Characterization and Genetic Variation of Vibrio cholerae Isolated from Clinical and Environmental Sources in Thailand

Achiraya Siriphap; Pimlapas Leekitcharoenphon; Rolf S. Kaas; Chonchanok Theethakaew; Frank M. Aarestrup; Orasa Sutheinkul; Rene S. Hendriksen

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169324

Abstract

Cholera is still an important public health problem in several countries, including Thailand. In this study, a collection of clinical and environmental V. cholerae serogroup O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 strains originating from Thailand (1983 to 2013) was characterized to determine phenotypic and genotypic traits and to investigate the genetic relatedness. Using a combination of conventional methods and whole genome sequencing (WGS), 78 V. cholerae strains were identified. WGS was used to determine the serogroup, biotype, virulence, mobile genetic elements, and antimicrobial resistance genes using online bioinformatics tools. In addition, phenotypic antimicrobial resistance was determined by the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) test. The 78 V. cholerae strains belonged to the following serogroups O1: (n = 44), O139 (n = 16) and non-O1/non-O139 (n = 18). Interestingly, we found that the typical El Tor O1 strains were the major cause of clinical cholera during 1983–2000 with two Classical O1 strains detected in 2000. In 2004–2010, the El Tor variant strains revealed genotypes of the Classical biotype possessing either only ctxB or both ctxB and rstR while they harbored tcpA of the El Tor biotype. Thirty O1 and eleven O139 clinical strains carried CTXϕ (Cholera toxin) and tcpA as well four different pathogenic islands (PAIs). Beside non-O1/non-O139, the O1 environmental strains also presented chxA and Type Three Secretion System (TTSS). The in silico MultiLocus Sequence Typing (MLST) discriminated the O1 and O139 clinical strains from other serogroups and environmental strains. ST69 was dominant in the clinical strains belonging to the 7^th pandemic clone. Non-O1/non-O139 and environmental strains showed various novel STs indicating genetic variation. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains were observed and conferred resistance to ampicillin, azithromycin, nalidixic acid, sulfamethoxazole, tetracycline, and trimethoprim and harboured variants of the SXT elements.

For the first time since 1986, the presence of V. cholerae O1 Classical was reported causing cholera outbreaks in Thailand. In addition, we found that V. cholerae O1 El Tor variant and O139 were pre-dominating the pathogenic strains in Thailand. Using WGS and bioinformatic tools to analyze both historical and contemporary V. cholerae circulating in Thailand provided a more detailed understanding of the V. cholerae epidemiology, which ultimately could be applied for control measures and management of cholera in Thailand.

Citation: Siriphap A, Leekitcharoenphon P, Kaas RS, Theethakaew C, Aarestrup FM, Sutheinkul O, et al. (2017) Characterization and Genetic Variation of Vibrio cholerae Isolated from Clinical and Environmental Sources in Thailand. PLoS ONE 12(1): e0169324. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324

Editor: Ashlesh K. Murthy, Midwestern University, UNITED STATES

Received: July 11, 2016; Accepted: December 15, 2016; Published: January 19, 2017

Copyright: © 2017 Siriphap 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 sequence data have been submitted to the European Nucleotide Archive under study accession number: PRJEB14630 (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB14630).

Funding: This work was supported in part by Department of Microbiology grant, the China Medical Board, the Faculty of Public Health of Mahidol University to Orasa Sutheinkul, the Danish Council for Strategic Research (grant number 09-067103) to Frank M. Aarestrup, and in part by the World Health Organization Global Food-borne Infections Network and World Health Organization, Food Safety Office (WP-12-FOS-003342) to Rene S. Hendriksen. 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 cholerae is the causative agent of the severe, watery diarrheal disease cholera. V. cholerae is classified into approximately 206 serogroups of which O1 and O139 have the potential to cause cholera outbreaks and are associated with cholera pandemics. The remaining serogroups; determined non-O1/non-O139 are often referred to as environmental cholera [1–3] and part of the normal flora of aquatic ecosystems [4]. Nonetheless, some non-O1/non-O139 strains have the potential to cause mild diarrhea, and outbreaks have been observed in several countries including Thailand [5–7]. The serogroup O1 is divided into two biotypes: Classical and El Tor, based on phenotypic differences [2].

Since 1817, cholera has spread from the Indian sub-continent and seven pandemics have been observed, the seventh of which is still ongoing. The first six pandemics were associated with the O1 Classical biotype and ceased around 1923 [8, 9]. In 1961, the 7^th pandemic began in Southeast Asia, caused by the O1 El Tor biotype [3, 10–13]. Whole genome sequence (WGS) analysis has identified eight distinct phylogenetic lineages: L1-L8 with L1 and L3-L6 representing the former pandemics and L2 the present 7^th El Tor pandemic. Lineages L7 and L8 are formed by unique isolates [12]. The lineage L2 of the 7^th pandemic has further been subdivided into three waves; I, II and III, of which, wave III seems to consist of several clusters [3, 12]. In general, the clusters separate isolates from Africa and India from those isolated in Haiti, Nepal, and Southeast Asia [12, 14]. In 1992, V. cholerae O139 emerged and caused epidemic cholera [15] followed in 2002 by the emergence of V. cholerae O1 variants; a genetic mixture of the Classical and El Tor biotypes. The V. cholerae O1 variants were later reported in several countries in Africa and Asia [16–19]. Since 2013, after the containment of the cholera outbreak in Haiti, the number of reported cholera cases has decreased globally. In Asia however, the incidence of cholera has increased and continues to pose a serious public health concern [20].

V. cholerae consists of two chromosomes and the hallmark of pathogenic V. cholerae is the major virulence factors; cholera toxin (CT) and toxin co-regulated pilus (TCP). The two virulence factors are clustered within two regions; the Vibrio pathogenicity island I (VPI-1) encoded by TCP [21] and the CTX genetic element comprised by a core region in CTXϕ. The latter contains not only the genes of the cholera toxin, ctxAB, but also carries the zonular occludens toxin (zot) and accessory colonization enterotoxin (ace) [22]. In addition, other virulence genes encoding hemolysin (hlyA), heat stable enterotoxin (stn), mannose-sensitive hemagglutin pilus (mshA), repeats-in-toxin A toxin (rtxA), and a ToxR regulatory protein (toxR) have been associated with diarrheal disease [23, 24]. Recently, the type III secretion system (TTSS) has been known as a key virulence factor and appears to be an important virulence factor for pathogenicity of non-O1/non-O139 [25].

Since 1997, endemic or sporadic cholera cases have been linked every year to contaminated seafood or potable water in Thailand [26]. Antimicrobial treatments have been recommended for only severe dehydration cases. Nonetheless, the occurrence of resistant strains has dramatically increased [27]. The presence of the SXT element and class I integron have been reported to contribute to the spread of antimicrobial resistance genes among V. cholerae and other bacteria [28].

The objective of this study was to provide more knowledge of the genotypic variation in V. cholerae observed during the past three decades in Thailand. A collection of clinical and environmental V. cholerae serogroup O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 strains collected between 1983 and 2013 in Thailand were characterized by a combination of conventional microbiological tests, molecular methods, next generation sequencing, and bioinformatics tools to determine the pheno- and genotypes. In addition, the distribution of virulence-associated genes and the occurrence of antimicrobial resistance and corresponding resistance genes including the class 1 integron and SXT element among V. cholerae strains were subsequently analyzed to elucidate the emerging antimicrobial resistance and virulence properties.

Materials and Methods

Bacterial strains

A total of 78 V. cholerae strains were selected for this study based on the serogroups O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139, the sources for these strains were the clinic and environment, and date (1983–2013) from the culture collection of the Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Thailand (Table A in S1 File). The clinical strains were previously isolated from stools and rectal swabs of patients suffering from sporadic cases or outbreaks of cholera in central Thailand and the environmental strains were isolated from seafood, water, and hand swabs.

Characterization of V. cholerae

The purity of all V. cholerae strains were assessed on Thiosulfate-citrate-bile salts-sucrose (TCBS) agar prior to confirmation using a combination of biochemical, serological, and molecular methods as previously described [29, 30]. Serogroups and serotypes were determined by slide agglutination utilizing specific polyvalent antisera against V. cholerae O1 and O139, and monovalent specific to Inaba and Ogawa antisera (S & A Reagents Lab, Bangkok, Thailand) and by touchdown-multiplex polymerase chain reaction (TMPCR) using species-specific primers for V. cholerae (ompW gene) and serogroup-specific for O1 (rfbV gene) and O139 (wbfZ gene) [30].

All V. cholerae O1 strains were classified according to biotypes using the quality control strains; O395 (O1 Classical), N16961 (O1 El Tor), and MO45 (O139) and based on the combination of previously described conventional biotyping methods [31] and genotypically by a bioinformatics tool: MyDbFinder (https://cge.cbs.dtu.dk/services/MyDbFinder/) as previously described [32].

