College of Veterinary Medicine / University of Mosul
  • Register
  • Login
  • العربیة

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences

Notice

As part of Open Journals’ initiatives, we create website for scholarly open access journals. If you are responsible for this journal and would like to know more about how to use the editorial system, please visit our website at https://ejournalplus.com or
send us an email to info@ejournalplus.com

We will contact you soon

  1. Home
  2. Volume 37, Issue 2
  3. Authors

Current Issue

By Issue

By Subject

Keyword Index

Author Index

Indexing Databases XML

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Editorial Staff

Facts and Figures

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

Antibiotics resistance patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from meat at Mosul city retails

    Ibrahim M. Jawher Muntaha G. Hasan

Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 2023, Volume 37, Issue 2, Pages 363-367
10.33899/ijvs.2022.133961.2322

  • Show Article
  • Highlights
  • Full Text
  • References
  • Download
  • Cite
  • Statistics
  • Share

Abstract

Psychrotrophic bacteria are one of the significant microbes in chilled meat,pseudomonasis the most predominant member of this group. Pseudomonas could survive in various ecological niches. In the current study, we detect the prevalence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in meat at Mosul city retailsandtheir antibiotics resistance profile. One hundred fifty samples from beef, mutton and chicken meat were collected aseptically and cultivated. P. aeruginosa isolates were phenotypically and genetically recognized, and their antimicrobial activity was carried out for cultured isolates. Our findings revealed that 21 (14%) of meat samples were P. aeruginosa positive with a high significant recovery rate in chicken meat 11 (22%) and beef 7 (14%) compared to mutton 3 (6%). The antimicrobial resistance level of P. aeruginosa were 100% for amoxicillin, and 66% for aztreonam. The susceptibilities were 95% for tobramycin, 90% for levofloxacin, 90% for ciprofloxacin, 90% for gentamicin, 76% for piperacillin, and 57% for meropenem. In conclusion, P. aeruginosa is likely to be more common in meat, especially in chicken. Therefore, good hygienic practices should be applied to handle and preserve meat under suitable conditions to extend its shelf life, ensure meat safety, and conserve consumer health. 
Keywords:
    Pseudomonas aeruginosa Meat spoilage Antibiotic resistance
Main Subjects:
  • Meat Hygiene

Introduction

 

Meat quality is a multifaceted topic influenced by internal and external animal variables. The consumer recognizes quality through good sensory attributes. To avoid economic losses, the producer must meet organoleptic conditions; and ensure that the product remains microbiologically safe during storage (1). Meat spoiling is caused by a range of factors, including oxidation, enzymatic autolysis, and microbiological growth, which vary based on husbandry practices, animal species, ages at slaughtering, handling, processing, and preservation method. Microbial spoilage leads to pH alteration, degradation, and slime formation, reflecting off odor and loss of bloom (2,3). Pseudomonas is a significant gram-negative bacterium that spread widely in food, water, soil, and the environment due to their simple nutritional requirements. In addition, it has been related to human and animal illness and a high mortality rate in broiler chickens (4), it is an excellent concern in newly hatched chicks (5). It also has a high distribution within the food ecosystem (6). Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Pseudomonas putida, and Pseudomonas fragi are the most representativespecies of the genus in animal products, Pseudomonas has a significant value in meat and milk because of its ability to produce several lipolytic and proteolytic enzymes and develop a biofilm that impacts food quality (7-9). P. aeruginosa is an opportunistic pathogen associated with meat spoilage and reduces the shelf life of meat and meat products (10-12). It is associated with severe infections, especially in immunocompromised individuals (13,14). A single flagellum and multiple cell surface pili offer bacterial movement and adhesion characteristics, allowing pseudomonas species to colonize surfaces, especially under cold and aerobic conditions (15,16). P. aeruginosa causes many infections that do not respond to treatment and are life threatening due to their high multi-drug resistance to antibiotics through their lower outer membrane permeability (17,18). The production of antibiotic-inactivating enzymes and the expression of efflux-pumps that expel the antibiotics out of the cell propagate antimicrobial resistance genes across the food chain, all of them increasing the resistance gene pool and posing a risk to the public health (19,20). Clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa possess a multidrug-resistance than the food and environmental isolates. Antimicrobial resistance of a prospective disease to a wide range of antibiotics could signal a severe problem that affects public health (21,22). Because there has been no previous research on the antimicrobial activity of P. aeruginosa isolated from meat, the current study was designed to evaluate the prevalence of P. aeruginosa in meat displayed in Mosul city retails and assess its antibiotic resistance patterns.

