<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<title>Short Communication</title>

<style>
.Page_1{
	
	<!--margin-left:200px; -->
	<!--margin-right:200px; -->
	
	border:1px;
	border-color:#d3d1d1;

	font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
	font-size:14px;
	line-height:25px;
	color:#000;
	
	
	
	
	
		<!--min-width:460px; -->
	
	height:100%;
	background-color:#FFF;
	padding-left:5px;
	padding-right:5px;
	
	text-align:justify;



		}
	
	
	
.Hdr1{
	color:#004F4F;
	margin-top:30px;
	margin-bottom:0px;
	
	padding-left:5px;
	padding-right:5px;
	padding-bottom:0px;

			
	  }
.Hdr2{
	text-align:center;
	margin-top:0px;
	margin-bottom:0px;
	color:#002E5B;
	padding-bottom:1px;
	padding-top:1px;
	padding-left:5px;
	padding-right:5px;
		

	}
	
.Mrgn_Top {
	margin-top: 0px;
}
.Author{color:#002E5B; 
text-align:center;}
.inner{
<!--	border: 1px solid #d3d1d1;
	border-radius: 5px;
 -->	padding-left:10px;
	padding-right:10px;
	}
.Hdr30 {
	color:#990000;
	margin-bottom:2px;
	border-bottom-style: solid;
	border-bottom-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-bottom-width: 1px;
	padding:10px;
	background-color:#FFF;

}
.Hdr3{
	color:#002E5B;
padding: 0 0 7px;
margin: 1.5em 0 0.5em 0;
font-size: 1.4em;
border-bottom: 1px solid #d3d1d1;

padding-left:5px;
	padding-right:5px;

}



p {
	padding-left:5px;
	padding-right:5px;
    margin-top:2px;
	margin-bottom:2px;
  <!-- border-bottom-style: solid;
	border-bottom-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-bottom-width: 1px; -->
   }
.p3{margin-top:1px;
margin-bottom:2px;
text-align:center;
margin-bottom:1px;
	<!--border-bottom-style: solid;
	border-bottom-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-bottom-width: 1px;
 -->	}

.p2 {
	
	margin-bottom:10px;
	line-height:1.4em;
	}
	ol{
	padding-left:60px;
	padding-right:30px;		
		}
		
		.p4{
	border-bottom-style: solid;
	border-bottom-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-bottom-width: 1px;
	padding-left:60px;
	padding-right:60px;
	
}
.p5{
	border-bottom-style: solid;
	border-bottom-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-bottom-width: 1px;

	}
	#ColorID {
		padding-top:5px;
		padding-bottom:5px;
		color:#002E5B;
		}
.pt{
	background-color:#BDF;
	border-top-style:solid;
	
	border-top-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-top-width: 1px;
	border-bottom-style: solid;
	
	border-bottom-color:#d3d1d1;
	border-bottom-width: 1px;
	height:90px;
	
	
	}
	
	
.img_display{
	float:left;
	padding:5px;
	
	}
	.img_text{ padding:10px;
		
		}
		
		.Txt_Dis{
			padding-right:20px;
			}
</style>


</head>

<body class="Page_1">

<div class="p5">
<p>
<h1 class="Hdr1">

Short Communication


</h1>

Journal of Animal Health and Production 2 (3): 38 – 39 


</p>


</div>


<div>
<h2 class="Hdr2">


Prevalence of Escherichia Coli from Pigs and Cattle 

</h2>

<p class="p3">




<strong>Sonuwara Begum</strong><span><sup>1*</sup></span>, 

<strong>Gakul Chandra Hazarika</strong><span><sup>1</sup></span>, 


<strong>Swaraj Rajkhowa</strong><span><sup>2</sup></span>

</p>


</div>

<div class="p4">

<ol>

<li>Department of  Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Science, Khanapara, Guwahati –22 </li>

<li>National Research Centre on Pig (Indian Council of Agricultural Research), Rani, Guwahati – 31</li>


</ol>




</div>


<div>        
<p><span class="Author">*Corresponding author:Sonuwarabegum@yahoo.com </span></p>

</div>
<div id="ColorID"><p>
<span><b>ARTICLE CITATION:</b></span> 

Begum S, Hazarika GC, Rajkhowa S (2014). Prevalence of Escherichia coli from pigs and cattle. J. Anim.  Health Prod. 2 (3): 38 – 39.


