Literature DB >> 26908887

On-farm Campylobacter and Escherichia coli in commercial broiler chickens: Re-used bedding does not influence Campylobacter emergence and levels across sequential farming cycles.

H N Chinivasagam1, W Estella2, H Rodrigues2, D G Mayer2, C Weyand2, T Tran2, A Onysk2, I Diallo3.   

Abstract

Limitations in quality bedding material have resulted in the growing need to re-use litter during broiler farming in some countries, which can be of concern from a food-safety perspective. The aim of this study was to compare the Campylobacter levels in ceca and litter across three litter treatments under commercial farming conditions. The litter treatments were (a) the use of new litter after each farming cycle; (b) an Australian partial litter re-use practice; and (c) a full litter re-use practice. The study was carried out on two farms over two years (Farm 1, from 2009-2010 and Farm 2, from 2010-2011), across three sheds (35,000 to 40,000 chickens/shed) on each farm, adopting three different litter treatments across six commercial cycles. A random sampling design was adopted to test litter and ceca for Campylobacter and Escherichia coli, prior to commercial first thin-out and final pick-up. Campylobacter levels varied little across litter practices and farming cycles on each farm and were in the range of log 8.0-9.0 CFU/g in ceca and log 4.0-6.0 MPN/g for litter. Similarly the E. coli in ceca were ∼log 7.0 CFU/g. At first thin-out and final pick-up, the statistical analysis for both litter and ceca showed that the three-way interaction (treatments by farms by times) was highly significant (P<0.01), indicating that the patterns of Campylobacter emergence/presence across time vary between the farms, cycles and pickups. The emergence and levels of both organisms were not influenced by litter treatments across the six farming cycles on both farms. Either C. jejuni or C. coli could be the dominant species across litter and ceca, and this phenomenon could not be attributed to specific litter treatments. Irrespective of the litter treatments in place, cycle 2 on Farm 2 remained Campylobacter-free. These outcomes suggest that litter treatments did not directly influence the time of emergence and levels of Campylobacter and E. coli during commercial farming.
© 2016 Poultry Science Association Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Campylobacter; E. coli; ceca; chickens; litter

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26908887      PMCID: PMC4957531          DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Poult Sci        ISSN: 0032-5791            Impact factor:   3.352


  35 in total

1.  Percent G+C profiling accurately reveals diet-related differences in the gastrointestinal microbial community of broiler chickens.

Authors:  J H Apajalahti; A Kettunen; M R Bedford; W E Holben
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  Diversity and phylogenetic analysis of bacteria in the mucosa of chicken ceca and comparison with bacteria in the cecal lumen.

Authors:  Jianhua Gong; Robert J Forster; Hai Yu; James R Chambers; Parviz M Sabour; Roger Wheatcroft; Shu Chen
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  2002-02-19       Impact factor: 2.742

3.  Campylobacter spp. contamination of chicken carcasses during processing in relation to flock colonisation.

Authors:  V M Allen; S A Bull; J E L Corry; G Domingue; F Jørgensen; J A Frost; R Whyte; A Gonzalez; N Elviss; T J Humphrey
Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 5.277

Review 4.  Stress response of Campylobacter spp. and its role in food processing.

Authors:  T Alter; K Scherer
Journal:  J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health       Date:  2006-10

5.  Challenges of Campylobacter jejuni in poultry production.

Authors:  Hanne Ingmer
Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol       Date:  2010-12-20       Impact factor: 5.277

Review 6.  The avian intestinal flora with particular reference to the possible ecological significance of the cecal anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  E M Barnes
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  1972-12       Impact factor: 7.045

7.  Following an imaginary Campylobacter population from farm to fork and beyond: a bacterial perspective.

Authors:  T M Wassenaar
Journal:  Lett Appl Microbiol       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 2.858

8.  Infective dose of Campylobacter jejuni in milk.

Authors:  D A Robinson
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1981-05-16

9.  Enumeration and diversity of campylobacters and bacteriophages isolated during the rearing cycles of free-range and organic chickens.

Authors:  A El-Shibiny; P L Connerton; I F Connerton
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.792

10.  Campylobacter succession in broiler chickens.

Authors:  A El-Shibiny; P L Connerton; I F Connerton
Journal:  Vet Microbiol       Date:  2007-06-06       Impact factor: 3.293

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Chicken Gut Microbiome and Human Health: Past Scenarios, Current Perspectives, and Futuristic Applications.

Authors:  Utkarsh Sood; Vipin Gupta; Roshan Kumar; Sukanya Lal; Derek Fawcett; Supriya Rattan; Gerrard Eddy Jai Poinern; Rup Lal
Journal:  Indian J Microbiol       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 2.461

2.  Impact of Built-up-Litter and Commercial Antimicrobials on Salmonella and Campylobacter Contamination of Broiler Carcasses Processed at a Pilot Mobile Poultry-Processing Unit.

Authors:  KaWang Li; Lacey Lemonakis; Brian Glover; Joseph Moritz; Cangliang Shen
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2017-06-09

3.  Bacterial Detection and Recovery From Poultry Litter.

Authors:  Jodie R Plumblee Lawrence; Denice Cudnik; Adelumola Oladeinde
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 5.640

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.