Nasotracheal microbiota of nestlings of parent white storks with different foraging habits in Spain

Nasotracheal Microbiota of Nestlings of Parent White storks with Different Foraging Habits in Spain Idris Nasir Abdullahi, 1 Guillermo Jua ´rez-Ferna ´ndez, 1 U ´rsula Ho ¨fle, 2 Teresa Cardona-Cabrera, 2 David Mı ´nguez, 1 Javier Pineda-Pampliega, 3,4 Carmen Lozano, 1 Myriam Zarazaga, 1 and Carmen Torres 1 1 OneHealth-UR Research Group, Area of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of La Rioja, Logron ˜o, Spain 2 SaBio (Health and Biotechnology) Research Group, Game and Wildlife Research Institute (CSIC-UCLM-JCCM), Ciudad Real, Spain 3 Department of Biology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden 4 Department of Biodiversity, Ecology and Evolution, Faculty of Biology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain Abstract: Migratory storks could be vectors of transmission of bacteria of public health concern mediated by the colonization, persistence and excretion of such bacteria. This study aims to determine genera/species diversity, prevalence, and co-colonization indices of bacteria obtained from tracheal (T) and nasal (N) samples from storks in relation to exposure to point sources through foraging. One-hundred and thirty-six samples from 87 nestlings of colonies of parent white storks with different foraging habits (natural habitat and landfills) were obtained (84 T-samples and 52 N-samples) and processed. Morphologically distinct colonies (up to 12/ sample) were randomly selected and identified by MALDI-TOF-MS. About 87.2% of the total 806 isolates recovered were identified: 398 from T-samples (56.6%) and 305 from N-samples (43.4%). Among identified isolates, 17 genera and 46 species of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were detected, Staphylococcus (58.0%) and Enterococcus (20.5%) being the most prevalent genera. S. sciuri was the most prevalent species from T (36.7%) and N (34.4%) cavities of total isolates, followed by E. faecalis (11.1% each from T and N), and S. aureus [T (6.5%), N (13.4%)].Of N-samples, E. faecium was significantly associated with nestlings of parent storks foraging in landfills (p= 0.018). S. sciuri (p= 0.0034) and M. caseolyticus (p= 0.032) from Tsamples were significantly higher among nestlings of parent storks foraging in natural habitats. More than 80% of bacterial species in the T and N cavities showed 1–10% co-colonization indices with one another, but few had 40% indices. S. sciuri and E. faecalis were the most frequent species identified in the stork nestlings. Moreover, they were highly colonized by other diverse and potentially pathogenic bacteria. Thus, storks could be sentinels of point sources and vehicles of bacterial transmission across the ‘‘One Health’’ ecosystems. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-023-01626-x. Published online: April 15, 2023 Correspondence to: Carmen Torres, e-mail: [email protected] EcoHealth 20, 105–121, 2023 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-023-01626-x Original Contribution 2023 The Author(s) Keywords: White storks, Nasotracheal microbiota, Staphylococcus sciuri, Bacterial ecology, S. aureus colonization INTRODUCTION The recent focus on the ‘One Health’ framework of public health research includes wildlife, with special reference to migratory birds that could serve as carriers and vehicles of important zoonotic bacteria of great concern to human and animal health (Abdullahi et al. 2021). From an epidemiologist’s perspective, close contact of birds with human housing through nesting and perching and cultivated land through foraging and resting offers manifold possible transmission routes for infectious agents. In addition, species such as the white stork (Ciconia ciconia) that are migratory and travel between Europe and Africa could potentially mediate the transcontinental transfer of potential pathogens (Wilharm et al. 2016). It has been demonstrated that white storks are susceptible to colonization by numerous bacteria and/or infections that can have considerable direct and indirect impacts on humans, other wild, aquatic, domestic animals, livestock and the environment (Ruiz-Ripa et al. 2020; Jarma et al. 2021). Staphylococcus is considered a common colonizer of the skin, peritoneum and nasotracheal cavities of many wild animals (Ruiz-Ripa et al. 2020). Among the Staphylococcus genus, Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) represents the main etiological agent of human and animal infections such as superficial skin and soft tissue infections, osteomyelitis, and septicemia, among others (Taylor and Unakal 2021). Its economic importance in livestock production is mainly represented by the emergence and spread of certain antimicrobial-resistant phenotypes (such as the methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA]) and clones that drastically reduce animal product yield, especially in dairy cattle (Iceland et al. 2014; Lozano et al. 2016). Even though coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are usually less virulent than S. aureus, they have also become important nosocomial pathogens, and many species colonize the skin and mucosal linings of both humans and animals (Becker et al. 2014). Moreover, CoNS have been reported in tracheal samples of wild birds, with a high prevalence of S. sciuri (Ruiz-Ripa et al. 2020). Of these, multidrugand methicillin-resistant CoNS strains were identified, highlighting the role of wild birds as carriers of antimicrobial resistance mechanisms (Ruiz-Ripa et al. 2020). Moreover, our research group previously reported a high rate (34.8%) of S. aureus nasotracheal carriage in white stork nestlings exposed to human residues (Go ´mez et al. 2016), but that study solely focused on S. aureus. Available microecological evidence, in recent times, has highlighted the relevance of studying the nasal and tracheal bacterial microbiota of wild animals (Peixoto et al. 2021). Bacteria of the genus Enterococcus, which are considered harmless commensals in healthy animals, are often resistant to several clinically important antibiotics, and therefore serve as sentinel microorganisms for tracking trends in resistance to antimicrobials with Gram-positive activity (Nocera et al. 2021). Enterococci comprise both commensals and opportunistic pathogens that are ubiquitous in the environment. They can be isolated from soil, water, plants, wild animals, birds, and insects (Paniagua Voiro et al. 2018). Two species are of greater clinical relevance, E. faecalis and E. faecium, and they frequently acquire resistance genes for antimicrobial agents, including the so-called ‘last resort’ antimicrobial agents (such as linezolid) representing a growing public health concern (Torres et al. 2018). Aside from staphylococci and enterococci, other different bacterial genera with medical, veterinary and agricultural concerns have been detected from the nasal and tracheal cavities of wild birds, but in very few studies (Gambino et al. 2021). In this regard, it is important to highlight the previous detection of cephalosporin-resistant Escherichia coli (E. coli) in white storks from intestinal tract samples (Ho ¨fle et al. 2020). Although E. coli is part of the normal microbiota of the intestine, it might be translocated to other tissues or organs of an animal. One key question for research is how certain bacterial colonization depends on ecological traits such as foraging habits and the habitat of the host (Vittecoq et al. 2016). It is therefore important to understand the bacterial diversities in nasotracheal cavities of storks in context with their foraging behaviour, habitat and movement ecology. These traits along with the persistence and quantity of excretion of such bacteria determine the potential role of this species in the spread of pathogenic bacteria. For instance, numerous white storks have adapted to relying on landfills for foraging during migration and wintering but also foraging and resting in rice and other 106 I. N. Abdullahi et al. cereal fields (Martı ´n-Ve ´lez et al. 2020). Some storks have even established colonies close to landfills (Tortosa et al. 2002). During the breeding season nevertheless adult storks primarily forage close to the nest, providing an opportunity to comparatively study the impact of diet and foraging habitat on the respiratory tract microbiota of nestlings (Pineda-Pampliega et al. 2021). Thus, to investigate how the potential nasotracheal carriages of different bacterial species in storks vary across foraging habitats and between colonies, this study aims to determine the genera/species diversity, prevalence rates and co-colonization of bacterial isolates obtained from nasotracheal (NT) samples from stork nestlings from different colonies along a habitat gradient from landfill to natural habitat in Southern Spain. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sample Collection, Transportation and Preservation White stork nestlings (juvenile storks in the nest prior to fledging) were sampled in June 2021 at 45–55 days of age. Nasal and tracheal swab samples were collected from the stork nestlings from four different colonies based on the different foraging habits of their parents when raising their chicks. This study design took advantage of the fact that during the chick-raising period, parent storks are spatially bound to the nesting habitat (i.e. forage primarily close to the nest) and thus a clear differentiation of the habitat in which food items are foraged is possible. Also, sampling of nestlings is less invasive and logistically less challenging than the capture of adult storks and is carried out during routine ringing procedures. The storks corresponded to four different colonies with different foraging strategies (colonies 1 and 2: located and foraging in natural habitat; colonies 3 and 4: foraging in two different landfills). Nasal and tracheal samples from a total of 87 white stork nestlings were collected, which comprised 136 samples: 84 tracheal (T) and 52 nasal (N). Of these animals, 49 had both nasal and tracheal samples collected. The uneven distribution of samples was due to technical problems, as some samples could not be processed further due to contaminations. We collected at least one full set (nasal and tracheal swabs) of samples of one of the siblings in each nest. Nestlings were extracted from the nest by gently wrapping them in a towel and lowering them to the floor by hand or in a large bag. Each bird was ringed with a metal and a PVC ring. The PVC ring is marked with a four-digit large alphanumeric code and