Skip to content
1887

Microbial Genomics logo Microbial Genomics

Volume 11, Issue 5

Genomic characterization of from canine otitis highlights the need for a One Health approach to this opportunistic pathogen Open Access

Abstract

In humans, is well known as a prominent opportunistic pathogen associated with antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which presents a major challenge to successful treatment. This is also the case in animals, particularly in companion dogs where is a common cause of otitis. Despite its clinical significance, little data are available on the genomics and epidemiology of in dogs. To address this, we have genome-sequenced 34 canine otitis isolates from a veterinary referral hospital and analysed these along with a further 62 publicly available genomes from canine isolates. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that all three phylogroups A–C are represented amongst a diverse bacterial population isolated from dogs. We identify examples of persistent or recurrent infection by the same strain of up to 309 days between sampling, demonstrating the difficulty of successfully eradicating infection. Isolates encoded a variety of AMR genes with genomic and phenotypic AMR correlating poorly for β-lactams but showing complete concordance between fluoroquinolone resistance and quinolone resistance-determining regions (QRDRs) of DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV. Pangenome-wide analysis between 80 canine otitis isolates (34 newly sequenced here and a further 46 publicly available) and a reference collection of 491 human isolates found no genes which were over-represented or specific to either host species, indicating similar strains infect both humans and dogs. This agrees with the sharing of multilocus sequence types between dogs and humans, including the isolation here of ST235 from three dogs, a lineage prominent among the multidrug resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) international high-risk clones of causing human infections. The presence of such ‘high-risk' clones in companion dogs is concerning given their potential impact on animal health and the potential for zoonotic spread. These data provide new insight into this difficult-to-treat veterinary pathogen and promote the need for a One Health approach to tackling it.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): bacterial drug resistance , bacterial genome , canine , One Health , otitis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa
© 2025 The Authors
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001407
2025-05-01
2025-05-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/mgen/11/5/mgen001407.html?itemId=/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001407&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hoiby N, Johansen HK, Moser C, Ciofu O. Clinical Relevance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: A Master of Adaptation and Survival Strategies. Rehm BHA. Pseudomonas: Model Organism, Pathogen, Cell Factory 200825–44
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Moradali MF, Ghods S, Rehm BHA. Pseudomonas aeruginosa lifestyle: a paradigm for adaptation, survival, and persistence. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2017; 7:39 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Nickerson R, Thornton CS, Johnston B, Lee AHY, Cheng Z. Pseudomonas aeruginosa in chronic lung disease: untangling the dysregulated host immune response. Front Immunol 2024; 15:1405376 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Lyczak JB, Cannon CL, Pier GB. Establishment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection: lessons from a versatile opportunist. Microbes Infect 2000; 2:1051–1060 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Langendonk RF, Neill DR, Fothergill JL. The building blocks of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: implications for current resistance-breaking therapies. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021; 11: [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Organisation WH WHO bacterial priority pathogens list, 2024: bacterial pathogens of public health importance to guide research, development and strategies to prevent and control antimicrobial resistance. Geneva 2024
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Rice LB. Federal funding for the study of antimicrobial resistance in nosocomial pathogens: no ESKAPE. J Infect Dis 2008; 197:1079–1081 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Mestrovic T, Robles Aguilar G, Swetschinski LR, Ikuta KS, Gray AP et al. The burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance in the WHO European region in 2019: a cross-country systematic analysis. Lancet Public Health 2022; 7:e897–e913 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Pottier M, Castagnet S, Gravey F, Leduc G, Sévin C et al. Antimicrobial resistance and genetic diversity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa strains isolated from equine and other veterinary samples. Pathogens 2022; 12:64 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Elfadadny A, Uchiyama J, Goto K, Imanishi I, Ragab RF et al. Antimicrobial resistance and genotyping of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from the ear canals of dogs in Japan. Front Vet Sci 2023; 10:1074127 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Mahmoud SF, Fayez M, Swelum AA, Alswat AS, Alkafafy M et al. Genetic diversity, biofilm formation, and antibiotic resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from cow, camel, and mare with clinical endometritis. Vet Sci 2022; 9:239 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Barnard N, Foster A. How to treat Pseudomonas otitis in dogs. Vet Rec 2018; 182:109–110
