| |
Original research
|
Peer reviewed
|
Further evaluation of a novel polymeric antimicrobial for the control of porcine
postweaning colibacillosis
David J. Hampson, BVetMed, PhD, DSc, FRCPath, FRCVS; Alistair I. Murdoch, BVMS, MRCVS, MBA
DJH: School of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch,
WA, 6150, Australia. AIM: Chemeq Ltd, Technology Park, Bentley, WA, 6102,
Australia. Corresponding author: Dr David J. Hampson, School of Veterinary
and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA, 6150, Australia;
Tel: +61 89360 2287;
Fax: +61 89310 4144; E-mail: D.Hampson@murdoch.edu.au.
Cite as: Hampson DJ, Murdoch AI. Further evaluation of a novel polymeric
antimicrobial for the control of porcine postweaning colibacillosis. J Swine Health Prod. 2003;11(5):223-228. Also available as a PDF.
Summary
Objectives: To evaluate a new polymeric antimicrobial for the control of
porcine postweaning colibacillosis (PWC).
Materials and methods: In an experimental infection study, three groups of
12 weaner pigs received either Chemeq
polymeric antimicrobial in the food, a therapeutic dosage of apramycin orally, or
no treatment. Three days after weaning, the pigs were challenged orally with cultures
of [beta]-hemolytic Escherichia coli O8:K87:K88, then monitored daily
and euthanized 11 days after weaning. In a field trial, 148 weaned pigs in a
commercial swine herd were divided into five
groups, receiving polymeric antimicrobial either
in their water or food, apramycin in their water, a commercial
E coli PWC bacterin, or no treatment. Postweaning
performance was monitored.
Results: In the infection study, pigs
receiving polymeric antimicrobial had less
diarrhea than the apramycin-treated group
(P <.01) but not the untreated control group,
and had fewer hemolytic E coli in their
large intestines than the control pigs (P <.05).
In the field trial, pigs receiving polymeric antimicrobial had less diarrhea than pigs
in the other groups (P <.05), and fewer
were removed from the study because of severe PWC
(P <.05).
Discussion: Antimicrobial resistance is
increasing amongst PWC strains of E coli, and new antimicrobials and strategies
are needed to maintain postweaning health and production. Chemeq polymeric
antimicrobial reduced diarrhea after weaning, and was a useful adjunct to the control
of PWC.
Implications: Chemeq polymeric
antimicrobial has therapeutic advantage in the treatment and control of PWC.
Keywords: swine, weaning, diarrhea,
Escherichia coli, antimicrobial
Search the AASV web site for pages with similar keywords.
Received: October 24, 2002
Accepted: March 28, 2003
Management of antimicrobial drug resistance has become a major global imperative. For veterinarians, there is a requirement to
reduce routine use of the antimicrobials that are currently available, and also to
optimize the health of animals in the face of emergence of resistant bacterial pathogens.
In the context of intensive pig production, postweaning colibacillosis (PWC)
remains one of the most problematic bacterial diseases still occurring endemically in
swine production units worldwide.1
Classical PWC is a common and severe diarrheal disease which occurs in the first 3 to
10 days after weaning. Diarrhea results from the action of one or more serotypes
of [beta]-hemolytic enterotoxigenic
Escherichia coli which proliferate in the
proximal small intestine during this postweaning
period.2 The E coli adhere to
villous enterocytes via specific pili, and release
enterotoxins which are responsible for loss of fluid and electrolytes, and hence cause
the secretory diarrhea.3,4
The use of oral or systemic antibiotics, together with electrolyte
replacement therapy, is the most common method
used to treat PWC. Unfortunately, the strains of
E coli associated with PWC are becoming increasingly resistant to a range of
antimicrobials,5,6 and in response to this
problem, a variety of alternative therapies are being developed. Recently, a novel
polymeric antimicrobial, active ingredient
poly (2-propenal, 2-propenoic acid) (Chemeq
polymeric antimicrobial; Chemeq Ltd, Bentley, Western Australia), was
reported to have potential for the control of
PWC.7 In vitro studies have shown that it
exerts biocidal activity against a range of
bacteria, bacterial spores, fungi, and viruses,
and, furthermore, that the large molecular weight of the polymer limits its
absorption through the gut wall.8 This
antimicrobial has a mode of action different from that
of other antimicrobials in current use. It contains reactive aldehyde groups that act
by initially adsorbing to, then denaturing, surface proteins of micro-organisms,
thereby killing them in a non-selective way.
