Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from stool specimens of diarrhea patients in Nantong, Jiangsu, China during 2018–2020

  • Junfang Sun ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Junfang Sun, Xue Li

    Roles Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Xue Li ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Junfang Sun, Xue Li

    Roles Investigation, Methodology

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Zimeng Hu,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation School of Animal Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Xingfan Xue,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation School of Medicine, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Miaomiao Zhang,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation School of Medicine, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Qimin Wu,

    Roles Investigation

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Wei Zhang,

    Roles Resources

    Affiliation School of Animal Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Yiquan Zhang ,

    Roles Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    zhangyiquanq@163.com (YZ); rainman78@163.com (RL)

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯
  • Renfei Lu

    Roles Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    zhangyiquanq@163.com (YZ); rainman78@163.com (RL)

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory, Affiliated Nantong Hospital 3 of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China

    ⨯

Abstract

Vibrio parahaemolyticus is the leading cause of acute seafood-associated gastroenteritis worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the presence of virulence genes, biofilm formation, motor capacities and antimicrobial resistance profile of V. parahaemolyticus isolates isolated from clinical samples in Nantong during 2018–2020. Sixty-six V. parahaemolyticus strains isolated from stool specimens of diarrheal patients were examined. The PCR results showed that there were two tdh+trh+ isolates, four tdh-trh- isolates and sixty tdh+trh- isolates, accounting for 3.0%, 6.1% and 90.9%, respectively. All the tdh carrying isolates manifested the positive reactions for the Kanagawa phenomenon (KP) test. Most of the isolates harbored at least one of the specific DNA markers of ‘pandemic group’ strains, suggesting that the dominant isolates of V. parahaemolyticus in Nantong might belong to the new O3: K6 or its serovariants. All tdh+ isolates possessed the Vp-PAI genes, but no tdh-trh- isolates carried the T3SS2 genes. All isolates were biofilm producers and had relatively strong motor capacities. In addition, the V. parahaemolyticus isolates were resistant to ampicillin (98.5%), cefuroxime (75.6%), cefepime (66.7%), piperacillin (59.1%) and ampicillin/sulbactam (50.0%), but sensitive to ciprofloxacin (100.0%), levofloxacin (100.0%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (98.5%), gentamicin (98.5%), amikacin (97%), meropenem (71.2%), and ceftazidime (56.1%). Multidrug-resistant isolates in clinical might be related to the inappropriate use of antimicrobials in aquaculture.

Citation: Sun J, Li X, Hu Z, Xue X, Zhang M, Wu Q, et al. (2022) Characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from stool specimens of diarrhea patients in Nantong, Jiangsu, China during 2018–2020. PLoS ONE 17(8): e0273700. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700

Editor: Iddya Karunasagar, Nitte University, INDIA

Received: April 30, 2022; Accepted: August 12, 2022; Published: August 26, 2022

Copyright: © 2022 Sun et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript.

Funding: This study was supported by the Natural Science Research Project of Nantong Science and Technology Bureau (Grant No. JC2021027), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (JUSRP121061). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Vibrio parahaemolyticus, a Gram-negative, highly motile, halophilic bacterium, is naturally found in marine ecosystems [1]. This bacterium is the leading cause of seafood-associated gastroenteritis in many countries including China [2–5]. Human infections with V. parahaemolyticus are usually caused by consumption of raw or undercooked seafood [6]. Pathogenic isolates usually produce thermostable direct hemolysin (TDH; encoded by tdh) and/or TDH-related hemolysin (TRH; encoded by trh) [7]. However, other factors such as the type III secretion systems (T3SS1 and T3SS2), urease (encoded by ure) and proteases also play roles in the pathogenesis of V. parahaemolyticus [6, 7]. T3SS1 is expressed by both pathogenic and non-pathogenic isolates, whereas T3SS2 only exists in pathogenic isolates [8]. The T3SS2 gene cluster and the two copies of tdh genes are present in a pathogenicity island known as Vp-PAI located on the smaller chromosome 2 of V. parahaemolyticus [9]. V. parahaemolyticus can utilize T3SS2 to efficiently inject TDH into target cells as an effector that contributes to intestinal fluid accumulation in an animal model [10].

There are total 13 somatic (O) antigens and 71 capsular (K) antigens in V. parahaemolyticus making up more than 70 serotypes [11]. However, since 1996, the new O3: K6 and its serovariants (O4: K68, O1: K25, O1: KUT, O1: K26 etc.) known as the ‘pandemic group’ had accounted for the majority of clinical isolates [12]. The ‘pandemic group’ isolates usually carried the tdh gene but not the trh and ure genes [12]. V. parahaemolyticus can be confirmed by the species-specific thermolabile hemolysin (tlh) and toxR genes [13–16], while the ‘pandemic group’ isolates can be distinguished by PCR targeting on several specific DNA markers, including the group-specific (GS) DNA sequence of toxRS/new [17], the ORF8 located on the f237 phage [18], the insertion sequence in the ORF of HU-α [19], the pandemic group specific (PGS) sequence [20], and the DNA fragment of VP2905 ORF [21].