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Antimicrobial susceptibility to ampicillin (AMP), azithromycin (AZM), cefotaxime (CTX), chloramphenicol (CHL), ciprofloxacin (CIP), gentamicin (GEN), meropenem (MEM), nalidixic acid (NAL), sulfamethoxazole (SMX), ceftazidime (CAZ), tetracycline (TET), tigecycline (TGC), and trimethoprim (TMP) was performed by broth microdilution to determine minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) with a commercially prepared, panel of dehydrated antimicrobials (Sensititre; TREK Diagnostic Systems Ltd., East Grinstead, England). Antimicrobial susceptibility test results were interpreted according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoints [33], except for tigecycline, for which the clinical breakpoint was used according to the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) recommendations (http://www.eucast.org). Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 was used as reference strain for quality control according to CLSI guidelines [33].

Whole genome sequencing

V. choleare genomic DNA was extracted using the Invitrogen Easy-DNA^TM Kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The concentrations of the extracted DNA were determined using a Qubit dsDNA BR assay kit (Invitrogen). The genomic DNA was prepared for Illumina paired-end sequencing using the Illumina (Illumina, Inc., San Diego, CA) NexteraXT® Guide 150319425031942 following protocol revision C. A sample of pooled NexteraXT Libraries was loaded onto an Illumina MiSeq reagent cartridge using MiSeq Reagent Kit v2 and 500 cycles with a Standard Flow Cell. The libraries were sequenced using the MiSeq Illumina platform and MiSeq Control Software 2.3.0.3. All strains were paired-end sequenced.

Raw sequence data were submitted to the European Nucleotide Archive (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena) under study accession no.: PRJEB14630 (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/ena/data/view/PRJEB14630). The raw reads were assembled using the Assemble pipeline (version 1.0) available from the Center for Genomic Epidemiology (CGE; http://cge.cbs.dtu.dk/services/all.php) based on the Velvet algorithms for de novo short reads assembly. A complete list of genomic sequence data is available in Table B in S1 File.

The use of bioinformatics tools

Identification of V. cholerae and determination of associated virulence genes and pathogenicity islands.

MyDbFinder is a BLAST-based search-engine that was developed as “an empty database” in the same format as the ResFinder tool [34] to identify user-defined genes (https://cge.cbs.dtu.dk/services/MyDbFinder/). The users populate their own database by including DNA sequences of interest in FASTA format into a pure text file. MyDbFinder query raw reads or assembled genome data and outputs the best matching genes from the user’s database.

The web-server MyDbFinder 1.0 was used to, in silico, determine the species-specific gene (ompW), serogroup-specific genes (rfbV-O1, wbfZ-O139), biotypes-specific genes (ctxB, rstR, tcpA), specific gene (VC2346) of the 7^th pandemic strain, putative virulence genes (ctxA, ctxB, zot, ace, tcpA, hlyA, stn, chxA, rtxA, ompU, toxR, mshA, TTSS), and pathogenic islands (PAI): (VPI-1, VPI-2, VSP-1, VSP-2) in all V. cholerae strains with a selected threshold equal to 95% identity as previously described [32]. The genes used in this study are shown in Table C in S1 File.

Determination of antimicrobial resistance genes, SXT element, and class 1 integron.

In all V. cholerae strains, antimicrobial resistance genes were detected based on the assembled sequences using the ResFinder tool (version 2.1, 80% threshold for %ID/ 60% minimum length) available from CGE [34]. The SXT element, class 1 integron, and presence of mutation in the DNA gyrase gene (gyrA), and the DNA topoisomerase IV genes (parC and parE) were determined using MyDbFinder as previously described [32]. The nucleotide sequence of integrase gene of the SXT element (int_SXT), the class 1 integron (intI), gyrA, parC, and parE genes of the quinolone-resistant V. cholerae strains from GenBank were used as references (Table C in S1 File).

ICEVcHai1 (JN648379) and dfrA18 gene of SXT^MO10 (AY034138) were used as templates in MyDBFinder (threshold, 95% identity) to determine which V. cholerae strains contained an int_SXT gene.

Multilocus sequence type.

The assembled sequences were analyzed to identify the MLST, sequence type (ST) for V. cholerae using the MLST tool (version 1.7) available from CGE [35]. The seven housekeeping genes: adk, gyrB, metE, mdh, pntA, purM, and pyrC as previously described by Octavia et al. (2013) [36], were extracted from 78 V. cholerae genomes in this study and 6 V. cholerae genomes from the NCBI database (M66-2, O395, N16961, MO45, MS6, 2010EL-1786). Concatenation of the housekeeping gene sequences was performed with an in-house python script. A multiple alignment was created from the concatenated sequences using MUSCLE via MEGA5 [37]. The final phylogenetic MLST tree was constructed by MEGA5 using the maximum likelihood method of 1,000 bootstrap replicates using Tamura-Nei model for inference [38]. Figtree (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/) was used to visualize the tree. The confidence of the nodes in the tree is estimated by bootstrap values, calculated by sampling with replacements from the multiple sequence alignment. New STs were confirmed by PCR as previously described Octavia et al. (2013) [36].

Genomic islands in the chromosomes of V. cholerae.

Variation of genomic islands including CTX, VPI-1, VPI-2, VSP-1, VSP-2, and the super-integron were visualized and determined based on chromosome I and II of the reference genome V. cholerae N16961 (accession no. AE003852 and AE003853) using a BLAST atlas. All protein sequences from the reference genome were aligned against other V. cholerae genomes using BLASTP. The presence and absence of genes were visualized in a circle, with greater similarity represented by higher intensity of color [39].

Results

Characterization of V. cholerae strains

Of the 78 V. cholerae strains investigated, 44 belonged to serogroup O1, 16 to O139, and 18 to non-O139/non-O1. Among the 44 V. cholerae O1 strains, 24 strains were identified as Inaba and 20 strains as Ogawa (Fig 1, Table D in S1 File).

Download:

Fig 1. In silico MLST tree of Vibrio cholerae strains related with virulence gene profiles.

The V. cholerae clinical (*) and environmental (•) strains in Thailand were related to pandemic and epidemic strains. Seven housekeeping genes were extracted from V. cholerae genomes. The phylogenetic tree was generated by FigTree.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.g001

The biotype classification of the 44 V. cholerae O1 strains revealed 15 strains determined as being typical El Tor similar to the phenotype of El Tor strain N16961 (CCA⁺ HSE⁺ PB^r VP⁺). The 15 strains all carried according to MyDbFinder identical genes; ctxB, rstR, and tcpA with the exception of three environmental strains (TC22, MK14, and 4T5) and one clinical strain (TC183). Two strains (VC O1-8 and VC O1-10) belonged to the biotype Classical, exhibiting the phenotype CCA^- HSE^- PB^s VP^- and genotypically similar to O395 strain (Classical). Furthermore, 26 V. cholerae O1 strains tested phenotypically El Tor but revealed using MyDbFinder mixed Classical and El Tor genotypes and determined as an El Tor variant. Finally, one V. cholerae O1 strain (MK14) expressed phenotypically both biotypes (CCA⁺ HSE⁺ PB^s VP⁺) and was determined as belonging to the hybrid biotype (Fig 1, Table D in S1 File).

The MLST types of the 78 V. cholerae and 6 reference genomes were analyzed and assigned to 26 different STs (Fig 1). The analysis showed that 50 strains were represented by ST69, making this the most common ST and all 50 of these strains related to clinical strains. Among clinical strains, 38 O1 El Tor and 12 serogroup O139 belonged to the same cluster with the pandemic strains (N16961 and MO45) and the Haitian strain (2010EL1786). The strains harbored the 7^th pandemic-specific gene (VC2346) according to MyDbFinder, suggesting that they belong to the same clonal linage. The cluster is also linked to the pre-6^th pandemic strain (M66-2) and the endemic strain from Thailand (MS6), which was closely related to the cluster of the O1 Classical strains (ST73) including the strains related to the 6^th pandemic (Table E in S1 File). All of the non-O1/non-O139 strains and the environmental strains, except for four O139 strains belonging to ST187, were assigned to different novel STs, suggesting a high degree of genetic diversity.