<br>
<span><b>Received: </b></span>2014–08–18, <span><b>Revised: </b></span>2014–09–04, <span><b>Accepted: </b></span>2014–09–06<br>

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at 

(<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14737/journal.jahp/2014/2.3.38.39">

http://dx.doi.org/10.14737/journal.jahp/2014/2.3.38.39

</a>)
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited </p>
</div>

<div>
     <h3 class="Hdr3">ABSTRACT</h3>

    <p>
    Escherichia coli a gram negative rod shaped bacteria has been shown to be normal inhabitant of the gastrointestinal tract of animals and man and most of them are harmless, but some of the serotypes of it are pathogenic and causes diarrhoea and extra intra–intestinal infections in human and animals. A study was done to find out the prevalence of Escherichia coli from pigs and cattle from organized and unorganized farm in Assam. A total of 260 faecal samples, comprising 110 from cattle and 150 from pigs were examined for the presence of E.coli. The overall prevalence of E.coli in cattle was recorded as 67.27%. The prevalence was recorded as 76.67% and 56.00% in diarrhoeic cattle and non– diarrhoeic cattle, respectively. The overall prevalence of E.coli in pigs was recorded as 59.33%. The prevalence was recorded as 70.59% and 44.62% from diarrhoeic pigs and non– diarrhoeic pigs, respectively.
    </p>
 
</div>




<div>
  
  <h3 class="Hdr3"></h3>
    <p>
    Escherichia coli (E. coli) a member of family Enterobacteriaceae is a short Gram ¬negative, non–spore forming and usually peritrichous and fimbriate bacillus. It serves as a major facultative anaerobe throughout its life as a harmless saprophyte but Larulle (1889) was the first to suggest the possible role of E. coli as a pathogenic organism. In  debilitated or immunosupressed host or when gastrointestinal barriers are violated even normal non pathogenic strains of E. coli can cause infection.
</p><br><p>
The samples were collected aseptically in sterile vials from organized and unorganized farm of Assam. A total of 260 faecal samples, comprising 110 from cattle and 150 from pigs were examined for the presence of E.coli. All the samples were collected aseptically in sterile vials, immediately brought to the laboratory for bacteriological culture. The commercially available readymade Mac Conkey broth and Mac Conkey lactose agar media (HiMedia, Mumbai) was used for bacterial isolation, identification and characterization of E. coli. Faecal samples were first inoculated in Mac Conkey’s broth and incubated at 37°C overnight. For primary isolation of E.coli Mac Conkey lactose agar is used, samples were inoculated on Mac Conkey lactose agar plates and incubated at 37°C overnight. Morphological characteristics like shape, size, arrangement and staining reaction of the organisms of each isolates were studied after staining the fresh culture smears with Gram’s stain. 
</p><p>The prevalence of E.coli in diarrhoeic and non diarrhoeic adult cattle as well as calves was recorded. A total of 110 faecal samples were collected out of which 74 (67.27%) samples were found positive to E.coli. The prevalence was found to be 60% and 88.57% in diarrhoeic adult cattle and calves, respectively whereas it was found to be 53.33%and 60% in non diarrhoeic cattle and calves, respectively. The overall prevalence of E.coli in diarrhoeic cattle and non–diarrhoeic cattle was found to be 76.67% and 56.00%, respectively. Trend on the prevalence of E. coli in both diarrhoeic and non diarrhoeic adult cattle and calves is shown graphically in (Figure 1).
</p>
</div>


