Zoonotic potential and prevalence of Salmonella serovars isolated from pets

Figures & data

Figure 1. Home balcony keeping ornamental birds in Wałbrzych, Poland [author: Emil Paluch] (as the example of potential Salmonella spp. transmission from wild, free-living birds (zoom on the lower, right arrow) to ornamental birds outdoor)

Figure 2. Factors influencing Salmonella-prevalence among domestic animals, exluding diet [29,35]

Table 1. The distribution of Salmonella subspecies in reptiles in 2015–2021 (from the lowest to highest Salmonella-prevalence [%])

Salmonella prevalence [%]	Number of isolated serovars	Country of study	Publication year	Reptiles information	Salmonella subspecies prevalence [%]	Ref.
2.1%	15	Japan	2020	706 green anoles (Anolis carolinensis)	100% enterica	[64]
3%	3	Poland	2015	130 European pond turtles (Emys orbicularis)	100% enterica	[69]
4.19%	10	Canada	2018	236 Grand Cayman iguanas (Cyclura lewisi)	100% enterica	[80]
4.3%	4	Costa Rica	2015	115 Asian housed geckos (H. frenatus)	100% enterica	[73]
5%	2	New Zealand	2021	221 reptiles including 82 geckos and 139 sinks	100% enterica	[81]
5.2%	9	Malaysia	2017	171 snakes including boas, pythons and anacondas	Not showna	[75]
13%	14	Croatia	2015	200 reptiles including lizards, chelonians, and snakes	34.6% enterica, 23.1% houtanae, 23.1% arizonae, 15.4% diarizonae, 2.8% salamae	[65]
13.6%	29	Italy	2016	213 reptiles including chelonians, saurians and ophidians	89% enterica 11% salamae	[66]
15%	64	Guadeloupe	2019	426 reptiles including anoles, iguanas and geckos	73.8% enterica 26.2% houtenae	[59]
17.87%	15	Poland	2020	84 reptiles including lizards, agamas, anoles, tortoises and kingsnakes	53.3% enterica 26,7% diarizonae 20% salamae	[46]
18.9%	31	China	2016	164 pet turtles	100% enterica	[74]
22.2%	10	Poland	2020	45 grass snakes Natrix natrix	Not shown	[70]
29.7%	40	Slovenia	2016	74 reptiles including snakes, lizards and chelonians	63.6% enterica 31.8% diarizonae 4.5% arizonae	[72]
34.2%	26	Brazil	2019	76 reptiles, including lizards, chelonians, and snakes	50% enterica 34.6% houtenae 7.6% diarizonae 7.6% arizonae	[77]
34.3%	24	Italy	2018	70 geckos	83% enterica 8% diarizonae 8% houtenae	[67]
35.6%	16	Grenada	2020	45 Grenada bank tree boas (Corallus grenadensis)	100% enterica	[82]
41%	Not showna	Portugal	2021	78 reptiles including 43 turtles, 27 lizards and 8 snakes	40.6% arizonae 59.4% other subsp.	[71]
43%	44	Norway	2020	103 reptiles including snakes, lizards and chelonians	40% enterica 36% diarizonae 11% salamae 4% arizonae 2% houtenae 7% unknown	[31]
43.8%	20	Brazil	2020	153 black and white tegu lizards (Salvator merianae)	100% enterica	[76]
48%	59	Spain	2021	54 reptiles from pet shops and 69 reptiles from households	56.9% enterica 19.6% houtenae 11.8% diarizonae 9.8% salamae 2% arizonae	[68]
57%	57	Italy	2017	100 reptiles including snakes, lizards, turtles	Not showna	[14]
60%	36	USA	2015	60 reptiles including lizards, snakes, turtles and a combination of reptiles	88% enterica 12% other subsp.	[78]
83.3%	189	Japan	2019	227 small red-eared sliders (Trachemys scripta elegans)	57.3% enterica 29% other subsp.	[84]
87.5%	14	Poland	2016	16 snakes including 15 grass snakes (Natrix natrix) and 1 smooth snake (Coronella austriaca)	81.8% diarizonae 18.2% enterica	[30]

aIn these studies, the detected Salmonella isolates from reptiles were not differentiated for species, subspecies or serovars