Distribution of virulence-associated genes and pathogenicity islands

The distribution of virulence-associated genes and pathogenicity islands among the 78 V. cholerae strains was determined using MyDbFinder (Fig 1 and Table 1). All strains harbored the virulence-associated genes hlyA, rtxA, and toxR, with only the stn gene absent. Ten of the 17 virulence-associated genes (ctxA, ctxB, zot, ace, tcpA, hlyA, mshA, rtxA, ompU, and toxR) were found in 34 of the clinical strains (serogroup O1 and O139). Moreover, these strains contained the pathogenicity islands (PAIs) VPI-1, VPI-2, VSP-1, and VSP-2, except for two strains of O139 (6668/3 and 6225/3), which lacked VSP-2. All non-O1/non-O139 strains obtained from a clinical source harbored the hlyA, rtxA, and toxR genes, whereas strain IPD1231/8 52B in addition also harbored the mshA, TTSS, and VPI-2. Two out of four O1 strains of environmental origin harbored hlyA, mshA, rtxA, ompU, toxR, and VPI-2. Only one O1 strain contained the genes chxA (TC 22), TTSS (MK14), and VSP-1 (MK14). Among environmental strains, the virulence-associated genes and the PAIs of the non-O1/non-O139 similar to the O1 strain were detected but lacked TTSS and VSP-1. All four O139 strains harbored hlyA, rtxA, ompU, toxR, and VPI-2. Nine V. cholerae genomes based on the different serogroups, biotypes, and sources were compared using a BLAST atlas. The atlas revealed several variable genomic regions in chromosome I (Fig 2A) and II (Fig 2B). VPI-1, VPI-2, VSP-1, and VSP-2 were determined in the chromosome I among the regions of PAIs including CTXϕ, especially the clinical strains of O1 El Tor (510/77, 22116, P25), and O139 (22136). The O1 Classical (VC O1-8) and non-O1/non-O139 (IPD221/8 44B) strain lacked VSP-1 and VSP-2. Among the environmental strains, the O1 strain (MK14) harbored two PAIs, VSP-1 and VPI-2, while both O139 (DT8) and non-O1/non-O139 strains (VCR12) harbored only VPI-2. A large genomic island, super-integron, located in the chromosome II, showed more genetic diversity and obviously differed among these strains.

Download:

Fig 2. Genomic variation of representative Vibrio cholerae strains in Thailand.

BLAST atlas with chromosome I (A) and II (B) of V. cholerae N16961 as reference strain (black) followed by the nine representative strains of serogroup O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 composed of serogroup O1 (blue) (clinical strains: 510/77, typical El Tor; VCO1-8, classical; 22116 and P25, El Tor variant; environmental strain: MK14, hybrid El Tor), O139 (green) (clinical strains: 22136, environmental strain: DT8), and non-O1/non-O139 (red) (clinical strains: IPD22I/8 44B, environmental strain: VCR12).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.g002

Download:

Table 1. Occurrence of virulence-associated genes among Vibrio cholerae strains from Thailand.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.t001

Antimicrobial resistant strains, antimicrobial resistance genes, class 1 integron, and SXT element

The MIC determination of all 78 V. cholerae strains revealed that 48 of them originating between 1991 and 2013 were resistant to at least one antimicrobial (Table 2). The 48 strains were resistant to TMP (52.6%), SMX (48.7%), NAL (43.6%), TET (14.1%), AMP (7.7%), and AZM (6.4%). Moreover, 27 (56.3%) of the 48 antimicrobial resistant strains were considered multidrug resistant (MDR) and conferred resistance to three or more antimicrobial classes and exhibited four distinct MDR patterns: NAL-SMX-TMP, NAL-TET-TMP, NAL-SMX-TET-TMP, and AZM-NAL-SMX-TET-TMP (Table F in S1 File). It is noteworthy to mention that some resistance genes were observed among the strains being phenotypically susceptible. These strains were of O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139, isolated between 1983 and 2010 and harbored the catB9 (60.3%) and floR (35.9%) conferring resistance to chloramphenicol (O-acetyltransferase activity) and florfenicol (co-resistance to both chloramphenicol and florfenicol), respectively.

Download:

Table 2. Frequency of resistance of Vibrio cholerae strains in Thailand.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.t002

The presence of the specific integrase genes of class 1 integron (intI gene) and SXT element (int_SXT gene) were in silico determined among the 78 V. cholerae strains using MyDbFinder (Table 3). All of the strains lacked the intI gene. In contrast, 43 strains of V. cholerae serogroups O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 isolated during 1991 to 2013 presented the int_SXT. The SXT element harbored the following antimicrobial resistance genes: sul2, dfrA1, dfr18, floR, strA, and strB, which are mostly associated with SMX and TMP resistant strains (Fig 3).

Download:

Fig 3. Genetic variation of SXT element in Vibrio cholerae.

The SXT structures of among 43 V. cholerae strains from Thailand were compared. Reads were mapped to genes of ICEVcHai1 (accession no. JN648379) and dfrA18 gene in SXTMO10 element (accession no. AY034138).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.g003

Download:

Table 3. Frequency of SXT element and antimicrobial resistance genes in Vibrio cholerae strains, Thailand.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.t003

The majority of V. cholerae strains (52.6%) were resistant to TMP, of which strains belonging to serogroup O1 (2001–2005) contained the dfrA1 gene and O139 strains (1991–2000) contained the dfrA18 gene (Table 3). All 38 (48.7%) strains conferring resistance to SMX contained sul2 gene. Among the six AMP-resistant strains (7.7%), four O139 environmental strains (DT8, DT7, WKB T9, and PKN T5) and one clinical non-O1/non-O139 strain (1231/8 52B) harbored the bla_P1 and the bla_CARB-9 gene, respectively, whereas only one non-O1/non-O139 environmental strain (I-WASTE-HSH1-TY2) harbored the bla_CARB-7 gene. All five clinical O1 strains (6.4%) resistant to AZT contained the mphA gene. Interestingly, the 11 strains resistant to TET lacked resistance genes. The genes strA and strB conferring resistance to streptomycin were present in 39 strains (50%) including 12 strains (100%) of O139 and 1 strain (25%) of non-O1/non-O139 isolated during 1991–2000.

Amino acid substitutions in codon gyrA (Ser83Ile) and parC (Ser85Leu) were observed in 34 NAL-resistant strains (43.6%) isolated between 1991 and 2013 belonging to serogroup O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139. In addition, one non-O1/non-O139 strain (1262 W278) conferred resistance to quinolone harboring the qnrVC5.

The whole genome sequence of the strains harboring the SXT element revealed a structure organized similar to ICEVchHai1 and SXT^MO10 in the GenBank (Fig 3). Most strains except for 4053024303, 4053024306, and 22138 shared the similar structures of SXT element with common known deletions in loci VC1786ICE6 and VC1786ICE14. The variations in the SXT structures separated the individual serogroup O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 into distinct branches of the phylogenetic tree (Fig 3). The SXT elements of O1 strains were divided into two clades (GI and GII). The SXT structure of GI was highly similar to the structure of ICEVchHai1. Nineteen loci including dfrA18 and floR were absent in GII. The SXT structures among the O139 strains harbored loci similar to SXT^MO10 and ICEVchHai1 but lacked 25 loci including dfrA1. For non-O1/non-O139 strains, four strains harbored the SXT element and their SXT structures were similar to those of O139 strains. Only one resistant strain, VHS1-22I, harbored floR, strA, strB, and sul2 genes. Two susceptible strains and one NAL-resistant strain did not contain these antimicrobial resistance genes including dfrA18 and dfrA1.

Discussion

Since 1982, V. cholerae has been present and emerging in Thailand [40]. In the last decade, sporadic cholera cases have been observed in Thailand caused primarily by V. cholerae O1 and O139. In this study, we found that the phenotypic results characterizing V. cholerae were all in concordance with the in silico genotypic data revealed by WGS targeting the following genes: ompW, rfbV, wbfZ, ctxB, rstR, and tcpA. These genes have previously been used to classify V. cholerae strains [27, 30, 41–43]. The tested strains were classified into serogroups O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 showing that both V. cholerae serogroup O1 and O139 are present in Thailand and have potentially caused cholera.

In Thailand, several studies have reported the emergence of V. cholerae however, the biotype V. cholerae O1 classical has not been detected since 1986 [27, 44–46]. Interestingly, this study revealed that two strains obtained from stool samples in 2000 were identified as the Classical biotype and were genetically similar to the strains related to the 6^th cholera pandemic (Table E in S1 File). This indicated that the Classical biotype might have re-emerged, causing cholera outbreaks in Thailand after having been absent for several years during the 6^th cholera pandemic. The decline of typical El Tor strains coincided with the first reports from Bangladesh of the emergence of the El Tor variant strain [16]. Furthermore, the El Tor variants possessing both the Classical and El Tor biotypes were recovered from clinical strains during 2004–2010. Detection of the El Tor variant was previously reported in Cameroon, India, and Thailand [18, 32, 41]. The variant of the Classical and El Tor biotypes increases the severity of the disease and may result in higher morbidity and mortality [47, 48]. Kim et al. suggested that the El Tor variant possessing the Classical biotype originated through recombination between the Classical and El Tor types of CTXϕ [49]. One hybrid strain of this study, MK14, originating from a river water sample, lacked the biotype-specific genes as well as the main virulence genes (ctxAB and tcpA), suggesting it to be a non-toxigenic strain and in agreement with previous reports [50, 51]. The non-toxigenic strains, however, have been responsible for causing mild to moderate diarrhea in human volunteers in clinical trials [2]. These El Tor variant strains clustered together with the clinical strains including typical El Tor biotype and O139 serogroup. Moreover, the in silico MLST analysis showed that the clinical strains had a highly genetic relationship with the pandemic and outbreak strains. The majority of the clinical strains O1 and O139 belonged to ST69 and showed genetic similarity to the 7^th pandemic strain (N16961), the Haitian outbreak strain (2010EL-1786), and the Cameroon outbreak strains [32]. In addition, all of the clinical strains harbor the specific gene marker of the 7^th pandemic clone. These findings suggest that the clinical strains (1983–2010) in Thailand might originate from a common ancestor of the 7^th pandemic strain. The STs of the clinical strains showed that they were closely related to the pre 6^th pandemic strain (M66-2) and a previous outbreak strain in Thailand (MS6) [52]. The clinical strains of O1 and O139 were highly conserved with regard to MLST (ST69) but contained different virulence genes, particularly ctxAB and tcpA. These findings have previously been reported and might be a result of horizontal gene transfer [36, 53, 54]. The in silico MLST analysis clearly showed discrimination amongst the different sources (clinical and environmental) and serogroups O1 and O139 as compared with non-O1/non-O139 strains. The clinical strains of O1 and O139 were highly conserved with regard to MLST (ST69), while the environmental strains of O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 and the clinical strains of non-O1/non-O139 revealed different and novel STs. This indicates that the environmental strains including non-O1/non-O139 were highly diverse; however, these results might be caused by gene recombination and/or mutation [36].