allows identification of the individual stork from a distance using a telescope, for example during stork counts at landfills (visual recapture). Nasal swabs were obtained using sterile cotton-tipped urethral swabs that were introduced into the left nasal opening on the beak of each individual, avoiding contact with the beak surface and external border of the cavity, and softly rotated twice to touch all nasal conchae surface. For tracheal swabs, sterile cotton-tipped swabs were used and briefly inserted into the trachea avoiding contact with the oral mucosa. Swabs were transferred immediately to commercial Amies’ transport medium tubes and stored at 4C until arrival at the laboratory where they were frozen immediately at -80C until analysis. Nestlings were returned to the nest immediately after sampling. Handling of each nestling took less than 20 min and was carried out following all applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and ethical use of animals, specifically directive 2010/63/EU and Spanish laws 9/ 2003 and 32/2007, and RD 178/2004 and RD 1201/2005. All procedures were approved by the ethical committee for animal experimentation of the University of Castilla–La Mancha and authorized by the regional government of Castilla–La Mancha (permit no.: VS/MLCE/avp_21_198). Bacterial Isolation and Identification The nasal and tracheal swab samples were inoculated into brain heart infusion (BHI; Condalab, Madrid, Spain) broth supplemented with 6.5% NaCl and incubated for 24 h at 37C. After overnight incubation, the broth samples were diluted and carefully dispensed onto four different bacteria culture media: blood agar (BioMerieux), mannitol salt agar (MSA, Condalab, Madrid, Spain), oxacillin screening agar base supplemented with oxacillin (ORSAB medium, OXOID Hampshire, UK), and CHROMagar TM LIN (CHROMagar TM LIN, Paris, France). Plates were incubated for 24– 48 h at 37C, for bacterial recovery. After overnight growth, up to 12 different colonies were randomly selected per sample (based on their morphology, colour and haemolysis). The colonies were identified by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS; Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany) using the standard extraction protocol recommended by the manufacturer as previously described (Torres-Sangiao et al. 2021). For the calibration of the spectrometer, the Nasotracheal Microbiota of Nestlings Storks 107 protein profile of the E. coli strain DH5 peptide was used (Bruker Daltonics). Statistical Analysis To assess the effect of the use of landfills as a food resource on the frequency of appearance of the different bacteria, we constructed 94 linear mixed models with binomial distributed dependent variables (47 for each type of sample, nasal or tracheal). Of these, 26 were discarded because all values were equal to 0 (16 nasal and 10 tracheal). In these models, natural or landfill was included as a factor, and the nest was included as a random factor to avoid pseudoreplication. In addition, to evaluate if the presence of a microorganism differs between the nasal and tracheal cavity, 47 models with binomial distributed dependent variables were constructed. In these models, nasal or tracheal was included as a fixed factor, and nest of origin of the nestlings and natural or landfill habitat were included as random factors. Finally, to check if a correlation between the appearance of the different microorganisms exists, we calculated the Jaccard Similarity Index for all bacteria by sample type (nasal or tracheal). These models were performed in R 4.1.3 (R Core Team 2022) using the R packages lme4 (1.1–28), car (3.0–12) and vegan (2.6–2) (Bates et al. 2015; Fox and Weisberg 2019; Oksanen et al. 2022). The package ggplot2 (3.3.5) was used to create the figures (Wickham 2016). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05 for all analyses. RESULTS Frequency of Bacteria Species and Genera Recovered from the Nasal and Tracheal Samples A total of 806 isolates were recovered (up to 12/sample), and 703 of them (87.2%) were identified by MALDI-TOF– MS: 398 from T-samples (56.6%) and 305 from N-samples (43.4%) (Table 1). A total of 17 genera and 46 species were detected. Of all the identified bacteria, 408 isolates were Staphylococcus (T= 218, N= 190), 144 Enterococcus (T= 74, N= 70), 34 Macrococcus (T= 24, N= 10), 30 Bacillus (T= 15, N= 15), 19 Corynebacterium (T= 13, N= 6), 22 Proteus (T= 19, N= 3), 11 Lactococcus (T=9, N= 2), 7 Enterobacter (T=6, N= 1), 3 Arthrobacter (T= 3), 6 Streptococcus (T=4, N= 2), 5 Acinetobacter (T=3,N= 2), 4 Escherichia coli (T= 4) and Providencia spp (T= 4), 2 Citrobacter spp (N= 2), and one each Micrococcus spp (T= 1) and Klebsiella spp (N= 1) (Table 1). Of all the bacteria genera identified, there were significant associations of Enterococcus and Proteus with the sample type collected from the storks (Nor Trespectively) (p<0.05) (Table 1). Out of the 408 staphylococci isolates, the most frequently identified species were S. sciuri (n= 251, 61.5%), S. aureus (n= 67, 16.4%), S. chromogenes (n= 20, 5.0%), S. epidermidis (n= 17, 4.1%) and S. xylosus (n= 11, 2.7%). Out of the 144 enterococci isolates, the most frequently detected were E. faecalis (n= 78, 54.2%), E. faecium (n= 47, 32.6%), then E. cecorum (n= 8, 5.6%) and E. casseliflavus (n= 5, 3.5%) (Table 2). Among other genera with few species identified, Macrococcus caseolyticus (4.8%), Lactococcus garvieae (1.6%), Micrococcus luteus (0.1%), Streptococcus gallolyticus (0.9%), Arthrobacter cretinolyticus (0.4%), Corynebacterium falsenii (0.4%), Escherichia coli (0.6%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (0.1%) and Acinetobacter baumannii (0.3%) were found in low frequencies (Table 2). Diversity of Bacterial Species from Nasal and Tracheal Cavities of Nestlings Based on Foraging Habits of Parent Storks Of the 52 nasal and 85 tracheal samples collected from 87 storks, about 88.1% of nestlings from parent storks foraging in natural habitats and 81.4% nestlings of parent storks foraging in landfills had at least one Staphylococcus sp in their tracheal samples. However, all the stork nestlings from parents foraging in natural habitats (100%) and 90.6% of those foraging in landfills had at least one Staphylococcus sp. in their nasal samples (Table 3). On the other hand, 55.0% and 68.8% of stork nestlings from parents foraging in natural habitats and landfills, respectively, were enterococcal nasal carriers. In contrast, 38.1% and 46.5% of nestlings of parent storks foraging in natural habitats and landfills, respectively, had enterococcal tracheal carriage (Table 3). In most cases, stork nestlings with parents foraging in landfills had a relatively higher prevalence of various species of Staphylococcus and Enterococcus. For the tracheal samples, S. sciuri was significantly higher among nestlings of storks foraging in natural habitats than those in landfills (v 2 = 8.568, d.f. = 1, p= 0.0034). In the nasal samples, a significantly higher prevalence of E. faecium was identified in nestlings of storks foraging in landfills than in those in 108 I. N. Abdullahi et al. the natural habitat (v 2 = 5.594, d.f = 1, p= 0.018) (Table 3, Fig. 1, Supplementary Table S1). Regarding the other groups of bacteria in each of the samples, M. caseolyticus (v 2 = 4.623, d.f. = 1, p= 0.032) was detected significantly more frequently in the tracheal cavity of nestlings of storks foraging in natural habitat in contrast to those foraging on landfills (Fig. 1, Supplementary Table S1). In contrast, Bacillus sp.was more frequently present in samples from the tracheal cavity of nestlings of storks foraging in landfills than those in the natural habitat (v 2 = 8.023, d.f. = 1, p= 0.0046) (Fig. 1, Supplementary Table S1). There was no significant association between all other species identified (either from the nasal or tracheal cavity) with the foraging habits of the parent storks (Supplementary Table S1). Distribution Pattern of Bacterial Species Based on the Sample Types of White Stork Nestlings In most cases, the bacteria recovery rates were relatively higher from the nasal than the tracheal cavities (Supplementary Table S2). Significantly higher associations were found in S. aureus, S. sciuri,S. chromogenes,S. xylosus with the nasal than the tracheal cavities of the storks (v 2 test all at d.f. = 1, p<0.05, v= 10.69, 6.732, 5.644 and 5.433, respectively) (Fig. 2, Supplementary Table S2). However, a significantly higher association was obtained in Proteus sp. with the tracheal than in nasal cavities of the storks (v 2 = 7.131, d.f. = 1, p= 0.0075) (Fig. 2, Supplementary Table S2). There was no significant association between all other species identified with the type of samples analysed (Supplementary Table S2). Co-Colonization of Bacteria Species in the Nasal and Tracheal Samples of White Stork Nestlings In the tracheal cavities, the vast majority of the bacterial species had 1–10% correlation with one another (Fig. 3, Supplementary Table S3). In the remaining species, the highest correlation was between B. lichenformis versus E. hirae (100.0%), K. pneumoniae versus A. baumanni (50.0%), S. haemolyticus versus K. pneumoniae (33.3%), A. baumanni versus S. haemolyticus (25.0%) and L. garvieae versus E. coli (25.0%) (Fig. 3, Supplementary Table S3). In the nasal cavities of storks, the majority of the bacterial species had 1–10% correlation between them (Fig. 4, Supplementary Table S3). In the others, the highest correlation was between S. aureus versus E. faecalis (46.2%), then S. aureus versus S. sciuiri (35.4%), S. scuiri versus E. faecalis (32.7%), and M. caseolyticus versus S. chromogenes (30.0%). Those with between 20.1 and 29.9% correlation included S. simulans versus E. durans (25.0%), S. simulans versus C. auromucosum (25.0%), S. saprophyticus versus S. falsenii (25.0%), S. sciuri versus E. faecium (27.1%), L. garvieae versus E. casseliflavus (25.0%), E. casseliflavus versus C. freundii (25.0%), and E. casseliflavus versus C. braakii (25.0%) (Fig. 4, Supplementary Table S3). DISCUSSION Migratory birds (such as storks) have been suggested to play a vital role in the spread of bacteria of public health concern across habitats and regions of the world. Key factors for a vector role are exposure to point sources of such bacteria, colonization, persistence and excretion. The former is closely related to the ecology of the species and the behaviour of individuals. In this respect, the acquisition of pathogenic bacteria through the diet (i.e. foraging) is more evident and has been reported for digestive tract samples (Wilharm et al. 