Because of its non-specific mode of action, use of this antimicrobial is unlikely to
contribute to further antibiotic resistance in enteric pathogens of food-producing
animals or human beings. Chemeq polymeric antimicrobial becomes less active as
it passes along the gastrointestinal tract, due to the formation of microbiologically
inactive polymer-protein conjugates (unpublished data, V. Wycoco, 2002).
Consequently, there is minimal impact on the microflora of the lower tract.
The purpose of the current work, comprising an experimental infection study and
a field trial, was to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of
the polymeric antimicrobialin the control of PWC.
In the initial experimental infection study, efficacy was compared with the use
of apramycin sulfate given as a treatment for diarrhea in weaned pigs inoculated
with K88+ E coli. In the field trial, efficacy
was compared with the use of apramycin sulfate and a commercial PWC
E coli bacterin. Preliminary results of this study have
been reported.9,10
Materials and methods
Experimental infection study
Animals, housing, and feeding.
Thirty-six Large White x Landrace piglets were purchased from a commercial swine herd
on the day of weaning at 21 days of age (Day 0). They were transported to
Murdoch University, weighed, ear tagged, and allotted in a randomized complete block
design to three treatment groups of 12, each of which comprised six males and six
females penned separately. The pigs were housed in six adjacent pens in an isolation
animal facility. Water and feed were available ad libitum, and each day uneaten feed
was removed and fresh feed was supplied. Group food intake, which was the sum
of the intakes of both pens in each group, was recorded daily. The diet was a
commercial, antimicrobial-free, pelleted weaner
diet (19% crude protein).
Study design. Beginning on Day 0, the food offered to the piglets of Group 1
was top-dressed with a controlled-release pellet containing 1% of
Chemeq polymeric antimicrobial plus 0.1% sucrose. The
amount added was such that the piglets were consuming approximately 30 mg of
polymer per kg BW daily by Day 3. Daily from Day 4, apramycin sulfate (Apralan Soluble
Powder; Elanco Animal Health, West Ryde, Australia) was administered to the
piglets of Group 2. Each pig received 2 mL of a solution of apramycin sulfate dissolved
in water, given orally by syringe once daily, for a dose of 15 mg per kg BW. The
piglets of Group 3 received no antimicrobial treatments.
On Day 3, rectal swabs were taken from each pig and used to inoculate
Columbia agar plates (Oxoid Ltd, Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK) containing 5%
defibrinated ovine blood. The plates were incubated overnight at 37°C. After
swabbing, the animals were dosed orally with 50 mL of an approximate 6-hour culture
(109 colony forming units per mL) of
[beta]-hemolytic E coli grown at 37°C in
brain heart infusion broth. The strain had been recovered from a pig with PWC in a
Western Australian swine herd, and had been identified as serotype O8:K87:K88, by
the E coli Reference Laboratory, Bendigo,
Australia. This strain has been used in previous experimental infection studies to
reproduce PWC in weanling pigs.7 The sensitivity
to antimicrobials of the inoculated strain and a subsequently recovered isolate were
tested on Mueller-Hinton agar (Difco Laboratories, BD, North Ryde, NSW, Australia)
by the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion technique according to the United States
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards
guidelines.11 The antimicrobials tested were neomycin, ampicillin,
tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, tylosin, compound sulfonamides,
and apramycin. Width of the zone of inhibition after overnight incubation was used to
classify the organisms as susceptible, intermediate or
resistant.11
Starting on Day 8, when clinical evidence of PWC was first observed in the
control group, fecal swabs were collected daily from each pig and used to inoculate
Columbia agar plates (Oxoid) containing 5% defibrinated ovine blood. The plates
were incubated overnight at 37°C, and the extent of
[beta]-hemolytic E coli growth on the plates was estimated in a
semi-quantitative fashion, with a score of 1 for
organisms present only in the inoculum, 2 for
organisms also present in the first streak, 3 for organisms also present in the second
streak, and 4 for organisms also present in the third streak and beyond. Group mean
fecal [beta]-hemolytic E coli scores were
calculated for each group from Day 8 until the end of the experiment.
