introduction, the methods section, the abstract, and contributed to the discussion. NN and NC carried out the literature review and contributed to the writing up. NN compiled and summarised all data from the original publications, and created the spider charts.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="S7">
<title>Conflict of Interest Statement</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<fn-group>
<fn fn-type="financial-disclosure">
<p><bold>Funding.</bold> This work was funded by the Wellcome Trust through an Intermediate Clinical Fellowship awarded to JC-M (Grant No. 110085/Z/15/Z).</p></fn>
</fn-group>
<sec id="S8" sec-type="supplementary-material">
<title>Supplementary Material</title>
<p>The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at <uri xlink:href="http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fvets.2017.00126/full&#x00023;supplementary-material">http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fvets.2017.00126/full&#x00023;supplementary-material</uri>.</p>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Data_Sheet_1.xlsx" id="SM1" mimetype="applicationn/xlsx" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1"><label>1</label><citation citation-type="web"><collab>World Health Organization</collab>. <source>Antimicrobial Resistance: Global Report on Surveillance</source>. (<year>2014</year>). Available from: <uri xlink:href="http://www.who.int/drugresistance/documents/surveillancereport/en/">http://www.who.int/drugresistance/documents/surveillancereport/en/</uri></citation></ref>
<ref id="B2"><label>2</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Marshall</surname> <given-names>BM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Levy</surname> <given-names>SB</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Food animals and antimicrobials: impacts on human health</article-title>. <source>Clin Microbiol Rev</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>24</volume>:<fpage>718</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>33</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/CMR.00002-11</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21976606</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B3"><label>3</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Van Boeckel</surname> <given-names>TP</given-names></name> <name><surname>Brower</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gilbert</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Grenfell</surname> <given-names>BT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Levin</surname> <given-names>SA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Robinson</surname> <given-names>TP</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals</article-title>. <source>Proc Natl Acad Sci USA</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>112</volume>(<issue>18</issue>):<fpage>5649</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>54</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.1503141112</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25792457</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B4"><label>4</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tadesse</surname> <given-names>DA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhao</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tong</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ayers</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bartholomew</surname> <given-names>MJ</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Antimicrobial drug resistance in <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> from humans and food animals, United States, 1950-2002</article-title>. <source>Emerg Infect Dis</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>18</volume>:<fpage>741</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>9</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3201/eid1805.111153</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22515968</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B5"><label>5</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Luna-Galaz</surname> <given-names>GA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Morales-Erasto</surname> <given-names>V</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pe&#x000F1;uelas-Rivas</surname> <given-names>CG</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Soriano-Vargas</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial sensitivity of <italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic> isolates from four Latin American countries</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>60</volume>:<fpage>673</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/11398-022616-ResNote.1</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27610729</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B6"><label>6</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Simoneit</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Burow</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tenhagen</surname> <given-names>BA</given-names></name> <name><surname>K&#x000E4;sbohrer</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Oral administration of antimicrobials increase antimicrobial resistance in <italic>E. coli</italic> from chicken-a systematic review</article-title>. <source>Prev Vet Med</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>118</volume>:<fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.11.010</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B7"><label>7</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bortolaia</surname> <given-names>V</given-names></name> <name><surname>Espinosa-Gongora</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guardabassi</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Human health risks associated with antimicrobial-resistant enterococci and <italic>Staphylococcus aureus</italic> on poultry meat</article-title>. <source>Clin Microbiol Infect</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>22</volume>:<fpage>130</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>40</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.cmi.2015.12.003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26706616</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B8"><label>8</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial drug resistance and the occurrence of plasmids in <italic>Haemophilus paragallinarum</italic></article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>1988</year>) <volume>32</volume>:<fpage>742</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2307/1590993</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">3202771</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B9"><label>9</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Van</surname> <given-names>TT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nguyen</surname> <given-names>HN</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smooker</surname> <given-names>PM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Coloe</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The antibiotic resistance characteristics of non-typhoidal <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> isolated from food-producing animals, retail meat and humans in South East Asia</article-title>. <source>Int J Food Microbiol</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>154</volume>:<fpage>98</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>106</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.12.032</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22265849</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B10"><label>10</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Custer</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Steele</surname> <given-names>JA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wilcox</surname> <given-names>BA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Intensified food production and correlated risks to human health in the Greater Mekong Subregion: a systematic review</article-title>. <source>Environ Health</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>14</volume>:<fpage>43</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12940-015-0033-8</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26006733</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B11"><label>11</label><citation citation-type="web"><collab>Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations</collab>. <source>FAOSTAT: Live Animals Data</source>. (<year>2017</year>). Available from: <uri xlink:href="http://www.fao.org/faostat/en">http://www.fao.org/faostat/en</uri></citation></ref>
<ref id="B12"><label>12</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Agunos</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Leger</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Carson</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Review of antimicrobial therapy of selected bacterial diseases in broiler chickens in Canada</article-title>. <source>Can Vet J</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>53</volume>:<fpage>1289</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>300</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23729827</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B13"><label>13</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Landoni</surname> <given-names>MF</given-names></name> <name><surname>Albarellos</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The use of antimicrobial agents in broiler chickens</article-title>. <source>Vet J</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>205</volume>:<fpage>21</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.04.016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25981931</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B14"><label>14</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Page</surname> <given-names>SW</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gautier</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Use of antimicrobial agents in livestock</article-title>. <source>Rev Sci Tech</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>31</volume>:<fpage>145</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>88</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.20506/rst.31.1.2106</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B15"><label>15</label><citation citation-type="web"><collab>World Health Organization</collab>. <source>Critically Important Antimicrobials for Human Medicine, 5th Revision</source>. (<year>2017</year>). Available from: <uri xlink:href="http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/antimicrobials-fifth/en/">http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/antimicrobials-fifth/en/</uri></citation></ref>