 

Material and methods

 

Ethical approval

The scientific committee of the veterinary public health department approved this work on the twelfth session at 20/June/2021.

 

Samples

The study was based in Mosul city, and meat samples were taken from different markets and butcher’s shops. One hundred fifty meat samples from beef, mutton, and chicken each 50 were collected randomly and under sterile conditions the samples were transported as soon as possible to the College of Veterinary medicine, Veterinary Public Health Laboratory, for further microbiological analysis.

 

Isolation and identifications

Meat samples were homogenized with nutrient broth under sterile conditions for enrichment. Additionally, cetrimide agar medium (Neogen, USA) was used to isolate Pseudomonas as a selective medium, Plates were inoculated using the streaked plate method and incubated aerobically at 37°C for 24 hours, and the pure culture of P. aeruginosa was exposed to ultra-violet light to detect the fluorescence ability. Detection of P. aeruginosa isolates was done microscopically based on using a light microscope to observe Gram staining, confirmed by biochemical tests (23,24). Molecular detection of P. aeruginosawere done usingthe rpoB gene to confirm the isolates (25).

 

Antibiotic susceptibility test

To assess the susceptibility ofP. aeruginosaisolates to antibiotics, the standard Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method was used according to Jorgensen and Turnidge (26). The antibiotics discs (Bioanalyse, Turkey) used against pseudomonas isolates including levofloxacin (LEV 5 μg), ciprofloxacin (CIP 5 μg), amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (AMC 30 μg), piperacillin (PRL 100 μg), aztreonam (ATM 30 μg), meropenem (MEM 10 μg), tobramycin (TOB 10 μg), gentamicin (CN 10 μg). The suspension of isolates equivalent to 0.5 McFarland opacity standard was prepared and inoculated on Mueller-Hinton agar plates using a sterile swab. Then, the discs were placed aseptically on the inoculated surface of the media and incubated for 24 hours at 37ºC. After the incubation period, the diameter of the inhibition zone to each disc was measured using a digital caliper (Ingco, China). The results were translated to Susceptible, Intermediate, and Resistant categories by comparing inhibition zone diameters according to manufacturer instructions.

 

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis of the observed data was done with a Chi-square test using SPSS software version 22.

 

Results

 

Depending on molecular detection of P. aeruginosa according to the presence of the rpoB gene by conventional PCR, out of 150 meat samples collected from Mosul city retails, twenty-one isolates of P. aeruginosawere positive with a total recovery rate pf 14% (Table 1). The results revealed significant differences between the recovery rate of P. aeruginosafrom beef and chicken meat compared to mutton at P

 

Table 1: The prevalence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in different types of meat

 

Type of meat sample

No. samples

No. +ve Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Recovery rate (%)

Beef

50

7

14

Mutton

50

3

6

Chicken

50

11

22

Total

150

21

14

 

 

 

Figure 1: (a) growth of P. aeruginosa on cetrimide agar, (b) fluorescence activity under UV-light.

 

Among the 21 isolates of P. aeruginosa from different types of meat, the antimicrobial resistance profile revealed high resistance of isolates to amoxicillin at 100%, aztreonam at 66%, while meropenem was recorded at 14%. In contrast, P. aeruginosa isolates were susceptible to tobramycin 100%, levofloxacin 90%, ciprofloxacin 90%, gentamicin 90%, followed by piperacillin 76% and meropenem 57%. at various levels, some strains showed a multi-drug resistance to amoxicillin, aztreonam, and meropenem (Figure 2).