2016; Ho ¨fle et al. 2020; Jarma et al. 2021). In contrast, there is a paucity of evidence for the respiratory tract to constitute a reservoir of Staphylococcus spp (Go ´mez et al. 2016). In particular, detailed bacterial diversity data on the respiratory tract and their association with the foraging habits of storks remain very scarce. Here, we report such data for nestling white storks that could also reflect the behaviour of their parents, as during the breeding season they are spatially bound to their nest, foraging primarily close to the location of the colony (Pineda-Pampliega et al. 2021). Gram-positive cocci were the most frequently detected bacteria from the nasal and tracheal cavities of storks,followed by Gram-positive bacilli, while Enterobacterales and Gram-negative non-fermenters were relatively less frequent. Anatomically, Gram-positive cocci are often aerobic and could have a higher affinity to and colonize the upper respiratory tissues (nasal and tracheal) (Yildiz et al. 2020), and it is expected for them to be more prevalent than Gram-negative bacilli which are facultative anaerobes (such as Enterobacterales) and have more affinity to the intestinal lumen and tissues. This is because the gut contains low levels of oxygen due to oxygen consumption by facultative anaerobes (Franzin et al. 2021). Nasotracheal Microbiota of Nestlings Storks 109 Comparison of Bacteria Species by Sample Types of Nestling Storks Even though both nasal and tracheal cavities could support the growth of most bacterial species, significant associations and higher prevalence were found in S. aureus,S. sciuri,S. chromogenes, and S. xylosus in the nasal cavities of the storks. We are unaware of any previous study that compared this phenomenon. However, a possible reason for this observation could be that the nostrils are more proximal to the external environment and more readily sustain the persistence and recovery of these bacteria (especially S. aureus) than the tracheal cavity. Also, it may have to do with the interactions of the staphylococci with the epithelial cells of the nose to overcome host defence mechanisms, as in the case of S. aureus (Sakr et al. 2018). On the other hand, Proteus sp.was significantly more frequently detected in tracheal than nasal samples. This might reflect colonization originating from the oral cavity or contamination of the sample during collection despite the care taken not to touch the oral mucosa, as Proteus spp. are a common inhabitant of the digestive tract. Table 1. Distribution Pattern of Bacteria Genera Identified from Tracheal and Nasal Samples of Nestling Storks Analysed. N o (%) in tracheal samples (n= 85) N o (%) in nasal samples (n= 52) v 2 pTotal number of isolates of Total number of isolates in tracheal and nasal samples Tracheal Nasal Gram-positive cocci Staphylococcus 76 (89.4) 51 (98.1) 3.58 0.058 218 190 408 Enterococcus 37 (43.5) 36 (69.2) 8.65 0.003* 74 70 144 Macrococcus 15 (17.6) 7 (13.5) 0.42 0.517 24 10 34 Lactococcus 7 (8.2) 1 (1.9) 2.24 0.126 9 2 11 Streptococcus 3 (3.5) 2 (3.8) 0.01 0.924 4 2 6 Micrococcus 0 (0.0) 1 (1.9) 2.04 0.153 0 1 1 Vagococcus 1 (1.2) 1 (1.9) 0.13 0.723 1 1 2 Gram-positive bacilli Bacillus 15 (17.6) 13 (22.4) 1.07 0.300 15 15 30 Arthrobacter 3 (8.2) 0 (0.0) 1.88 0.170 3 0 3 Corynebacterium 4 (4.7) 3 (5.8) 0.08 0.784 13 6 19 Gram negative bacteria: Enterobacterales Proteus 16 (18.8) 2 (3.8) 6.34 0.012* 19 3 22 Enterobacter 4 (4.7) 1 (1.9) 0.71 0.399 6 1 7 Escherichia 3 (3.5) 0 (0.0) 1.88 0.171 4 0 4 Providencia 4 (4.7) 0 (0.0) 2.52 0.112 4 0 4 Klebsiella 1 (1.2) 0 (0.0) 0.62 0.433 1 0 1 Citrobacter 0 (0.0) 1 (1.9) 1.62 0.204 0 2 2 Gram negative bacteria: Non-fermenting Acinetobacter 3 (3.5) 1 (1.9) 0.29 0.588 3 2 5 Total isolates 398 305 703 The number of viable samples from each source is as follows. a. Both tracheal and nasal = 49. b. Total animals tested = 87. *Significant association determined by Chi-squared test at 95% CI. 110 I. N. Abdullahi et al. Table 2. Number of Isolates of Each Species Recovered from the Nasal and Tracheal Samples of Nestling Storks. Bacteria genera and species No. (%) of isolates from tracheal samples (n= 85) No. (%) of isolates from nasal samples (n= 52) Total number (%) of isolates from tracheal and nasal samples Percentage of isolates of species per genus Staphylococcus S. sciuri 146 (36.7) 105 (34.4) 251 (35.7) 61.5 S. aureus 26 (6.5) 41 (13.4) 67 (9.5) 16.4 S. chromogenes 6 (1.5) 14 (4.6) 20 (2.8) 5.0 S. epidermidis 13 (3.3) 4 (1.3) 17 (2.4) 4.1 S. xylosus 2 (0.5) 9 (3.0) 11 (1.6) 2.7 S. lentus 7 (1.8) 3 (1.0) 10 (1.4) 2.5 S. simulans 1 (0.3) 7 (2.3) 8 (1.1) 1.9 S. hominis 7 (1.8) 0 (0.0) 7 (1.0) 1.7 S. saprophyticus 5 (1.3) 1 (0.3) 6 (0.9) 1.5 S. hyicus 1 (0.3) 4 (1.3) 5 (0.7) 0.6 S. haemolyticus 2 (0.5) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.3) 0.5 S. arlettae 0 (0.0) 2 (0.7) 2 (0.3) 0.5 S. capitis 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 0.2 S. pasteuri 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 0.2 Total 218 190 408 100.0 Enterococcus E. faecalis 44 (11.1) 34 (11.1) 78 (11.1) 54.2 E. faecium 19 (4.8) 28 (9.2) 47 (6.7) 32.6 E. cecorum 8 (2.0) 0 (0.0) 8 (1.1) 5.6 E. casseliflavus 0 (0.0) 5 (1.6) 5 (0.7) 3.5 E. gallinarum 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.3) 1.4 E. durans 0 (0.0) 