ISSN 2410-7751 (Print)
ISSN 2410-776X (Online)
Biotechnologia Acta V. 15, No. 4, 2022
P. 41-43. Bibliography 7, Engl.
UDC: 579.63 + 612.017.11
https://doi.org/10.15407/biotech15.04.041
INDICATORS OF THE SKIN MICROBIOTA AND THE PHAGOCYTIC ACTIVITY IN MEAT AND EGG PRODUCTION WORKERS
V. L. Sokolenko, S. V. Sokolenko, V. V. Honcharenko, V. V. Kucher, I. V. Kobal
Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy, Cherkasy, Ukraine
Aim. The analysis of the indicators of skin microbiota and phagocytic activity of neutrophils and monocytes in employees of the "Peremoga Nova" poultry farm.
Methods. The presence of sanitary and epidemiologically important groups of bacteria and the number of mesophilic aerobic and facultative anaerobic microorganisms (MAFAnM) on the skin surface, leukogram parameters and phagocytic activity of professional phagocytes were determined. The indicators of students of the Bohdan Khmelnytsky National University of Cherkasy were used as a control.
Results. It was found that the MAFAnM index in the experimental group (3.2?103 CFU/cm3) is significantly lower than in the control group (2.7?103 CFU/cm3), however, the percentage of Staphylococcus spp. carriers is higher (67.5% versus 40.0%). In the experimental group, the relative and total number of monocytes is significantly higher compared to the control group. There is a positive correlation between the phagocytic number and the phagocytic index of monocytes and the value of MAFAnM.
Conclusions. There was an increase of the level of monocytes in meat and egg products workers against the background of the presence of bacteria of the Staphylococcus spp. group on the skin. It may indicate the activation of pro-inflammatory factors at the level of peripheral blood. An increased percentage of staphylococcal carriers is a sign of adaptation of Staphylococcus spp. bacteria to the antibiotics used in the manufacturing process.
Key words: skin microbiota, phagocytic activity, poultry farm, sanitary condition
© Palladin Institute of Biochemistry of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 2022
References
1. Wu Y. N., Chen J. S. Food safety monitoring and surveillance in China: Past, present and future. Food Control. 2018, 90, 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.03.009
2. Sokolenko V. L., Sokolenko S. V. Manifestations of allostatic load in residents of radiation contaminated areas aged 18–24 years. Regulatory Mechanisms in Biosystems. 2019, 10(4), 422–431. https://doi.org/10.15421/021963
3. Byrd A. L., Belkaid Y., Segre J. A. The human skin microbiome. Nature Reviews Microbiology. 2018, 16(3), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2017.157
4. Sherwani M. A., Tufail S., Muzaffar A. F., Yusuf N. The skin microbiome and immune system: Potential target for chemoprevention?. Photodermatology, photoimmunology & photomedicine. 2018, 34(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpp.12334
5. Catinean A., Neag M. A., Mitre A. O., Bocsan C. I., Buzoianu A. D. Microbiota and Immune-Mediated Skin Diseases – An Overview. Microorganisms. 2019, 7(9), 279. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms7090279
6. Oh J., Unutmaz D. Immune cells for microbiota surveillance. Science. 2019, 366(6464), 419–420. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz4014
7. Merad M., Martin J. C. Pathological inflammation in patients with COVID-19: a key role for monocytes and macrophages. Nature reviews immunology. 2020, 20(6), 355–362. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-020-0331-4