 

 

 

Figure 2: Antibiotics resistance patterns of P. aeruginosa isolated from meat

 

Discussion

 

Pseudomonas is a potent indicator of food spoilage, especially in meat and meat products leading to putrefaction under aerobic conditions (27). Meat processing can be the primary source of contamination in fresh meat and meat products that are not exposed to heat during preparation (28). Our results exhibited 14% P. aeruginosa recovery rate in meat displayed at Mosul city retails, which may be related to defects in storage temperature. These results agree with the recovery rate of P. aeruginosa reported by Hemmat (29) in frozen imported meat. In contrast the prevalence of P. aeruginosa in bovine meat was 47. 8% in Abidjan (30). The differences in the prevalence of P. aeruginosa in beef, mutton, and chicken meat may be related to the initial contamination level. Intrinsic properties of meat despite the variation in the recovery rate of P. aeruginosa from animal sources, the presence of these microbiotas in meat reflects the weakness of hygienic measurement applied in meat production and marketing, which negatively impacts meat quality and accelerates spoilage (31,32). The low isolation rate of P. aeruginosa in mutton may be due to the elevation of other microbiota such as p. fluorescens andenterobacteriaceaethrough competition. Also, a higher intramuscular fat content of mutton reduces the growth of spoilage bacteria, especially if it was preserved under vacuum packaging (33,34). The antibiotics resistance patterns of Pseudomonas varied according to phylogeny. The P. aeruginosastrains isolated from different types of meat were sensitive to aminoglycosides, fluoroquinolones, penicillin and carbapenems with total isolates resistance to amoxicillin and high resistance to aztreonam. These results agree with (35,36) who conducted that the resistance to beta-lactams was related to the presence of plasmid-mediated extended-spectrum beta-lactamases. Another study conducted by Murphy et al. (37) on frozen meat accepts our findings. Moreover, 29% of isolates show intermediate resistance to meropenem, this high percentage of resistance may be related to the indiscriminate use of antibiotics by veterinarians in farm animals as treatment or as growth promoters and can be transmitted to human beings (38,39). The most effective antibiotics against P. aeruginosa weretobramycin, levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin and gentamicin similar to pseudomonas resistance recorded in poultry meat by Kousar et al. (40). Also, poultry farms spread multi-drug resistance in their environment (41,42). Both Piperacillin and Meropenem are the second most effective antibiotics against P. aeruginosa from meat. Our results were approved by Glen and Lamont (43) who reported ciprofloxacin as a potent drug against Pseudomonas. Due to the excessive use of antibiotics in livestock farms, a severe public health hazard is developed. Therefore, possible strategies are essential for enhancing the effectiveness of antibiotics, especially the beta-lactam. in treating p. aeruginosa infections (44,45). Finally, proper handling of raw products, adequate cooking of meat, and proper disposal of waste, can minimize the antibiotics resistance of these bacteria, which may reflect the misuse of antibiotics in animals.

 

Conclusion

 

Antimicrobial resistance is a significant challenge to food safety and consumer health. The antibiotic resistance of P. aeruginosa may generate a burden and limit the choice of antibiotics due to resistance development.

 

Acknowledgments

 

The University of Mosul in Mosul, Iraq. The College of Veterinary Medicine supported this research.

 

Conflict of interest

 

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. 