Furthermore, the environmental strains could be distinguished from the clinical strains using in silico MLST based on the difference in the virulence gene profiles. The environmental strains of O1 and O139 lacked the CTXϕ and tcpA genes, especially. However, these strains harbored other virulence genes similar to non-O1/non-O139. Both chxA and TTSS genes were frequently found among non-O1/non-O139 pathogenic strains and associated with diarrhea [36, 51, 55]. However, the environmental O1 strains in this study harbored chxA gene (TC22) and TTSS (MK14), indicating virulence potential to cause disease.

Our study showed that the antimicrobial resistance profiles SMX-TMP and NAL-SMX-TMP were predominant among the clinical strains of serogroup O139 and O1, respectively. In addition, other clinical strains exhibited resistance to TET, AZM, and AMP in contrast to the environmental strains which were mostly resistant to NAL followed by AMP, TMP, and TET. Previous reports have described different antimicrobial resistant profiles compared with those from Thailand, such as resistance to furazolidone, NAL, sulfisoxazole, streptomycin, and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in Haiti [56] as well as TET, streptomycin, sulfisoxazole and trimethoprim in China [57]. During 2003–2011, V. cholerae O1 has been reported as being resistant to erythromycin, TET, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, and AMP in Thailand [27].

Our study showed a similar concordance between the antimicrobial susceptibility testing data and the in silico-detected corresponding resistance genes in the V. cholerae strains using the ResFinder bioinformatics tool [34]. A few disagreements were observed and confirmed by re-testing the MIC determination. These discrepancies related to TET-resistant strains in which no conferring resistance genes or other resistance mechanisms could be detected. This phenomenon is well-known and has previously been reported related to potential efflux pumps [58]. In contrast, we observed some strains that harbored both floR and catB9 but displayed a susceptible phenotypic resistance profile. This observation has also been described in a recent publication describing the cholera in Haiti [56]. Similarly, susceptible non-O1/non-O139 strains harboring the qnrVC5 gene did not express resistance to quinolone. Normally, one would anticipate isolates that harbor the genes floR and catB9 would be associated with reduced susceptibility to CHL [59] and those that harbor the gene qnrVC5 would be associated with quinolone resistance. These abnormalities are most likely linked to incorrect interpretative criterion.

According to World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, TET and CIP are the drugs of choice for the treatment of cholera. Unfortunately, there is a lack of prudent usage in Thailand because these antimicrobials are being misused/overused in the agricultural section [60]. During 2003–2011, the endemic cholera strains in Thailand were resistant to TET, whereas cholera was still susceptible to CIP as proven by Chomvarin et al., 2013 [27] and in this study. Amino acid substitutions in gyrA and parC are the main mechanism responsible for quinolone resistance in V. cholerae [56, 58, 61]. In this study, the same point mutations in gyrA (S83I) and parC (S85L) were detected among NAL-resistant strains found in both clinical and environmental sources.

The SXT element is an ICE that translocates a panel of antimicrobial resistance genes via horizontal gene transfer [62]. The first SXT, SXT^MO10, was discovered in V. cholerae O139 strain MO10. It harbored resistant determinants to trimethoprim (dfrA18), streptomycin (strA, strB), sulfamethoxazole (sul2), and chloramphenicol (floR) [63]. Other ICEs identified in O1 and non-O1/non-O139 harbor a similar set of resistance genes as the SXT^MO10 strain [28, 64]. Recently, WGS has been used to identify a variant of SXT in a Haitian O1 strain, ICEVchHai1 harboring dfrA1, strA, strB, sul2, and floR [56]. We analyzed the genetic variation in SXT elements by comparing with gene loci in ICEVchHai1 and dfrA18 in SXT^MO10. ICEVchHai1 has previously been used as the reference for comparison with the SXT element in India [64]. In this study, we found that the SXT in each of the different serogroups O1, O139, and non-O1/non-O139 were distinctly different. The SXT structures of the O1 strains showed a higher genetic similarity with ICEVchHai1 than the SXT structures of O139 and non-O1/nonO139 strains. This indicated that the acquired SXT element in the O1 Thai strains were similar to those of the Haitian and Indian strains. These findings are consistent with a previous study that showed identity of SXT within the same serogroup of V. cholerae [28].

In this study, we found that the re-occurrence of classical toxigenic strains have been persisted since 2000 in Thailand. The variation of phenotypic and genotypic characteristics shows that the V. cholerae O1 biotype El Tor variant has caused the majority of the outbreaks since 2004. The V. cholerae O1 and O139 obtained from clinical source commonly harboured CTXϕ and tcpA. Conversely, their environmental strains lacking those virulence genes could be detected. Moreover, the occurrence of SXT element and resistance genes conferring antimicrobial resistance was encountered among Thai strains. These findings suggest that lysogenicity of V. cholerae O1 for CTXϕ and other genetic markers including resistance genes should be further intensively surveillance and control. Future application of WGS combined with bioinformatic tools, such as MLST [35], MyDbFinder, ResFinder [34], and VcTypeFinder (in development), have in this study proven the power and are highly discriminatory methods in understanding the epidemiology of V. cholerae.

Conclusions

In this study, we used WGS and bioinformatic tools to analyze both historical and contemporary V. cholerae circulating in Thailand. To our knowledge, this is the first time since 1986 that the presence of V. cholerae O1 classical has been reported causing cholera outbreaks in Thailand. We found that the majority of the pathogenic strains belonged to V. cholerae O1 El Tor variant and O139. In silico analysis showed that the clinical strains shared common genetic background as well as harbored virulence genes, PAIs and mobile genetic elements associated with antimicrobial resistance while environmental strains were highly diverse. This study contributed to understanding the epidemiology of V. cholerae in Thailand that ultimately can be applied for control measures and management of the disease in Thailand.

Supporting Information

S1 File. Supplementary_table1-Sequence_info.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169324.s001

(XLS)

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: OS CT RSH FMA.
Data curation: PL.
Formal analysis: AS PL.
Funding acquisition: FMA OS RSH.
Investigation: AS RSH PL.
Methodology: RSH PL AS RSK.
Project administration: RSH.
Resources: FMA.
Software: AS PL RSK.
Supervision: RSH OS CT PL.
Validation: RSH OS.
Visualization: AS PL.
Writing – original draft: AS.
Writing – review & editing: RSH PL.

