Loading…
Isolation and Identification of Infection-Causing Bacteria in Dairy Animals and Determination of Their Antibiogram
Pathogens are always a threat to the livestock and domestic animals due to their exposure to the contaminated environments. The study was conducted to evaluation of the prevalence of Escherichia coli, Shigella spp., Salmonella spp., and S. aureus, in farm animals (cattle and buffalos). A total of 15...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of food quality 2021-12, Vol.2021, p.1-9 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3 |
container_end_page | 9 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Journal of food quality |
container_volume | 2021 |
creator | Arbab, Safia Ullah, Hanif Wang, Weiwei Li, Ka Akbar, Ali Zhang, Jiyu |
description | Pathogens are always a threat to the livestock and domestic animals due to their exposure to the contaminated environments. The study was conducted to evaluation of the prevalence of Escherichia coli, Shigella spp., Salmonella spp., and S. aureus, in farm animals (cattle and buffalos). A total of 150 (n = 150) samples were collected from cattle and buffaloes, 60 samples from cows’ and buffalo’s teats milk, 30 of water samples, and 60 of fecal samples isolates from dairy farm animals, which may act as reservoir disseminating such pathogens. Farm hygiene, management, and milking procedure were listed through a questionnaire. The most common pathogens detected in this study was E. coli 88 (58%) and S. aureus 81 (54%), followed by Salmonella spp. 32 (21%), and Shigella spp. 44 (29%), respectively. During the antibiogram studies, the results revealed that the highest number of bacterial isolates showed resistance against ampicillin 50 (56.8%), followed by ciprofloxacin 23 (26.1%) and augmentin 22 (25%) of Escherichia coli and ampicillin 49 (60.4%), cefpodoxime 23 (28.3%), and augmentin 20 (24.6%) of S. aureus. In the case of Salmonella spp., the highest resistance was showed by amoxicillin 16 (50%). In Shigella spp., the highest resistance was shown by ampicillin 16 (36.3%), followed by cefpodoxime and ceftazidime 10 (22.7%). The high frequency of isolates in this investigation with multiple antibiotic resistance ranges from 15. MARI % value of S. aureus and E. coli 15 (12.5%), followed by Salmonella and Shigella spp. ranges from 12 (10%), suggesting the presence of various antibiotic-resistant bacteria as well as highly resistant bacteria. The mean ± SD zone areas for the greater resistance are for E. coli and S. aureus, already known to be multiresistant, followed by Salmonella spp. and Shigella spp., when the zone areas are for the low resistance, and the findings determined that there was a little difference between S. aureus and E. coli. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1155/2021/2958304 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_628d354de19e41af81f14f2ff31ddde9</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A696962882</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_628d354de19e41af81f14f2ff31ddde9</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A696962882</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhiMEEkvhxg-IxBHS-jOJj8sW2kiVuJSzNWuPt7Pa2MXJCvXf19tURUgIzcHyO8-8M6Opqo-cnXOu9YVggl8Io3vJ1KtqxTulG6V197paMa7axijRv63eTdOeMak1U6sqD1M6wEwp1hB9PXiMMwVyi5RCPcSA7vRpNnCcKO7qr-BmzAQ1xfoSKD_U60gjHKYnh0ssyZHii8HtHVIuyExbSrsM4_vqTSg0fnh-z6qf37_dbq6bmx9Xw2Z90zjVsbmR0BmtlAq94oA8IPRgDA89V2pbNmlD17VcehU8QyFQgFG9RPRbDVLJrTyrhsXXJ9jb-1xmzA82AdknIeWdhTyTO6BtRe-lVh65wdKt9AhcBRGC5N57NMXr0-J1n9OvI06z3adjjmV8K1rOZcuMaf9QOyimFEOaM7iRJmfXrSkh-l4U6vwfVAmPI7kUMVDR_yr4shS4nKYpY3hZhjN7Orw9Hd4-H77gnxf8jqKH3_R_-hFLgauT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2611360996</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Isolation and Identification of Infection-Causing Bacteria in Dairy Animals and Determination of Their Antibiogram</title><source>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</source><source>Wiley Open Access</source><source>BSC - Ebsco (Business Source Ultimate)</source><creator>Arbab, Safia ; Ullah, Hanif ; Wang, Weiwei ; Li, Ka ; Akbar, Ali ; Zhang, Jiyu</creator><contributor>Hashemi Gahruie, Hadi ; Hadi Hashemi Gahruie</contributor><creatorcontrib>Arbab, Safia ; Ullah, Hanif ; Wang, Weiwei ; Li, Ka ; Akbar, Ali ; Zhang, Jiyu ; Hashemi Gahruie, Hadi ; Hadi Hashemi Gahruie</creatorcontrib><description>Pathogens are always a threat to the livestock and domestic animals due to their exposure to the contaminated environments. The study was conducted to evaluation of the prevalence of Escherichia coli, Shigella spp., Salmonella spp., and S. aureus, in farm animals (cattle and buffalos). A total of 150 (n = 150) samples were collected from cattle and buffaloes, 60 samples from cows’ and buffalo’s teats milk, 30 of water samples, and 60 of fecal samples isolates from dairy farm animals, which may act as reservoir disseminating such pathogens. Farm hygiene, management, and milking procedure were listed through a questionnaire. The most common pathogens detected in this study was E. coli 88 (58%) and S. aureus 81 (54%), followed by Salmonella spp. 32 (21%), and Shigella spp. 44 (29%), respectively. During the antibiogram studies, the results revealed that the highest number of bacterial isolates showed resistance against ampicillin 50 (56.8%), followed by ciprofloxacin 23 (26.1%) and augmentin 22 (25%) of Escherichia coli and ampicillin 49 (60.4%), cefpodoxime 23 (28.3%), and augmentin 20 (24.6%) of S. aureus. In the case of Salmonella spp., the highest resistance was showed by amoxicillin 16 (50%). In Shigella spp., the highest resistance was shown by ampicillin 16 (36.3%), followed by cefpodoxime and ceftazidime 10 (22.7%). The high frequency of isolates in this investigation with multiple antibiotic resistance ranges from 15. MARI % value of S. aureus and E. coli 15 (12.5%), followed by Salmonella and Shigella spp. ranges from 12 (10%), suggesting the presence of various antibiotic-resistant bacteria as well as highly resistant bacteria. The mean ± SD zone areas for the greater resistance are for E. coli and S. aureus, already known to be multiresistant, followed by Salmonella spp. and Shigella spp., when the zone areas are for the low resistance, and the findings determined that there was a little difference between S. aureus and E. coli.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0146-9428</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1745-4557</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1155/2021/2958304</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cairo: Hindawi</publisher><subject>Amoxicillin ; Animal lactation ; Animals ; Antibiotic resistance ; Antibiotics ; Antimicrobial agents ; Bacteria ; Bacterial infections ; Cattle ; Dairy farming ; Dairy farms ; Domestic animals ; Drinking water ; Drug resistance ; Drug resistance in microorganisms ; E coli ; Escherichia coli ; Feces ; Food contamination & poisoning ; Food quality ; Gram-positive bacteria ; Health aspects ; Laboratories ; Livestock ; Metabolites ; Methylene blue ; Microorganisms ; Milk ; Morphology ; Organisms ; Pathogens ; Public health ; Salmonella ; Staphylococcus aureus ; Staphylococcus infections ; Tetracycline ; Tetracyclines ; Water analysis ; Water sampling</subject><ispartof>Journal of food quality, 2021-12, Vol.2021, p.1-9</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2021 Safia Arbab et al.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Safia Arbab et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9448-8312 ; 0000-0002-9940-9708 ; 0000-0003-1052-8522</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2611360996/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2611360996?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590,75126</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Hashemi Gahruie, Hadi</contributor><contributor>Hadi Hashemi Gahruie</contributor><creatorcontrib>Arbab, Safia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ullah, Hanif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Weiwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Ka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akbar, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Jiyu</creatorcontrib><title>Isolation and Identification of Infection-Causing Bacteria in Dairy Animals and Determination of Their Antibiogram</title><title>Journal of food quality</title><description>Pathogens are always a threat to the livestock and domestic animals due to their exposure to the contaminated environments. The study was conducted to evaluation of the prevalence of Escherichia coli, Shigella spp., Salmonella spp., and S. aureus, in farm animals (cattle and buffalos). A total of 150 (n = 150) samples were collected from cattle and buffaloes, 60 samples from cows’ and buffalo’s teats milk, 30 of water samples, and 60 of fecal samples isolates from dairy farm animals, which may act as reservoir disseminating such pathogens. Farm hygiene, management, and milking procedure were listed through a questionnaire. The most common pathogens detected in this study was E. coli 88 (58%) and S. aureus 81 (54%), followed by Salmonella spp. 32 (21%), and Shigella spp. 44 (29%), respectively. During the antibiogram studies, the results revealed that the highest number of bacterial isolates showed resistance against ampicillin 50 (56.8%), followed by ciprofloxacin 23 (26.1%) and augmentin 22 (25%) of Escherichia coli and ampicillin 49 (60.4%), cefpodoxime 23 (28.3%), and augmentin 20 (24.6%) of S. aureus. In the case of Salmonella spp., the highest resistance was showed by amoxicillin 16 (50%). In Shigella spp., the highest resistance was shown by ampicillin 16 (36.3%), followed by cefpodoxime and ceftazidime 10 (22.7%). The high frequency of isolates in this investigation with multiple antibiotic resistance ranges from 15. MARI % value of S. aureus and E. coli 15 (12.5%), followed by Salmonella and Shigella spp. ranges from 12 (10%), suggesting the presence of various antibiotic-resistant bacteria as well as highly resistant bacteria. The mean ± SD zone areas for the greater resistance are for E. coli and S. aureus, already known to be multiresistant, followed by Salmonella spp. and Shigella spp., when the zone areas are for the low resistance, and the findings determined that there was a little difference between S. aureus and E. coli.