Table 2. Salmonella-prevalence in dogs in 2015–2021 (from the lowest to highest Salmonella prevalence [%])

Salmonella prevalence [%]	Number of Salmonella-positive dogs	Country	Publication year	Number of tested dogs	Salmonella serovar/s or subspecies	Ref.
0.23%	1	UK	2015	436	1 isolatea: Salmonella enterica subsp. arizonae (1/1, 100%)	[10]
1.85%	6	Spain	2020	325	3 Salmonella enterica serovars: Havana (3/325) S. Mikawasima (2/325) S. monophasic Typhimurium (1/325)	[103]
2.5%	60	US	2017	2422	24 Salmonella enterica serovars, 64 isolates the most predominant: S. Newport (13/64, 20.3%), S. Enteritidis (5/64, 7.8%), S. Javiana (5/64, 7.8%), S. Infantis (5/64, 7.8%), S. Typhimurium (4/64, 6.35%),	[104]
4,9%	27	US	2015	554b	10 Salmonella enterica serovars, 27 isolates the most predominant: S. Newport (6/27, 22%) S. Javiana (4/27,15%) S. Braenderup (2/27, 7%) S. Infantis (2/27, 7%)	[102]
5.4%	22	Australia	2019	405	Not specified	[107]
5.6%	8	Grenada, West Indies	2018	144	6 Salmonella enterica serovars, 35 isolates S. Arechavaleta (13/35, 37.1%) S. Montevideo (5/35, 14.3%) S. Javiana (2/35, 5.7%) S. Rubislaw (5/35, 14.3%) S. Braenderup (5/35, 14.3%) S. Kiambu (5/35, 14.3%)	[105]
6.27%	24	Mexico	2019	385	24 Salmonella isolatesa S. enterica subsp. enterica (21/24, 87.5%) S. enterica subsp. arizonae (3/24, 12.5%)	[111]
9.47%	25	China	2020	243	8 Salmonella enterica serovars S. Kentucky (11/25, 44%), S. Indiana (5/25,20%), S. Typhimurium (4/25,16%) S. Derby (1/25, 4%) S. Toucra (1/25, 4%) S. San Diego (1/25, 4%) S. Newport (1/25, 4%) S. Saint Paul (1/25, 4%)	[28]
11%	11	Iran	2018	100b	S. enterica ser. Typhimurium (7/11, 63.4%) S. enterica ser. Enteritidis 36.4%)	[112]
11.7%	42	Ethiopia	2017	360	14 Salmonella enterica serovars the most predominant: S. Bronx (7/42, 16.7%), S. Newport (6/42, 14.3%), S. Typhimurium (4/42, 9.5%), S. Indiana (4/42, 9.5%), S. Kentucky (4/42, 9.5%), S. Saint Paul (4/42, 9.5%) S. Virchow (4/42, 9.5%)	[109]
12.5%	5	Equador	2016	267	S. enterica ser. Infantis (5/267, 1.9%)	[110]
12,86%	18	Thailand	2020	140	13 Salmonella enterica serovars the most predominant: S. Stanley (3/18, 16.67%) S. Hvittingfoss (3/18, 16.67%) S. enterica serotype I 1,4, [5],12:i:- (2/18, 11.20%)	[106]

aThese studies did not include the Salmonella subsp. differentiation into serovars

bFaecal samples were obtained from shelter dogs

Ahmer BM, Gunn JS. Interaction of Salmonella spp. with the Intestinal Microbiota. Front Microbiol. 2011;2(101). DOI:https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2011.00101.

 Google Scholar

Gilbert MJ, Duim B, Zomer AL, et al. Living in cold blood: arcobacter, Campylobacter, and Helicobacter in reptiles. Front Microbiol. 2019;10:1086.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sumiyama D, Shimizu A, Kanazawa T, et al. Prevalence of Salmonella in green anoles (Anolis Carolinensis), an invasive alien species in Naha and Tomigusuku Cities, Okinawa Main Island, Japan. J Vet Med Sci. 2020;82(5):678-680. doi:https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.19-0594.