A visual assessment was made of the consistency of the fecal output in a
semi-quantitative manner on a daily basis, with a
score of 0 for normal fecal consistency, 1 for
soft fecal consistency, and 2 for diarrhea. A mean fecal consistency score was
calculated for each group by totaling the fecal
scores and dividing by the number of samples for the group. Within each group, the
number of days that pigs had a fecal score of 1 or
2 was also calculated (diarrhea days). Mean days of diarrhea for each group were
calculated over the period Day 8 to 11.
On Day 11, the pigs were weighed and then euthanized with an intravenous
injection of sodium barbiturate. All pigs were subjected to postmortem examination.
The gastrointestinal tract was dissected free from the mesentery. The length of
the small intestine was recorded, and then it was opened at points 25%
(proximal), 50% (mid) and 75% (distal) along its length. The intestinal mucosa in each
area was swabbed without rinsing or scraping, and the swabs were used to inoculate
Columbia blood agar plates, which were then incubated as described for fecal swabs.
The cecum and the proximal colon were also opened, and the mucosa was swabbed
and the swabs cultured as described. Mean [beta]-hemolytic
E coli scores for the five intestinal sites were calculated as for
fecal swabs.
Statistical analysis. Statistical analysis
was undertaken using STATISTIX, version 7 (Analytical Software, Tallahassee,
Florida). The weights of the pigs in the three
groups were compared by analysis of variance (ANOVA) at the beginning and end of
the trial. Fecal consistency scores, mean fecal
[beta]-hemolytic E coli scores, and mean
[beta]-hemolytic E coli scores at the five intestinal sites at necropsy were
compared between the treatment groups of pigs
using the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA.
Field trial
A field trial was carried out in a 400-sow herd that had a history of high
morbidity and mortality due to PWC associated with
[beta]-hemolytic E coli O149:K91:K88. Postweaning colibacillosis was
routinely managed by the use of a commercial E
coli bacterin given to the piglets 7 to 10
days prior to weaning, and treatment of affected pigs with oral antibiotic preparations
and injections. The antibiotic preparation was selected according to clinical response,
but apramycin sulfate was considered the drug of choice. A total of 148 Large White
x Landrace pigs weaned at approximately 21 days of age were randomly assigned to
five treatment groups of 28 to 31 pigs, with an even distribution of male and female
pigs amongst the groups. Each treatment group was housed in a single pen. Individual
pigs were identified with an ear tag, and were weighed on the day of weaning (Day
0), and on Days 7 and 14. The diet was a commercial, antimicrobial-free
wheat-based weaner diet containing 20% crude protein. Uneaten feed was removed
daily, weighed, and replaced with fresh feed.
Pigs in Group 1 (n = 30) received antimicrobial polymer, 30 mg per kg BW
daily, added manually to their drinking water in a calibrated static drinker so that
intake could be monitored. Pigs in Group 2 (n = 29) received antimicrobial polymer, 30
mg per kg BW daily, top-dressed on their feed in controlled-release pellets containing
1% polymeric antimicrobial plus 0.1% sucrose. Pigs in Group 3 (n = 28)
received apramycin sulfate, 12.5 mg per kg BW daily, added to their drinking water in
a calibrated static drinker. Pigs in Group 4 (n = 30) were vaccinated with a commercial
E coli bacterin (Weanavac; Intervet,
Bendigo, Australia) administered intramuscularly
to each piglet 1 week prior to weaning; Group 4 received no antimicrobial treatment.
Pigs in Group 5 (n = 31) received no treatment. Staff caring for the pigs were blinded to
the nature of the treatments being administered, ie, they were unaware of the types
of agents being administered.
Medication for pigs in Groups 1 to 3 commenced on Day 0. The presence of
diarrhea and mortality in all groups was assessed daily. On Days 4 through 7,
fecal swabs were taken from all pigs with diarrhea, and used to inoculate Columbia
agar plates containing 5% defibrinated ovine blood. Plates were incubated overnight
at 37°C. The growth of [beta]-hemolytic E
coli on the plates was estimated in a semi-quantitative fashion, using the same
criteria as in the experimental infection study.