The increasing number of V. parahaemolyticus isolates is shown to be resistant to multiple antibiotics due to inappropriate use of antimicrobials in aquaculture [15, 22–25]. In particular, the emergence of multi-drug resistant isolates should be given sufficient attention. V. parahaemolyticus isolates harboring the class 1 integrons of dfrA14-blaVEB-1-aadB and blaVEB-1-aadB-arr2-cmlA-blaOXA-10-aadA1, which are strongly associated with multi-drug resistance to various antibiotics including ampicillin, ceftazidime, cefotaxime and gentamicin, have been isolated from ready-to-eat foods in China [26]. Biofilms are extracellular matrix-enclosed bacterial colonies on surfaces [27]. V. parahaemolyticus is able to form biofilms on seafood surfaces, which enhance resistance to adverse growth conditions and/or chemical agents such as detergents and antibiotics thereby improving the survival rate and pathogenicity of the bacteria [27]. The biofilm formation ability of V. parahaemolyticus requires some specific genes, such as those associated with the biosynthesis of flagella, pili and exopolysaccharide [27, 28].

Nantong is located in the southeast of Jiangsu, bordering the Yellow Sea, with a coastline of over 200 km. The threat of V. parahaemolyticus to the health of citizens should be given adequate attention with the increasing of seafood consumption. Nevertheless, there is limited literature involving the prevalence or pathogenic profiles of V. parahaemolyticus in this city. In this study, a total of 66 V. parahaemolyticus isolates were isolated from stool specimens of diarrhoeal cases in Nantong, Jiangsu, China during 2018–2020. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay was applied to screen the virulence-associated genes including tdh, trh, ure, Mtase and Vp-PAI genes (vopP, vscC2, vopC and VPA1376), as well as the species-specific marker genes tlh and toxR. All the isolates were subjected for screening of pandemic genotype by detecting the presence of PGS sequence (PGS-PCR), toxRS/new (GS-PCR), HU-α and orf8. At the same, a series of phenotypic experiments were employed to detect the hemolytic activities, biofilm formation abilities, motor (swimming and swarming) capacities and antimicrobial resistance profile of the V. parahaemolyticus isolates.

Materials and methods

Isolation of V. parahaemolyticus

Stool specimens from diarrhoeal cases (watery or loose stools with a duration of no more than 7 days) admitted in the different hospitals in Nantong were collected during 2018–2020, and screened for the presence of V. parahaemolyticus by applying the published methods [25, 29]. Briefly, stool specimens were inoculated into 5 ml of Alkaline Peptone Water (APW) (Polypeptone 10 g/L; Sodium chloride 10 g/L; pH8.6) and incubated at 37°C with shaking for 12 h. The APW-enriched culture was diluted 10,000-fold with the phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), and then 200 μL of the diluted samples were spread onto Thiosulphate Citrate Bile Salts Sucrose (TCBS; Beijing Land Bridge, China) agar plate, and incubated at 37°C for 12 h. The green or blue-green colonies were selected as presumed V. parahaemolyticus and then characterized by VITEK automatic biochemical analyzer (bioMerieux, France).

Ethics approval was not requested because no human or animal subjects were involved.

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay

Approximately 20 μL glycerol stock of V. parahaemolyticus was inoculated into 5 mL 2.5% Bacto heart infusion (HI; BD Bioscience, USA) broth supplemented with 1.5% (w/v) NaCl and incubated at 37°C with shaking at 200 rpm for 12 h, followed by centrifugation at 8000 g for 5 min. The genomic DNA was isolated using a QIAamp DNA mini Kit (Qiagen, Germany), and the concentration of DNA was determined by a NanoDrop spectrophotometry (ThermoFisher Scientific, USA).

Primers for PCR were synthesized by GRNEWIZ (Suzhou, China) and listed in Table 1. The PCR reaction mixture contained 10 μL 2×Taq PCR Mastermix (TIANGEN BIOTECH CO., LTD., China), 2 μL genomic DNA (10 ng/μL), 1 μL primer pair solution (10 μM each), and 7 μL sterile distilled water. PCR amplification was performed as the following conditions: pre-denaturation at 95°C for 5 min, followed by 30 cycles of denaturation at 94°C for 50 s, annealing at 54°C for 50 s, and extension at 72°C for 50 s, and ending extension at 72°C for 5 min. PCR products were detected by 1% agarose gel electrophoresis.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Primers used in this study.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.t001

Biofilm crystal violet (CV) staining

CV staining was performed as previously described [30]. Briefly, the overnight cultures were diluted 50-fold into 5 mL HI broth and cultured at 37°C with shaking at 200 rpm to OD600 equals to 1.4. The resultant cultures were 50-fold diluted into 2 mL Difco marine (M) broth 2216 (BD Biosciences, USA) in 96-well plates (Corning Inc., Untied States) and allowed to grow at 30°C with shaking at 150 rpm for 48 h. The surface attached biofilms in vitro were stained with 0.1% CV. The bound CV was dissolved with 20% ethanol, and the OD570 values were then determined as the index of CV staining.

