Isolated Bacteria from the Uteri of Camels with Different Reproductive Backgrounds: A Study on Sampling Methodology, Prevalence, and Clinical Significance
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Design
2.2. Animals
2.3. Reproductive Examinations
2.4. Uterine Sampling
2.5. Uterine Culture
2.6. Uterine Treatments
2.7. Superovulation and Embryo Transfer
2.8. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Experiment 1
3.2. Experiment 2
3.3. Experiment 3
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Heil, B.A.; Paccamonti, D.L.; Sones, J.L. Role for the mammalian female reproductive tract microbiome in pregnancy outcomes. Physiol. Genom. 2019, 51, 390–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Williams, E.J. Drivers of Post-partum Uterine Disease in Dairy Cattle. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2013, 48, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Holyoak, G.R.; Premathilake, H.U.; Lyman, C.C.; Sones, J.L.; Gunn, A.; Wieneke, X.; DeSilva, U. The healthy equine uterus harbors a distinct core microbiome plus a rich and diverse microbiome that varies with geographical location. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 14790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Williams, E.; Fischer, D.; Noakes, D.; England, G.; Rycroft, A.; Dobson, H.; Sheldon, I. The relationship between uterine pathogen growth density and ovarian function in the postpartum dairy cow. Theriogenology 2007, 68, 549–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sheldon, I.; Molinari, P.; Ormsby, T.; Bromfield, J. Preventing postpartum uterine disease in dairy cattle depends on avoiding, tolerating and resisting pathogenic bacteria. Theriogenology 2020, 150, 158–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bicalho, M.; Machado, V.; Oikonomou, G.; Gilbert, R.; Bicalho, R. Association between virulence factors of Escherichia coli, Fusobacterium necrophorum, and Arcanobacterium pyogenes and uterine diseases of dairy cows. Veter- Microbiol. 2012, 157, 125–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opsomer, G.; Gröhn, Y.; Hertl, J.; Coryn, M.; Deluyker, H.; de Kruif, A. Risk factors for post partum ovarian dysfunction in high producing dairy cows in Belgium: A field study. Theriogenology 2000, 53, 841–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheldon, I.M.; Noakes, D.E.; Rycroft, A.N.; Pfeiffer, D.U.; Dobson, H. Influence of uterine bacterial contamination after parturition on ovarian dominant follicle selection and follicle growth and function in cattle. Reproduction 2002, 123, 837–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilbert, R.O.; Shin, S.T.; Guard, C.L.; Erb, H.N.; Frajblat, M. Prevalence of endometritis and its effects on reproductive performance of dairy cows. Theriogenology 2005, 64, 1879–1888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- LeBlanc, S.; Duffield, T.; Leslie, K.; Bateman, K.; Keefe, G.; Walton, J.; Johnson, W. Defining and Diagnosing Postpartum Clinical Endometritis and its Impact on Reproductive Performance in Dairy Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2002, 85, 2223–2236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheldon, I.M.; Cronin, J.; Goetze, L.; Donofrio, G.; Schuberth, H.-J. Defining Postpartum Uterine Disease and the Mechanisms of Infection and Immunity in the Female Reproductive Tract in Cattle1. Biol. Reprod. 2009, 81, 1025–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tibary, A.; Fite, C.; Anouassi, A.; Sghiri, A. Infectious causes of reproductive loss in camelids. Theriogenology 2006, 66, 633–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elshazly, M.O.; El-Rahman, S.S.A.; Hamza, D.A.; Ali, M.E. Pathological and bacteriological studies on reproductive tract abnormalities of she-camels (Camelus dromedarius), emphasizing on zoonotic importance. J. Adv. Veter-Anim. Res. 2020, 7, 633–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nabih, A.; Osman, R. Bacteriological studies of endometritis as a main cause for reproductive and fertility problems in she-camel. Assiut Vet. Med. J. 2012, 58, 371–379. [Google Scholar]