Six [beta]-hemolytic E coli colonies from
different pigs were submitted to the E coli
Reference Laboratory, Bendigo, Australia, for serotyping, and were also subjected
to antimicrobial sensitivity testing as previously described. A daily
semi-quantitative assessment was made of fecal
consistency, with scoring as in the experimental
infection study. Feed consumption was recorded for all groups. Pigs that became
moribund due to dehydration and toxemia associated with acute PWC were removed from
the study and euthanized.
Statistical analysis. Statistical analysis
was undertaken using STATISTIX, version 7 (Analytical Software). Mortality rates for
all groups were compared using a c2 test,
with rates between groups compared using two-tailed Fisher's exact tests. Group weights
at the beginning of the trial were compared by ANOVA. As mean weight at the
beginning of the trial was significantly different for some groups, final weights were
not compared. Instead, the mean percentage change in body weight between Day 0
and 14 was calculated for each group, and mean gains were compared between
groups by ANOVA. Pigs that were removed from the trial were not included in the
analysis. Numbers of pigs that had diarrhea in
each group were compared using ANOVA. A Tukey-Kramer multiple comparison
of means test was performed when the ANOVA yielded significant results.
Results
Experimental infection study
All pigs remained healthy prior to experimental challenge, and hemolytic
E coli was not detected in their feces at the time
of challenge. One pig in the negative control group developed severe septic arthritis
and was euthanized on humane grounds on Day 6. Pigs in all three groups
gained weight during the trial, and there were no significant differences among groups
in weights at the beginning or end of the trial. No mortalities occurred.
Clinical evidence of PWC was first observed on Day 8. Mean fecal
consistency scores for the groups from Day 8 to 11
are recorded in Table 1. The mean fecal consistency score was lower
(P <.05) for pigs receiving the
polymeric antimicrobial (Group 1) than for pigs receiving apramycin
(Group 2). Consistent with this, the pigs of Group 1 had fewer days of diarrhea
(P <.05) compared to the pigs of Group 2 (Table 1).
Between Days 8 and 10, [beta]-hemolytic E coli
was detected in the feces of all pigs except three from Group 2
(apramycin-treated pigs). The fecal E coli score was
lower (P <.05) for Group 2 than for the
other groups on Days 8 and 9 (Table 1). At necropsy, some fluid distension was
observed in the small intestines of all pigs, but no other gross abnormalities were
detected. Mean scores for [beta]-hemolytic E
coli throughout the small intestine were numerically lower (but not statistically
different) for the pigs treated with Chemeq
polymeric antimicrobial (Group 1) compared to both other groups
(Table 1). Mean scores for [beta]-hemolytic E
coli in the cecum and colon were lower
(P <.05) for the Group 1 pigs than for
the untreated controls (Group 3) (Table 1). The
O8:K87:K88 E coli strain used in the experiment, and a recovered isolate
which had the same serotype, were both susceptible to apramycin, but resistant to
the other antimicrobials tested.
Field trial
Results are summarized in Table 2. Pigs receiving the polymeric antimicrobial
in either drinking water (Group 1) or feed (Group 2) remained healthy
throughout the trial, and no mortalities occurred.
Mortalities occurred in each of the other three groups, with more mortalities in those
receiving apramycin (Group 3) and no treatment (Group 5) than in the other
three groups. Pigs in Groups 3, 4 (vaccinated), and 5 had more diarrhea days
(P<.05) and higher fecal consistency scores
(P<.05) than pigs in Groups 1 and 2.
Mean weight at the beginning of the trial was less for Group 3 than for Groups 2
and 4 (P<.05). Mean percentage gain was
less for pigs of Group 2 compared to pigs of Group 3, whilst no other differences
were significant (Table 2).
The representative [beta]-hemolytic E
coli colonies from pigs with diarrhea were typed as O149:K91:K88, the same as
the predominant serotype previously associated with PWC in the herd. The isolates
were resistant to apramycin, compound sulfonamides, and tetracycline, and sensitive to
the other antimicrobials tested. Beta-hemolytic
E coli was recovered from five pigs in Group 3, two pigs in Group 4, and
four pigs in Group 5, but not from pigs in either Group 1 or 2.