Swimming motility

Swimming motility assay was performed as previously described [31]. Briefly, the overnight cell cultures were diluted 50-fold into 5 mL HI broth and cultured at 37°C with shaking at 200 rpm to OD600 equals to 1.4. Thereafter, 2 μL of the culture was inoculated into the semi-solid swim plates (1% Oxoid Tryptone, 2% NaCl [Merck, Germany], and 0.2% Difco Noble agar [BD Biosciences, USA]). Diameter of swimming area was measured after incubation at 37°C for 2 h.

Swarming motility

Swarming motility assay was performed as previously described [31]. Briefly, the overnight cell cultures were diluted 50-fold into 5 mL HI broth and cultured at 37°C with shaking at 200 rpm to OD600 equals to 1.4. Thereafter, 2 μL of the culture was spotted on the swarm plate (2.5% Bacto heart infusion, 1.5% NaCl, and 1.8% Difco noble agar). Diameter of swarming zone was measured after incubation at 37°C for 48 h.

Kanagawa phenomenon (KP) test

KP test was performed as previously described [32]. Briefly, 5 μL of the overnight cell culture was inoculated onto Wagatsuma agar (CHROMagar, China) containing 5% rabbit red blood cells (RBCs). Isolates with β-hemolysis after incubation at 37°C were considered as the KP positive.

Antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST)

The VITEK 2 AST-GN09 antimicrobial sensitivity kit contains the following antimicrobial agents: ampicillin (AMP), ampicillin/sulbactam (SAM), piperacillin (PIP), piperacillin/tazobactam (TZP), cefazolin (CZ), cefuroxime (CXM), ceftazidime (CAZ), cefepime (FEP), meropenem (MEM), amikacin (AN), gentamicin (CN), ciprofloxacin (CIP), levofloxacin (LEV), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (SXT). A proper amount of separated and purified bacteria was added into a test tube containing 3 mL 0.45% NaCl solution, adjusting the turbidity of the bacteria solution to be the same as that of 0.5–0.63 Macmillan tube, taking 145 μL of 0.5–0.63 Macmillan unit bacteria suspension in a testing tube. AST for V. parahaemolyticus isolates was determined by minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) using a VITEK2 Compact automatic microbial analyzer (bioMérieux, France) [33]. The results were categorized as resistant (R), intermediate (I), or susceptible (S).

Replicates and statistical methods

PCR, KP test and AST were performed two times with the same results. The swimming, swarming and CV staining were performed three independent bacterial cultures with three replicates for each, and the results were expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD). Paired Student’s t-tests were employed to calculate the statistical significance. P < 0.01 was considered as the significant.

Results

Identification of virulence genes in clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates

A total of 66 isolates were isolated from stool specimens. All the isolates were confirmed by the VITEK automatic biochemical analysis. There were two tdh+trh+ isolates, four tdh-trh- isolates and sixty tdh+trh- isolates (Table 2), accounting for 3.0%, 6.1% and 90.9%, respectively. No isolate was tdh-trh+. The tlh and toxR genes were detected in all isolates (Table 2). The toxR/new, orf8 and HU-α genes were only detected in the tdh+trh- isolates (Table 2), and the prevalence of these genes was all 40.9% (27/66). The prevalence of PGS sequence was 100.0% (2/2) in tdh+trh+ isolates, 86.7% (52/60) in tdh+trh- isolates and 50.0% (2/4) in tdh-trh- isolates (Table 2). The prevalence of ure was 100.0% (2/2) in tdh+trh+ isolates, 0.0% (0/60) in tdh+trh- isolates and 25.0% (1/4) in tdh-trh- isolates (Table 2). The prevalence of Mtase was 0.0% (0/2) in tdh+trh+ isolates, 45.0% (27/60) in tdh+trh- isolates and 25.0% (1/4) in tdh-trh- isolates (Table 2). The other four virulence genes, vopP (100.0%; Table 2), vscC2 (100.0%; Table 2), vopC (98.3%; Table 2), and VPA1376 (98.3%; Table 2), were detected in the genomic DNA of tdh+trh- isolates. One tdh-trh- isolate was also confirmed to harbor the VPA1376 gene (Table 2).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Presence of virulence genes in the 66 clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.t002

Hemolytic activity of clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates

The hemolytic activity of each isolate was measured by the KP test on the Wagatsuma agar supplemented with 5% RBCs. As shown in Fig 1, all the tdh+trh+ and tdh+trh- isolates were recorded as positive reactions with a β hemolysis zone surrounding the growth spot, whereas all the tdh-trh- isolates gave negative reactions. These results suggested that all isolates harboring the tdh gene was able to express active TDH.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. The hemolytic activity of V. parahaemolyticus isolates against RBCs was evaluated by observing whether there was a β-hemolysis zone surrounding the spot of growth on the Wagatsuma agar plate.