- Belina, D.; Eshetu, A.; Alemu, S.; Shasho, B.; Mohammed, T.; Mohammed, A.; Mummed, B.; Regassa, D. Reproductive Diseases and Disorders of Female Camels: An Assessment and Pathological and Bacteriological Study in Eastern Ethiopia. Veter-Med. Int. 2021, 2021, 6641361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wernery, U. The Barren Camel with Endometritis—Isolation of Trichomonas Fetus and Different Bacteria. J. Veter-Med. Ser. B 1991, 38, 523–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.; Derar, R.; Al-Sobayil, F.; Al-Hawas, A.; Hassanein, K. A retrospective study on clinical findings of 7300 cases (2007–2014) of barren female dromedaries. Theriogenology 2015, 84, 452–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wernery, U.; Kumar, B. Reproductive disorders in dromedary camels due to infectious causes and its treatment. J. Camel. Pract. Res. 1994, 1, 85–87. [Google Scholar]
- Sghiri, A.; Driancourt, M.A. Seasonal effects on fertility and ovarian follicular growth and maturation in camels (Camelus dromedarius). Anim. Reprod. Sci. 1999, 55, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheldon, I.M.; Lewis, G.S.; LeBlanc, S.; Gilbert, R.O. Defining postpartum uterine disease in cattle. Theriogenology 2006, 65, 1516–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blanchard, T.; Garcia, M.; Hurtgen, J.; Kenney, R. Comparison of two techniques for obtaining endometrial bacteriologic cultures in the mare. Theriogenology 1981, 16, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ball, B.; Shin, S.; Patten, V.; Lein, D.; Woods, G. Use of a low-volume uterine flush for microbiologic and cytologic examination of the mare’s endometrium. Theriogenology 1988, 29, 1269–1283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quinn, P.J.; Markey, B.K.; Leonard, F.C.; Hartigan, P.; Fanning, S.; Fitzpatrick, E. Veterinary Microbiology and Microbial Disease; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Shokri, H.; Khosravi, A.; Sharifzadeh, A.; Tootian, Z. Isolation and identification of yeast flora from genital tract in healthy female camels (Camelus dromedarius). Veter-Microbiol. 2010, 144, 183–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gharst, G.; Oyarzabal, O.A.; Hussain, S.K. Review of current methodologies to isolate and identify Campylobacter spp. from foods. J. Microbiol. Methods 2013, 95, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ararooti, T.; Niasari-Naslaji, A.; Asadi-Moghaddam, B.; Razavi, K.; Panahi, F. Superovulatory response following FSH, eCG-FSH and hMG and pregnancy rates following transfer of hatched blastocyst embryos with different diameter and shape in dromedary camel. Theriogenology 2018, 106, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karen, A.; Mansour, N. Factors affecting pregnancy rates and pregnancy losses after embryo transfer in dromedary camels. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2020, 221, 106580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skidmore, J.A.; Billah, M. Embryo transfer in the dromedary camel (Camelus dromedarius) using asynchronous, meclofenamic acid-treated recipients. Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 2005, 17, 417–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosmer, D.W., Jr.; Lemeshow, S.; Sturdivant, R.X. Applied Logistic Regression; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Jeon, S.J.; Neto, A.V.; Gobikrushanth, M.; Daetz, R.; Mingoti, R.D.; Parize, A.C.B.; de Freitas, S.L.; da Costa, A.N.L.; Bicalho, R.C.; Lima, S.; et al. Uterine Microbiota Progression from Calving until Establishment of Metritis in Dairy Cows. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2015, 81, 6324–6332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Williams, E.J.; Fischer, D.P.; Pfeiffer, D.U.; England, G.C.W.; Noakes, D.E.; Dobson, H.; Sheldon, I.M. Clinical evaluation of postpartum vaginal mucus reflects uterine bacterial infection and the immune response in cattle. Theriogenology 2005, 63, 102–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bicalho, M.L.S.; Lima, F.S.; Machado, V.S.; Meira, E.B., Jr.; Ganda, E.K.; Foditsch, C.; Gilbert, R.O. Associations among Trueperella pyogenes, endometritis diagnosis, and pregnancy outcomes in dairy cows. Theriogenology 2016, 85, 267–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leblanc, M.M.; Causey, R.C. Clinical and Subclinical Endometritis in the Mare: Both Threats to Fertility. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2009, 44, 10–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- LeBlanc, M.M.; Magsig, J.; Stromberg, A.J. Use of a low-volume uterine flush for diagnosing endometritis in chronically infertile mares. Theriogenology 2007, 68, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.; Al-Sobayil, F.; Al-Hawas, A. Evaluating the effectiveness of different treatments of uterine infections in female camels (Camelus dromedarius). Theriogenology 2010, 74, 40–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Asadi-Moghaddam, B.; Niasarinaslaji, A.S.; Ararooti, F.T.; Panahi, F.; Hossini, M.; Moulavi, F.; Razavi, K. Treatment of clinical endometritis in dromedary camel with Oxytertracycline and Cephaprin benzathine. In Proceedings of the 18th International Congress on Animal Reproduction, Tours, France, 26–30 June 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Dubuc, J.; Duffield, T.; Leslie, K.; Walton, J.; LeBlanc, S. Risk factors for postpartum uterine diseases in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93, 5764–5771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Denis-Robichaud, J.; Dubuc, J. Determination of optimal diagnostic criteria for purulent vaginal discharge and cytological endometritis in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2015, 98, 6848–6855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hurtgen, J.P. Pathogenesis and treatment of endometritis in the mare: A review. Theriogenology 2006, 66, 560–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ricketts, S.W. The treatment of equine endometritis in studfarm practice. Pferdeheilkunde Equine Med. 1999, 15, 588–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kelly, E.; McAloon, C.; O’Grady, L.; Duane, M.; Somers, J.; Beltman, M. Cow-level risk factors for reproductive tract disease diagnosed by 2 methods in pasture-grazed dairy cattle in Ireland. J. Dairy Sci. 2020, 103, 737–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pascal, N.; Basole, K.O.; D’Andre, H.C.; Omedo, B.B. Risk factors associated with endometritis in zero-grazed dairy cows on smallholder farms in Rwanda. Prev. Veter-Med. 2021, 188, 105252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Refaat, D.; Ali, A.; Saeed, E.M.; Al-Sobayil, F.; Al-Samri, A.; Elbehiry, A. Diagnostic evaluation of subclinical endometritis in dromedary camels. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2020, 215, 106327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sampling Method (n = 72) | ||
---|---|---|
Lavage | Swab | |
Total positive uteri (%) | 48 (66.6) | 44 (61.1) |
Total isolates | 88 | 74 |
Discarded plates | - | 2 |
Gram −/+ 1 | 53/35 | 34/40 |
Organism (%) | ||
E. coli | 19 (21.5) | 11 (15.0) |
Proteus mirabilis | 13 (14.7) | 9(12.3) |
Trueperella pyogenes | 11 (12.5) | 10 (13.6) |
Pseudomonas aeruginosa | 8 (9.1) | 5 (6.8) |
Enterobacter aerogenes | 8 (9.1) | 9 (12.1) |
Staphylococcus spp. | 8(9.1) | 11 (15.0) |
Staphylococcus aureus | 7 (7.9) | 7 (9.6) |
Bacillus spp. | 4 (4.5) | 5 (6.8) |
Klebsiella pneumoniae | 5 (5.7) | - |
Corynebacterium spp. | 4 (4.5) | 4 (5.4) |
Campylobacter spp. | 1 (1.1) | 1 (1.3) |
Streptococcus spp. | - | 1 (1.3) |
Citrobacter freundii | - | 1 (1.3) |
Fungi | - | - |
Reproductive History (n = 856) | p-Value | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sub-Fertile (n = 72) | Nulliparous (n = 44) | Calved (n = 264) | Unknown (n = 476) | ||
Total infected uteri (%) (n = 394) | 48 (66.6) | 15 (34.1) | 112 (42.4) | 219 (46.0) | 0.136 |
Groups combined (%) | 48 (66.6) a | 346/784 (44.2) b | 0.035 | ||
Total isolates (%) (n = 556) | 88 | 21 | 156 | 291 | - |
Isolates/Group | 1.22 a | 0.48 b | 0.59 b | 0.61 b | <0.002 |
Isolates/infected uteri | 1.83 | 1.4 | 1.39 | 1.32 | 0.457 |
Isolates (%) 1 | |||||
