| Literature DB >> 35249551 |
Annette Deane1, Declan Murphy2, Finola C Leonard3, William Byrne2, Tracey Clegg3, Gillian Madigan2, Margaret Griffin2, John Egan2, Deirdre M Prendergast2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Salmonella is an important zoonotic pathogen and is one of the main causes of foodborne outbreaks and infections in the European Union. Pigs are a significant reservoir and are frequently subclinical carriers of this organism. Salmonella can be shed in the faeces allowing infection to spread to other pigs, the environment, transport vehicles, lairages and other areas. Inadvertent spillage of gut contents during the slaughter process also leads to contamination. A pig Salmonella control programme has operated in Ireland since 2002 but many local surveys and an EUMS baseline survey in 2008 continued to indicate high levels of the organism in the pig sector. The objectives of this study were to generate updated information on the prevalence of Salmonella spp, in slaughter pigs and carcasses in Irish abattoirs. Five pigs from each of 164 herds were randomly sampled over a 14-week period during 2016. One sample from each of the five pigs of; caecal content, ileo-caecal lymph nodes and carcass swabs (pre-chill) were collected. The five caeca and lymph node samples from each herd were processed as one pool of caecal samples and one pool of lymph node samples, respectively, while the five carcass swabs were tested as individual samples. All isolates were characterised by serotyping and antimicrobial susceptibility.Entities:
Keywords: Abattoirs; Caecal; Carcass swabs; Ireland; Lymph nodes; Pigs; Salmonella; Serology
Year: 2022 PMID: 35249551 PMCID: PMC8898491 DOI: 10.1186/s13620-022-00211-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ir Vet J ISSN: 0368-0762 Impact factor: 2.146
Total number of animals sampled, and type and number of samples positive for Salmonella in 6 abattoirs
| A | 22 | 110 | 11 (50) | 5 (22.7) | 11 (50) | 6 (27.3) | 6 (5.5) |
| B | 30 | 150 | 17 (56.7) | 10 (33.3) | 17 (56.7) | 13 (43.3) | 25 (16.7) |
| C | 40 | 200 | 19 (47.5) | 8 (20) | 20 (50) | 7 (17.5) | 10 (5) |
| D | 26 | 130 | 14 (53.8) | 5 (19.2) | 15 (57.7) | 4 (15.4) | 5 (3.8) |
| E | 25 | 125 | 19 (76) | 15 (60) | 19 (76) | 8 (32) | 10 (8) |
| F | 21 | 105 | 11 (52.4) | 9 (42.9) | 12 (57.1) | 12 (57.1) | 38 (36.2) |
| Total | 164 | 820 | 91 (55.5) | 52 (31.7) | 97 (59.1) | 50 (30.5) | 94 (11.5) |
aPools of 5 samples were tested in the case of caecal and lymph node samples and thus each pooled sample represents the result for one herd
bCarcass swabs were tested individually; 5 samples were collected per herd
Main Salmonella serotypes isolated from *pooled caecal content and lymph node samples and individual carcass swabs collected in each of 6 abattoirs
| Number Positive (% of isolates from same sample type and same abattoir) | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample Type | Abattoir | Total isolates per abattoir | Mono ST | ST | Other | ||||||
| *Lymph Node | A | 2 (4) | 1(2) | - | - | - | - | - | 2(4) | ||
| B | 5(10) | 3(6) | - | - | - | 1(2) | - | 1(2) | |||
| C | 4(8) | 3(6) | - | - | - | - | - | 1(2) | |||
| D | 1(2) | 4(8) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||
| E | 6(12) | 5(10) | - | 4(8) | - | - | - | - | |||
| F | 3(6) | 1(2) | 2(4) | - | 2(4) | - | - | 1(2) | |||
| *Caecal Contents | A | 4(4) | 4(4) | - | 1(1) | 1(1) | - | - | 1(1) | ||
| B | 7(8) | 6(7) | 1(1) | - | - | 1(1) | - | 2(2) | |||
| C | 11(12) | 3(3) | - | - | 1(1) | - | 2(2) | 2(2) | |||
| D | 9(10) | 2(2) | - | 1(1) | 1(1) | 1(1) | - | - | |||
| E | 9(10) | 1(1) | - | 7(8) | 1(1) | - | - | 1(1) | |||
| F | 3(3) | 2(2) | 3(3) | - | 2(2) | - | - | 1(1) | |||
| Carcass Swabs | A | 6(6) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| B | 17(18) | 4(4) | 1(1) | - | 1(1) | - | - | 2(2) | |||
| C | 5(5) | - | - | - | 1(1) | - | - | 2(2) | |||
| D | - | 5(5) | - | - | - | - | - | - | |||
| E | 3(3) | 3(3) | - | 1(1) | 1(1) | - | - | 2(2) | |||
| F | 7(7) | 3(3) | 25(27) | - | 3(3) | - | - | - | |||
Fig. 1Percentage of herds with a positive carcass swab by processing plant
Antimicrobial resistance profiles of Salmonella (n = 235) from lymph nodes, caecal samples and carcass swabs
| AMR Profile | Monophasic variant | Other serovars | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMP CHL CIP GEN TET TIG TMP | 1 | 1 | |||
| AMP CHL GEN TET TIG TMP | 1 | 1 | |||
| AMP CHL GEN TET TMP | 34 | 3 | 2 | 39 | |
| CHL CIP TET TIG TMP | 1 | 1 | |||
| AMP CHL TET TIG TMP | 2 | 1 | 3 | ||
| CHL TET TIG TMP | 1 | 1 | |||
| AMP GEN TET TMP | 2 | 1 | 3 | ||
| AMP CHL TET TMP | 4 | 4 | 8 | ||
| AMP CHL CIP TET | 1 | 1 | |||
| AMP GEN TET | 15 | 1 | 1 | 17 | |
| AMP CHL TET | 14 | 1 | 15 | ||
| AMP TET TMP | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | |
| CIP NAL | 2 | 2 | |||
| TET TMP | 8 | 8 | |||
| CHL TET | 1 | 1 | |||
| AMP TET | 32 | 3 | 35 | ||
| TMP | 2 | 2 | |||
| TET | 2 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 12 |
| AMP | 5 | 8 | 13 | ||
| Fully Susceptible | 4 | 7 | 3 | 54 | 68 |