  1. Molecular detection of pseudomonas aeruginosa from meat using rpoB gene.
  2. Monitoring the antibiotics resistance patterns of pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from meat at Mosul city retails.
  3. The challenge of pseudomonas aeruginosa from meat to antimicrobials. 
  • PDF (572 K)
  • XML
(2023). Antibiotics resistance patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from meat at Mosul city retails. Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 37(2), 363-367. doi: 10.33899/ijvs.2022.133961.2322
Ibrahim M. Jawher; Muntaha G. Hasan. "Antibiotics resistance patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from meat at Mosul city retails". Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 37, 2, 2023, 363-367. doi: 10.33899/ijvs.2022.133961.2322
(2023). 'Antibiotics resistance patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from meat at Mosul city retails', Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 37(2), pp. 363-367. doi: 10.33899/ijvs.2022.133961.2322
Antibiotics resistance patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from meat at Mosul city retails. Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 2023; 37(2): 363-367. doi: 10.33899/ijvs.2022.133961.2322
  • RIS
  • EndNote
  • BibTeX
  • APA
  • MLA
  • Harvard
  • Vancouver

  1. Mills J, Donnison A, Brightwell G. Factors affecting microbial spoilage and shelf- life of chilled vacuum-packed lamb transported to distant markets: A review. Meat Sci. 2014;98(1):71-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.05.002
  2. Dave D, Ghaly AE. Meat spoilage mechanisms and preservation techniques: A critical review. Am J Agric Biol Sci. 2011;6(4):486-510. DOI: 10.3844/ajabssp.2011.486.510
  3. Miller RK. Factors affecting the quality of raw meat. In: Joseph K, John K, Ledward D, editors. Meat processing improving quality. USA: CRC Press; 2002. 26-63 p.
  4. Shukla S, Mishra P. Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection in broiler chicks in Jabalpur. Int J Ext Res. 2015;6:37-39. [available at]
  5. Eraky R, Abd El-ghany W, Soliman K. Studies on Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in hatcheries and chicken. J Hell Vet Med Soc. 2020;71(1):1953-1962. DOI: 10.12681/jhvms.22937   
  6. Abd El-Ghany WA. Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection of avian origin: Zoonosis and one health implications. Vet World. 2021;14(8):2155-2159. DOI: 10.14202/vetworld.2021.2155-2159
  7. Shahat H, Mohamed H, Abd Al-Azeem M, Nasef S. Molecular detection of some virulence genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from chicken embryos and broilers with regard to disinfectant resistance. SVU-Int J Vet Sci. 2019;2(2):52-70. DOI: 10.21608/svu.2019.12365.1011
  8. Rawat S. Food spoilage: Microorganisms and their prevention. Asian J Plant Sci Res. 2015;5(4):47-56. [available at]
  9. Ercolini D, Russo F, Blaiotta G, Pepe O, Mauriello G, Villani F. Simultaneous detection of Pseudomonas fragi, P.lundensis, and P.putida from meat by use of a multiplex PCR assay targeting the carA gene. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(7):2354-9. DOI: 10.1128/aem.02603-06
  10. Casaburi A, Piombino P, Nychas GJ, Villani F, Ercolini D. Bacterial populations and the volatilome associated to meat spoilage. Food Microbiol. 2015;45:83-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.fm.2014.02.002
  11. Iulietto MF, Sechi P, Borgogni E, Cenci-Goga BT. Meat spoilage: A Critical review of a neglected alteration due to ropy slime producing bacteria. Ital J Anim Sci. 2015;14(3):4011. DOI: 10.4081/ijas.2015.4011
  12. Franzetti L, Mauro S. Characterizations of Pseudomonas spp: Isolated from foods. Ann Microbiol. 2007;57(1):39-47. DOI: 10.1007/bf03175048
  13. Tsao LH, Hsin CY, Liu HY, Chuang HC, Chen LY, Lee YJ. Risk factors for healthcare- associated infection caused by carbapenem: Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Microbiol Immunol Infect. 2018;51(3):359-66. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2017.08.015
