K Yarnell1, M Le Bon1, N Turton2, M Savova2, A McGlennon1, S Forsythe2. 1. School of Animal, Rural and Environmental Sciences, Nottingham Trent University, Southwell, Nottingham, UK. 2. School of Science and Technology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the rate of growth of four microbial strains that cause disease in the horse, on four commonly used types of bedding. The moisture-holding capacity of each bedding type was also tested. METHODS AND RESULTS: Microbial strains included Streptococcus equi, Streptococcus zooepidemicus, Fusobacterium necrophorum, Dichelobacter nodosus and Dermatophilus congolensis. The bedding types tested were Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine shavings), Pinus nigra (Corsican pine shavings), Picea sitchensis (Sitka spruce shavings), Cannabis sativa (hemp) and chopped wheat straw. A suspension of each microbial strain was spread in triplicate on agar media and incubated in its optimal growth conditions. The viable count (colony-forming unit per ml) was determined for each bacterial strain for the five different bedding types. Pinus sylvestris bedding resulted in significantly less (P = 0·001) bacterial growth of all strains tested. CONCLUSIONS: Factors resulting in the inhibition of bacterial growth include the antibacterial effects reported in the Pinacea family and the physical properties of the bedding substrate. Research is currently focussed on the diagnosis and management of disease. Prevention of disease is also important for matters of biosecurity. Strategies should include the provision of a hygienic environment and the use of specific types of bedding. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Bedding choice has implications for global equine health and disease prevention as well as potential benefits in other animal species.
AIMS: To compare the rate of growth of four microbial strains that cause disease in the horse, on four commonly used types of bedding. The moisture-holding capacity of each bedding type was also tested. METHODS AND RESULTS: Microbial strains included Streptococcus equi, Streptococcus zooepidemicus, Fusobacterium necrophorum, Dichelobacter nodosus and Dermatophilus congolensis. The bedding types tested were Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine shavings), Pinus nigra (Corsican pine shavings), Picea sitchensis (Sitka spruce shavings), Cannabis sativa (hemp) and chopped wheat straw. A suspension of each microbial strain was spread in triplicate on agar media and incubated in its optimal growth conditions. The viable count (colony-forming unit per ml) was determined for each bacterial strain for the five different bedding types. Pinus sylvestris bedding resulted in significantly less (P = 0·001) bacterial growth of all strains tested. CONCLUSIONS: Factors resulting in the inhibition of bacterial growth include the antibacterial effects reported in the Pinacea family and the physical properties of the bedding substrate. Research is currently focussed on the diagnosis and management of disease. Prevention of disease is also important for matters of biosecurity. Strategies should include the provision of a hygienic environment and the use of specific types of bedding. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Bedding choice has implications for global equine health and disease prevention as well as potential benefits in other animal species.