The pictures shown here are representative images of V. parahaemolyticus cells on Wagatsuma agar.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.g001

Biofilm formation by clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates

Biofilm formation by the 66 isolates was investigated by the CV staining. As shown in Table 3, all the isolates were biofilm producers. Regarding the degrees of biofilm [34], 50.0% of tdh+trh+ isolates and 10.0% of tdh+trh- isolates were weak producers, 50.0% of tdh+trh+ isolates, 48.3% of tdh+trh- isolates and 100% of tdh-trh- isolates were moderate producers, while 41.7% of tdh+trh- isolates were strong producers.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. Biofilm formation by V. parahaemolyticus isolates at 30°C.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.t003

Swimming and swarming motility of clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates

V. parahaemolyticus possesses dual flagellar systems, i.e., a single polar flagellum for swimming in liquid and peritrichous lateral flagella for swarming on surfaces [35]. In this study, the swimming and swarming capacities were compared between each clinical isolates and the reference strain RIMD2210633. According to this, the motor abilities of clinical isolates were divided into three grades: weak, medium, and strong, which respectively indicated that their motor abilities were much lower, no difference with, or significantly higher than those of RIMD2210633. As shown in Table 4, all the isolates were swimmers; 11.7% of tdh+trh- isolates and 50.0% of tdh-trh- isolates were weak swimmers; 50.0% of tdh+trh+ isolates and 25.0% of tdh+trh- isolates were moderate swimmers, while 50.0% of tdh+trh+ isolates, 63.3% of tdh+trh- isolates and 50.0% of tdh-trh- isolates were strong swimmers. Similarly, all of the isolates were swarm cells (Table 5), among which 100% of tdh+trh- isolates, 20.0% of tdh+trh- isolates and 50.0% of tdh-trh- isolates were moderate swarm cells; 80.0% of tdh+trh- isolates and 50.0% of tdh-trh- isolates were strong swarm cells. These results indicated that all the isolates had a relatively strong motor capacity.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 4. Swimming motility of V. parahaemolyticus isolates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.t004

thumbnail
Download:
Table 5. Swarming motility of V. parahaemolyticus isolates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.t005

Antibiotic susceptibility of clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates

AST was performed on clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates using 14 antibiotics. As shown in Table 6, the V. parahaemolyticus isolates were extremely resistant to ampicillin (98.5%), followed by cefuroxime (75.6%), cefepime (66.7%), piperacillin (59.1%), ampicillin/sulbactam (50.0%), piperacillin/tazobactam (45.5%), ceftazidime (43.9%), cefazolin (28.8%), and meropenem (28.8%). All the isolates were sensitive to ciprofloxacin (100.0%) and levofloxacin (100.0%), followed by trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (98.5%), gentamicin (98.5%), amikacin (97.0%), meropenem (71.2%), ceftazidime (56.1%), piperacillin/tazobactam (40.9%), piperacillin (36.4%), and ampicillin/sulbactam (28.8%).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 6. Antibiotics resistance profiles of clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273700.t006

Discussion

V. parahaemolyticus can be easily isolated from seawater and seafood [36–39]. However, most of environmental isolates are non-pathogenic with a very low detection rate of the tdh and/or trh genes [14, 15, 29, 38–41]. By contrast, majority of clinical isolates harbor the tdh and/or trh genes [14, 15, 29, 40, 41]. In this study, 66 V. parahaemolyticus isolates were isolated from stool specimens, of these, 62 isolates had the tdh gene, and 2 isolates simultaneously contained the trh gene. The proportion of clinical isolates containing the tdh and/or trh genes is similar to the results of other researchers [15, 39, 42–44]. Significantly, four isolates harbored neither the tdh nor the trh gene but had the ability to cause disease, which has been similarly reported in previous studies [13, 43]. The pathogenic mechanisms of clinical isolates carrying neither tdh nor trh still need to be further investigated.

The tlh and toxR genes are the species-specific markers that can be detected in all the V. parahaemolyticus isolates [13–16]. The PGS sequence, toxR/new, orf8 and HU-α genes were used as specific DNA markers to distinguish the ‘pandemic group’ isolates from other serotypes [17–20]. The data showed that most of the isolates harbor one or more specific DNA markers of the ‘pandemic group’, indicating that the dominant isolates of V. parahaemolyticus in Nantong might belong to the new O3: K6 or its serovariants.

The ability to product urease by V. parahaemolyticus has been demonstrated highly correlates with the existing of the trh gene [45]. As shown in this study, all the trh positive isolates possessed the ure gene. However, one tdh-trh- isolate also harbored the ure gene. The presence of ure in tdh-trh- isolate might be due to the presence of trh gene variant that could not be detected by the PCR used in this study. In addition, the MTase gene encoding a putative virulence-associated DNA methyltransferase was major detected in the tdh+tdh- isolates, which was similar to a previous report [46]. T3SS1 and T3SS2 are also thought to be involved in the pathogenicity of V. parahaemolyticus [47]. T3SS2 was only present in the tdh+ isolates [9], but a novel T3SS2 belonging to a different lineage was also detected in the trh+ isolates [48]. In this work, we showed that all the tdh+ isolates possessed at least two of the vopP, vscC2, vopC and VPA1376 genes located in the Vp-PAI gene cluster (T3SS2). None of the T3SS2 genes (vopP, vscC2 and vopC) were detected in the tdh-trh- isolates, but one of the isolates harbored the VPA1376 gene, suggesting this gene was likely to be acquired by horizontal transfer.

The antimicrobial resistance of V. parahaemolyticus has become one of the most serious threats to fish farming, food safety and public health. Most of the isolates in this study exhibited a high level of resistance to ampicillin, cefuroxime, cefepime, piperacillin, and ampicillin/sulbactam, but sensitive to ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, gentamicin, amikacin, meropenem, and ceftazidime. V. parahaemolyticus isolates are universally resistant to ampicillin according to literatures [3, 15, 24, 25, 40, 41, 44, 49–53]. The blaCARB-17 gene encoding a novel class A carbenicillin-hydrolyzing β-lactamase family of β-lactamase that is responsible for the resistance to penicillin was detected in all tested V. parahaemolyticus isolates [54]. However, the antimicrobial resistance profiles of V. parahaemolyticus might vary in different reports, for instance, 60.3% of V. parahaemolyticus isolates from rearing water samples of shrimp farms in Fujian, China exhibited resistance to gentamicin in the report of Shu Zhao, et al.[50], and 50.8% and 47.6% of isolates from African salad samples in Nigeria were resistant to amikacin and ceftazidime in the report of Etinosa O. Igbinosa, et al. [3]. No matter how different of the antimicrobial resistance profiles, emergence of multi-drug resistant V. parahaemolyticus is a serious threat to aquaculture and public health.

V. parahaemolyticus possesses the strong ability to form biofilms and persist on the surfaces of seafood for the long existence [27]. This study showed that all clinical V. parahaemolyticus isolates were biofilm producers. The ability to form biofilms is related to the source of isolates and cultural temperature, and pathogenic isolates produced more biofilms than non-pathogenic isolates [34, 55]. Incubation temperature of 37°C was considered as optimum temperature for biofilm formation by V. parahaemolyticus [56]. Importantly, it is universally acknowledged that bacterial cells in biofilms are much more resistant to adverse conditions than planktonic cells [27]. Therefore, the biofilm produced by V. parahaemolyticus hugely increases the potential risks to seafood consumers. The movements of V. parahaemolyticus propelled by flagella can be divided into swimming and swarming, both of which are required for the initial stages of biofilm formation [28]. The data showed that all V. parahaemolyticus isolates had relatively strong motor capacities, which were consistent with the observational facts that all the isolates were biofilm producers.

In conclusion, this study focused on the virulence, biofilm formation, motilities and antimicrobial resistance of V. parahaemolyticus isolates isolated from stool specimens of diarrheal cases in Nantong during 2018–2020. A total of 66 isolates were collected, 93.9% of them carried the tdh gene and manifested the positive reactions for KP test. Most of the isolates harbored at least one of the specific DNA markers of ‘pandemic group’ strains, suggesting that the dominant isolates of V. parahaemolyticus in Nantong belonged to the new O3: K6 and its serovariants. 100.0% of tdh+ isolates possessed the Vp-PAI genes, but only one tdh-trh- isolate carried the T3SS2 gene. All V. parahaemolyticus isolates were biofilm producers and had relatively strong motor capacities. In addition, the V. parahaemolyticus isolates were resistant to ampicillin, cefuroxime, cefepime, piperacillin and ampicillin/sulbactam, but sensitive to ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, gentamicin, amikacin, meropenem and ceftazidime. The data presented here would be beneficial for preventing and controlling the seafood-associated illnesses caused by V. parahaemolyticus in Nantong, Jiangsu, China.