 Google Scholar

Nowakiewicz A, Ziółkowska G, Zięba P, et al. Aerobic Bacterial Microbiota Isolated from the Cloaca of The European Pond Turtle (Emys orbicularis) in Poland. J Wildl Dis. 2015;51(1):255–259.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

McWhorter A, Owens J, Valcanis M, et al. In vitro invasiveness and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella enterica subspecies isolated from wild and captive reptiles. Zoonoses Public Health. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12820.

 Google Scholar

Jiménez RR, Barquero-Calvo E, Abarca JG, et al. Salmonella Isolates in the Introduced Asian House Gecko (Hemidactylus frenatus) with Emphasis on Salmonella Weltevreden, in Two Regions in Costa Rica. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2015;15(9):550–555.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Baling M, Mitchell C. Prevalence of Salmonella spp. in translocated wild reptiles and effect of duration of quarantine on their body condition. N Z Vet J. 2021;69(3):174–179.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Abba Y, Ilyasu YM, Noordin MM. Isolation and identification of bacterial populations of zoonotic importance from captive non-venomous snakes in Malaysia. Microb Pathog. 2017;108:49–54.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lukac M, Pedersen K, Prukner-Radovcic E. Prevalence of Salmonella in captice reptiles from Croatia. J Zoo Wildl Med. 2015. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1638/2014-0098r1.1.

 Google Scholar

Bertelloni F, Chemaly M, Cerri D, et al. Salmonella infection in healthy pet reptiles: bacteriological isolation and study of some pathogenic characters. Acta Microbiol. Immunol Hung. 2016; DOI:https://doi.org/10.1556/030.63.2016.2.5.

 Google Scholar

Guyomard-Rabenirina S, Weill FX, Bastian S, et al. Reptiles in Guadeloupe (French West Indies) are a reservoir of major human Salmonella enterica serovars. PLoS One. 2019;14(7):e0220145.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dudek B, Książczyk M, Krzyżewska E, et al. Comparison of the phylogenetic analysis of PFGE profiles and the characteristic of virulence genes in clinical and reptile associated Salmonella strains. BMC Vet Res. 2019;15(1). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-2019-1.

 Google Scholar

Zhang J, Kuang D, Wang F, et al. Turtles as a Possible Reservoir of Nontyphoidal Salmonella in Shanghai, China. Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2016;13(8):428–433.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pawlak A, Morka K, Bury S, et al. Microbiota in Free-Living Grass Snake Natrix natrix from Poland, Curr. Microbiol. 2020. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-020-02021-3.

 Google Scholar

Romero SB, Kvapil P, Cížek A, et al. The prevalence and antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella species isolated from captive reptiles at ljubljana zoo. Slov Vet Res. 2016;53 (1): 43-8.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ramos CP, Santana JA, Coura FM, et al.Identification and Characterization of Escherichia coli, Salmonella Spp., Clostridium perfringens, and C. difficile Isolates from Reptiles in Brazil. BioMed Res Int. (2019) 2019:9530732. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9530732.

 Google Scholar

Russo TP, Varriale L, Borrelli L, et al. Salmonella serotypes isolated in geckos kept in seven collections in southern Italy. J Small Anim Pract. 2018;59(5):294–297.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rush EM, Amadi VA, Johnson R, et al. Salmonella serovars associated with Grenadian tree boa (Corallus grenadensis) and their antimicrobial susceptibility. Vet Med Sci. 2020;6(3):565–569.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cota JB, Carvalho AC, Dias I, et al. Salmonella spp. in Pet Reptiles in Portugal: prevalence and Chlorhexidine Gluconate Antimicrobial Efficacy. Antibiotics. 2021;10(324):324.

 Google Scholar

Bjelland AM, Sandvik LM, Skarstein MM, et al. Prevalence of Salmonella serovars isolated from reptiles in Norwegian zoos. Acta Vet Scand. 2020;62(1). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13028-020-0502-0

 Google Scholar

Abrahão CR, Moreno LZ, Silva JCR, et al. Salmonella enterica in Invasive Lizard from Fernando de Noronha Archipelago: serotyping, Antimicrobial Resistance and Molecular Epidemiology. Microorganisms. 2020 Dec 17;8(12):2017.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Marin C, Lorenzo-Rebenaque L, Laso O, et al. Pet Reptiles: a Potential Source of Transmission of Multidrug-Resistant Salmonella. Front Vet Sci. 2021;7:613718.DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.613718.