<ref id="B16"><label>16</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Reig</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Toldra</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Veterinary drug residues in meat: concerns and rapid methods for detection</article-title>. <source>Meat Sci</source> (<year>2008</year>) <volume>78</volume>:<fpage>60</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.07.029</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22062096</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B17"><label>17</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Goetting</surname> <given-names>V</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lee</surname> <given-names>KA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tell</surname> <given-names>LA</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Pharmacokinetics of veterinary drugs in laying hens and residues in eggs: a review of the literature</article-title>. <source>J Vet Pharmacol Ther</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>34</volume>:<fpage>521</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>56</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2885.2011.01287.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21679196</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B18"><label>18</label><citation citation-type="journal"><collab>EFSA</collab>. <article-title>The European Union Summary Report on antimicrobial resistance in zoonotic and indicator bacteria from humans, animals and food in 2012</article-title>. <source>EFSA J</source> (<year>2014</year>) <volume>12</volume>:<fpage>3590</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3590</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B19"><label>19</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nhung</surname> <given-names>NT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cuong</surname> <given-names>NV</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thwaites</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name> <name><surname>Carrique-Mas</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial usage and antimicrobial resistance in animal production in southeast Asia: a review</article-title>. <source>Antibiotics (Basel)</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>E37</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/antibiotics5040037</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27827853</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B20"><label>20</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Overdevest</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Willemsen</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rijnsburger</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Eustace</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hawkey</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Extended-spectrum <italic>&#x003B2;</italic>-lactamase genes of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> in chicken meat and humans, The Netherlands</article-title>. <source>Emerg Infect Dis</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>17</volume>:<fpage>1216</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>22</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3201/eid1707.110209</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B21"><label>21</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kheiri</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Akhtari</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial resistance and integron gene cassette arrays in commensal <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> from human and animal sources in IRI</article-title>. <source>Gut Pathog</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>8</volume>:<fpage>40</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s13099-016-0123-3</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27582900</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B22"><label>22</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lutful Kabir</surname> <given-names>SM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Avian colibacillosis and salmonellosis: a closer look at epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, control and public health concerns</article-title>. <source>Int J Environ Res Public Health</source> (<year>2010</year>) <volume>7</volume>:<fpage>89</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>114</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ijerph7010089</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20195435</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B23"><label>23</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Al-Arfaj</surname> <given-names>AA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hessain</surname> <given-names>AM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hemeg</surname> <given-names>HA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mohamed</surname> <given-names>KF</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moussa</surname> <given-names>IM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Isolation, characterization and antibiogram of pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> recovered from broiler chicken, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia</article-title>. <source>J Anim Plant Sci</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>25</volume>:<fpage>1540</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>2</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B24"><label>24</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Joshi</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>SP</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antibiotic resistance profile of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> isolates from colibacillosis in and around Pantnagar, India</article-title>. <source>Vet World</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>405</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>8</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5455/vetworld.2012.405-408</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B25"><label>25</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>XS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>GQ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Du</surname> <given-names>XD</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cui</surname> <given-names>BA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>SM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shen</surname> <given-names>JZ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility and molecular detection of chloramphenicol and florfenicol resistance among <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> isolates from diseased chickens</article-title>. <source>J Vet Sci</source> (<year>2007</year>) <volume>8</volume>:<fpage>243</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4142/jvs.2007.8.3.243</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17679770</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B26"><label>26</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dou</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gong</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Han</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shen</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Characterization of avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia col</italic>i isolated in eastern China</article-title>. <source>Gene</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>576</volume>(<issue>1 Pt 2</issue>):<fpage>244</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>8</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.gene.2015.10.012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26475938</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B27"><label>27</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Abu-Basha</surname> <given-names>EA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gharaibeh</surname> <given-names>SM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thabet</surname> <given-names>AM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> susceptibility of resistant <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> field isolates to antimicrobial combinations</article-title>. <source>J Appl Poult Res</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>21</volume>:<fpage>595</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>602</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/japr.2011-00500</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B28"><label>28</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jahantigh</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dizaji</surname> <given-names>RE</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial drug resistance pattern of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> isolated from chickens farms with colibacillosis infection</article-title>. <source>Open J Med Microbiol</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>159</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>62</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojmm.2015.54019</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B29"><label>29</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chansiripornchai</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mooljuntee</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Boonkhum</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial sensitivity of avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> (APEC) isolated from chickens during 2007-2010</article-title>. <source>Thai J Vet Med</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>41</volume>:<fpage>519</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>22</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B30"><label>30</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Saidi</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mafirakureva</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mbanga</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial resistance of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> isolated from chickens with colibacillosis in and around Harare, Zimbabwe</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>57</volume>:<fpage>152</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/10325-081512-Case.1</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B31"><label>31</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Awad</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arafat</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Elhadidy</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Genetic elements associated with antimicrobial resistance among avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic></article-title>. <source>Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>15</volume>:<fpage>8</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12941-016-0174-9</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B32"><label>32</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ahmed</surname> <given-names>AM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shimamoto</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shimamoto</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Molecular characterization of multidrug-resistant avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> isolated from septicemic broilers</article-title>. <source>Int J Med Microbiol</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>303</volume>:<fpage>475</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>83</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/ps/pev008</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B33"><label>33</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Huang</surname> <given-names>TM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lin</surname> <given-names>TL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wu</surname> <given-names>CC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility and resistance of chicken <italic>Escherichia coli, Salmonella</italic> spp., and <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> isolates</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>53</volume>:<fpage>89</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>93</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/8268-021608-Reg.1</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19432009</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B34"><label>34</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Malik</surname> <given-names>YS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chander</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>SC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Goya</surname> <given-names>SM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>A retrospective study on antimicrobial resistance in <italic>Mannheimia</italic> (<italic>Pasteurella</italic>) <italic>haemolytica, Escherichia coli, Salmonella</italic> species, and <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> from chickens in Minnesota</article-title>. <source>J Appl Poult Res</source> (<year>2005</year>) <volume>14</volume>:<fpage>506</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>11</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/japr/14.3.506</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B35"><label>35</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sol&#x000E0;-Gin&#x000E9;s</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cameron-Veas</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Badiola</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dolz</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Maj&#x000F3;</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dahbi</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Diversity of multi-drug resistant avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> (APEC) causing outbreaks of colibacillosis in broilers during 2012 in Spain</article-title>. <source>PLoS One</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>10</volume>:<fpage>e0143191</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0143191</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26600205</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B36"><label>36</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Braga</surname> <given-names>JF</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chanteloup</surname> <given-names>NK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Trotereau</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baucheron</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guabiraba</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ecco</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Diversity