Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Antimicrobial Resistance in Escherichia coli Isolates from Swine and Wild Small Mammals in the Proximity of Swine Farms and in Natural Environments in Ontario, Canada

Open access
Kozak, Gosia K., Boerlin, Patrick, Janecko, Nicol, Reid-Smith, Richard J., Jardine, Claire·2009·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Wild animals not normally exposed to antimicrobial agents can acquire antimicrobial agent-resistant bacteria through contact with humans and domestic animals and through the environment. In this study we assessed the frequency of antimicrobial resistance in generic Escherichia coli isolates from wild small mammals (mice, voles, and shrews) and the effect of their habitat (farm or natural area) on antimicrobial resistance. Additionally, we compared the types and frequency of antimicrobial resistance in E. coli isolates from swine on the same farms from which wild small mammals were collected. Animals residing in the vicinity of farms were five times more likely to carry E. coli isolates with tetracycline resistance determinants than animals living in natural areas; resistance to tetracycline was also the most frequently observed resistance in isolates recovered from swine (83%). Our results suggest that E. coli isolates from wild small mammals living on farms have higher rates of resistance and are more frequently multiresistant than E. coli isolates from environments, such as natural areas, that are less impacted by human and agricultural activities. No Salmonella isolates were recovered from any of the wild small mammal feces. This study suggests that close proximity to food animal agriculture increases the likelihood that E. coli isolates from wild animals are resistant to some antimicrobials, possibly due to exposure to resistant E. coli isolates from livestock, to the resistance genes of these isolates, or to antimicrobials through contact with animal feed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aem.01821-08

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Kozak, G. K., Boerlin, P., Janecko, N., Reid-Smith, R. J., & Jardine, C.
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2009-02
Volume
75
Issue
3
Pages
559-566
ISSN
  • 0099-2240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5336
OpenAlex
W2117664027
Cited by
309
References
1
FWCI
4.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Antimicrobial Resistance in Escherichia coli Isolates from Swine and Wild Small Mammals in the Proximity of Swine Farms and in Natural Environments in Ontario, Canada. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aem.01821-08
The paper
Kozak, G. K., Boerlin, P., Janecko, N., Reid-Smith, R. J., & Jardine, C. (2009). Antimicrobial Resistance in Escherichia coli Isolates from Swine and Wild Small Mammals in the Proximity of Swine Farms and in Natural Environments in Ontario, Canada. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.01821-08

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.