 Google Scholar

Rabsch W, Plenz B, Fruth A, et al. Evidence for the transmission of Salmonella from reptiles to children in Germany, July 2010 to October 2011. Euro Surveill. 2013;18(46):20634.

 Google Scholar

Whitten T, Bender JB, Smith K, et al. Reptile-associated salmonellosis in Minnesota, 1996-2011. Zoonoses Public Health. 2015, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/zph.12140.

 Google Scholar

Kuroki R, Ishihara R, Nakajima N, et al. Prevalence of Salmonella enterica Subspecies enterica in Red-Eared Sliders Trachemys scripta elegans Retailed in Pet Shops in Japan. Jpn J Infect Dis. 2019;72(1):38–43.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zając M, Wasyl D, Różycki M, et al. Free-living snakes as a source and possible vector of Salmonella spp. and parasites. Eur J Wildl Res. 2016;62(2):161–166.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Scheelings TF, Lightfoot D, Holz P. Prevalence of Salmonella in Australian reptiles. J Wildl Dis. 2011;47(1):1–11.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cummings KJ, Mitchell PK, Rodriguez-Rivera LD, et al. Sequence analysis of Salmonella enterica isolates obtained from shelter dogs throughout Texas. Vet Med Sci. 2020;6(4):975–979.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Reimschuessel R, Grabenstein M, Guag J, et al. Multilaboratory Survey To Evaluate Salmonella Prevalence in Diarrheic and Nondiarrheic Dogs and Cats in the USA between 2012 and 2014. J Clin Microbiol. 2017 May;55(5):1350–1368.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bataller E, García-Romero E, Llobat L, et al. Dogs as a source of Salmonella spp. in apparently healthy dogs in the Valencia Region. Could it be related with intestinal lactic acid bacteria? BMC Vet Res. 2020;16(1):268.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kim MW, Sharp CR, Boyd CJ, et al. Faecal PCR panel results and clinical findings in Western Australian dogs with diarrhoea. Aust Vet J. 2020;98(11):11.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Amadi VA, Hariharan H, Arya G, et al. Serovars and antimicrobial resistance of non-typhoidal Salmonella isolated from non-diarrhoeic dogs in Grenada, West Indies. Vet Med Sci. 2017;4(1):26–34.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Castro KMN, Munoz ET, García GF, et al. Prevalence, risk factors, and identification of Salmonella spp. in stray dogs of northwest Mexico. Austral Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 2019;51:1.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hoelzer K, Switt A, Switt M. Animal contact as a source of human non-typhoidal salmonellosis-Review. Vet Res. 2011;42(1):34.

 Google Scholar

Askari N, Mashhad Rafiee S, Amini K. A case control study of Salmonella SPP. infection in stray dogs in Tehran shelters and the correlation between paraclinical tests results and clinical findings. Arch Razi Inst. 2020;75(1):93–99.

 Google Scholar

Kiflu B, Alemayehu H, Abdurahaman M, et al. Salmonella serotypes and their antimicrobial susceptibility in apparently healthy dogs in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. BMC Vet Res. 2017;13(1):134.

 Google Scholar

Vasco K, Graham JH, Trueba G. Detection of zoonotic enteropathogens in children and domestic animals in a semirural community in ecuador. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2016;82(14):4218–4224.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Stull JW, Brophy J, Weese JS. Reducing the risk of pet-associated zoonotic infections. CMAJ. 2015;187(10):736–743.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wu X, Angkititrakul S, Richards AL, et al. Risk of Antimicrobial Resistant Non-Typhoidal Salmonella during Asymptomatic Infection Passage between Pet Dogs and Their Human Caregivers in Khon Kaen, Thailand. Antibiotics (Basel). 2020;9(8):477.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the finding of this study are available within the article (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20008686.2021.1975530).