Cited by 12Antimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsSalmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology

Prevalence, Infectious Characteristics and Genetic Diversity of Staphylococcus aureus and Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Two Raw-Meat Processing Establishments in Northern Greece

Open access
Komodromos, Dimitrios, Kotzamanidis, Charalampos, Giantzi, Virginia, Pappa, Styliani, Papa, Anna, Zdragas, Antonios, Angelidis, Apostolos, Sergelidis, Daniel·2022·Pathogens

Abstract

In the present study, we investigated the isolation frequency, the genetic diversity, and the infectious characteristics of Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) from the incoming meat and the meat products, the environment, and the workers’ nasal cavities, in two meat-processing establishments in northern Greece. The isolated S. aureus strains were examined for their resistance to antimicrobials, carriage of the mecA and mecC genes, carriage of genes encoding for the production of nine staphylococcal enterotoxins, carriage of the Panton–Valentine Leukocidin and Toxic Shock Syndrome genes, and the ability to form biofilm. The genetic diversity of the isolates was evaluated using Pulsed Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE) and spa typing. S. aureus was isolated from 13.8% of the 160 samples examined, while only one sample (0.6%) was contaminated by MRSA carrying the mecA gene. The evaluation of the antimicrobial susceptibility of the isolates revealed low antimicrobial resistance. The higher resistance frequencies were observed for penicillin (68.2%), amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (36.4%) and tetracycline (18.2%), while 31.8% of the isolates were sensitive to all antimicrobials examined. Multidrug resistance was observed in two isolates. None of the isolates carried the mecC or lukF-PV genes, and two isolates (9.1%) harbored the tst gene. Eight isolates (36.4%) carried the seb gene, one carried the sed gene, two (9.1%) carried both the sed and sei genes, and one isolate (4.5%) carried the seb, sed and sei genes. Twenty-one (95.5%) of the isolates showed moderate biofilm production ability, while only one (4.5%) was characterized as a strong biofilm producer. Genotyping of the isolates by PFGE indicates that S. aureus from different meat-processing establishments represent separate genetic populations. Ten different spa types were identified, while no common spa type isolates were detected within the two plants. Overall, our findings emphasize the need for the strict application of good hygienic practices at the plant level to control the spread of S. aureus and MRSA to the community through the end products.

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 · 10.3390/pathogens11111370

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies have revealed the presence of MDR bacteria, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, and MDR-Salmonella, in meat products.

    “Studies have revealed the presence of MDR bacteria, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, and MDR-Salmonella, in meat products [63,76,77,78,79].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 94 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Komodromos, D., Kotzamanidis, C., Giantzi, V., Pappa, S., Papa, A., Zdragas, A., Angelidis, A., & Sergelidis, D.
Affiliations
  • Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (GR)
  • Hellenic Agricultural Organization - DIMITRA (GR)
Corresponding author
Kotzamanidis, Charalampos
Venue
Pathogens
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-11-17
Volume
11
Issue
11
Pages
1370
ISSN
2076-0817 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309613537
Cited by
12
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3
FWCI
1.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Pathogens (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
European Union’s Horizon 2020 grant VEO (874735)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Milk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Keywords
Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, raw meat, antimicrobial resistance, mecA gene, mecC gene, staphylococcal enterotoxins, toxic shock syndrome toxin, Panton-Valentine leukocidin, biofilm formation, spa typing, genetic diversity, nasal carriage, food safety

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