</description><subject>Amoxicillin</subject><subject>Animal lactation</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Antibiotic resistance</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Antimicrobial agents</subject><subject>Bacteria</subject><subject>Bacterial infections</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>Dairy farming</subject><subject>Dairy farms</subject><subject>Domestic animals</subject><subject>Drinking water</subject><subject>Drug resistance</subject><subject>Drug resistance in microorganisms</subject><subject>E coli</subject><subject>Escherichia coli</subject><subject>Feces</subject><subject>Food contamination & poisoning</subject><subject>Food quality</subject><subject>Gram-positive bacteria</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Metabolites</subject><subject>Methylene blue</subject><subject>Microorganisms</subject><subject>Milk</subject><subject>Morphology</subject><subject>Organisms</subject><subject>Pathogens</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Salmonella</subject><subject>Staphylococcus aureus</subject><subject>Staphylococcus infections</subject><subject>Tetracycline</subject><subject>Tetracyclines</subject><subject>Water analysis</subject><subject>Water sampling</subject><issn>0146-9428</issn><issn>1745-4557</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhiMEEkvhxg-IxBHS-jOJj8sW2kiVuJSzNWuPt7Pa2MXJCvXf19tURUgIzcHyO8-8M6Opqo-cnXOu9YVggl8Io3vJ1KtqxTulG6V197paMa7axijRv63eTdOeMak1U6sqD1M6wEwp1hB9PXiMMwVyi5RCPcSA7vRpNnCcKO7qr-BmzAQ1xfoSKD_U60gjHKYnh0ssyZHii8HtHVIuyExbSrsM4_vqTSg0fnh-z6qf37_dbq6bmx9Xw2Z90zjVsbmR0BmtlAq94oA8IPRgDA89V2pbNmlD17VcehU8QyFQgFG9RPRbDVLJrTyrhsXXJ9jb-1xmzA82AdknIeWdhTyTO6BtRe-lVh65wdKt9AhcBRGC5N57NMXr0-J1n9OvI06z3adjjmV8K1rOZcuMaf9QOyimFEOaM7iRJmfXrSkh-l4U6vwfVAmPI7kUMVDR_yr4shS4nKYpY3hZhjN7Orw9Hd4-H77gnxf8jqKH3_R_-hFLgauT</recordid><startdate>20211208</startdate><enddate>20211208</enddate><creator>Arbab, Safia</creator><creator>Ullah, Hanif</creator><creator>Wang, Weiwei</creator><creator>Li, Ka</creator><creator>Akbar, Ali</creator><creator>Zhang, Jiyu</creator><general>Hindawi</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Hindawi Limited</general><general>Hindawi-Wiley</general><scope>RHU</scope><scope>RHW</scope><scope>RHX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9448-8312</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9940-9708</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1052-8522</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211208</creationdate><title>Isolation and Identification of Infection-Causing Bacteria in Dairy Animals and Determination of Their Antibiogram</title><author>Arbab, Safia ; Ullah, Hanif ; Wang, Weiwei ; Li, Ka ; Akbar, Ali ; Zhang, Jiyu</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Amoxicillin</topic><topic>Animal lactation</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Antibiotic resistance</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Antimicrobial agents</topic><topic>Bacteria</topic><topic>Bacterial infections</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>Dairy farming</topic><topic>Dairy farms</topic><topic>Domestic animals</topic><topic>Drinking water</topic><topic>Drug resistance</topic><topic>Drug resistance in microorganisms</topic><topic>E coli</topic><topic>Escherichia coli</topic><topic>Feces</topic><topic>Food contamination & poisoning</topic><topic>Food quality</topic><topic>Gram-positive bacteria</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Metabolites</topic><topic>Methylene blue</topic><topic>Microorganisms</topic><topic>Milk</topic><topic>Morphology</topic><topic>Organisms</topic><topic>Pathogens</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Salmonella</topic><topic>Staphylococcus aureus</topic><topic>Staphylococcus infections</topic><topic>Tetracycline</topic><topic>Tetracyclines</topic><topic>Water analysis</topic><topic>Water sampling</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Arbab, Safia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ullah, Hanif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Weiwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Ka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akbar, Ali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Jiyu</creatorcontrib><collection>Hindawi