of <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> strains involved in vertebral osteomyelitis and arthritis in broilers in Brazil</article-title>. <source>BMC Vet Res</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>12</volume>:<fpage>140</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12917-016-0762-0</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27417195</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B37"><label>37</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kempf</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jouy</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chauvin</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Colistin use and colistin resistance in bacteria from animals</article-title>. <source>Int J Antimicrob Agents</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>48</volume>:<fpage>598</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>606</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2016.09.016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27836380</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B38"><label>38</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lima Barbieri</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nielsen</surname> <given-names>DW</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wannemuehler</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cavender</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hussein</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yan</surname> <given-names>SG</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>mcr-1 identified in avian pathogenic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> (APEC)</article-title>. <source>PLoS One</source> (<year>2017</year>) <volume>12</volume>(<issue>3</issue>):<fpage>e0172997</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0172997</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28264015</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B39"><label>39</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Barrow</surname> <given-names>PA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Freitas Neto</surname> <given-names>OC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Pullorum disease and fowl typhoid-new thoughts on old diseases: a review</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>40</volume>:<fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>13</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079457.2010.542575</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B40"><label>40</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shivaprasad</surname> <given-names>HL</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Fowl typhoid and pullorum disease</article-title>. <source>Rev Sci Tech Off</source> (<year>2000</year>) <volume>19</volume>:<fpage>405</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>24</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.20506/rst.19.2.1222</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B41"><label>41</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lee</surname> <given-names>YJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kim</surname> <given-names>KS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kwon</surname> <given-names>YK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tak</surname> <given-names>RB</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Biochemical characteristics and antimicrobials susceptibility of <italic>Salmonella gallinarum</italic> isolated in Korea</article-title>. <source>J Vet Sci</source> (<year>2003</year>) <volume>4</volume>:<fpage>161</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14610370</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B42"><label>42</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lee</surname> <given-names>YJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kim</surname> <given-names>KS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kim</surname> <given-names>JH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tak</surname> <given-names>RB</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>Salmonella gallinarum</italic> gyrA mutations associated with fluoroquinolone resistance</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2004</year>) <volume>33</volume>:<fpage>251</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/0301945042000195759</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15276996</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B43"><label>43</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lee</surname> <given-names>SK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chon</surname> <given-names>JW</given-names></name> <name><surname>Song</surname> <given-names>KY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hyeon</surname> <given-names>JY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moon</surname> <given-names>JS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Seo</surname> <given-names>KH</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Prevalence, characterization, and antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Salmonella gallinarum</italic> isolated from eggs produced in conventional or organic farms in South Korea</article-title>. <source>Poult Sci</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>92</volume>:<fpage>2789</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>97</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/ps.2013-03175</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24046429</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B44"><label>44</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kang</surname> <given-names>MS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kim</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jung</surname> <given-names>BY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Her</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jeong</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cho</surname> <given-names>YM</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Characterization of antimicrobial resistance of recent <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> serovar Gallinarum isolates from chickens in South Korea</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2010</year>) <volume>39</volume>:<fpage>201</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>5</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079451003767261</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20544426</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B45"><label>45</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dey</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mahanti</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Batabyal</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Joardar</surname> <given-names>SN</given-names></name> <name><surname>Samanta</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Isore</surname> <given-names>DP</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Identification and antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Salmonella gallinarum</italic> isolated from fowl typhoid outbreak in backyard Vanaraja fowl</article-title>. <source>Explor Anim Med Res</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>6</volume>:<fpage>63</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B46"><label>46</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Taddele</surname> <given-names>MH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rathore</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dhama</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antibiogram assay of <italic>Salmonella gallinarum</italic> and other <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> serovars of poultry origin in India</article-title>. <source>Asian J Anim Vet Adv</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>7</volume>:<fpage>309</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>17</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3923/ajava.2012.309.317</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B47"><label>47</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Penha</surname> <given-names>RA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ferreira</surname> <given-names>JC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kanashiro</surname> <given-names>AM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Costa</surname> <given-names>AL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Berchieri</surname> <given-names>AJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Salmonella gallinarum</italic> and <italic>Salmonella pullorum</italic> isolated from ill poultry in Brazil</article-title>. <source>Cienc Rural</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>46</volume>:<fpage>513</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>8</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/0103-8478cr20150398</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B48"><label>48</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gong</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhu</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Miao</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Antimicrobial resistance, presence of integrons and biofilm formation of <italic>Salmonella pullorum</italic> isolates from eastern China (1962-2010)</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>42</volume>:<fpage>290</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079457.2013.788129</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B49"><label>49</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Krauland</surname> <given-names>MG</given-names></name> <name><surname>Marsh</surname> <given-names>JW</given-names></name> <name><surname>Paterson</surname> <given-names>DL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Harrison</surname> <given-names>LH</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Integron-mediated multidrug resistance in a global collection of nontyphoidal <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> isolates</article-title>. <source>Emerg Infect Dis</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>15</volume>:<fpage>388</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>96</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3201/eid1503.081131</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B50"><label>50</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Q</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hu</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wu</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xie</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tao</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Complete genome sequence of <italic>Salmonella enterica</italic> serovar Pullorum multidrug resistance strain S06004 from China</article-title>. <source>J Microbiol Biotechnol</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>25</volume>:<fpage>606</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>11</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4014/jmb.1406.06031</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25394606</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B51"><label>51</label><citation citation-type="book"><collab>Anon</collab>. <article-title>Fowl cholera</article-title>. In: <person-group person-group-type="editor"><collab>Office International des Epizooties</collab></person-group>, editor. <source>OIE Terrestrial Manual 2015</source>. <publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Office International des Epizooties</publisher-name> (<year>2015</year>). p. <fpage>1</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>11</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B52"><label>52</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jones</surname> <given-names>KH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thornton</surname> <given-names>JK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mauel</surname> <given-names>MJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>A 5-year retrospective report of <italic>Gallibacterium anatis</italic> and <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> isolates from chickens in Mississippi</article-title>. <source>Poult