2 (0.7) 2 (0.3) 1.4 E. canis 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 0.7 E. hirae 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 0.7 Total 74 70 144 100.0 Macrococcus caseolyticus 24 (6.0) 10 (3.3) 34 (4.8) 100.0 Lactococcus garvieae 9 (2.3) 2 (0.7) 11 (1.6) 100.0 Streptococcus gallolyticus 4 (1.0) 2 (0.7) 6 (0.9) 100.0 Micrococcus luteus 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1) 100.0 Vagococcus lutrae 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.3) 100.0 Bacillus Bacillus sp. 14 (3.5) 9 (2.9) 23 (3.3) 76.7 B. cereus 0 (0.0) 4 (1.3) 4 (0.6) 13.3 B. licheniformis 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3) 2 (0.3) 6.7 B. subtilis 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1) 3.3 Total 15 15 30 100.0 Arthrobacter cretinolyticus 3 (0.8) 0 (0.0) 3 (0.4) 100.0 Nasotracheal Microbiota of Nestlings Storks 111 Comparison of Nasal and Tracheal Bacteria Carriage of Nestlings by Foraging Habits of Parent Storks Some bacterial species were recovered in high frequencies from nestlings of parent storks foraging in landfills. The exception was S. sciuri, which was identified in higher frequency from the trachea of storks foraging in natural habitats. The high CoNS carriage rate detected in the nasal and tracheal samples in our storks (>80%), is similar to the high prevalence rate previously detected in different types of wild birds in Spain (60%) (Ruiz-Ripa et al. 2020) and in Portugal (75%) (Sousa et al. 2016), but much higher than the prevalence reported in wild birds in Italy (11.4%) (Gambino et al. 2021). These differences could reflect variation in nasal and tracheal staphylococci colonization rates, the wild animal species, and could also be due to differences in methodologies used by the studies. Behavioural traits that could also influence this high prevalence could be the sharing of pastures with livestock such as cattle and small ruminants and the consumption of dung beetles by the storks, as well as the habit of storks to use cattle manure in the nest presumably to aid in the thermoreguTable 2. continued Bacteria genera and species No. (%) of isolates from tracheal samples (n= 85) No. (%) of isolates from nasal samples (n= 52) Total number (%) of isolates from tracheal and nasal samples Percentage of isolates of species per genus Corynebacterium Corynebacterium sp. 12 (3.0) 3 (1.0) 15 (2.1) 78.9 C. falsenii 1 (0.3) 2 (0.7) 3 (0.4) 15.8 C. auromucosum 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1) 5.3 Total 13 6 19 100.0 Proteus Proteus sp. 18 (4.5) 3 (1.0) 21 (3.0) 95.5 P. vulgaris 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 4.5 Total 19 3 22 100.0 Enterobacter E. cloacae 6 (1.5) 0 (0.0) 6 (0.9) 85.7 E. asburea 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1) 14.3 Total 6 1 7 100.0 Escherichia coli 4 (1.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (0.6) 100.0 Providencia P. stuartii 3 (0.8) 0 (0.0) 3 (0.4) 75.0 P. retgerii 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 25.0 Total 4 0 4 100.0 Klebsiella pneumoniae 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.1) 100.0 Citrobacter C. braakii 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1) 50.0 C. freundii 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.1) 50.0 Total 0 2 2 100.0 Acinetobacter A. junii 1 (0.3) 2 (0.7) 3 (0.4) 60.0 A. baumannii 2 (0.5) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.3) 40.0 Total 3 2 5 100.0 Total isolates (%) 398 (56.6) 305 (43.4) 703 (100.0) 100.0 112 I. N. Abdullahi et al. lation of newly hatched chicks (Ferreira et al. 2019; Tortosa and Villafuerte 1999). Highly diverse Staphylococcus spp were detected, of which S. sciuri and S. aureus accounted for over 85% of isolates of the entire genus detected. A possible explanation for the abundance of S. sciuri could be that this species is largely adapted to wildlife, especially wild birds, whereas S. aureus has a very broad host range of adaptation across various ecosystems (Guinane et al. 2010). Staphylococcus aureus is a major source of opportunistic infection, especially in immunocompromised humans and a frequent etiological agent of animal infections (Haag et al. 2019). Other staphylococcal species are seldom associated with human and animal infections. It is worth mentioning that S. scuiri has occasionally been implicated in infections in animals (Kengkoom and Ampawong 2017; Nemeghaire et al. 2014; Zeman et al. 2017) and hospitalized humans (Cirkovic et al. 2017). In the storks, enterococci are the second most frequent colonizers of the nasal and tracheal cavities. In this study, several non-E. faecalis and non-E. faecium species including E. gallinarum, E. casseliflavus, E. cecorum, E. canis, E. hirae and E. durans were also isolated to a small extent. It is important to mention that even though enterococci are associated with the intestinal tract of humans and animals, Table 3. Diversity Pattern of Nasal and Tracheal Staphylococci and Enterococci of Nestlings in Relation to the Foraging Habits of Parent Storks. Bacterial genera and species Tracheal Nasal No. (%) of positive nestlings of parent storks foraging in natural areas No. (%) of positive nestlings of parent storks foraging in landfills No. (%) of positive nestlings of parent storks foraging in natural areas No. (%) of positive nestlings of parent storks foraging in landfills (n= 42) (n= 43) (n= 20) (n= 32) Staphylococci 37 (88.1) 35 (81.4) 20 (100.0) 29 (90.6) S. sciuri 36 (85.7) 23 (53.4) 18 (90.0) 28 (87.5) S. aureus 3 (7.1) 7 (16.3) 7 (35.0) 12 (37.5) S. epidermidis 0 (0.0) 8 (18.6) 1 (5.0) 4 (12.5) S. hominis 0 (0.0) 7 (16.