  14. Migiyama Y, Yanagihara K, Kaku N, Harada Y, Yamada K, Nagaoka K. Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bacteremia among immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients: Relation to initial antibiotic therapy and survival. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2016;69(2):91-96. DOI: 10.7883/yoken.jjid.2014.573
  15. Liang R, Yu X, Wang R, Luo X, Mao Y, Zhu L. Bacterial diversity and spoilage-related microbiota associated with freshly prepared chicken products under aerobic conditions at 4°C. J Food Protect. 2012;75(6):1057-1062.  DOI: 10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-11-439 
  16. Driscoll JA, Brody SL, Kollef MH. The epidemiology: Pathogenesis and treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Drugs. 2007;67:351-68. DOI: 10.2165/00003495- 200767030-00003
  17. Aloush V, Navon-Venezia S, Seigman-Igra Y, Cabili S, Carmeli Y. Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Risk factors and clinical impact. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(1):43-48. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.50.1.43-48.2006
  18. Cosgrove SE, Carmeli Y. The impact of antimicrobial resistance on health and economic outcomes. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36(11):1433-1437. DOI: 10.1086/375081
  19. Henwood CJ, Livermore DM, James D, Warner M. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Results of a UK survey and evaluation of the British society for antimicrobial chemotherapy disc susceptibility test. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001;47:789-799.DOI: 10.1093/jac/47.6.789
  20. Hancock REW, Speert DP. Antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Mechanisms and impact on treatment. Drug Resist Updat. 2000;3(4):247-55. DOI: 10.1054/drup.2000.0152
  21. Bhuiya M, Sarkar MI, Sohag MH, Ali H, Roy CK, Akther L. Sarker AF. Enumerating antibiotic susceptibility patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from different sources in Dhaka city. Open Microbiol J. 2018;12:172-180. DOI: 10.2174/1874285801812010172
  22. Lavilla LL, Benomar N, Casado Muñoz MC, Gálvez A, Abriouel H. Antibiotic multi resistance analysis of mesophilic and psychrotrophic Pseudomonas spp: Isolated from goat and lamb slaughterhouse surfaces throughout the meat production process. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014;80(21):6792-806. DOI: 10.1128/aem.01998-14
  23. Konemen EW, Allen SD, Dowell VR, Sommers HM. Color atlas and textbook of diagnostic microbiology 2nd ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott Co; 1983. 689 p.
  24. Quinn PJ, Markey BK, Leonard FC, Hartigan P, Fanning S, Patrick EF. Veterinary microbiology and microbial disease. UK: John Willy & Son Ltd; 2011.
  25. Jawher IM, and Hassan MG. Molecular identification of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in meat at Mosul city retails using PCR technique. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2022;36(4):1083-1087. DOI: 10.33899/ijvs.2022.133086.2173
  26. Jorgensen JH, Turnidge JD. Susceptibility test methods: Dilution and disk diffusion methods. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;26(1);1253-1273. DOI: 10.1128/9781555817381.ch71
  27. Wickramasinghe NN, Ravensdale J, Coorey R, Chandry SP, Dykes GA. The predominance of psychrotrophic Pseudomonads on aerobically stored chilled red meat. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2019;18(5):1622-1635. DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12483
  28. Stellato G, Utter DR, Voorhis A, De Angelis M, Eren AM, Ercolini D. A few Pseudomonas oligotypes dominate in the meat and dairy processing environment. Front Microbiol. 2017;8(2)312- 315. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00264
  29. Hemmat MI, Hassan MA, Nahla AB, Mohga AA. Prevalence and molecular characterization of Pseudomonas species in frozen imported meat. Benha Vet Med J. 2016;31(2):220-224. DOI: 10.21608/bvmj.2016.31301
  30. Benie CD. Molecular identification and virulence factors of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains isolated from animal products. J Bacteriol Mycol. 2017;4(3):33-35. DOI: 10.15406/jbmoa.2017.04.00094
  31. Addis M. Major causes of meat spoilage and preservation techniques: A review. Food Sci Qual Manag. 2015;41(201):101-114. [available at]