References

  1. 1. Lovell CR. Ecological fitness and virulence features of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in estuarine environments. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2017;101(5):1781–94. Epub 2017/02/02. pmid:28144705.
  2. 2. Li Y, Xie X, Shi X, Lin Y, Qiu Y, Mou J, et al. Vibrio parahaemolyticus, Southern Coastal Region of China, 2007–2012. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;20(4):685–8. Epub 2014/03/25. pmid:24655369; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3966377.
  3. 3. Igbinosa EO, Beshiru A, Igbinosa IH, Ogofure AG, Uwhuba KE. Prevalence and Characterization of Food-Borne Vibrio parahaemolyticus From African Salad in Southern Nigeria. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:632266. Epub 2021/06/26. pmid:34168622; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8217614.
  4. 4. Li Y, Xie T, Pang R, Wu Q, Zhang J, Lei T, et al. Food-Borne Vibrio parahaemolyticus in China: Prevalence, Antibiotic Susceptibility, and Genetic Characterization. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:1670. Epub 2020/08/09. pmid:32765472; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7378779.
  5. 5. Velazquez-Roman J, Leon-Sicairos N, de Jesus Hernandez-Diaz L, Canizalez-Roman A. Pandemic Vibrio parahaemolyticus O3:K6 on the American continent. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2014;3:110. Epub 2014/01/16. pmid:24427744; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3878053.
  6. 6. Osei-Adjei G, Huang X, Zhang Y. The extracellular proteases produced by Vibrio parahaemolyticus. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2018;34(5):68. Epub 2018/05/13. pmid:29752585.
  7. 7. Letchumanan V, Chan KG, Lee LH. Vibrio parahaemolyticus: a review on the pathogenesis, prevalence, and advance molecular identification techniques. Front Microbiol. 2014;5:705. Epub 2015/01/08. pmid:25566219; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4263241.
  8. 8. Kodama T, Hiyoshi H, Okada R, Matsuda S, Gotoh K, Iida T. Regulation of Vibrio parahaemolyticus T3SS2 gene expression and function of T3SS2 effectors that modulate actin cytoskeleton. Cell Microbiol. 2015;17(2):183–90. Epub 2014/12/17. pmid:25495647.
  9. 9. Makino K, Oshima K, Kurokawa K, Yokoyama K, Uda T, Tagomori K, et al. Genome sequence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus: a pathogenic mechanism distinct from that of V cholerae. Lancet. 2003;361(9359):743–9. Epub 2003/03/07. pmid:12620739.
  10. 10. Matsuda S, Okada R, Tandhavanant S, Hiyoshi H, Gotoh K, Iida T, et al. Export of a Vibrio parahaemolyticus toxin by the Sec and type III secretion machineries in tandem. Nat Microbiol. 2019;4(5):781–8. Epub 2019/02/20. pmid:30778145.
  11. 11. Han H, Wong HC, Kan B, Guo Z, Zeng X, Yin S, et al. Genome plasticity of Vibrio parahaemolyticus: microevolution of the ’pandemic group’. BMC Genomics. 2008;9:570. Epub 2008/11/29. pmid:19038058.
  12. 12. Nair GB, Ramamurthy T, Bhattacharya SK, Dutta B, Takeda Y, Sack DA. Global dissemination of Vibrio parahaemolyticus serotype O3:K6 and its serovariants. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007;20(1):39–48. Epub 2007/01/16. pmid:17223622; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1797631.
  13. 13. Wang H, Tang X, Su YC, Chen J, Yan J. Characterization of clinical Vibrio parahaemolyticus strains in Zhoushan, China, from 2013 to 2014. PLoS One. 2017;12(7):e0180335. Epub 2017/07/06. pmid:28678810; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5498046.
  14. 14. Chen X, Zhu Q, Yu F, Zhang W, Wang R, Ye X, et al. Serology, virulence and molecular characteristics of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from seafood in Zhejiang province. PLoS One. 2018;13(10):e0204892. Epub 2018/10/05. pmid:30286209; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6171872.
  15. 15. Yan W, Ji L, Xu D, Chen L, Wu X. Molecular characterization of clinical and environmental Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolates in Huzhou, China. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240143. Epub 2020/10/03. pmid:33007026; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7531842.
  16. 16. Hara-Kudo Y, Sugiyama K, Nishibuchi M, Chowdhury A, Yatsuyanagi J, Ohtomo Y, et al. Prevalence of pandemic thermostable direct hemolysin-producing Vibrio parahaemolyticus O3:K6 in seafood and the coastal environment in Japan. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2003;69(7):3883–91. Epub 2003/07/04. pmid:12839757; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC165169.
  17. 17. Matsumoto C, Okuda J, Ishibashi M, Iwanaga M, Garg P, Rammamurthy T, et al. Pandemic spread of an O3:K6 clone of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and emergence of related strains evidenced by arbitrarily primed PCR and toxRS sequence analyses. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38(2):578–85. Epub 2000/02/03. pmid:10655349; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC86152.
  18. 18. Nasu H, Iida T, Sugahara T, Yamaichi Y, Park KS, Yokoyama K, et al. A filamentous phage associated with recent pandemic Vibrio parahaemolyticus O3:K6 strains. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38(6):2156–61. Epub 2000/06/02. pmid:10834969; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC86752.
  19. 19. Williams TL, Musser SM, Nordstrom JL, DePaola A, Monday SR. Identification of a protein biomarker unique to the pandemic O3:K6 clone of Vibrio parahaemolyticus. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42(4):1657–65. Epub 2004/04/09. pmid:15071022; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC387615.
