The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antibiotic resistance of faecal Escherichia coli in poultry, poultry farmers and poultry slaughterers
Abstract
The percentage of faecal samples containing resistant Echerichia coli and the proportion of resistant faecal E. coli were determined in three poultry populations: broilers and turkeys commonly given antibiotics, and laying hens treated with antibiotics relatively infrequently. Faecal samples of five human populations were also examined: turkey farmers, broiler farmers, laying-hen farmers, broiler slaughterers and turkey slaughterers. The MICs of antibiotics commonly used in poultry medicine were also determined. Ciprofloxacin-resistant isolates from these eight populations and from turkey meat were genotyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) after SmaI digestion. The proportion of samples containing resistant E. coli and the percentages of resistant E. coli were significantly higher in turkeys and broilers than in the laying-hen population. Resistance to nearly all antibiotics in faecal E. coli of turkey and broiler farmers, and of turkey and broiler slaughterers, was higher than in laying-hen farmers. Multiresistant isolates were common in turkey and broiler farmers but absent in laying-hen farmers. The same resistance patterns were found in turkeys, turkey farmers and turkey slaughterers and in broiler, broiler farmers and broiler slaughterers. The PFGE patterns of the isolates from the eight populations were quite heterogeneous, but E. coli with an identical PFGE pattern were isolated at two farms from a turkey and the farmer, and also from a broiler and a broiler farmer from different farms. Moreover, three E. coli isolates from turkey meat were identical to faecal isolates from turkeys. The results of this study strongly indicate that transmission of resistant clones and resistance plasmids of E. coli from poultry to humans commonly occurs.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The crisis in antibiotic resistance
Neu, H. C. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.257.5073.1064 · Cited by 2,834
High frequency of antimicrobial resistance in human fecal flora
Levy, S. B., Marshall, B., Schluederberg, S., Rowse, D., & Davis, J. (1988) · Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy · doi:10.1128/aac.32.12.1801 · Cited by 160
Cited by
Food Animals and Antimicrobials: Impacts on Human Health
Marshall, B. M., & Levy, S. B. (2011) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00002-11 · Cited by 2,241
Manyi-Loh, C., Mamphweli, S., Meyer, E., & Okoh, A. (2018) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules23040795 · Cited by 1,808
Food safety impacts of antimicrobial use and their residues in aquaculture
Okocha, R. C., Olatoye, I. O., & Adedeji, O. B. (2018) · Public Health Reviews · doi:10.1186/s40985-018-0099-2 · Cited by 513
Rodriguez-Siek, K. E., Giddings, C. W., Doetkott, C., Johnson, T. J., Fakhr, M. K., & Nolan, L. K. (2005) · Microbiology · doi:10.1099/mic.0.27499-0 · Cited by 432
Antibiotic and synthetic growth promoters in animal diets: Review of impact and analytical methods
Gonzalez Ronquillo, M., & Angeles Hernandez, J. C. (2017) · Food Control · doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.03.001 · Cited by 365
Metadata
- Authors
- van den Bogaard, A. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-06-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 763-771
- ISSN
- 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2091
- OpenAlex
- W2131526557
- Cited by
- 622
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antibiotic resistance of faecal Escherichia coli in poultry, poultry farmers and poultry slaughterers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/47.6.763
- The paper
- van den Bogaard, A. E. (2001). Antibiotic resistance of faecal Escherichia coli in poultry, poultry farmers and poultry slaughterers. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/47.6.763
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.