References

1. Bhattacharya SK, Bhattacharya MK, Nair GB, Dutta D, Deb A, Ramamurthy T, et al. Clinical profile of acute diarrhoea cases infected with the new epidemic strain of Vibrio cholerae O139: designation of the disease as cholera. J Infect. 1993;27(1):11–5. pmid:8370939
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
2. Kaper JB, Morris JG Jr., Levine MM. Cholera. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1995;8(1):48–86. pmid:7704895
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
3. Moore S, Thomson N, Mutreja A, Piarroux R. Widespread epidemic cholera caused by a restricted subset of Vibrio cholerae clones. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(5):373–9. pmid:24575898
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
4. Yamai S, Okitsu T, Shimada T, Katsube Y. [Distribution of serogroups of Vibrio cholerae non-O1 non-O139 with specific reference to their ability to produce cholera toxin, and addition of novel serogroups]. Kansenshogaku Zasshi. 1997;71(10):1037–45. pmid:9394556
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
5. Dalsgaard A, Forslund A, Bodhidatta L, Serichantalergs O, Pitarangsi C, Pang L, et al. A high proportion of Vibrio cholerae strains isolated from children with diarrhoea in Bangkok, Thailand are multiple antibiotic resistant and belong to heterogenous non-O1, non-O139 O-serotypes. Epidemiol Infect. 1999;122(2):217–26. pmid:10355785
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
6. Onifade TJ, Hutchinson R, Van Zile K, Bodager D, Baker R, Blackmore C. Toxin producing Vibrio cholerae O75 outbreak, United States, March to April 2011. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(20):19870. pmid:21616048
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
7. Chatterjee S, Ghosh K, Raychoudhuri A, Chowdhury G, Bhattacharya MK, Mukhopadhyay AK, et al. Incidence, virulence factors, and clonality among clinical strains of non-O1, non-O139 Vibrio cholerae isolates from hospitalized diarrheal patients in Kolkata, India. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47(4):1087–95. pmid:19158257
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
8. Harris JB, LaRocque RC, Qadri F, Ryan ET, Calderwood SB. Cholera. Lancet. 2012;379(9835):2466–76. pmid:22748592
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
9. Devault AM, Golding GB, Waglechner N, Enk JM, Kuch M, Tien JH, et al. Second-pandemic strain of Vibrio cholerae from the Philadelphia cholera outbreak of 1849. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(4):334–40. pmid:24401020
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
10. Cho YJ, Yi H, Lee JH, Kim DW, Chun J. Genomic evolution of Vibrio cholerae. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2010;13(5):646–51. pmid:20851041
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
11. Chun J, Grim CJ, Hasan NA, Lee JH, Choi SY, Haley BJ, et al. Comparative genomics reveals mechanism for short-term and long-term clonal transitions in pandemic Vibrio cholerae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(36):15442–7. pmid:19720995
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
12. Mutreja A, Kim DW, Thomson NR, Connor TR, Lee JH, Kariuki S, et al. Evidence for several waves of global transmission in the seventh cholera pandemic. Nature. 2011;477(7365):462–5. pmid:21866102
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Chin CS, Sorenson J, Harris JB, Robins WP, Charles RC, Jean-Charles RR, et al. The origin of the Haitian cholera outbreak strain. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(1):33–42. pmid:21142692
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
14. Hendriksen RS, Price LB, Schupp JM, Gillece JD, Kaas RS, Engelthaler DM, et al. Population genetics of Vibrio cholerae from Nepal in 2010: evidence on the origin of the Haitian outbreak. MBio. 2011;2(4):e00157–11. pmid:21862630
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
15. Albert MJ, Siddique AK, Islam MS, Faruque AS, Ansaruzzaman M, Faruque SM, et al. Large outbreak of clinical cholera due to Vibrio cholerae non-O1 in Bangladesh. Lancet. 1993;341(8846):704. pmid:8095621
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
16. Nair GB, Faruque SM, Bhuiyan NA, Kamruzzaman M, Siddique AK, Sack DA. New variants of Vibrio cholerae O1 biotype El Tor with attributes of the classical biotype from hospitalized patients with acute diarrhea in Bangladesh. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40(9):3296–9. pmid:12202569
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
17. Safa A, Sultana J, Dac Cam P, Mwansa JC, Kong RY. Vibrio cholerae O1 hybrid El Tor strains, Asia and Africa. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(6):987–8. pmid:18507925
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
18. Na-Ubol M, Srimanote P, Chongsa-Nguan M, Indrawattana N, Sookrung N, Tapchaisri P, et al. Hybrid & El Tor variant biotypes of Vibrio cholerae O1 in Thailand. Indian J Med Res. 2011;133:387–94. pmid:21537091
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
19. Dixit SM, Johura FT, Manandhar S, Sadique A, Rajbhandari RM, Mannan SB, et al. Cholera outbreaks (2012) in three districts of Nepal reveal clonal transmission of multi-drug resistant Vibrio cholerae O1. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:392. pmid:25022982
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
20. Global Health Observatory (GHO) data [database on the Internet]. World Health Organization. 2014. Available from: http://www.who.int/gho/epidemic_diseases/cholera/cases_text/en/.
21. Kirn TJ, Lafferty MJ, Sandoe CM, Taylor RK. Delineation of pilin domains required for bacterial association into microcolonies and intestinal colonization by Vibrio cholerae. Mol Microbiol. 2000;35(4):896–910. pmid:10692166
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
22. Waldor MK, Mekalanos JJ. Lysogenic conversion by a filamentous phage encoding cholera toxin. Science. 1996;272(5270):1910–4. pmid:8658163
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
23. Rivera IN, Chun J, Huq A, Sack RB, Colwell RR. Genotypes associated with virulence in environmental isolates of Vibrio cholerae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67(6):2421–9. pmid:11375146
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
24. Singh DV, Matte MH, Matte GR, Jiang S, Sabeena F, Shukla BN, et al. Molecular analysis of Vibrio cholerae O1, O139, non-O1, and non-O139 strains: clonal relationships between clinical and environmental isolates. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67(2):910–21. pmid:11157262
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
25. Luo Y, Ye J, Jin D, Ding G, Zhang Z, Mei L, et al. Molecular analysis of non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae isolated from hospitalised patients in China. BMC Microbiol. 2013;13:52. pmid:23497008
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
26. Epidemiology Bo. Annual epidemiological surveillance report. In: Department of Disease Control MoPH, editor. Nonthaburi, Thailand: Bureau of Epidemiology; 2014.
27. Chomvarin C, Johura FT, Mannan SB, Jumroenjit W, Kanoktippornchai B, Tangkanakul W, et al. Drug response and genetic properties of Vibrio cholerae associated with endemic cholera in north-eastern Thailand, 2003–2011. J Med Microbiol. 2013;62(Pt 4):599–609. pmid:23319310
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
28. Wozniak RA, Fouts DE, Spagnoletti M, Colombo MM, Ceccarelli D, Garriss G, et al. Comparative ICE genomics: insights into the evolution of the SXT/R391 family of ICEs. PLoS Genet. 2009;5(12):e1000786. pmid:20041216
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
29. Alam M, Sultana M, Nair GB, Siddique AK, Hasan NA, Sack RB, et al. Viable but nonculturable Vibrio cholerae O1 in biofilms in the aquatic environment and their role in cholera transmission. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(45):17801–6. pmid:17968017
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
30. Bhumiratana A, Siriphap A, Khamsuwan N, Borthong J, Chonsin K, Sutheinkul O. O Serogroup-Specific Touchdown-Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction for Detection and Identification of Vibrio cholerae O1, O139, and Non-O1/Non-O139. Biochem Res Int. 2014;2014:295421. pmid:25614837
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
31. WHO. Manual for laboratory investigations of acute enteric infections. WHO document. 1987.
32. Kaas RS, Ngandjio A, Nzouankeu A, Siriphap A, Fonkoua MC, Aarestrup FM, et al. The Lake Chad Basin, an Isolated and Persistent Reservoir of Vibrio cholerae O1: A Genomic Insight into the Outbreak in Cameroon, 2010. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0155691. pmid:27191718
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
33. CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; Twenty-fifth Informational Supplement M100-S25. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2015.
34. Zankari E, Hasman H, Kaas RS, Seyfarth AM, Agerso Y, Lund O, et al. Genotyping using whole-genome sequencing is a realistic alternative to surveillance based on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013;68(4):771–7. pmid:23233485
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
35. Larsen MV, Cosentino S, Rasmussen S, Friis C, Hasman H, Marvig RL, et al. Multilocus sequence typing of total-genome-sequenced bacteria. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(4):1355–61. pmid:22238442
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
36. Octavia S, Salim A, Kurniawan J, Lam C, Leung Q, Ahsan S, et al. Population structure and evolution of non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae by multilocus sequence typing. PLoS One. 2013;8(6):e65342. pmid:23776471
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
37. Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(5):1792–7. pmid:15034147
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
38. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol. 2011;28(10):2731–9. pmid:21546353
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
39. Hallin PF, Binnewies TT, Ussery DW. The genome BLASTatlas-a GeneWiz extension for visualization of whole-genome homology. Mol Biosyst. 2008;4(5):363–71. pmid:18414733
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
40. Hoge CW, Bodhidatta L, Echeverria P, Deesuwan M, Kitporka P. Epidemiologic study of Vibrio cholerae O1 and O139 in Thailand: at the advancing edge of the eighth pandemic. Am J Epidemiol. 1996;143(3):263–8. pmid:8561160
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
41. Bhattacharya D, Dey S, Pazhani GP, Ramamurthy T, Parande MV, Kholkute SD, et al. Vibrio cholerae O1 El Tor variant and emergence of Haitian ctxB variant in the strains isolated from South India. Med Microbiol Immunol. 2016;205(2):195–200. pmid:26337047
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
42. Safa A, Bhuyian NA, Nusrin S, Ansaruzzaman M, Alam M, Hamabata T, et al. Genetic characteristics of Matlab variants of Vibrio cholerae O1 that are hybrids between classical and El Tor biotypes. J Med Microbiol. 2006;55(Pt 11):1563–9. pmid:17030917
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
43. Safa A, Bhuiyan NA, Murphy D, Bates J, Nusrin S, Kong RY, et al. Multilocus genetic analysis reveals that the Australian strains of Vibrio cholerae O1 are similar to the pre-seventh pandemic strains of the El Tor biotype. J Med Microbiol. 2009;58(Pt 1):105–11. pmid:19074660
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
44. Preeprem S, Mittraparp-arthorn P, Bhoopong P, Vuddhakul V. Isolation and characterization of Vibrio cholerae isolates from seafood in Hat Yai City, Songkhla, Thailand. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2014;11(11):881–6. pmid:25188839
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
45. Tapchaisri P, Na-Ubol M, Tiyasuttipan W, Chaiyaroj SC, Yamasaki S, Wongsaroj T, et al. Molecular typing of Vibrio cholerae O1 isolates from Thailand by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. J Health Popul Nutr. 2008;26(1):79–87. pmid:18637531
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
46. Tabtieng R, Wattanasri S, Echeverria P, Seriwatana J, Bodhidatta L, Chatkaeomorakot A, et al. An epidemic of Vibrio cholerae el tor Inaba resistant to several antibiotics with a conjugative group C plasmid coding for type II dihydrofolate reductase in Thailand. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1989;41(6):680–6. pmid:2641646
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
47. Ghosh-Banerjee J, Senoh M, Takahashi T, Hamabata T, Barman S, Koley H, et al. Cholera toxin production by the El Tor variant of Vibrio cholerae O1 compared to prototype El Tor and classical biotypes. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(11):4283–6. pmid:20810767
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
48. Kumar P, Jain M, Goel AK, Bhadauria S, Sharma SK, Kamboj DV, et al. A large cholera outbreak due to a new cholera toxin variant of the Vibrio cholerae O1 El Tor biotype in Orissa, Eastern India. J Med Microbiol. 2009;58(Pt 2):234–8. pmid:19141742
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
49. Kim EJ, Lee D, Moon SH, Lee CH, Kim SJ, Lee JH, et al. Molecular insights into the evolutionary pathway of Vibrio cholerae O1 atypical El Tor variants. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10(9):e1004384. pmid:25233006
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
50. Faruque SM, Chowdhury N, Kamruzzaman M, Dziejman M, Rahman MH, Sack DA, et al. Genetic diversity and virulence potential of environmental Vibrio cholerae population in a cholera-endemic area. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(7):2123–8. pmid:14766976
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
51. Li X, Wang D, Li B, Zhou H, Liang S, Ke C, et al. Characterization of environmental Vibrio cholerae serogroups O1 and O139 in the Pearl River Estuary, China. Can J Microbiol. 2016;62(2):139–47. pmid:26674584
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
52. Okada K, Roobthaisong A, Swaddiwudhipong W, Hamada S, Chantaroj S. Vibrio cholerae O1 isolate with novel genetic background, Thailand-Myanmar. Emerg Infect Dis. 2013;19(6):1015–7. pmid:23735934
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
53. Karaolis DK, Somara S, Maneval DR Jr., Johnson JA, Kaper JB. A bacteriophage encoding a pathogenicity island, a type-IV pilus and a phage receptor in cholera bacteria. Nature. 1999;399(6734):375–9. pmid:10360577
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
54. Faruque SM, Mekalanos JJ. Pathogenicity islands and phages in Vibrio cholerae evolution. Trends Microbiol. 2003;11(11):505–10. pmid:14607067
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
55. Awasthi SP, Asakura M, Chowdhury N, Neogi SB, Hinenoya A, Golbar HM, et al. Novel cholix toxin variants, ADP-ribosylating toxins in Vibrio cholerae non-O1/non-O139 strains, and their pathogenicity. Infect Immun. 2013;81(2):531–41. pmid:23230295
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
56. Sjolund-Karlsson M, Reimer A, Folster JP, Walker M, Dahourou GA, Batra DG, et al. Drug-resistance mechanisms in Vibrio cholerae O1 outbreak strain, Haiti, 2010. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17(11):2151–4. pmid:22099122
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
57. Pang B, Du P, Zhou Z, Diao B, Cui Z, Zhou H, et al. The Transmission and Antibiotic Resistance Variation in a Multiple Drug Resistance Clade of Vibrio cholerae Circulating in Multiple Countries in Asia. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0149742. pmid:26930352
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
58. Kitaoka M, Miyata ST, Unterweger D, Pukatzki S. Antibiotic resistance mechanisms of Vibrio cholerae. J Med Microbiol. 2011;60(Pt 4):397–407. pmid:21252269
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
59. Marin MA, Thompson CC, Freitas FS, Fonseca EL, Aboderin AO, Zailani SB, et al. Cholera outbreaks in Nigeria are associated with multidrug resistant atypical El Tor and non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013;7(2):e2049. pmid:23459673
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
60. Supawat K, Huttayananont S, Sawanpanyalert P, Aswapokee N, Mootsikapun P. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance of Vibrio cholerae in Thailand from 2000 to 2004. J Med Assoc Thai. 2009;92 Suppl 4:S82–6.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
61. Kumar P, Mishra DK, Deshmukh DG, Jain M, Zade AM, Ingole KV, et al. Haitian variant ctxB producing Vibrio cholerae O1 with reduced susceptibility to ciprofloxacin is persistent in Yavatmal, Maharashtra, India, after causing a cholera outbreak. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(5):O292–3. pmid:24102849
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
62. Waldor MK, Tschape H, Mekalanos JJ. A new type of conjugative transposon encodes resistance to sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and streptomycin in Vibrio cholerae O139. J Bacteriol. 1996;178(14):4157–65. pmid:8763944
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
63. Hochhut B, Waldor MK. Site-specific integration of the conjugal Vibrio cholerae SXT element into prfC. Mol Microbiol. 1999;32(1):99–110. pmid:10216863
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
64. Abd El Ghany M, Chander J, Mutreja A, Rashid M, Hill-Cawthorne GA, Ali S, et al. The population structure of Vibrio cholerae from the Chandigarh Region of Northern India. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(7):e2981. pmid:25058483
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Bhattacharya SK, Bhattacharya MK, Nair GB, Dutta D, Deb A, Ramamurthy T, et al. Clinical profile of acute diarrhoea cases infected with the new epidemic strain of Vibrio cholerae O139: designation of the disease as cholera. J Infect. 1993;27(1):11–5. pmid:8370939
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[2] View Article