Sci</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>92</volume>:<fpage>3166</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>71</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/ps.2013-03321</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24235226</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B53"><label>53</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Furian</surname> <given-names>TQ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Borges</surname> <given-names>KA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Laviniki</surname> <given-names>V</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rocha</surname> <given-names>SL</given-names></name> <name><surname>de Almeida</surname> <given-names>CN</given-names></name> <name><surname>do Nascimento</surname> <given-names>VP</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Virulence genes and antimicrobial resistance of <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> isolated from poultry and swine</article-title>. <source>Braz J Microbiol</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>47</volume>:<fpage>210</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.bjm.2015.11.014</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26887247</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B54"><label>54</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rigobelo</surname> <given-names>EC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Maluta</surname> <given-names>RP</given-names></name> <name><surname>de &#x000C1;vila</surname> <given-names>FA</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Identification and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> isolated from chickens and Japanese quails in Brazil</article-title>. <source>Braz J Microbiol</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>44</volume>:<fpage>161</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/S1517-83822013000100023</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24159299</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B55"><label>55</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shivachandra</surname> <given-names>SB</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>AA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Biswas</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ramakrishnan</surname> <given-names>MA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>VP</given-names></name> <name><surname>Srivastava</surname> <given-names>SK</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antibiotic sensitivity patterns among Indian strains of avian <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic></article-title>. <source>Trop Anim Health Prod</source> (<year>2004</year>) <volume>36</volume>:<fpage>743</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>50</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1023/B:TROP.0000045950.35070.7f</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15643810</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B56"><label>56</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jonas</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Morishita</surname> <given-names>TY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Angrick</surname> <given-names>EJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jahja</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Characterization of nine <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> isolates from avian cholera outbreaks in Indonesia</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2001</year>) <volume>45</volume>:<fpage>34</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>42</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2307/1593009</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11332497</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B57"><label>57</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sellyei</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Varga</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Szentesi-Samu</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kaszanyitzky</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Magyar</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> isolated from swine and poultry</article-title>. <source>Acta Vet Hung</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>57</volume>:<fpage>357</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>67</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1556/AVet.57.2009.3.2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19635708</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B58"><label>58</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mohamed</surname> <given-names>MA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mohamed</surname> <given-names>MW</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmed</surname> <given-names>AI</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ibrahim</surname> <given-names>AA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmed</surname> <given-names>MS</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> in backyard chickens in Upper Egypt: incidence with polymerase chain reaction analysis for capsule type, virulence in chicken embryos and antimicrobial resistance</article-title>. <source>Vet Ital</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>48</volume>:<fpage>77</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>86</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22485004</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B59"><label>59</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>San Millan</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Escudero</surname> <given-names>JA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gutierrez</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hidalgo</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Garcia</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Llagostera</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Multiresistance in <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic> is mediated by coexistence of small plasmids</article-title>. <source>Antimicrob Agents Chemother</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>53</volume>:<fpage>3399</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>404</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/AAC.01522-08</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19528282</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B60"><label>60</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kehrenberg</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schwarz</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Occurrence and linkage of genes coding for resistance to sulfonamides, streptomycin and chloramphenicol in bacteria of the genera <italic>Pasteurella</italic> and <italic>Mannheimia</italic></article-title>. <source>FEMS Microbiol Lett</source> (<year>2001</year>) <volume>205</volume>:<fpage>283</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>90</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1574-6968.2001.tb10962.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11750817</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B61"><label>61</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kehrenberg</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tham</surname> <given-names>NT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schwarz</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>New plasmid-borne antibiotic resistance gene cluster in <italic>Pasteurella multocida</italic></article-title>. <source>Antimicrob Agents Chemother</source> (<year>2003</year>) <volume>47</volume>:<fpage>2978</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>80</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/AAC.47.9.2978-2980.2003</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12937006</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B62"><label>62</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Reid</surname> <given-names>GG</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Further characterization of <italic>Haemophilus paragallinarum</italic> and <italic>Haemophilus avium</italic></article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>1982</year>) <volume>7</volume>:<fpage>359</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>67</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0378-1135(82)90016-5</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">6758314</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B63"><label>63</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Poernomo</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sutarma</surname></name> <name><surname>Rafiee</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Characterisation of isolates of <italic>Haemophilus paragallinarum</italic> from Indonesia</article-title>. <source>Aust Vet J</source> (<year>2000</year>) <volume>78</volume>:<fpage>759</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>62</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1751-0813.2000.tb10447.x</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11194721</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B64"><label>64</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hsu</surname> <given-names>YM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shieh</surname> <given-names>HK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>WH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>TY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shiang</surname> <given-names>JH</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility, plasmid profiles and haemocin activities of <italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic> strains</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2007</year>) <volume>124</volume>:<fpage>209</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>18</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2007.04.024</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17485180</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B65"><label>65</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chukiatsiri</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sasipreeyajan</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yuwatanichsampan</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chansiripornchai</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Serovar identification, antimicrobial sensitivity, and virulence of <italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic> isolated from chickens in Thailand</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>56</volume>:<fpage>359</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>64</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/9881-080811-Reg.1</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22856194</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B66"><label>66</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Noonkhokhetkong</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chukiatsiri</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sasipreeyajan</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chansiripornchai</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Determination of antimicrobial susceptibility, antimicrobial resistance genes and <italic>in vivo</italic> testing of antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic></article-title>. <source>Thai J Vet Med</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>43</volume>:<fpage>525</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>31</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B67"><label>67</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Anjaneya</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shambhu Dayal</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kuldeep</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mohd Yaqoob</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vasudevan</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Isolation, antibiogram and PCR detection of <italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic> from poultry flocks of India</article-title>. <source>J Pure Appl Microbiol</source> (<year>2014</year>) <volume>8</volume>:<fpage>4181</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>8</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B68"><label>68</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Byarugaba</surname> <given-names>DK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Minga</surname> <given-names>UM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gwakisa</surname> <given-names>PS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Katunguka-Rwakishaya</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bisgaard</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Christensen</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Demonstration