E. coli (n = 141) | 19 (21.6) | 5 (23.8) | 49(31.4) | 68 (23.3) | 0.474 |
Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 63) | 8 (9.1) | 2 (8.7) | 13 (8.3) | 40 (13.7) | 0.411 |
Proteus mirabilis (n = 61) | 13 (14.7) | 3 (14.3) | 18 (11.5) | 27 (9.3) | 0.586 |
Trueperella pyogenes (n = 55) | 11 (12.5) | 2 (8.7) | 17 (10.9) | 25 (8.6) | 0.766 |
Staphylococcus spp. (n = 47) | 8 (9.1) | 3 (13.0) | 12 (7.7) | 24 (8.2) | 0.827 |
Enterobacter aerogenes (n = 40) | 8 (9.1) | 1 (4.3) | 8 (5.1) | 23 (7.9) | 0.650 |
Bacillus spp. (n = 30) | 4 (4.5) | 2 98.7) | 8 (5.1) | 16 (5.5) | 0.862 |
Staphylococcus aureus (n = 28) | 7 (7.9) | 1 (4.3) | 6 (3.8) | 14 (4.8) | 0.608 |
Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 24) | 5 (5.7) | - | 4 (2.6) | 15 (5.1) | 0.407 |
Corynebacterium spp. (n = 17) | 4 (4.5) | 1 (4.3) | 4 (2.6) | 9 (3.1) | 0.844 |
Strep. Alpha hemolytic (n = 11) | - | 1 (4.3) | 4 (2.6) | 6 (2.1) | 0.731 |
Micrococcus luteus (n = 8) | - | - | 5 (3.2) | 3(1.0) | 0.105 |
Strep. Beta hemolytic (n = 8) | - | - | 2 (1.3) | 6 (2.1) | 0.559 |
Salmonella spp. (n = 5) | - | - | 2 (1.3) | 3 (1.0) | 0.811 |
Mannheimia haemolytica(n = 5) | - | - | 1 (0.6) | 4 (1.4) | 0.486 |
Campylobacter (n = 5) | 1 (1.1) | - | 1 (0.6) | 3 (1.0) | 0.900 |
Serratia marcescens (n = 4) | - | 2 (1.3) | 2 (0.7) | 0.528 | |
Listeria monocytogenes (n = 2) | - | - | 2 (0.7) | - | - |
Pasteurella multocida (n = 1) | - | 1 (0.3) | - | - |
N Cases | + Culture (%) | − Culture (%) | p Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Animal type | ||||
Sub-fertile a | 72 | 48 (66.6) | 24 (33.3) | 0.001 |
Calved b | 264 | 112 (42.4) | 152 (57.6) | |
Unknown b | 476 | 219 (46.0) | 257 (54.0) | |
BCS | ||||
≤2 | 194 | 95 (48.9) | 99 (51.1) | 0.112 |
2–3 | 357 | 170 (47.6) | 187 (52.4) | |
3–4 | 185 | 79 (42.7) | 106 (57.3) | |
4–5 | 76 | 31 (40.8) | 45 (59.2) | |
Age group | ||||
≤10 years | 631 | 290 (45.9) | 341 (55.8) | 0.248 |
>10 years | 181 | 89 (49.2) | 92 (50.8) | |
Ovarian status | ||||
Active | 578 | 267 (46.2) | 311 (53.8) | 0.361 |
Inactive | 234 | 112 (47.8) | 122 (52.1) | |
Uterine discharge | ||||
No discharge (ND) a | 407 | 213 (52.3) | 194 (47.6) | 0.000 |
Gelatinous discharge (GD) ab | 153 | 75 (49.0) | 78 (50.1) | |
Purulent discharge grade 1 (PDG1) b | 124 | 45 (36.3) | 79 (63.7) | |
Purulent discharge grade 2 (PDG2) b | 72 | 27 (37.5) | 45 (62.5) | |
Purulent discharge grade 3 (PDG3) b | 56 | 19 (33.9) | 37 (66.1) | |
Uterine ultrasonography | ||||
No echogenicity in lumen (NE) a | 611 | 265 (43.4) | 346 (56.6) | 0.000 |
Moderate echogenic line (MEL) a | 109 | 49 (44.9) | 60 (55.1) | |
Continuous echogenic line/fluid (CEL) b | 92 | 65 (70.6) | 27 (29.4) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Asadi, B.; Seyedasgari, F.; Ashrafi Tamai, I.; Yarmohammadi, M.; Ebadi, R.; Kim, E.; Barin, A. Isolated Bacteria from the Uteri of Camels with Different Reproductive Backgrounds: A Study on Sampling Methodology, Prevalence, and Clinical Significance. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10010039
Asadi B, Seyedasgari F, Ashrafi Tamai I, Yarmohammadi M, Ebadi R, Kim E, Barin A. Isolated Bacteria from the Uteri of Camels with Different Reproductive Backgrounds: A Study on Sampling Methodology, Prevalence, and Clinical Significance. Veterinary Sciences. 2023; 10(1):39. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10010039
Chicago/Turabian StyleAsadi, Behnam, Fahimeh Seyedasgari, Iradj Ashrafi Tamai, Mehdi Yarmohammadi, Reza Ebadi, Ellen Kim, and Abbas Barin. 2023. "Isolated Bacteria from the Uteri of Camels with Different Reproductive Backgrounds: A Study on Sampling Methodology, Prevalence, and Clinical Significance" Veterinary Sciences 10, no. 1: 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10010039
APA StyleAsadi, B., Seyedasgari, F., Ashrafi Tamai, I., Yarmohammadi, M., Ebadi, R., Kim, E., & Barin, A. (2023). Isolated Bacteria from the Uteri of Camels with Different Reproductive Backgrounds: A Study on Sampling Methodology, Prevalence, and Clinical Significance. Veterinary Sciences, 10(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci10010039