[3] PubMed/NCBI

[4] Google Scholar

[ref2] 2. Kaper JB, Morris JG Jr., Levine MM. Cholera. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1995;8(1):48–86. pmid:7704895
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[6] View Article

[7] PubMed/NCBI

[8] Google Scholar

[ref3] 3. Moore S, Thomson N, Mutreja A, Piarroux R. Widespread epidemic cholera caused by a restricted subset of Vibrio cholerae clones. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(5):373–9. pmid:24575898
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[10] View Article

[11] PubMed/NCBI

[12] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Yamai S, Okitsu T, Shimada T, Katsube Y. [Distribution of serogroups of Vibrio cholerae non-O1 non-O139 with specific reference to their ability to produce cholera toxin, and addition of novel serogroups]. Kansenshogaku Zasshi. 1997;71(10):1037–45. pmid:9394556
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[14] View Article

[15] PubMed/NCBI

[16] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Dalsgaard A, Forslund A, Bodhidatta L, Serichantalergs O, Pitarangsi C, Pang L, et al. A high proportion of Vibrio cholerae strains isolated from children with diarrhoea in Bangkok, Thailand are multiple antibiotic resistant and belong to heterogenous non-O1, non-O139 O-serotypes. Epidemiol Infect. 1999;122(2):217–26. pmid:10355785
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[18] View Article

[19] PubMed/NCBI

[20] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. Onifade TJ, Hutchinson R, Van Zile K, Bodager D, Baker R, Blackmore C. Toxin producing Vibrio cholerae O75 outbreak, United States, March to April 2011. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(20):19870. pmid:21616048
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[22] View Article

[23] PubMed/NCBI

[24] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. Chatterjee S, Ghosh K, Raychoudhuri A, Chowdhury G, Bhattacharya MK, Mukhopadhyay AK, et al. Incidence, virulence factors, and clonality among clinical strains of non-O1, non-O139 Vibrio cholerae isolates from hospitalized diarrheal patients in Kolkata, India. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47(4):1087–95. pmid:19158257
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[26] View Article

[27] PubMed/NCBI

[28] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Harris JB, LaRocque RC, Qadri F, Ryan ET, Calderwood SB. Cholera. Lancet. 2012;379(9835):2466–76. pmid:22748592
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[30] View Article

[31] PubMed/NCBI

[32] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Devault AM, Golding GB, Waglechner N, Enk JM, Kuch M, Tien JH, et al. Second-pandemic strain of Vibrio cholerae from the Philadelphia cholera outbreak of 1849. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(4):334–40. pmid:24401020
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[34] View Article

[35] PubMed/NCBI

[36] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Cho YJ, Yi H, Lee JH, Kim DW, Chun J. Genomic evolution of Vibrio cholerae. Curr Opin Microbiol. 2010;13(5):646–51. pmid:20851041
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[38] View Article