Discussion
The initial experimental infection study successfully reproduced PWC,
although the disease was relatively mild.
Untreated control pigs had a mean of only 1.7 days
of diarrhea, and a mean fecal E coli score
of 1.86 on Days 8 through 11, when diarrhea occurred. In some experimental studies
it has been difficult to reproduce
PWC,12 whilst in other studies using a similar
inoculum to that used here, pigs have died with acute signs of disease within 36
hours of inoculation.7 The strain of
E coli used in this study was able both to colonize
the intestinal tract and induce diarrhea. Fecal shedding of hemolytic
E coli was detected in all pigs except three in Group 2,
the group treated with apramycin. No attempt was made to assess the K88 (F4)
receptor status of the pigs, and even though the
pigs were randomly assigned to their groups, it is possible that differences in receptor
status between groups might have influenced the degree of
E coli colonization of the small intestine, which was not detected
by recording fecal shedding.
The polymeric antimicrobial was given in the food daily beginning Day 0,
whilst apramycin sulfate was given daily as a post-exposure treatment starting on Day 4.
The trial was designed in this way because it was likely to be several days before the
pigs consumed enough feed to receive the optimal daily dose of polymeric
antimicrobial. It was envisaged that if the new
antimicrobial were to be used in commercial swine herds with recurrent PWC problems,
it would be provided in the feed. On the other hand, there was some concern that
if the apramycin was given as an oral dose at a therapeutic concentration before the
experimental infection, it might completely prevent colonization in this group.
Unexpectedly, although the E coli strain used to infect the pigs was susceptible
to apramycin, treatment with apramycin was not effective in preventing diarrhea,
although it did significantly reduce fecal shedding of the
E coli strain. In contrast, compared to the apramycin-treated
group, the pigs receiving the polymeric
antimicrobial had lower mean fecal consistency scores on Days 9 and 10, and less
diarrhea during Days 8 through 11, but they had significantly more fecal shedding
of hemolytic E coli on Days 8 and 9.
Interestingly, at necropsy, the pigs receiving the polymeric antimicrobial had
numerically fewer hemolytic E coli throughout
their intestinal tracts than did pigs in the other two groups, and significantly fewer in
the cecum and colon than the control pigs of Group 3. It has been suggested that
the polymeric antimicrobial, with
functional aldehyde groups, acts mainly in the
small intestine, where it becomes more active as a biocidal compound in the alkaline
environment (unpublished data, V. Wycoco, 2002). As this region of optimal activity
is also the site of origin of the hypersecretory diarrhea, this may explain why pigs
receiving the antimicrobial had less diarrhea but still had more fecal shedding of
hemolytic E coli than did pigs of the other
two groups. Overall, the pigs receiving the
polymeric antimicrobial tended to have less diarrhea and lower
E coli scores in the intestinal tract at the end of the trial than
did the pigs treated with apramycin or the untreated pigs. Therefore, this study
provided initial evidence suggesting that
Chemeq polymeric antimicrobial might be of use
in the control of PWC.
The field study was conducted on a commercial farm where PWC was a major
recurrent problem. The results obtained during the trial confirmed
that [beta]-hemolytic E coli of serogroup
O149 were involved in the etiology of the
diarrhea present on the farm. Chemeq
polymeric antimicrobial given either in the
water or in the feed was effective in preventing the natural colonization
by hemolytic strains of E coli that was seen
in the untreated group and other treated groups of pigs. Furthermore,
treatment with the polymeric antimicrobial
significantly reduced diarrhea and completely prevented subsequent mortalities
associated with PWC. In contrast, both apramycin treatment and the use of a bacterin
appeared ineffective at controlling the PWC problem that occurred on the farm.
Although apramycin was used as the drug of choice on the farm, the
predominant hemolytic E coli strain circulating
during the study period (O149:K99:K88) was unexpectedly found to be resistant
to apramycin in vitro, possibly as a consequence of its regular use. This
resistance may help to explain the lack of
protection achieved with apramycin in the field
trial. Apramycin resistance appears to be
increasing amongst E coli strains recovered
from cases of PWC.6,13 Lack of efficacy of the
E coli bacterin during the trial is
consistent with reports of a general lack of efficacy
of autogenous and other bacterins for controlling
PWC.14
Although the pigs receiving the
polymeric antimicrobial in the feed gained less
weight than the pigs receiving apramycin, these results were influenced by the fact that
the weights of the pigs that were removed because of ill-health were not included in
the final analysis, and, as there were no mortalities in the pigs receiving the
polymeric antimicrobial, none were removed from
the analysis.