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Pye C. Pseudomonas otitis externa in dogs. Can Vet J 2018; 59:1231–1234
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Secker B, Shaw S, Atterbury RJ. Pseudomonas spp. in canine otitis externa. Microorganisms 2023; 11:2650 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hillier A, Griffin CE. The ACVD task force on canine atopic dermatitis (I): incidence and prevalence. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2001; 81:147–151 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Goss R, Adams VJ, Heinrich C, Grundon R, Linn-Pearl R et al. Progressive ulcerative keratitis in dogs in the United Kingdom: microbial isolates, antimicrobial sensitivity, and resistance patterns. Vet Ophthalmol 2023 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Hall JL, Holmes MA, Baines SJ. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of canine urinary tract pathogens. Vet Rec 2013; 173:549 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Cole LK, Kwochka KW, Kowalski JJ, Hillier A. Microbial flora and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of isolated pathogens from the horizontal ear canal and middle ear in dogs with otitis media. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998; 212:534–538 [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Colombini S, Merchant SR, Hosgood G. Microbial flora and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns from dogs with otitis media. Vet Dermatol 2000; 11:235–239 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Petersen AD, Walker RD, Bowman MM, Schott HC II, Rosser EJ Jr. Frequency of isolation and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Staphylococcus intermedius and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from canine skin and ear samples over a 6-year period (1992–1997). J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2002; 38:407–413 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Miller WG, Campbell KL. Diseases of the eyelids, claws, anal sacs and ears. In Muller and Kirk’s Small Animal Dermatology, 7th. edn St. Louis: Elsevier/Saunders; 2013
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Martín Barrasa JL, Lupiola Gómez P, González Lama Z, Tejedor Junco MT. Antibacterial susceptibility patterns of Pseudomonas strains isolated from chronic canine otitis externa. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health 2000; 47:191–196 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Barnard N, Foster A. Pseudomonas otitis in dogs: a general practitioner’s guide to treatment. In Practice 2017; 39:386–398 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Korbelik J, Singh A, Rousseau J, Weese JS. Characterization of the otic bacterial microbiota in dogs with otitis externa compared to healthy individuals. Vet Dermatol 2019; 30:228–e70 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Bradley CW, Lee FF, Rankin SC, Kalan LR, Horwinski J et al. The otic microbiota and mycobiota in a referral population of dogs in eastern USA with otitis externa. Vet Dermatol 2020; 31:225–e49 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. O Neill DG, Church DB, McGreevy PD, Thomson PC, Brodbelt DC. Prevalence of disorders recorded in dogs attending primary-care veterinary practices in England. PLoS One 2014; 9:e90501 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. O’Neill DG, Volk AV, Soares T, Church DB, Brodbelt DC et al. Frequency and predisposing factors for canine otitis externa in the UK - a primary veterinary care epidemiological view. Canine Med Genet 2021; 8:7 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Nuttall T. Managing recurrent otitis externa in dogs: what have we learned and what can we do better?. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2023; 261:S10–S22 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. King SB, Doucette KP, Seewald W, Forster SL. A randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter evaluation of the efficacy and safety of A once weekly two dose otic gel containing florfenicol, terbinafine and betamethasone administered for the treatment of canine otitis externa. BMC Vet Res 2018; 14:307 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Summers JF, O’Neill DG, Church D, Collins L, Sargan D et al. Health-related welfare prioritisation of canine disorders using electronic health records in primary care practice in the UK. BMC Vet Res 2019; 15:163 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Nielsen SS, Bicout DJ, Calistri P, Canali E, Drewe JA et al. Assessment of animal diseases caused by bacteria resistant to antimicrobials: dogs and cats. EFS2 2021; 19:e06680 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Foster G, Robb A, Paterson GK. Isolation and genome sequencing of Staphylococcus schleiferi subspecies coagulans from Antarctic and North Sea seals. Access Microbiol 2020; 2:acmi000162 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Astashyn A, Tvedte ES, Sweeney D, Sapojnikov V, Bouk N et al. Rapid and sensitive detection of genome contamination at scale with FCS-GX. Genome Biol 2024; 25:60
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Parks DH, Imelfort M, Skennerton CT, Hugenholtz P, Tyson GW. CheckM: assessing the quality of microbial genomes recovered from isolates, single cells, and metagenomes. Genome Res 2015; 25:1043–1055
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Ciufo S, Kannan S, Sharma S, Badretdin A, Clark K et al. Using average nucleotide identity to improve taxonomic assignments in prokaryotic genomes at the NCBI. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2018; 68:2386–2392
