Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | BMC Microbiology

Fig. 3

From: Multidrug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa survey in a stream receiving effluents from ineffective wastewater hospital plants

Fig. 3

Antimicrobial resistant and biofilm formation analysis. Diagram showing (a) the antimicrobial resistance profiles of 25 P. aeruginosa isolates obtained from water samples tested in this study. Isolates are labelled with either RHE, THE or ST to indicate their origin: RHE for raw hospital effluent, THE for treated hospital effluent and ST for stream sample. The susceptibility testing was carried out according to the protocol of the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI, 2012) using 14 different antimicrobials: Levofloxacin (LEV); Norfloxacin (NOR); Ciprofloxacin (CIP); Ceftriaxon (CRO); Cefepime (CPM); Ceftazidima (CAZ); Meropenem (MER); Imipenem (IMP); Amicacina (AMI); Gentamicina (GEN); Ampicilin (AMP); Piperaciline-Tazobactam (PTZ); Aztreonam monobactan (ATM); and Polimixina B-I (POL). Black-squares are used to indicate resistance and white-squares are used to indicate susceptibility. b Frequencies of antimicrobial resistant phenotypes were calculated as percentages of antimicrobial resistance among isolates of same origin. c-d Comparison of biofilm formation in LB broth with or without shaking. Biofilm production expressed as absorbance measurements taken at 600 nm. Comparison between MDRPA versus P. aeruginosa (c); Comparison between HE versus ST isolates (d); e-f Linear regression analysis showing that the number of antimicrobials a MDRPA is resistant to correlates with the amount of biofilm it produces independently of shaking

Back to article page