  32. Abdelaziz AA, Elbanna TE, Sonbol FI, Gamaleldin NM, El Maghraby GM. Optimization of niosomes for enhanced antibacterial activity and reduced bacterial resistance: In vitro and in vivo evaluation. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2015;12(2):163-80. DOI: 10.1517/17425247.2014.942639
  33. Rodrigues G, Coelho-Fernandes S, Faria AS, Lorenzo JM, Gonzales-Barron U, Cadavez V. Microbial deterioration of portuguese lamb meat as affected by its intrinsic properties. The 1st international electronic conference on food science and functional foods. MDPI. 2020; DOI: 10.3390/foods_2020-07753
  34. Wang T, Guo H, Zhang H, Ren F, Zhang M, Ge S. Dynamics of bacterial communities of lamb meat packaged in air and vacuum pouch during chilled storage. Food Sci Anim Resour. 2019;39(2):209-21. DOI: 10.5851/kosfa.2019.e16
  35. Elbehiry A, Marzouk E, Moussa I, Abalkhail A, Ibrahim M, Hamada M. Pseudomonas species prevalence, protein analysis, and antibiotic resistance: An evolving public health challenge. Res Sq. 2022;12(1):53. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1067810/v1
  36. Khalafallah BM, El-Tawab A, Awad A, Nada S, Elkhayat ME. Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of pseudomonas species isolated from frozen meat. Benha Vet Med J. 2020;39(2):47-51. DOI: 10.21608/bvmj.2020.46777.1285
  37. Murphy D, Ricci A, Auce Z, Beechinor JG, Bergendahl H, Breathnach R, Bureš J, Duarte Da Silva JP, Hederová J, Hekman P. EMA and EFSA joint scientific opinion on measures to reduce the need to use antimicrobial agents in animal husbandry in the European Union, and the resulting impacts on food safety (RONAFA). EFSA J. 2017;15(1):4666. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4666
  38. The Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance meets the World Health Organization (WHO). J. Glob. Antimicrob. Resist. 2019;18:305-308. DOI: 10.1016/j.jgar.2019.07.022
  39. Heir E, Moen B, Åsli AW, Sunde M, Langsrud S. Antibiotic resistance and phylogeny of Pseudomonas spp. isolated over three decades from chicken meat in the Norwegian food chain. Microorganisms. 2021;9(2):207. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9020207
  40. Kousar S, Rehman N, Javed A, Hussain A, Naeem M, Masood S, Ali HA, Manzoor A, Khan AA, Akrem A, Iqbal F, Zulfiqar A, Jamshaid MB, Waqas M, Waseem A, Saeed MQ. Intensive poultry farming practices influence antibiotic resistance profiles in Pseudomonas aeruginosa inhabiting nearby soils. Infect Drug Resist. 2021;14:4511-4516. DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S324055
  41. Gales AC, Jones RN, Turnidge J, Renee R, Ramphal R. Characterization of P. aeruginosa occurrence rate, antimicrobial susceptibility pattern and molecular typing in the global sentry antimicrobial surveillance program. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:S146-155. DOI: 10.2147/idr.s324055 
  42. Teba AA, and Iname JL. Isolation and antimicrobial resistance of Staphylococcus spp., enteric bacteria and Pseudomonas spp. associated with respiratory tract infections of sheep. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2021;35(1-3):53-58. DOI: 10.33899/ijvs.2021.131098.1917
  43. Glen KA, Lamont IL. β-lactam resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Current status, future prospects. Pathogens. 2021;10(12):1638-1640. DOI: 10.3390/pathogens10121638
  44. Hala MM, Heba YK, Halah AA, Bashar SN, Nihad AJ, Khaild AJ. Evaluation the safety and synergistic effect of NiFe2O4 nanoparticles with antibiotic against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2021;35(1):71-77. DOI:10.33899/ijvs.2020.126298.1294
  45. El-Oksh AS, Elmasry DM, Ibrahim GA. Effect of garlic oil nanoemulsion against multidrug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from broiler. Iraqi J Vet Sci. 2022;36(4):877-888. DOI: 10.33899/ijvs.2022.132430.2094

  • Article View: 141
  • PDF Download: 25
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Telegram
  • Home
  • Glossary
  • News
  • Aims and Scope
  • Privacy Policy
  • Sitemap

 

© 2023, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul

 
Powered by eJournalPlus