Yeasts and filamentous fungi in psittacidae and birds of prey droppings in midwest region of Brazil: a potential hazard to human health.

D P Leite-Jr,H D Hoffmann-Santos,D T Takahara,R C Hahn,W B Simi,C R Paula

doi:10.1590/1519-6984.181192

D P Leite-Jr, H D Hoffmann-Santos + Show 4 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.181192

Copy DOI

Abstract

Birds of prey and from Psittacidae family are host to fungal microbiota and play an important role in the epidemiology of zoonoses. Few studies in the literature have characterized mycelial and yeast fungi in the droppings of these birds and correlated the isolates with the zoonotic potential of the microorganisms. Droppings from 149 birds were evaluated and divided into two groups: captive: Rhea americana araneipes, Primolius maracana, Ara ararauna, Ara chloropterus, Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus, Amazona aestiva, Ara macao macao, Ramphastos toco, Sarcoramphus papa, Busarellus nigricollis, Bubo virginianus nacurutu, Buteogallus coronatus, Buteogallus urubitinga urubitinga, Spizaetus melanoleucus, Spizaetus ornatus ornatus, Buteo albonotatus, Geranoaetus albicaudatus albicaudatus, Rupornis magnirostris magnirostris and Harpia harpyja, and quarantined birds: Amazona aestiva and Eupsitulla aurea. The fungal isolates were identified according to macroscopic (gross colony appearance), micromorphological and biochemical characteristics. Among birds displayed in enclosures, Aspergillus niger (41.1%) and Candida kefyr (63.8%) were the fungi most frequently isolated in Harpia harpyja and Ramphastos toco, respectively. For quarantined birds, the following percentages were observed in Eupsittula aurea , (76.6%) C. krusei, (84.4%) C. kefyr and (15.2%) C. famata, while in Amazona aestiva, (76.2%) C. krusei was observed. These findings indicate potentially pathogenic species in the bird droppings assessed, which constitute a risk of exposure for keepers and individuals who visit the zoo. Birds of the Cerrado and Pantanal of Mato Grosso (Central Western region of Brazil) could act in the epidemiological chain of important zoonoses.

Highlights

Samples were collected from 109 birds on display for visitors, which were housed in 16 enclosures located at the regional animal zoological garden of the Cuiabá city - Federal University of Mato Grosso, central west region of Brazil, and 40 birds (2 species) maintained in 3 quarantine pens that were closed to visitors
Droppings from 149 birds were evaluated and divided into two groups: captive (n = 109): Rhea americana araneipes (15), Primolius maracana (10), Ara ararauna (11), Ara chloropterus (10), Anodorhynchus hyacinthinus (8), Amazona aestiva (18), Ara macao macao (7), Ramphastos toco (4), Sarcoramphus papa (4), Busarellus nigricollis (2), Bubo virginianus nacurutu (3), Buteogallus coronatus (1), Buteogallus urubitinga urubitinga (3), Spizaetus melanoleucus (2), Spizaetus ornatus ornatus (3), Buteo albonotatus (4), Geranoaetus albicaudatus albicaudatus (1), Rupornis magnirostris magnirostris (2) and Harpia harpyja (1), and quarantined birds (n = 40): Amazona aestiva (32) and Eupsitulla aurea (8) according to Clements et al (2017)
The current literature contains few studies that have evaluated fungal microbiota isolated from bird droppings, the majority focus on surveying yeasts, those belonging to the Cryptococcus complex, is a life-threatening systemic mycosis affecting a wide range of animals and humans (Danesi et al, 2014; Sykes and Malik, 2012)

Summary

Introduction

Several studies have highlighted the importance of bird dropping as a suitable substrate for the growth of yeasts and filamentous fungi (Elhariri et al, 2015; Mendes et al, 2014; Chryssanthou et al, 2011; Brilhante et al, 2010; Marinho et al, 2010; Rosário et al, 2010; Lugarini et al, 2008; Baroni et al, 2006; Pereira, 2006; Mancianti et al, 2002; López-Martínez and Castañón-Olivares, 1995; Caicedo et al, 1999). The richness and composition of the birds provide valuable data to understand the sensitivity and resistance of species, nesting and migratory sites (Manica et al, 2010) that may be adversely affected by opportunistic infections These infections can be developed in the birds themselves through environmental contamination of their habitats (Fraga et al, 2011; Lugarini et al, 2008; Cafarchia et al, 2006; Mancianti et al, 2002)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion