This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Butaye, P.
Right arrow Articles by Haesebrouck, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Butaye, P.
Right arrow Articles by Haesebrouck, F.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, October 1999, p. 2569-2570, Vol. 43, No. 10
0066-4804/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Phenotypic Distinction in Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis Strains between Susceptibility and Resistance to Growth-Enhancing Antibiotics

Patrick Butaye,* Luc A. Devriese, and Freddy Haesebrouck

Laboratory of Bacteriology and Mycology, Department of Pathology, Bacteriology, and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium

Received 27 October 1998/Returned for modification 29 April 1999/Accepted 4 August 1999

Susceptibility of Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis strains from animals and foods to growth-promoting antibiotics used in animal feed was tested by the agar dilution technique. Acquired resistance to bacitracin, narasin, tylosin, and virginiamycin was seen for both species, and for E. faecium, resistance to avilamycin and avoparcin was also seen. Drawing the distinction between susceptibility and resistance based on frequency distributions of MICs was easy with avoparcin, avilamycin, and tylosin but difficult with virginiamycin and to some extent also with bacitracin and narasin.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Laboratory of Bacteriology and Mycology, Department of Pathology, Bacteriology, and Avian Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ghent, Salisburylaan 133, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium. Phone: 32 9 264 74 35. Fax: 32 9 264 74 94. E-mail: pbutaye{at}allserv.rug.ac.be.

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, October 1999, p. 2569-2570, Vol. 43, No. 10
0066-4804/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Butaye, P., Devriese, L. A., Haesebrouck, F. (2003). Antimicrobial Growth Promoters Used in Animal Feed: Effects of Less Well Known Antibiotics on Gram-Positive Bacteria. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 16: 175-188 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Butaye, P., Devriese, L. A., Haesebrouck, F. (2001). Differences in Antibiotic Resistance Patterns of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium Strains Isolated from Farm and Pet Animals. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 45: 1374-1378 [Abstract] [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»