<div class="pt" > <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig1_506.PNG" target="new"><img class="img_display" src="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig1_506.PNG" width="80" height="80"></a>
<p class="Txt_Dis" ><span><b><a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig1_506.PNG" target="new">Figure 1: </a></b><a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig1_506.PNG"><span>Prevelence of E.coli in Diarrhoeic and Non–Diarrhoeic adult Cattle and Calves</a></p>
</div>


<div>
<p>
A total of 150 faecal samples from pigs were examined out of which 89 were found to be positive for E.coli. The prevalence was found to be 50% and 88.89% in diarrhoeic adult pigs and piglets, respectively whereas it was found to be 40% and 50% in non– diarrhoeic adult pigs and piglets. The overall prevalence of E.coli in diarrhoeic pigs and non diarrhoeic pigs were recorded as 70.59% and 44.62%, respectively. Trend on the prevalence of E.coli in both diarrhoeic and non diarrhoeic adult pigs and piglets as shown in (Figure 2)
</p>
</div>


<div class="pt" > <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig2_506.PNG" target="new"><img class="img_display" src="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig2_506.PNG" width="80" height="80"></a>
<p class="Txt_Dis" ><span><b><a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig2_506.PNG" target="new">Figure 2: </a></b><a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/uploads/imagesfiles/Fig2_506.PNG"><span>Prevelence of E.coli in Diarrhoeic and Non–Diarrhoeic Adult Pigs and Piglets</a></p>
</div>


<div>
<p>The present finding is similar with the findings of <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Sharma2004" target="_self">Sharma et al., (2004)</a> who also reported highest (94.52%) prevalence of E.coli in comparision to non–diarrhoeic calves. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Hussain2000" target="_self">Hussain and Saikia (2000)</a> and <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Wani2003" target="_self">Wani et al., (2003)</a> however isolated E.coli from all cases of calf diarrhea. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Shah1990" target="_self">Shah and Jhala (1990)</a> isolated E.coli  from 61.2% of diarrhoeic calves. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Scotland1990" target="_self">Scotland et al., (1990)</a> recorded that non O157: H7 was isolated from 26.9% diarrhoeic calves, 10% asymptomatic carrier calves and 5.5% in healthy calves in Srilanka. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Khang2004" target="_self">Khang et al., (2004)</a> recorded that out of 498 diarrhoeic and non diarrhoeic young calves from 115 different farms, out of which 254 non–diarrhoeic calves 24 (9.8%) were positive for EHEC O157 and 254 non–diarrhoeic calves 7 (2.8%) positive for EHEC O157.
</p><p>The present findings also corrborate with the findings of <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Sikdar1991" target="_self">Sikdar, (1991)</a> who also reported that 51.95% of piglets from four different farms of North eastern region of India were affected with diarrhea where the main etiological agents was found to be E.coli. The present findings are almost similar with the findings of <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Borah1994" target="_self">Borah (1994)</a> who also isolated E.coli from 86.11% of pigs that died of gastroenteritis. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Martins2000" target="_self">Martins et al., (2000)</a> reported prevalence of E.coli from three states of Brazil which was found to be 65.7% in  diarrhoeic and 42.8% in non–diarrhoeic piglets. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Do2006" target="_self">Do et al., (2006)</a> from North Vietnam reported that diarrhoea  was  found to affect 71.5% of the litter born during that period. <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Ngeleka2003" target="_self">Ngeleka et al., (2003)</a> reported the prevalence of E.coli pathotypes from diarrhoeic (40%) and non–diarrhoeic piglets (22.9%).
</p><p>It was observed that the highest prevalence was which might be attributed to the fact that in newborn piglets and calves E.coli is found to be the predominant bacteria associated with diarrhea (<a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Sikdar1991" target="_self">Sikdar., 1991</a>, <a href="http://nexusacademicpublishers.com/table_contents_detail/11/359/html/#Borah1994" target="_self">Borah., 1994</a>).The variation in prevalence as observed in the present study could be due to geographical variation of the studied area. 