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Göker M. TYGS is an automated high-throughput platform for state-of-the-art genome-based taxonomy. Nat Commun 2019; 10:2182 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Gurevich A, Saveliev V, Vyahhi N, Tesler G. QUAST: quality assessment tool for genome assemblies. Bioinformatics 2013; 29:1072–1075 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Ewels P, Magnusson M, Lundin S, Käller M. MultiQC: summarize analysis results for multiple tools and samples in a single report. Bioinformatics 2016; 32:3047–3048 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Seemann T. Prokka: rapid prokaryotic genome annotation. Bioinformatics 2014; 30:2068–2069 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Jain C, Rodriguez-R LM, Phillippy AM, Konstantinidis KT, Aluru S. High throughput ANI analysis of 90K prokaryotic genomes reveals clear species boundaries. Nat Commun 2018; 9:5114 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Goris J, Konstantinidis KT, Klappenbach JA, Coenye T, Vandamme P et al. DNA-DNA hybridization values and their relationship to whole-genome sequence similarities. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2007; 57:81–91 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Bayliss SC, Thorpe HA, Coyle NM, Sheppard SK, Feil EJ. PIRATE: a fast and scalable pangenomics toolbox for clustering diverged orthologues in bacteria. Gigascience 2019; 8:giz119 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O, Schrempf D, Woodhams MD et al. IQ-TREE 2: new models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic Era. Mol Biol Evol 2020; 37:1530–1534 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Hoang DT, Chernomor O, von Haeseler A, Minh BQ, Vinh LS. UFBoot2: improving the ultrafast bootstrap approximation. Mol Biol Evol 2018; 35:518–522 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Letunic I, Bork P. Interactive tree of life (iTOL) v4: recent updates and new developments. Nucleic Acids Res 2019; 47:W256–W259 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Freschi L, Jeukens J, Kukavica-Ibrulj I, Boyle B, Dupont M-J et al. Clinical utilization of genomics data produced by the international pseudomonas aeruginosa consortium. Front Microbiol 2015
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Kos VN, Déraspe M, McLaughlin RE, Whiteaker JD, Roy PH et al. The resistome of pseudomonas aeruginosa in relationship to phenotypic susceptibility. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015; 59:427–436
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Brynildsrud O, Bohlin J, Scheffer L, Eldholm V. Rapid scoring of genes in microbial pan-genome-wide association studies with Scoary. Genome Biol 2016; 17:238 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Argimón S, Yeats CA, Goater RJ, Abudahab K, Taylor B et al. A global resource for genomic predictions of antimicrobial resistance and surveillance of salmonella typhi at pathogenwatch. Nat Commun 2021; 12:2879
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Jolley KA, Bray JE, Maiden MCJ. Open-access bacterial population genomics: BIGSdb software, the PubMLST.org website and their applications. Wellcome Open Res 2018; 3:124 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Alcock BP, Raphenya AR, Lau TTY, Tsang KK, Bouchard M et al. CARD 2020: antibiotic resistome surveillance with the comprehensive antibiotic resistance database. Nucleic Acids Res 2020; 48:D517–D525 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  52. McArthur AG, Waglechner N, Nizam F, Yan A, Azad MA et al. The comprehensive antibiotic resistance database. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57:3348–3357 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Yu G, Smith DK, Zhu H, Guan Y, Lam T-Y. Ggtree: an r package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods Ecol Evol 2017; 8:28–36 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  54. RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R: Postit Software, PBC; 2023 https://posit.co/
  55. van Heel AJ, de Jong A, Song C, Viel JH, Kok J et al. BAGEL4: a user-friendly web server to thoroughly mine RiPPs and bacteriocins. Nucleic Acids Res 2018; 46:W278–W281 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Matuschek E, Brown DFJ, Kahlmeter G. Development of the EUCAST disk diffusion antimicrobial susceptibility testing method and its implementation in routine microbiology laboratories. Clin Microbiol Infect 2014; 20:O255–66 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  57. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST). Breakpoint tables for interpretation of mics and zone diameters. Version 13.1 2023
     [Google Scholar]
  58. European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) Routine and extended internal quality control for MIC determination and disk diffusion as recommended by EUCAST. Version 13.2 2023
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Eladawy M, Thomas JC, Hoyles L. Phenotypic and genomic characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates recovered from catheter-associated urinary tract infections in an Egyptian hospital. Microb Genom 2023; 9:001125 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Weiser R, Green AE, Bull MJ, Cunningham-Oakes E, Jolley KA et al. Not all Pseudomonas aeruginosa are equal: strains from industrial sources possess uniquely large multireplicon genomes. Microb Genom 2019; 5:e000276 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Hyun JE, Chung TH, Hwang CY. Identification of VIM-2 metallo-β-lactamase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from dogs with pyoderma and otitis in Korea. Vet Dermatol 2018; 29:186–e68 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Oliver A, Mulet X, López-Causapé C, Juan C. The increasing threat of Pseudomonas aeruginosa high-risk clones. Drug Resist Updat 2015; 21–22:41–59 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Del Barrio-Tofiño E, López-Causapé C, Oliver A. Pseudomonas aeruginosa epidemic high-risk clones and their association with horizontally-acquired β-lactamases: 2020 update. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2020; 56:106196 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Secker B, Shaw S, Hobley L, Atterbury RJ. Genomic and phenotypic characterisation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from canine otitis externa reveals high-risk sequence types identical to those found in human nosocomial infections. Front Microbiol 2025; 16:1526843 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Fernandes MR, Sellera FP, Moura Q, Carvalho MPN, Rosato PN et al. Zooanthroponotic transmission of drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Brazil. Emerg Infect Dis 2018; 24:1160–1162 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Sánchez-Diener I, Zamorano L, Peña C, Ocampo-Sosa A, Cabot G et al. Weighting the impact of virulence on the outcome of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020; 26:351–357 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Sánchez-Diener I, Zamorano L, López-Causapé C, Cabot G, Mulet X et al. Interplay among resistance profiles, high-risk clones, and virulence in the caenorhabditis elegans Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61:01586–17 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Gómez-Zorrilla S, Juan C, Cabot G, Camoez M, Tubau F et al. Impact of multidrug resistance on the pathogenicity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa: in vitro and in vivo studies. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2016; 47:368–374 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Recio R, Villa J, Viedma E, Orellana MÁ, Lora-Tamayo J et al. Bacteraemia due to extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa sequence type 235 high-risk clone: facing the perfect storm. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2018; 52:172–179 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Peña C, Cabot G, Gómez-Zorrilla S, Zamorano L, Ocampo-Sosa A et al. Influence of virulence genotype and resistance profile in the mortality of Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 60:539–548 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Engel J, Balachandran P. Role of Pseudomonas aeruginosa type III effectors in disease. Curr Opin Microbiol 2009; 12:61–66 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Freschi L, Jeukens J, Kukavica-Ibrulj I, Boyle B, Dupont M-J et al. Clinical utilization of genomics data produced by the international Pseudomonas aeruginosa consortium. Front Microbiol 2015; 6:1036 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Ozer EA, Nnah E, Didelot X, Whitaker RJ, Hauser AR. The population structure of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Is characterized by genetic isolation of exoU+ and exoS+ lineages. Genome Biol Evol 2019; 11:1780–1796 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Rebelo AR, Bortolaia V, Leekitcharoenphon P, Hansen DS, Nielsen HL et al. One day in denmark: comparison of phenotypic and genotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing in bacterial isolates from clinical settings. Front Microbiol 2022
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Ku PM, Hobbs DA, Gilmore M, Hobbs AL. 1234. Can susceptibility to one carbapenem be conferred to another? frequency of discordance in gram-negative clinical Isolates. Open Forum Infect Dis 2021; 8:S706–S707 [View Article]
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Ellington MJ, Ekelund O, Aarestrup FM, Canton R, Doumith M et al. The role of whole genome sequencing in antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacteria: report from the EUCAST Subcommittee. Clin Microbiol Infect 2017; 23:2–22 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Laborda P, Hernando-Amado S, Martínez JL, Sanz-García F. Antibiotic Resistance in Pseudomonas. In Filloux A, Ramos J-L. eds Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Biology, Pathogenesis and Control Strategies Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022 pp 117–143
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Langendonk RF, Neill DR, Fothergill JL. The building blocks of antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: implications for current resistance-breaking therapies. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021; 11:665759 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Pasca MR, Dalla Valle C, De Jesus Lopes Ribeiro AL, Buroni S, Papaleo MC et al. Evaluation of fluoroquinolone resistance mechanisms in Pseudomonas aeruginosa multidrug resistance clinical isolates. Microb Drug Resist 2012; 18:23–32 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Ghequire MGK, De Mot R. Ribosomally encoded antibacterial proteins and peptides from Pseudomonas. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2014; 38:523–568 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Newstead LL, Varjonen K, Nuttall T, Paterson GK. Staphylococcal-produced bacteriocins and antimicrobial peptides: their potential as alternative treatments for Staphylococcus aureus infections. Antibiotics 2020; 9:40 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Sugrue I, Ross RP, Hill C. Bacteriocin diversity, function, discovery and application as antimicrobials. Nat Rev Microbiol 2024; 22:556–571 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001407
Loading
Genomic characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa from canine otitis highlights the need for a One Health approach to this opportunistic pathogen
M Gen 11, 001407 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1099/mgen.0.001407
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001407
/content/journal/mgen/10.1099/mgen.0.001407
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

EXCEL

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error