of antibiotic resistance genes strA, blaTEM, tetA, tetC and sul2 in <italic>Avibacterium paragallinarum</italic></article-title>. <source>Afr J Microbiol Res</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>3624</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5897/AJMR11.186</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B69"><label>69</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bojesen</surname> <given-names>AM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nielsen</surname> <given-names>OL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Christensen</surname> <given-names>JP</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bisgaard</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vivo</italic> studies of <italic>Gallibacterium anatis</italic> infection in chickens</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2004</year>) <volume>33</volume>:<fpage>145</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>52</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079450310001652059</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15276980</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B70"><label>70</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Christensen</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bisgaard</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bojesen</surname> <given-names>AM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mutters</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Olsen</surname> <given-names>JE</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Genetic relationships among avian isolates classified as <italic>Pasteurella haemolytica</italic>, &#x02018;<italic>Actinobacillus salpingitidis</italic>&#x02019; or <italic>Pasteurella anatis</italic> with proposal of <italic>Gallibacterium anatis</italic> gen. nov., comb. nov. and description of additional genomospecies within <italic>Gallibacterium</italic> gen. nov</article-title>. <source>Int J Syst Evol Microbiol</source> (<year>2003</year>) <volume>53</volume>:<fpage>275</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>87</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B71"><label>71</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Akbar</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Naila</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Muhammad Athar</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Abdul</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saba</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Riasat</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Role of <italic>Mannheimia</italic> (<italic>Pasteurella</italic>) <italic>haemolytica</italic> in severe respiratory tract Infection in commercial poultry in Pakistan</article-title>. <source>Pak Vet J</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>35</volume>:<fpage>279</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>82</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B72"><label>72</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Van Empel</surname> <given-names>PC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hafez</surname> <given-names>HM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic>: a review</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>1999</year>) <volume>28</volume>:<fpage>217</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>27</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079459994704</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B73"><label>73</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Devriese</surname> <given-names>LA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hommez</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vandamme</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kersters</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Haesebrouck</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> antibiotic sensitivity of <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> strains from poultry and wild birds</article-title>. <source>Vet Rec</source> (<year>1995</year>) <volume>137</volume>:<fpage>435</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/vr.137.17.435</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B74"><label>74</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Van Veen</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hartman</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fabri</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> antibiotic sensitivity of strains of <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> isolated in the Netherlands between 1996 and 1999</article-title>. <source>Vet Rec</source> (<year>2001</year>) <volume>149</volume>:<fpage>611</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/vr.149.20.611</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11761291</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B75"><label>75</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Devriese</surname> <given-names>LA</given-names></name> <name><surname>De Herdt</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Haesebrouck</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antibiotic sensitivity and resistance in <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> strains from Belgian broiler chickens</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2001</year>) <volume>30</volume>:<fpage>197</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>200</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079450120054596</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19184900</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B76"><label>76</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Szabo</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wehmann</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Magyar</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> and <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> strains from wild and domesticated birds in Hungary</article-title>. <source>Acta Vet Hung</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>63</volume>:<fpage>413</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>24</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1556/004.2015.039</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26599089</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B77"><label>77</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Malik</surname> <given-names>YS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Olsen</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Goyal</surname> <given-names>SM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> antibiotic resistance profiles of <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> strains from Minnesota turkeys during 1996-2002</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2003</year>) <volume>47</volume>:<fpage>588</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>93</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/6086</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14562885</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B78"><label>78</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Soriano</surname> <given-names>VE</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vera</surname> <given-names>NA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Salado</surname> <given-names>CR</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fern&#x000E1;ndez</surname> <given-names>RP</given-names></name> <name><surname>Blackall</surname> <given-names>PJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> susceptibility of <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> to several antimicrobial drugs</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2003</year>) <volume>47</volume>:<fpage>476</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>80</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/0005-2086(2003)047[0476:IVSOOR]2.0.CO;2</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12887209</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B79"><label>79</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zahra</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ferreri</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Alkasir</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yin</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Han</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Su</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Isolation and characterization of small-colony variants of <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic></article-title>. <source>J Clin Microb</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>51</volume>:<fpage>3228</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>36</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/JCM.01337-13</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23863572</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B80"><label>80</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Marien</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Decostere</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nauwynck</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Froyman</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Devriese</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Haesebrouck</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vivo</italic> selection of reduced enrofloxacin susceptibility in <italic>Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale</italic> and its resistance-related mutations in gyrA</article-title>. <source>Microb Drug Resist</source> (<year>2006</year>) <volume>12</volume>:<fpage>140</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1089/mdr.2006.12.140</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16922632</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B81"><label>81</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Akeila</surname> <given-names>MA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saif</surname> <given-names>YM</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Protection of turkey poults from <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> infection and disease by pili and bacterins</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>1988</year>) <volume>32</volume>:<fpage>641</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>9</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2307/1590978</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">2904805</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B82"><label>82</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Raffel</surname> <given-names>TR</given-names></name> <name><surname>Register</surname> <given-names>KB</given-names></name> <name><surname>Marks</surname> <given-names>SA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Temple</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Prevalence of <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> infection in selected wild and domesticated birds in the eastern USA</article-title>. <source>J Wildl Dis</source> (<year>2002</year>) <volume>38</volume>:<fpage>40</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7589/0090-3558-38.1.40</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11838227</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B83"><label>83</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ping-Ping</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xue</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jing-Jing</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yuan-Li</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guan-Hua</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xiao-Hua</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Colonization pattern of <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> in experimental infection of chicken</article-title>. <source>Pak Vet J</source> (<year>2014</year>) <volume>34</volume>:<fpage>193</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B84"><label>84</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Harrington</surname> <given-names>AT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Castellanos</surname> <given-names>JA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ziedalski</surname> <given-names>TM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Clarridge</surname> <given-names>JE</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cookson</surname> <given-names>BT</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Isolation