  20. 20. Okura M, Osawa R, Iguchi A, Takagi M, Arakawa E, Terajima J, et al. PCR-based identification of pandemic group Vibrio parahaemolyticus with a novel group-specific primer pair. Microbiol Immunol. 2004;48(10):787–90. Epub 2004/10/27. pmid:15502414.
  21. 21. Okura M, Osawa R, Arakawa E, Terajima J, Watanabe H. Identification of Vibrio parahaemolyticus pandemic group-specific DNA sequence by genomic subtraction. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43(7):3533–6. Epub 2005/07/08. pmid:16000499; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1169085.
  22. 22. Kang CH, Shin Y, Kim W, Kim Y, Song K, Oh EG, et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from oysters in Korea. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016;23(1):918–26. Epub 2015/10/30. pmid:26511256.
  23. 23. Hu Y, Li F, Zheng Y, Jiao X, Guo L. Isolation, Molecular Characterization and Antibiotic Susceptibility Pattern of Vibrio parahaemolyticus from Aquatic Products in the Southern Fujian Coast, China. J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2020;30(6):856–67. Epub 2020/03/12. pmid:32160689.
  24. 24. Xie T, Yu Q, Tang X, Zhao J, He X. Prevalence, antibiotic susceptibility and characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolates in China. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2020;367(16). Epub 2020/08/10. pmid:32770178.
  25. 25. Siddique AB, Moniruzzaman M, Ali S, Dewan MN, Islam MR, Islam MS, et al. Characterization of Pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus Isolated From Fish Aquaculture of the Southwest Coastal Area of Bangladesh. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:635539. Epub 2021/03/26. pmid:33763050; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7982743.
  26. 26. Lei T, Zhang J, Jiang F, He M, Zeng H, Chen M, et al. Characterization of class 1 integrons harboring blaVEB-1 in Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from ready-to-eat foods in China. Int J Food Microbiol. 2020;318:108473. Epub 2019/12/22. pmid:31863965.
  27. 27. Ashrafudoulla M, Mizan MFR, Park SH, Ha SD. Current and future perspectives for controlling Vibrio biofilms in the seafood industry: a comprehensive review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021;61(11):1827–51. Epub 2020/05/22. pmid:32436440.
  28. 28. Yildiz FH, Visick KL. Vibrio biofilms: so much the same yet so different. Trends Microbiol. 2009;17(3):109–18. Epub 2009/02/24. pmid:19231189; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2729562.
  29. 29. Li J, Xue F, Yang Z, Zhang X, Zeng D, Chao G, et al. Vibrio parahaemolyticus Strains of Pandemic Serotypes Identified from Clinical and Environmental Samples from Jiangsu, China. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:787. Epub 2016/06/16. pmid:27303379; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4885827.
  30. 30. Zhang Y, Qiu Y, Gao H, Sun J, Li X, Zhang M, et al. OpaR Controls the Metabolism of c-di-GMP in Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Front Microbiol. 2021;12:676436. Epub 2021/06/25. pmid:34163453; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8215210.
  31. 31. Wang L, Ling Y, Jiang H, Qiu Y, Qiu J, Chen H, et al. AphA is required for biofilm formation, motility, and virulence in pandemic Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Int J Food Microbiol. 2013;160(3):245–51. Epub 2013/01/08. pmid:23290231.
  32. 32. Zhang Y, Hu L, Osei-Adjei G, Zhang Y, Yang W, Yin Z, et al. Autoregulation of ToxR and Its Regulatory Actions on Major Virulence Gene Loci in Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2018;8:291. Epub 2018/09/21. pmid:30234024; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6135047.
  33. 33. Zaman TU, Alrodayyan M, Albladi M, Aldrees M, Siddique MI, Aljohani S, et al. Clonal diversity and genetic profiling of antibiotic resistance among multidrug/carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates from a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia. BMC Infect Dis. 2018;18(1):205. Epub 2018/05/05. pmid:29724185; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5934806.
  34. 34. Ahmed HA, El Bayomi RM, Hussein MA, Khedr MHE, Abo Remela EM, El-Ashram AMM. Molecular characterization, antibiotic resistance pattern and biofilm formation of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and V. cholerae isolated from crustaceans and humans. Int J Food Microbiol. 2018;274:31–7. Epub 2018/03/28. pmid:29587179.
  35. 35. McCarter LL. Dual flagellar systems enable motility under different circumstances. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol. 2004;7(1–2):18–29. Epub 2004/06/02. pmid:15170400.
  36. 36. Han H, Li F, Yan W, Guo Y, Li N, Liu X, et al. Temporal and Spatial Variation in the Abundance of Total and Pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Shellfish in China. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0130302. Epub 2015/06/11. pmid:26061712; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4465338.
  37. 37. Tey YH, Jong KJ, Fen SY, Wong HC. Occurrence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus, Vibrio cholerae, and Vibrio vulnificus in the Aquacultural Environments of Taiwan. J Food Prot. 2015;78(5):969–76. Epub 2015/05/08. pmid:25951392.