[39] PubMed/NCBI

[40] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Chun J, Grim CJ, Hasan NA, Lee JH, Choi SY, Haley BJ, et al. Comparative genomics reveals mechanism for short-term and long-term clonal transitions in pandemic Vibrio cholerae. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106(36):15442–7. pmid:19720995
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[42] View Article

[43] PubMed/NCBI

[44] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Mutreja A, Kim DW, Thomson NR, Connor TR, Lee JH, Kariuki S, et al. Evidence for several waves of global transmission in the seventh cholera pandemic. Nature. 2011;477(7365):462–5. pmid:21866102
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[46] View Article

[47] PubMed/NCBI

[48] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Chin CS, Sorenson J, Harris JB, Robins WP, Charles RC, Jean-Charles RR, et al. The origin of the Haitian cholera outbreak strain. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(1):33–42. pmid:21142692
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[50] View Article

[51] PubMed/NCBI

[52] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Hendriksen RS, Price LB, Schupp JM, Gillece JD, Kaas RS, Engelthaler DM, et al. Population genetics of Vibrio cholerae from Nepal in 2010: evidence on the origin of the Haitian outbreak. MBio. 2011;2(4):e00157–11. pmid:21862630
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[54] View Article

[55] PubMed/NCBI

[56] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Albert MJ, Siddique AK, Islam MS, Faruque AS, Ansaruzzaman M, Faruque SM, et al. Large outbreak of clinical cholera due to Vibrio cholerae non-O1 in Bangladesh. Lancet. 1993;341(8846):704. pmid:8095621
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[58] View Article

[59] PubMed/NCBI

[60] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Nair GB, Faruque SM, Bhuiyan NA, Kamruzzaman M, Siddique AK, Sack DA. New variants of Vibrio cholerae O1 biotype El Tor with attributes of the classical biotype from hospitalized patients with acute diarrhea in Bangladesh. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40(9):3296–9. pmid:12202569
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[62] View Article

[63] PubMed/NCBI

[64] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Safa A, Sultana J, Dac Cam P, Mwansa JC, Kong RY. Vibrio cholerae O1 hybrid El Tor strains, Asia and Africa. Emerg Infect Dis. 2008;14(6):987–8. pmid:18507925
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[66] View Article

[67] PubMed/NCBI

[68] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Na-Ubol M, Srimanote P, Chongsa-Nguan M, Indrawattana N, Sookrung N, Tapchaisri P, et al. Hybrid & El Tor variant biotypes of Vibrio cholerae O1 in Thailand. Indian J Med Res. 2011;133:387–94. pmid:21537091
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[70] View Article

[71] PubMed/NCBI

[72] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Dixit SM, Johura FT, Manandhar S, Sadique A, Rajbhandari RM, Mannan SB, et al. Cholera outbreaks (2012) in three districts of Nepal reveal clonal transmission of multi-drug resistant Vibrio cholerae O1. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:392. pmid:25022982
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[74] View Article

[75] PubMed/NCBI

[76] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Global Health Observatory (GHO) data [database on the Internet]. World Health Organization. 2014. Available from: http://www.who.int/gho/epidemic_diseases/cholera/cases_text/en/.

[ref21] 21. Kirn TJ, Lafferty MJ, Sandoe CM, Taylor RK. Delineation of pilin domains required for bacterial association into microcolonies and intestinal colonization by Vibrio cholerae. Mol Microbiol. 2000;35(4):896–910. pmid:10692166
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[79] View Article

[80] PubMed/NCBI

[81] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Waldor MK, Mekalanos JJ. Lysogenic conversion by a filamentous phage encoding cholera toxin. Science. 1996;272(5270):1910–4. pmid:8658163
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[83] View Article

[84] PubMed/NCBI

[85] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Rivera IN, Chun J, Huq A, Sack RB, Colwell RR. Genotypes associated with virulence in environmental isolates of Vibrio cholerae. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67(6):2421–9. pmid:11375146
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[87] View Article

[88] PubMed/NCBI

[89] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Singh DV, Matte MH, Matte GR, Jiang S, Sabeena F, Shukla BN, et al. Molecular analysis of Vibrio cholerae O1, O139, non-O1, and non-O139 strains: clonal relationships between clinical and environmental isolates. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2001;67(2):910–21. pmid:11157262
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[91] View Article

[92] PubMed/NCBI

[93] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Luo Y, Ye J, Jin D, Ding G, Zhang Z, Mei L, et al. Molecular analysis of non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae isolated from hospitalised patients in China. BMC Microbiol. 2013;13:52. pmid:23497008
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[95] View Article

[96] PubMed/NCBI

[97] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Epidemiology Bo. Annual epidemiological surveillance report. In: Department of Disease Control MoPH, editor. Nonthaburi, Thailand: Bureau of Epidemiology; 2014.

[ref27] 27. Chomvarin C, Johura FT, Mannan SB, Jumroenjit W, Kanoktippornchai B, Tangkanakul W, et al. Drug response and genetic properties of Vibrio cholerae associated with endemic cholera in north-eastern Thailand, 2003–2011. J Med Microbiol. 2013;62(Pt 4):599–609. pmid:23319310
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[100] View Article

[101] PubMed/NCBI

[102] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Wozniak RA, Fouts DE, Spagnoletti M, Colombo MM, Ceccarelli D, Garriss G, et al. Comparative ICE genomics: insights into the evolution of the SXT/R391 family of ICEs. PLoS Genet. 2009;5(12):e1000786. pmid:20041216
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[104] View Article

[105] PubMed/NCBI

[106] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Alam M, Sultana M, Nair GB, Siddique AK, Hasan NA, Sack RB, et al. Viable but nonculturable Vibrio cholerae O1 in biofilms in the aquatic environment and their role in cholera transmission. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007;104(45):17801–6. pmid:17968017
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[108] View Article

[109] PubMed/NCBI

[110] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Bhumiratana A, Siriphap A, Khamsuwan N, Borthong J, Chonsin K, Sutheinkul O. O Serogroup-Specific Touchdown-Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction for Detection and Identification of Vibrio cholerae O1, O139, and Non-O1/Non-O139. Biochem Res Int. 2014;2014:295421. pmid:25614837
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[112] View Article

[113] PubMed/NCBI

[114] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. WHO. Manual for laboratory investigations of acute enteric infections. WHO document. 1987.

[ref32] 32. Kaas RS, Ngandjio A, Nzouankeu A, Siriphap A, Fonkoua MC, Aarestrup FM, et al. The Lake Chad Basin, an Isolated and Persistent Reservoir of Vibrio cholerae O1: A Genomic Insight into the Outbreak in Cameroon, 2010. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0155691. pmid:27191718
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[117] View Article

[118] PubMed/NCBI

[119] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. CLSI. Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; Twenty-fifth Informational Supplement M100-S25. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2015.

[ref34] 34. Zankari E, Hasman H, Kaas RS, Seyfarth AM, Agerso Y, Lund O, et al. Genotyping using whole-genome sequencing is a realistic alternative to surveillance based on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013;68(4):771–7. pmid:23233485
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[122] View Article

[123] PubMed/NCBI

[124] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. Larsen MV, Cosentino S, Rasmussen S, Friis C, Hasman H, Marvig RL, et al. Multilocus sequence typing of total-genome-sequenced bacteria. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(4):1355–61. pmid:22238442
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[126] View Article

[127] PubMed/NCBI

[128] Google Scholar

[ref36] 36. Octavia S, Salim A, Kurniawan J, Lam C, Leung Q, Ahsan S, et al. Population structure and evolution of non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae by multilocus sequence typing. PLoS One. 2013;8(6):e65342. pmid:23776471
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[130] View Article

[131] PubMed/NCBI

[132] Google Scholar

[ref37] 37. Edgar RC. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(5):1792–7. pmid:15034147
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[134] View Article

[135] PubMed/NCBI

[136] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S. MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol Biol Evol. 2011;28(10):2731–9. pmid:21546353
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[138] View Article

[139] PubMed/NCBI

[140] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Hallin PF, Binnewies TT, Ussery DW. The genome BLASTatlas-a GeneWiz extension for visualization of whole-genome homology. Mol Biosyst. 2008;4(5):363–71. pmid:18414733
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[142] View Article

[143] PubMed/NCBI

[144] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. Hoge CW, Bodhidatta L, Echeverria P, Deesuwan M, Kitporka P. Epidemiologic study of Vibrio cholerae O1 and O139 in Thailand: at the advancing edge of the eighth pandemic. Am J Epidemiol. 1996;143(3):263–8. pmid:8561160
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[146] View Article

[147] PubMed/NCBI

[148] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. Bhattacharya D, Dey S, Pazhani GP, Ramamurthy T, Parande MV, Kholkute SD, et al. Vibrio cholerae O1 El Tor variant and emergence of Haitian ctxB variant in the strains isolated from South India. Med Microbiol Immunol. 2016;205(2):195–200. pmid:26337047
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[150] View Article