Publishing Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Subscription Journals</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of food quality</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Arbab, Safia</au><au>Ullah, Hanif</au><au>Wang, Weiwei</au><au>Li, Ka</au><au>Akbar, Ali</au><au>Zhang, Jiyu</au><au>Hashemi Gahruie, Hadi</au><au>Hadi Hashemi Gahruie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Isolation and Identification of Infection-Causing Bacteria in Dairy Animals and Determination of Their Antibiogram</atitle><jtitle>Journal of food quality</jtitle><date>2021-12-08</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>2021</volume><spage>1</spage><epage>9</epage><pages>1-9</pages><issn>0146-9428</issn><eissn>1745-4557</eissn><abstract>Pathogens are always a threat to the livestock and domestic animals due to their exposure to the contaminated environments. The study was conducted to evaluation of the prevalence of Escherichia coli, Shigella spp., Salmonella spp., and S. aureus, in farm animals (cattle and buffalos). A total of 150 (n = 150) samples were collected from cattle and buffaloes, 60 samples from cows’ and buffalo’s teats milk, 30 of water samples, and 60 of fecal samples isolates from dairy farm animals, which may act as reservoir disseminating such pathogens. Farm hygiene, management, and milking procedure were listed through a questionnaire. The most common pathogens detected in this study was E. coli 88 (58%) and S. aureus 81 (54%), followed by Salmonella spp. 32 (21%), and Shigella spp. 44 (29%), respectively. During the antibiogram studies, the results revealed that the highest number of bacterial isolates showed resistance against ampicillin 50 (56.8%), followed by ciprofloxacin 23 (26.1%) and augmentin 22 (25%) of Escherichia coli and ampicillin 49 (60.4%), cefpodoxime 23 (28.3%), and augmentin 20 (24.6%) of S. aureus. In the case of Salmonella spp., the highest resistance was showed by amoxicillin 16 (50%). In Shigella spp., the highest resistance was shown by ampicillin 16 (36.3%), followed by cefpodoxime and ceftazidime 10 (22.7%). The high frequency of isolates in this investigation with multiple antibiotic resistance ranges from 15. MARI % value of S. aureus and E. coli 15 (12.5%), followed by Salmonella and Shigella spp. ranges from 12 (10%), suggesting the presence of various antibiotic-resistant bacteria as well as highly resistant bacteria. The mean ± SD zone areas for the greater resistance are for E. coli and S. aureus, already known to be multiresistant, followed by Salmonella spp. and Shigella spp., when the zone areas are for the low resistance, and the findings determined that there was a little difference between S. aureus and E. coli.</abstract><cop>Cairo</cop><pub>Hindawi</pub><doi>10.1155/2021/2958304</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9448-8312</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9940-9708</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1052-8522</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0146-9428 |
ispartof | Journal of food quality, 2021-12, Vol.2021, p.1-9 |
issn | 0146-9428 1745-4557 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_628d354de19e41af81f14f2ff31ddde9 |
source | Publicly Available Content (ProQuest); Wiley Open Access; BSC - Ebsco (Business Source Ultimate) |
subjects | Amoxicillin Animal lactation Animals Antibiotic resistance Antibiotics Antimicrobial agents Bacteria Bacterial infections Cattle Dairy farming Dairy farms Domestic animals Drinking water Drug resistance Drug resistance in microorganisms E coli Escherichia coli Feces Food contamination & poisoning Food quality Gram-positive bacteria Health aspects Laboratories Livestock Metabolites Methylene blue Microorganisms Milk Morphology Organisms Pathogens Public health Salmonella Staphylococcus aureus Staphylococcus infections Tetracycline Tetracyclines Water analysis Water sampling |
title | Isolation and Identification of Infection-Causing Bacteria in Dairy Animals and Determination of Their Antibiogram |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T16%3A30%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Isolation%20and%20Identification%20of%20Infection-Causing%20Bacteria%20in%20Dairy%20Animals%20and%20Determination%20of%20Their%20Antibiogram&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20food%20quality&rft.au=Arbab,%20Safia&rft.date=2021-12-08&rft.volume=2021&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=9&rft.pages=1-9&rft.issn=0146-9428&rft.eissn=1745-4557&rft_id=info:doi/10.1155/2021/2958304&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA696962882%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c470t-3a795444f841ae1fea8a991f8144b9426f77613d4fd0e22e2a9483eedb5a343b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2611360996&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A696962882&rfr_iscdi=true |