of <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> and novel <italic>Bordetella</italic> strain from patients with respiratory disease</article-title>. <source>Emerg Infect Dis</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>15</volume>:<fpage>72</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3201/eid1501.071677</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19116056</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B85"><label>85</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Beach</surname> <given-names>NM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Thompson</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mutnick</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Brown</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kettig</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name> <name><surname>Puffenbarger</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>Bordetella avium</italic> antibiotic resistance, novel enrichment culture, and antigenic characterization</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>160</volume>:<fpage>189</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>96</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.05.026</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22721730</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B86"><label>86</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grespan</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Camera</surname> <given-names>O</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kn&#x000F6;bl</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gomes</surname> <given-names>CR</given-names></name> <name><surname>Felizardo</surname> <given-names>MR</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ferreira</surname> <given-names>TS</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Virulence and molecular aspects of <italic>Bordetella avium</italic> isolated from cockatiel chicks (<italic>Nymphicus hollandicus</italic>) in Brazil</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>160</volume>:<fpage>530</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.06.023</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B87"><label>87</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kaldhusdal</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Benestad</surname> <given-names>SL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lovland</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Epidemiologic aspects of necrotic enteritis in broiler chickens-disease occurrence and production performance</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>45</volume>:<fpage>271</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079457.2016.1163521</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26956946</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B88"><label>88</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Martel</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Devriese</surname> <given-names>LA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cauwerts</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>De Gussem</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Decostere</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Haesebrouck</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Susceptibility of <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> strains from broiler chickens to antibiotics and anticoccidials</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2004</year>) <volume>33</volume>:<fpage>3</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/0307945031000163291</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">14681061</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B89"><label>89</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Johansson</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Greko</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Engstr&#x000F6;m</surname> <given-names>BE</given-names></name> <name><surname>Karlsson</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of Swedish, Norwegian and Danish isolates of <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> from poultry, and distribution of tetracycline resistance genes</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2004</year>) <volume>99</volume>:<fpage>251</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2004.01.009</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15066727</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B90"><label>90</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Osman</surname> <given-names>KM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Elhariri</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antibiotic resistance of <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> isolates from broiler chickens in Egypt</article-title>. <source>Rev Sci Tech Off</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>32</volume>:<fpage>841</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>50</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.20506/rst.32.2.2212</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24761735</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B91"><label>91</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Park</surname> <given-names>JY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kim</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Young Oh</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hye Ryoung</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jang</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hee Soo</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Characterization of <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> isolates obtained from 2010 to 2012 from chickens with necrotic enteritis in Korea</article-title>. <source>Poult Sci</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>94</volume>:<fpage>1158</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>64</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/ps/pev037</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25840962</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B92"><label>92</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Slavic</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Boerlin</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fabri</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Klotins</surname> <given-names>KC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zoethout</surname> <given-names>JK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Weir</surname> <given-names>PE</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> isolates of bovine, chicken, porcine, and turkey origin from Ontario</article-title>. <source>Can J Vet Res</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>75</volume>:<fpage>89</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>97</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21731178</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B93"><label>93</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Silva</surname> <given-names>RO</given-names></name> <name><surname>Salvarani</surname> <given-names>FM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Assis</surname> <given-names>RA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Martins</surname> <given-names>NR</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pires</surname> <given-names>PS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lobato</surname> <given-names>FC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> strains isolated from broiler chickens</article-title>. <source>Braz J Microbiol</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>40</volume>:<fpage>262</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/S1517-838220090002000010</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24031355</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B94"><label>94</label><citation citation-type="book"><collab>Anon</collab>. <article-title>The risk of development of antimicrobial resistance with the use of coccidiostats in poultry diets</article-title>. <source>VKM Report</source>. <publisher-name>Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety</publisher-name> (<year>2015</year>). Available from: <uri xlink:href="http://english.vkm.no/dav/73b79b01c3.pdf">http://english.vkm.no/dav/73b79b01c3.pdf</uri></citation></ref>
<ref id="B95"><label>95</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gholamiandehkordi</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Eeckhaut</surname> <given-names>V</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lanckriet</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Timbermont</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bjerrum</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ducatelle</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Antimicrobial resistance in <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> isolates from broilers in Belgium</article-title>. <source>Vet Res Commun</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>33</volume>:<fpage>1031</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11259-009-9306-4</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19597952</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B96"><label>96</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fan</surname> <given-names>YC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>CL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>TC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chou</surname> <given-names>CH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tsai</surname> <given-names>HJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Incidence and Antimicrobial susceptibility to <italic>Clostridium perfringens</italic> in premarket broilers in Taiwan</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>60</volume>:<fpage>444</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>9</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/11315-110915-Reg</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27309285</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B97"><label>97</label><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bradbury</surname> <given-names>JM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Morrow</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Chapter 20&#x02014;Avian mycoplasmas</article-title>. <edition>6th ed</edition>. In: <person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Pattison</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>McMullin</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bradbury</surname> <given-names>JM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Alexander</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name></person-group>, editors. <source>Poultry Diseases</source>. <publisher-loc>Edinburgh/New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Elsevier</publisher-name> (<year>2008</year>). p. <fpage>220</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>33</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B98"><label>98</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gerchman</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lysnyansky</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Perk</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Levisohn</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> susceptibilities to fluoroquinolones in current and archived <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> and <italic>Mycoplasma synoviae</italic> isolates from meat-type turkeys</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2008</year>) <volume>131</volume>:<fpage>266</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>76</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2008.04.006</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18534788</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B99"><label>99</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gerchman</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Levisohn</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mikula</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Manso-Silv&#x000E1;n</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lysnyansky</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Characterization of <italic>in vivo</italic>-acquired resistance to