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) S. lentus 2 (4.8) 4 (9.3) 1 (5.0) 3 (9.4) S. chromogenes 1 (2.4) 2 (4.7) 1 (5.0) 5 (15.6) S. xylosus 2 (4.8) 0 (0.0) 5 (25.0) 1 (3.1) S. capitis 1 (2.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) S. hyicus 0 (0.0) 1 (2.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) S. simulans 0 (0.0) 7 (16.3) 2 (10.0) 2 (6.2) S. saprophyticus 2 (4.8) 3 (7.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (3.1) S. haemolyticus 1 (2.4) 2 (4.7) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) S. pasteuri 1 (2.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) S. arlettae 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (3.1) Enterococci 16 (38.1) 20 (46.5) 11 (55.0) 22 (68.8) E. faecalis 10 (23.8) 10 (23.3) 8 (40.0) 11 (34.4) E. faecium 5 (11.9) 8 (18.6) 1 (5.0) 14 (43.8) E. cecorum 1 (2.4) 6 (13.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) E. canis 1 (2.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) E. hirae 1 (2.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) E. casseliflavus 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (20.0) 0 (0.0) E. gallinarum 0 (0.0) 1 (2.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (3.1) E. durans 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.0) 0 (0.0) NB: The number of viable tracheal and nasal samples from each group follows, respectively. a. Foraging in natural areas = 42 T versus 20 N. b. Foraging in landfills = 43 T versus 32 N. Nasotracheal Microbiota of Nestlings Storks 113 Li G, Du X, Zhou D, Li C, Huang L, Zheng Q, Cheng Z (2018) Emergence of pathogenic and multiple-antibiotic-resistant Macrococcus caseolyticus in commercial broiler chickens. Transboundary and Emerging Diseases 65(6):1605–1614. https:// doi.org/10.1111/tbed.12912 Lina G, Boutite F, Tristan A, Bes M, Etienne J, Vandenesch F (2003) Bacterial competition for human nasal cavity colonization: role of Staphylococcal agr alleles. Applyed Environmental Microbiology 69:18–23. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.69.1.1823.2003 Lozano, C., Gharsa, H., Ben Slama, K., Zarazaga, M., & Torres, C., (2016). Staphylococcus aureus in Animals and Food: Methicillin Resistance, Prevalence and Population Structure. A Review in the African Continent. Microorganisms,4(1), 12. https://doi.or g/10.3390/microorganisms4010012 Martı ´n-Ve ´lez, V., Mohring, B., Van Leeuwen, C.H.A., Shamounbaranes, J., Thaxter, C.B., Baert, J.M., Camphuysen, C.J., Green, A.J., (2020). Functional connectivity network between terrestrial and aquatic habitats by a generalist waterbird, and implications for biovectoring. Science of Total Environment 705, 135886. h ttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135886 Nemeghaire S, Vanderhaeghen W, Argudı ´n MA, Haesebrouck F, Butaye P (2014) Characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus sciuri isolates from industrially raised pigs, cattle and broiler chickens. The Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 69(11):2928–2934. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dku268 Nocera, F. P., Ferrara, G., Scandura, E., Ambrosio, M., Fiorito, F., & De Martino, L., (2021). A Preliminary Study on Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Staphylococcus spp. and Enterococcus spp. Grown on Mannitol Salt Agar in European Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) Hunted in Campania Region-Italy. Animals: 12(1), 85. h ttps://doi.org/10.3390/ani12010085 O’Kelly BC (2005) Sewage Sludge to Landfill: Some Pertinent Engineering Properties. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 55(6):765–771. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10473289.2005.10464670 Paniagua Voiro LR, Frago E, Kaltenpoth M, Hilker M, Fatouros NE (2018) Bacterial Symbionts in Lepidoptera: Their Diversity, Transmission, and Impact on the Host. Frontiers in Microbiology. 9:556. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.00556 Peixoto RS, Harkins DM, Nelson KE (2021) Advances in Microbiome Research for Animal Health. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences 9:289–311. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal091020-075907 Pineda-Pampliega J, Ramiro Y, Herrera-Duen ˜as A, Martinez-Haro M, Herna ´ndez JM, Aguirre JI, Ho ¨fle U. A multidisciplinary approach to the evaluation of the effects of foraging on landfills on white stork nestlings. Sci Total Environ. 2021 Jun 25;775:145197. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145 197. R Core Team. (2022). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/ Ruiz-Ripa, L., Go ´mez, P., Alonso, C. A., Camacho, M. C., Ramiro, Y., de la Puente, J., Ferna ´ndez-Ferna ´ndez, R., Quevedo, M. A ´., Blanco, J. M., Ba ´guena, G., Zarazaga, M., Ho ¨fle, U., Torres, C., (2020). Frequency and Characterization of Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence Genes of Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci from Wild Birds in Spain. Detection of tst-Carrying S. sciuri Isolates. Microorganisms,8(9), 1317. https://doi. org/10.3390/microorganisms8091317 Sakr A, Bre ´geon F, Me `ge JL, Rolain JM, Blin O (2018) Staphylococcus aureus Nasal Colonization: An Update on Mechanisms, Epidemiology, Risk Factors, and Subsequent Infections. Frontiers in Microbiology 9:2419. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fmicb.2018.02419 Schwendener S, Cotting K, Perreten V (2017) Novel methicillin resistance gene mecD in clinical Macrococcus caseolyticus strains from bovine and canine sources. Scientific Reports 7:43797. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep43797 Souillard, R., Laurentie, J., Kempf, I., Le Cae ¨r, V., Le Bouquin, S., Serror, P., & Allain, V., (2022). Increasing incidence of Enterococcus-associated diseases in poultry in France over the past 15 years. Veterinary Microbiology,269, 109426. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.vetmic.2022.109426 Sousa, M., Silva, N., Igrejas, G., Sargo, R., Benito, D., Go ´mez, P., Lozano, C., Manageiro, V., Torres, C., Canic¸a, M., & Poeta, P., (2016). Genetic Diversity and Antibiotic Resistance Among Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci Recovered from Birds of Prey in Portugal. Microbial Drug Resistance (Larchmont, N.Y.),22(8), 727–730. https://doi.org/10.1089/mdr.2015.0266 Sugimoto S, Iwamoto T, Takada K, Okuda K-I, Tajima A, Iwase T (2013) Staphylococcus epidermidis Esp degrades specific proteins associated with Staphylococcus aureus biofilm formation and host-pathogen interaction. Journal Bacteriology 195:1645–1655. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.01672-12 Taylor, T., Unakal, C., (2021). Staphylococcus aureus; StatPearls: Treasure Island, FL, USA. Torres-Sangiao E, Leal Rodriguez C, Garcı ´a-Riestra C (2021) Application and Perspectives of MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry in Clinical Microbiology Laboratories. Microorganisms 9(7):1539. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9071539 Torres, C., Alonso, C.A., Ruiz-Ripa, L., Leo ´n-Sampedro, R., Del Campo, R., Coque, T.M. (2018). Antimicrobial Resistance in Enterococcus spp. of animal origin. Microbiology Spectrum, 6(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.ARBA-0032-20 18. Tortosa FS, Villafuerte R (1999) Effect of nest microclimate on effective endothermy in White Stork Ciconia nestlings. Bird Study 46:336–341 Vittecoq, M., Godreuil, S., Prugnolle, F., Durand, P., Brazier, L., Renaud, N., Arnal, A., Aberkane, S., Jean-Pierre, H., GauthierClerc, M., Thomas, F., Renaud, F., (2016). Antimicrobial resistance in wildlife. Journal Applied Ecology 53 (2), 519–529 Wareth G, Neubauer H (2021) The Animal-foods-environment interface of Klebsiella pneumoniae in Germany: an observational study on pathogenicity, resistance development and the current situation. Veterinary Research 52(1):16. https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s13567-020-00875-w Wickham H (2016) ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis, New York: Springer-Verlag Wilharm, G., Skiebe, E., Higgins, P. G., Poppel, M. T., Blaschke, U., Leser, S., Heider, C., Heindorf, M., Brauner, P., Ja ¨ckel, U., Bo ¨hland, K., Cuny, C., Łopin ´ska, A., Kaminski, P., Kasprzak, M., Bochenski, M., Ciebiera, O., Tobo ´łka, M., _ Zołnierowicz, K. M., Siekiera, J., …Jerzak, L., (2017). Relatedness of wildlife and livestock avian isolates of the nosocomial pathogen Acinetobacter baumannii to lineages spread in hospitals worldwide. Environmental Microbiology,19(10), 4349–4364. https://d oi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.13931 World Health Organization., (2017). Prioritization of Pathogens to Guide Discovery, Research and Development of New Antibiotics for Drug-resistant Bacterial Infections, Including Tuberculosis. World Health Organization, Geneva (WHO/ EMP/IAU/2017.12). 120 I. N. Abdullahi et al. Wu, H., Wu, F-T., Zhou, Q-H., Zhao, D-P., (2021). Comparative Analysis of Gut Microbiota in Captive and Wild Oriental White Storks: Implications for Conservation Biology. Frontiers in Microbiology 12:649466. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.202 1.649466 Xiao G, Liu S, Xiao Y, Zhu Y, Zhao H, Li A, Li Z, Feng J (2019) Seasonal Changes in Gut Microbiota Diversity and Composition in the Greater Horseshoe Bat. Frontiers in Microbiology 10:2247. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2019.02247 Yildiz, S., Pereira Bonifacio Lopes, J. P., Berge ´, M., Gonza ´lez-Ruiz, V., Baud, D., Kloehn, J., Boal-Carvalho, I., Schaeren, O. P., Schotsaert, M., Hathaway, L. J., Rudaz, S., Viollier, P. H., Hapfelmeier, S., Francois, P., & Schmolke, M. (2020). Respiratory tissue-associated commensal bacteria offer therapeutic potential against pneumococcal colonization. eLife,9, e53581. h ttps://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.53581 Zeman M, Mas ˇlan ˇova ´I, Indra ´kova ´A, S ˇiborova ´M, Mikula ´s ˇek K, Bendı ´c ˇkova ´K, Plevka P, Vrbovska ´V, Zdra ´hal Z, Dos ˇkar ˇJ, Pantu ˚c ˇek R (2017) Staphylococcus sciuri bacteriophages double-convert for staphylokinase and phospholipase, mediate interspecies plasmid transduction, and package mecA gene. Scientific Reports 7:46319. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep46319 Nasotracheal Microbiota of Nestlings Storks 121