[151] PubMed/NCBI

[152] Google Scholar

[ref42] 42. Safa A, Bhuyian NA, Nusrin S, Ansaruzzaman M, Alam M, Hamabata T, et al. Genetic characteristics of Matlab variants of Vibrio cholerae O1 that are hybrids between classical and El Tor biotypes. J Med Microbiol. 2006;55(Pt 11):1563–9. pmid:17030917
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[154] View Article

[155] PubMed/NCBI

[156] Google Scholar

[ref43] 43. Safa A, Bhuiyan NA, Murphy D, Bates J, Nusrin S, Kong RY, et al. Multilocus genetic analysis reveals that the Australian strains of Vibrio cholerae O1 are similar to the pre-seventh pandemic strains of the El Tor biotype. J Med Microbiol. 2009;58(Pt 1):105–11. pmid:19074660
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[158] View Article

[159] PubMed/NCBI

[160] Google Scholar

[ref44] 44. Preeprem S, Mittraparp-arthorn P, Bhoopong P, Vuddhakul V. Isolation and characterization of Vibrio cholerae isolates from seafood in Hat Yai City, Songkhla, Thailand. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2014;11(11):881–6. pmid:25188839
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[162] View Article

[163] PubMed/NCBI

[164] Google Scholar

[ref45] 45. Tapchaisri P, Na-Ubol M, Tiyasuttipan W, Chaiyaroj SC, Yamasaki S, Wongsaroj T, et al. Molecular typing of Vibrio cholerae O1 isolates from Thailand by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. J Health Popul Nutr. 2008;26(1):79–87. pmid:18637531
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[166] View Article

[167] PubMed/NCBI

[168] Google Scholar

[ref46] 46. Tabtieng R, Wattanasri S, Echeverria P, Seriwatana J, Bodhidatta L, Chatkaeomorakot A, et al. An epidemic of Vibrio cholerae el tor Inaba resistant to several antibiotics with a conjugative group C plasmid coding for type II dihydrofolate reductase in Thailand. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1989;41(6):680–6. pmid:2641646
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[170] View Article

[171] PubMed/NCBI

[172] Google Scholar

[ref47] 47. Ghosh-Banerjee J, Senoh M, Takahashi T, Hamabata T, Barman S, Koley H, et al. Cholera toxin production by the El Tor variant of Vibrio cholerae O1 compared to prototype El Tor and classical biotypes. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48(11):4283–6. pmid:20810767
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[174] View Article

[175] PubMed/NCBI

[176] Google Scholar

[ref48] 48. Kumar P, Jain M, Goel AK, Bhadauria S, Sharma SK, Kamboj DV, et al. A large cholera outbreak due to a new cholera toxin variant of the Vibrio cholerae O1 El Tor biotype in Orissa, Eastern India. J Med Microbiol. 2009;58(Pt 2):234–8. pmid:19141742
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[178] View Article

[179] PubMed/NCBI

[180] Google Scholar

[ref49] 49. Kim EJ, Lee D, Moon SH, Lee CH, Kim SJ, Lee JH, et al. Molecular insights into the evolutionary pathway of Vibrio cholerae O1 atypical El Tor variants. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10(9):e1004384. pmid:25233006
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[182] View Article

[183] PubMed/NCBI

[184] Google Scholar

[ref50] 50. Faruque SM, Chowdhury N, Kamruzzaman M, Dziejman M, Rahman MH, Sack DA, et al. Genetic diversity and virulence potential of environmental Vibrio cholerae population in a cholera-endemic area. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004;101(7):2123–8. pmid:14766976
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[186] View Article

[187] PubMed/NCBI

[188] Google Scholar

[ref51] 51. Li X, Wang D, Li B, Zhou H, Liang S, Ke C, et al. Characterization of environmental Vibrio cholerae serogroups O1 and O139 in the Pearl River Estuary, China. Can J Microbiol. 2016;62(2):139–47. pmid:26674584
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[190] View Article

[191] PubMed/NCBI

[192] Google Scholar

[ref52] 52. Okada K, Roobthaisong A, Swaddiwudhipong W, Hamada S, Chantaroj S. Vibrio cholerae O1 isolate with novel genetic background, Thailand-Myanmar. Emerg Infect Dis. 2013;19(6):1015–7. pmid:23735934
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[194] View Article

[195] PubMed/NCBI

[196] Google Scholar

[ref53] 53. Karaolis DK, Somara S, Maneval DR Jr., Johnson JA, Kaper JB. A bacteriophage encoding a pathogenicity island, a type-IV pilus and a phage receptor in cholera bacteria. Nature. 1999;399(6734):375–9. pmid:10360577
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[198] View Article

[199] PubMed/NCBI

[200] Google Scholar

[ref54] 54. Faruque SM, Mekalanos JJ. Pathogenicity islands and phages in Vibrio cholerae evolution. Trends Microbiol. 2003;11(11):505–10. pmid:14607067
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[202] View Article

[203] PubMed/NCBI

[204] Google Scholar

[ref55] 55. Awasthi SP, Asakura M, Chowdhury N, Neogi SB, Hinenoya A, Golbar HM, et al. Novel cholix toxin variants, ADP-ribosylating toxins in Vibrio cholerae non-O1/non-O139 strains, and their pathogenicity. Infect Immun. 2013;81(2):531–41. pmid:23230295
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[206] View Article

[207] PubMed/NCBI

[208] Google Scholar

[ref56] 56. Sjolund-Karlsson M, Reimer A, Folster JP, Walker M, Dahourou GA, Batra DG, et al. Drug-resistance mechanisms in Vibrio cholerae O1 outbreak strain, Haiti, 2010. Emerg Infect Dis. 2011;17(11):2151–4. pmid:22099122
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[210] View Article

[211] PubMed/NCBI

[212] Google Scholar

[ref57] 57. Pang B, Du P, Zhou Z, Diao B, Cui Z, Zhou H, et al. The Transmission and Antibiotic Resistance Variation in a Multiple Drug Resistance Clade of Vibrio cholerae Circulating in Multiple Countries in Asia. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0149742. pmid:26930352
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[214] View Article

[215] PubMed/NCBI

[216] Google Scholar

[ref58] 58. Kitaoka M, Miyata ST, Unterweger D, Pukatzki S. Antibiotic resistance mechanisms of Vibrio cholerae. J Med Microbiol. 2011;60(Pt 4):397–407. pmid:21252269
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[218] View Article

[219] PubMed/NCBI

[220] Google Scholar

[ref59] 59. Marin MA, Thompson CC, Freitas FS, Fonseca EL, Aboderin AO, Zailani SB, et al. Cholera outbreaks in Nigeria are associated with multidrug resistant atypical El Tor and non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013;7(2):e2049. pmid:23459673
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[222] View Article

[223] PubMed/NCBI

[224] Google Scholar

[ref60] 60. Supawat K, Huttayananont S, Sawanpanyalert P, Aswapokee N, Mootsikapun P. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance of Vibrio cholerae in Thailand from 2000 to 2004. J Med Assoc Thai. 2009;92 Suppl 4:S82–6.
View Article
Google Scholar

[226] View Article

[227] Google Scholar

[ref61] 61. Kumar P, Mishra DK, Deshmukh DG, Jain M, Zade AM, Ingole KV, et al. Haitian variant ctxB producing Vibrio cholerae O1 with reduced susceptibility to ciprofloxacin is persistent in Yavatmal, Maharashtra, India, after causing a cholera outbreak. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(5):O292–3. pmid:24102849
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[229] View Article

[230] PubMed/NCBI

[231] Google Scholar

[ref62] 62. Waldor MK, Tschape H, Mekalanos JJ. A new type of conjugative transposon encodes resistance to sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and streptomycin in Vibrio cholerae O139. J Bacteriol. 1996;178(14):4157–65. pmid:8763944
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[233] View Article

[234] PubMed/NCBI

[235] Google Scholar

[ref63] 63. Hochhut B, Waldor MK. Site-specific integration of the conjugal Vibrio cholerae SXT element into prfC. Mol Microbiol. 1999;32(1):99–110. pmid:10216863
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[237] View Article

[238] PubMed/NCBI

[239] Google Scholar

[ref64] 64. Abd El Ghany M, Chander J, Mutreja A, Rashid M, Hill-Cawthorne GA, Ali S, et al. The population structure of Vibrio cholerae from the Chandigarh Region of Northern India. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014;8(7):e2981. pmid:25058483
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[241] View Article

[242] PubMed/NCBI

[243] Google Scholar

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Bacterial strains

Characterization of V. cholerae

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Whole genome sequencing

The use of bioinformatics tools

Identification of V. cholerae and determination of associated virulence genes and pathogenicity islands.

Determination of antimicrobial resistance genes, SXT element, and class 1 integron.

Multilocus sequence type.

Genomic islands in the chromosomes of V. cholerae.

Results

Characterization of V. cholerae strains

Distribution of virulence-associated genes and pathogenicity islands

Antimicrobial resistant strains, antimicrobial resistance genes, class 1 integron, and SXT element

Discussion

Conclusions

Supporting Information

S1 File. Supplementary_table1-Sequence_info.

Author Contributions

References