</p>
  
</div>


<div>
<h3 class="Hdr3">ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</h3>
<p>
The authors is very thankful to Department of Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Science Khanapara, Guwahati were these study was carried out.
</p>
</div>





<div>
<h3 class="Hdr3">REFERENCES</h3>
 
<p class="p2"> <a name="Borah1994"></a>
Borah P (1994). An epidemiological study on gastroenteritis in pigs. Ph.D. thesis, Assam Agric. Univ., Guwahati, India.
 </p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Do2006"></a>
Do TN, Cu PH, Nguyen HX, Au TX, Vu QN, Driesen ST, Townsend KM, Chin JJC and Trott DJ (2006). Pathotypes and serogroups of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli isolated from pre–weaning pigs in North Vietnam. Med. Microbiol. 55: 93 – 99. <br>
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.46247-0" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.46247-0</a><br>
PMid:16388036 
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Hussain2000"></a>
Hussain I, Saikia GK (2000). Isolation and characterization of bacteria from diarrhoeic bovine calves. Indian J. Comp. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect. Dis. 21: 125 – 127.
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Khang2004"></a>
Khang SJ, Ryu SJ, Chae JS, Woo GJ, Lee JH (2004). Occurrence and characteristics of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157 in calves associated with diarrhea. Vet. Microbiol. 98: 323 – 328. <br>
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2003.11.004" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2003.11.004</a><br>
PMid:15036541 
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Laurelle1889"></a>
Laurelle L (1889) L'Etude bacteriologique sur les peritonites par perforation. Cellule 5: 60-123
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Martins2000"></a>
Martins MdeF, Martinez–Rossi NM, Ferreria A, Brocchi M, Yano T, Fernando ACP, Silveria WD (2000). Pathogenic characterization of Escherichia coli strains isolated from newborn piglets with diarrhea in Brazil. Vet. Microbiol. 78: 91. <br>
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(00)00279-0" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1135(00)00279-0</a>
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Ngeleka2003"></a>
Ngeleka M, Pritchard J, Appleyard G, Middleton DM, Fairbrother JM (2003). Isolation and association of Escherichia coli AIDA– I/STb, rather than EAST1 pathotype, with diarrhea in piglets and antibiotic sensitivity of isolates. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 15(3): 242 – 252. <br>
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104063870301500305" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104063870301500305</a><br>
PMid:12735346 
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Scotland1990"></a>
Scotland SM, Willshaw GA, Smith HR, Rowe B (1990). Properties of strains of Escherichia coli O26: H11 in relation to their enteropathogenic or enterohaemorrhagic classification. J. Infect. Dis. 162: 1069 – 1074. <br>
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/infdis/162.5.1069" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/infdis/162.5.1069</a><br>
PMid:2230233 
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Shah1990"></a>
Shah NM, Jhala VM (1990). Microbiological investigation of neonatal diarrhea in bovine calves. Indian. J. Comp. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect. Dis. 11: 182.
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Sharma2004"></a>
Sharma DK, Soni SS, Kashyap SK, Shringi BN (2004). Seroprevalence, antibiotic sensitivity pattern and transfer of plasmid coded characters of E. coli. Indian Vet. J. 81: 6 – 8.
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Sikdar1991"></a>
Sikdar D (1991). Escherichia coli in piglet diarrhea: Enterotoxigenicity and drug sensitivity. M.V.Sc.Thesis, Assam Agric. Univ., Guwahati, India.
</p>

<p class="p2"> <a name="Wani2003"></a>
Wani SA, Bhatt MA, Samanta I, Nishikawa Y, Buchh AS (2003). Isolation and characterization of Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli (STEC) and enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC) from calves and lambs with diarrhoea in India. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 37: 121 – 126. <br><br>
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-765X.2003.01364.x" target="_blank">http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-765X.2003.01364.x</a><br>
PMid:12859653 
</p>


 
 
 
 
</div>



</body>
</html>