macrolides of <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> strains isolated from poultry</article-title>. <source>Vet Res</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>42</volume>:<fpage>90</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1297-9716-42-90</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21810258</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B100"><label>100</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gharaibeh</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Al-Rashdan</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Change in antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> field isolates</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>150</volume>:<fpage>379</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>83</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2011.02.005</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21382675</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B101"><label>101</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zakeri</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kashefi</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Comparative therapeutic efficacy of tiamulin and pulmotil in infected broiler and layer flocks with <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic></article-title>. <source>Afr J Pharm Pharmacol</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>1778</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>81</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5897/AJPP11.367</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B102"><label>102</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pakpinyo</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sasipreeyajan</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Molecular characterization and determination of antimicrobial resistance of <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> isolated from chickens</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2007</year>) <volume>125</volume>:<fpage>59</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>65</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2007.05.011</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17570621</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B103"><label>103</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gautier-Bouchardon</surname> <given-names>AV</given-names></name> <name><surname>Reinhardt</surname> <given-names>AK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kobisch</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kempf</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> development of resistance to enrofloxacin, erythromycin, tylosin, tiamulin and oxytetracycline in <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum, Mycoplasma iowae</italic> and <italic>Mycoplasma synoviae</italic></article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2002</year>) <volume>88</volume>:<fpage>47</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>58</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0378-1135(02)00087-1</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12119137</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B104"><label>104</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Horrox</surname> <given-names>NE</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Monensin-tiamulin interaction risk to poultry</article-title>. <source>Vet Rec</source> (<year>1980</year>) <volume>106</volume>:<fpage>278</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/vr.106.12.278</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B105"><label>105</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Reinhardt</surname> <given-names>AK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gautier-Bouchardon</surname> <given-names>AV</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gicquel-Bruneau</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kobisch</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kempf</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Persistence of <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> in chickens after treatment with enrofloxacin without development of resistance</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2005</year>) <volume>106</volume>:<fpage>129</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>37</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2004.11.016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15737482</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B106"><label>106</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Reinhardt</surname> <given-names>AK</given-names></name> <name><surname>B&#x000E9;b&#x000E9;ar</surname> <given-names>CM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kobisch</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kempf</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gautier-Bouchardon</surname> <given-names>AV</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Characterization of mutations in DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV involved in quinolone resistance of <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> mutants obtained <italic>in vitro</italic></article-title>. <source>Antimicrob Agents Chemother</source> (<year>2002</year>) <volume>46</volume>:<fpage>590</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>3</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/AAC.46.2.590-593.2002</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11796386</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B107"><label>107</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Reinhardt</surname> <given-names>AK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kempf</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kobisch</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gautier-Bouchardon</surname> <given-names>AV</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Fluoroquinolone resistance in <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic>: DNA gyrase as primary target of enrofloxacin and impact of mutations in topoisomerases on resistance level</article-title>. <source>J Antimicrob Chemother</source> (<year>2002</year>) <volume>50</volume>:<fpage>589</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>92</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/jac/dkf158</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12356806</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B108"><label>108</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lysnyansky</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gerchman</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Levisohn</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mikula</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Feberwee</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ferguson</surname> <given-names>NM</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Discrepancy between minimal inhibitory concentration to enrofloxacin and mutations present in the quinolone-resistance determining regions of <italic>Mycoplasma gallisepticum</italic> field strains</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>160</volume>:<fpage>222</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>6</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.05.002</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22655973</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B109"><label>109</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>QN</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chang</surname> <given-names>BJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Riley</surname> <given-names>TV</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title><italic>Erysipelothrix</italic>&#x000A0;<italic>rhusiopathiae</italic></article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2010</year>) <volume>140</volume>:<fpage>405</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>17</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2009.08.012</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19733019</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B110"><label>110</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bobrek</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gawel</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mazurkiewicz</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Infections with <italic>Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae</italic> in poultry flocks</article-title>. <source>Worlds Poult Sci J</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>69</volume>:<fpage>803</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>12</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S0043933913000822</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B111"><label>111</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Eriksson</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jansson</surname> <given-names>DS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Johansson</surname> <given-names>KE</given-names></name> <name><surname>B&#x000E5;verud</surname> <given-names>V</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chirico</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Asp&#x000E1;n</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Characterization of <italic>Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae</italic> isolates from poultry, pigs, emus, the poultry red mite and other animals</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>137</volume>:<fpage>98</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>104</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2008.12.016</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19193500</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B112"><label>112</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sarver</surname> <given-names>CF</given-names></name> <name><surname>Morishita</surname> <given-names>TY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nersessian</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The effect of route of inoculation and challenge dosage on <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> infection in Pekin ducks <italic>(Anas platyrhynchos)</italic></article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2005</year>) <volume>49</volume>:<fpage>104</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/7248-073004R1</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B113"><label>113</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhong</surname> <given-names>CY</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cheng</surname> <given-names>AC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>MS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhu</surname> <given-names>DK</given-names></name> <name><surname>Luo</surname> <given-names>QH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhong</surname> <given-names>CD</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Antibiotic susceptibility of <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> field isolates</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis</source> (<year>2009</year>) <volume>53</volume>:<fpage>601</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/8552-120408-ResNote.1</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20095163</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B114"><label>114</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ding</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mei</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zeng</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title><italic>In vitro</italic> susceptibility of four antimicrobials against <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> isolates: a comparison of minimum inhibitory concentrations and mutant prevention concentrations for ceftiofur, cefquinome, florfenicol, and tilmicosin</article-title>. <source>BMC Vet Res</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>12</volume>:<fpage>250</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12917-016-0796-3</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27829415</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B115"><label>115</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>JH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lin</surname> <given-names>DC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>GH</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>ZL</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Molecular characterization of the antimicrobial resistance of <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> isolated from ducks</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2012</year>) <volume>158</volume>:<fpage>376</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>83</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2012.03.005</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22464155</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B116"><label>116</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Surya</surname> <given-names>PS</given-names></name> <name><surname>Priya</surname> <given-names>PM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mini</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Biotyping and antibiogram of <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> from ducks in Kerala</article-title>. <source>Biosci Biotech Res Commun</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>457</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>62</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B117"><label>117</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chao-Fu</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wen-Hwa</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tung-Mao</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tai-Sheng</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yung-Fu</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial susceptibility of <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> isolated from ducks and the efficacy of ceftiofur treatment</article-title>. <source>J Vet Diagn Invest</source> (<year>2003</year>) <volume>15</volume>:<fpage>26</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>9</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/104063870301500106</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12580291</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B118"><label>118</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Luo</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cheng</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Identification of ribosomal RNA methyltransferase gene ermF in <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic></article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol</source> (<year>2015</year>) <volume>44</volume>:<fpage>162</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>8</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079457.2015.1019828</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25690020</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B119"><label>119</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>YF</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jiang</surname> <given-names>HX</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xiang</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhao</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Effects of two efflux pump inhibitors on the drug susceptibility of <italic>Riemerella anatipestifer</italic> isolates from China</article-title>. <source>J Integr Agric</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>15</volume>:<fpage>929</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>33</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61031-0</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B120"><label>120</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sandoz</surname> <given-names>KM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rockey</surname> <given-names>DD</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antibiotic resistance in Chlamydiae</article-title>. <source>Future Microbiol</source> (<year>2010</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>1427</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>42</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2217/fmb.10.96</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20860486</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B121"><label>121</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dhama</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mahendran</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tiwari</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>SD</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Tuberculosis in birds: insights into the <italic>Mycobacterium avium</italic> infections</article-title>. <source>Vet Med Int</source> (<year>2011</year>) <volume>2011</volume>:<fpage>712369</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4061/2011/712369</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21776352</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B122"><label>122</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Varga</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rajic</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>McFall</surname> <given-names>ME</given-names></name> <name><surname>Reid-Smith</surname> <given-names>RJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Deckert</surname> <given-names>AE</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pearl</surname> <given-names>DL</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Comparison of antimicrobial resistance in generic <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> and <italic>Salmonella</italic> spp. cultured from identical fecal samples in finishing swine</article-title>. <source>Can J Vet Res</source> (<year>2008</year>) <volume>72</volume>:<fpage>181</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>7</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B123"><label>123</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Grasboll</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Saxmose Nielsen</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Toft</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>Christiansen</surname> <given-names>LE</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>How fitness reduced, antimicrobial resistant bacteria survive and spread: a multiple pig-multiple bacterial Strain Model</article-title>. <source>PLoS One</source> (<year>2014</year>) <volume>9</volume>(<issue>7</issue>):<fpage>e100458</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0100458</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B124"><label>124</label><citation citation-type="book"><collab>Anon. Veterinary Investigation Diagnosis Analysis (VIDA)</collab>. <source>Annual Report on Data Recorded by APHA and Scotland&#x02019;s Rural College on Animal and Bird Diagnostic Submissions in Great Britain</source>. <publisher-name>Animal and Plant Health Agency (APH)</publisher-name> (<year>2016</year>). Available from: <uri xlink:href="http://ahvla.defra.gov.uk/vet-gateway/surveillance/reports.htm">http://ahvla.defra.gov.uk/vet-gateway/surveillance/reports.htm</uri></citation></ref>
<ref id="B125"><label>125</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Michael</surname> <given-names>GB</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kaspar</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Siqueira</surname> <given-names>AK</given-names></name> <name><surname>de Freitas</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Corbellini</surname> <given-names>LG</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kadlec</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing <italic>Escherichia coli</italic> isolates collected from diseased food-producing animals in the GERM-Vet monitoring program 2008-2014</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2017</year>) <volume>200</volume>:<fpage>142</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>50</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2016.08.023</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B126"><label>126</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>El Garch</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name> <name><surname>de Jong</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Simjee</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moyaert</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Klein</surname> <given-names>U</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ludwig</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Monitoring of antimicrobial susceptibility of respiratory tract pathogens isolated from diseased cattle and pigs across Europe, 2009-2012: VetPath results</article-title>. <source>Vet Microbiol</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>194</volume>:<fpage>11</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>22</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2016.04.009</pub-id><pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27102206</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B127"><label>127</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kaspar</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Steinacker</surname> <given-names>U</given-names></name> <name><surname>Heidemanns</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mankertz</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>GERM-Vet: a representative cross-sectional monitoring study with veterinary pathogen bacteria in Germany</article-title>. <source>Int J Med Microbiol</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>303</volume>:<fpage>24</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>24</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B128"><label>128</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Abiala</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Olayiwola</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Babatunde</surname> <given-names>O</given-names></name> <name><surname>Aiyelaagbe</surname> <given-names>O</given-names></name> <name><surname>Akinyemi</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Evaluation of therapeutic potentials of plant extracts against poultry bacteria threatening public health</article-title>. <source>BMC Complement Altern Med</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>16</volume>:<fpage>417</fpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12906-016-1399-z</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B129"><label>129</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Umar</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sabir</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmed</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Subhan</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Avian metapneumovirus infection in poultry</article-title>. <source>Worlds Poult Sci J</source> (<year>2016</year>) <volume>72</volume>:<fpage>833</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>45</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S0043933916000738</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B130"><label>130</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Schwarz</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Silley</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Simjee</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Woodford</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name> <name><surname>van Duijkeren</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name> <name><surname>Johnson</surname> <given-names>AP</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group> <article-title>Assessing the antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteria obtained from animals</article-title>. <source>J Antimicrob Chemother</source> (<year>2010</year>) <volume>65</volume>:<fpage>601</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>4</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetmic.2009.12.013</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B131"><label>131</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Agunos</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Carson</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Leger</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Antimicrobial therapy of selected diseases in turkeys, laying hens, and minor poultry species in Canada</article-title>. <source>Can Vet J</source> (<year>2013</year>) <volume>54</volume>:<fpage>1041</fpage>&#x02013;<lpage>52</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24179239</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B132"><label>132</label><citation citation-type="web"><collab>Anon</collab>. <source>CVMP Strategy on Antimicrobials 2016-2020 European Medicines Agency</source>. (<year>2016</year>). Available from: <uri xlink:href="http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2016/10/WC500214901.pdf">http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2016/10/WC500214901.pdf</uri></citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>