  38. 38. Almejhim M, Aljeldah M, Elhadi N. Improved isolation and detection of toxigenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus from coastal water in Saudi Arabia using immunomagnetic enrichment. PeerJ. 2021;9:e12402. Epub 2021/11/12. pmid:34760388; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8559605.
  39. 39. Ashrafudoulla M, Na KW, Hossain MI, Mizan MFR, Nahar S, Toushik SH, et al. Molecular and pathogenic characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from seafood. Mar Pollut Bull. 2021;172:112927. Epub 2021/09/17. pmid:34526263.
  40. 40. Jiang Y, Chu Y, Xie G, Li F, Wang L, Huang J, et al. Antimicrobial resistance, virulence and genetic relationship of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in seafood from coasts of Bohai Sea and Yellow Sea, China. Int J Food Microbiol. 2019;290:116–24. Epub 2018/10/16. pmid:30321865.
  41. 41. Su C, Chen L. Virulence, resistance, and genetic diversity of Vibrio parahaemolyticus recovered from commonly consumed aquatic products in Shanghai, China. Mar Pollut Bull. 2020;160:111554. Epub 2020/08/19. pmid:32810672.
  42. 42. Zhang H, Sun S, Shi W, Cui L, Gu Q. Serotype, virulence, and genetic traits of foodborne and clinical Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolates in Shanghai, China. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2013;10(9):796–804. Epub 2013/08/31. pmid:23988077.
  43. 43. Chao G, Jiao X, Zhou X, Yang Z, Huang J, Pan Z, et al. Serodiversity, pandemic O3:K6 clone, molecular typing, and antibiotic susceptibility of foodborne and clinical Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolates in Jiangsu, China. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2009;6(8):1021–8. Epub 2009/07/28. pmid:19630509.
  44. 44. Chen Y, Chen X, Yu F, Wu M, Wang R, Zheng S, et al. Serology, virulence, antimicrobial susceptibility and molecular characteristics of clinical Vibrio parahaemolyticus strains circulating in southeastern China from 2009 to 2013. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2016;22(3):258 e9-16. Epub 2015/11/26. pmid:26597222.
  45. 45. Suthienkul O, Ishibashi M, Iida T, Nettip N, Supavej S, Eampokalap B, et al. Urease production correlates with possession of the trh gene in Vibrio parahaemolyticus strains isolated in Thailand. J Infect Dis. 1995;172(5):1405–8. Epub 1995/11/01. pmid:7594689.
  46. 46. Wang HZ, Wong MM, O’Toole D, Mak MM, Wu RS, Kong RY. Identification of a DNA methyltransferase gene carried on a pathogenicity island-like element (VPAI) in Vibrio parahaemolyticus and its prevalence among clinical and environmental isolates. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006;72(6):4455–60. Epub 2006/06/06. pmid:16751568; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1489626.
  47. 47. Park KS, Ono T, Rokuda M, Jang MH, Okada K, Iida T, et al. Functional characterization of two type III secretion systems of Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Infect Immun. 2004;72(11):6659–65. Epub 2004/10/27. pmid:15501799; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC523034.
  48. 48. Okada N, Iida T, Park KS, Goto N, Yasunaga T, Hiyoshi H, et al. Identification and characterization of a novel type III secretion system in trh-positive Vibrio parahaemolyticus strain TH3996 reveal genetic lineage and diversity of pathogenic machinery beyond the species level. Infect Immun. 2009;77(2):904–13. Epub 2008/12/17. pmid:19075025.
  49. 49. Lei T, Jiang F, He M, Zhang J, Zeng H, Chen M, et al. Prevalence, virulence, antimicrobial resistance, and molecular characterization of fluoroquinolone resistance of Vibrio parahaemolyticus from different types of food samples in China. Int J Food Microbiol. 2020;317:108461. Epub 2019/12/04. pmid:31794931.
  50. 50. Zhao S, Ma L, Wang Y, Fu G, Zhou J, Li X, et al. Antimicrobial resistance and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis typing of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from shrimp mariculture environment along the east coast of China. Mar Pollut Bull. 2018;136:164–70. Epub 2018/12/05. pmid:30509797.
  51. 51. Hu Q, Chen L. Virulence and Antibiotic and Heavy Metal Resistance of Vibrio parahaemolyticus Isolated from Crustaceans and Shellfish in Shanghai, China. J Food Prot. 2016;79(8):1371–7. Epub 2016/08/09. pmid:27497124.
  52. 52. He Y, Jin L, Sun F, Hu Q, Chen L. Antibiotic and heavy-metal resistance of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from fresh shrimps in Shanghai fish markets, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016;23(15):15033–40. Epub 2016/04/17. pmid:27083906; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4956696.
  53. 53. Kang CH, Shin Y, Jang S, Yu H, Kim S, An S, et al. Characterization of Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolated from oysters in Korea: Resistance to various antibiotics and prevalence of virulence genes. Mar Pollut Bull. 2017;118(1–2):261–6. Epub 2017/03/11. pmid:28279505.
  54. 54. Chiou J, Li R, Chen S. CARB-17 family of beta-lactamases mediates intrinsic resistance to penicillins in Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(6):3593–5. Epub 2015/03/25. pmid:25801555; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4432138.
  55. 55. Song X, Ma Y, Fu J, Zhao A, Guo Z, Malakar PK, et al. Effect of temperature on pathogenic and non-pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus biofilm formation. Food control. 2017;73(1):485–91.
  56. 56. Elexson N, Yaya R, Nor AM, Kantilal HK, Son R. Biofilm assessment of vibrio parahaemolyticus from seafood using random amplified polymorphism DNA-PCR. International Food Research Journal. 2014;21(1):59–65.