Implications
- Under the conditions of these trials, Chemeq polymeric antimicrobial
was an effective treatment for the control of PWC.
- In a pen trial, where pigs were experimentally infected with
K88+ E coli, treatment with the
polymeric antimicrobial was more effective at reducing diarrhea than was
treatment with apramycin.
- In a large-scale field trial in a swine herd with natural PWC,
treatment with the Chemeq polymeric antimicrobial prevented mortalities
and resulted in significantly less diarrhea than did treatment with
apramycin, vaccination with an E coli bacterin,
or no treatment.
- Chemeq polymeric antimicrobial appears to be effective at
reducing losses associated with PWC under field conditions.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Associate Professor Ian Robertson for assistance with
the statistical analysis, and to Ms Fay Bahemia and Mr Vinnie Wycoco for
technical assistance.
References - refereed
1. Hampson DJ. Postweaning Escherichia
coli in pigs. In: Gyles CL, ed. Escherichia
coli in Domestic Animals and Humans.
2nd ed. Wallingford, UK: CAB International; 1994:171-191.
2. Bertschinger HU, Fairbrother JM. Post
weaning diarrhea and edema disease. In: Straw BE,
D'Allaire S, Mengeling WI, Taylor DJ, eds. Diseases of
Swine 8th ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science;
1999:441-454.
3. Morris JA, Sojka WJ. Escherichia coli as a
pathogen in animals. In: Sussman M, ed. The virulence
of Escherichia coli. London, UK: Academic
Press; 1985:47-77.
5. Barton MD. The down-side of antibiotic use
in pig production: the effect on antibiotic resistance
of enteric bacteria. In: Cranwell PD, ed.
Manipulating Pig Production VII. Werribee, Australia:
Australasian Pig Science Association; 1999:194-199.
6. Amezcua R, Friendship RM, Dewey CE, Gyles CL, Fairbrother JM. Presentation of
postweaning Escherichia coli diarrhea in southern Ontario,
prevalence of hemolytic E. coli serogroups involved,
and their antimicrobial resistance patterns. Can J Vet
Res. 2002;66:73-78.
7. Hampson DJ, Buddle R, Melrose GJH. Evaluation of a novel antimicrobial polymer for the
control of porcine postweaning colibacillosis. Aust Vet
J. 2000;78:117-120.
11. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests. Approved standard
M2-A3. Villanova, Pennsylvania; 1984.
12. Madec F, Bridoux N, Bounaix S, Cariolet R, Duval-iflah Y, Hampson DJ, Jestin A.
Experimental models of porcine postweaning colibacillosis
and their relationship to postweaning diarrhoea
and digestive disorders as encountered in the field.
Vet Microbiol. 2000;72:295-310.
13. Mateu E, Martin M. Antimicrobial resistance
in enteric porcine Escherichia coli strains in Spain.
Vet Rec. 2000;146:703-705.
References - non refereed
4. Francis DH. Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli
infections in pigs and its diagnosis. J Swine
Health Prod. 2002;10:171-175.
8. Melrose GJH; IP Australia, Woden, ACT,
Australia. Chemotherapeutic Compositions. Australian
Patent Number 701974. 1998.
9. Hampson DJ, Murdoch AI.
CHEMEQ" polymeric antimicrobial for the control of
experimental postweaning colibacillosis. Proc
17th IPVS Cong. Ames, Iowa. 2002;2:103.
10. Hampson DJ, Murdoch AI.
CHEMEQ" polymeric antimicrobial for the field control of
post- weaning colibacillosis. Proc
17th IPVS Cong. Ames, Iowa. 2002;2:104.
14. Friendship RM, Dewy CE, Amezcua R, Chernysheva L, Gyles CL. Failure of
non-antibiotic treatments for the control of postweaning
E. coli diarrhea. Proc 17th IPVS
Cong. Ames, Iowa. 2002:1;328.
|
|