TY - JOUR
T1 - Shrimp antimicrobial testing. I. in vitro susceptibility of thirteen gram-negative bacteria to twelve antimicrobials
AU - Mohney, Leone L.
AU - Bell, Thomas A.
AU - Lightner, Donald V.
N1 - Funding Information:
Partial funding for this work was provided by the Center for Tropical and Subtropical Aquaculture (U.S. Department of Agriculture grants 87-CRSR-2-3216, 88-3850-3884, 89-3850-02- 38500-4157, and 90-38500-50-45). The phar-maceutical firms listed in Table 2 are thanked for providing research quantities of compounds and for their financial support (Abbott, Hoffmann-La Roche). Various aquaculture groups in South America, North America, and Asia that have knowingly or unknowingly provided bacterial iso- lates are acknowledged for their help. Wen Jing is thanked for laboratory assistance in the actual MIC trials.
PY - 1992/12
Y1 - 1992/12
N2 - Standard minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC studies were conducted in vitro on eleven prospective antimicrobials and one reference antimicrobial. The compounds were tested against a standardized battery of l3 gram-negative bacterial isolates associated with shrimp disease. Two additional bacterial organisms not associated with shrimp, Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, were also tested as system controls. The compounds tested were chloramphenicol (reference), enrofloxacin, erythromycin, florfenicol, oxytetracycline, paromomycin, four experimental fluoroquinolines (PD124816, PD127391, PD131628, PD132133), Romet-30®, and Sara-fin®. All compounds, with the possible exception of paromomycin, had significantly better overall MIC ranges than did chloramphenicol.
AB - Standard minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC studies were conducted in vitro on eleven prospective antimicrobials and one reference antimicrobial. The compounds were tested against a standardized battery of l3 gram-negative bacterial isolates associated with shrimp disease. Two additional bacterial organisms not associated with shrimp, Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, were also tested as system controls. The compounds tested were chloramphenicol (reference), enrofloxacin, erythromycin, florfenicol, oxytetracycline, paromomycin, four experimental fluoroquinolines (PD124816, PD127391, PD131628, PD132133), Romet-30®, and Sara-fin®. All compounds, with the possible exception of paromomycin, had significantly better overall MIC ranges than did chloramphenicol.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84950450184&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84950450184&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1577/1548-8667(1992)004<0257:SATIIV>2.3.CO;2
DO - 10.1577/1548-8667(1992)004<0257:SATIIV>2.3.CO;2
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84950450184
SN - 0899-7659
VL - 4
SP - 257
EP - 261
JO - Journal of Aquatic Animal Health
JF - Journal of Aquatic Animal Health
IS - 4
ER -