Comparison of Mucosal Competitive Exclusion and Competitive Exclusion Treatment to Reduce Salmonella and Campylobacter spp. Colonization in Broiler Chickens

Abstract

Control of Salmonella spp. during the earliest phases of broiler production may provide the best opportunity to reduce human pathogens on processed broiler carcasses. Application of the "Nurmi concept" has been demonstrated to be an effective means in reducing Salmonella colonization among broiler chicks. In 1989, Aho et al. developed a competitive exclusion (CE) culture for control of Salmonella spp., whereas a mucosal competitive exclusion culture (MCE) developed in the United States was originally created to control Campylobacter colonization (Stern et al., 1995). The major differences in the two patents were the higher level of anaerobic culture required, the degree of epithelial scraping and washing of the ceca, media used for subculturing, and the culture incubation temperatures (35 C vs. 42 C). The CE and MCE were compared for efficacy in reducing Salmonella and Campylobacter colonization in broiler chicks. Nine adult birds (three for each of three replicates) were slaughtered, and each of a bird's paired ceca were used to produce corresponding antagonistic microflora, which were administered to day-of-hatch chicks. The chicks (a total of 210) were challenged 24 h later with Salmonella and Campylobacter and were killed 1 wk later, and levels of the pathogens were determined. Ninety CE-treated birds were significantly more colonized by Salmonella typhimurium than those 90 chicks treated with the MCE microflora (3.97 log 10 cfu/g cecal contents vs. 1.25 log 10 cfu/g cecal contents). Also, Campylobacter spp. colonization of these birds was significantly higher for CE-treated birds when compared with MCE-treated birds (6.96 log 10 cfu/g cecal contents vs. 5.03 log 10 cfu/g cecal contents). These results can be useful in developing intervention strategies to reduce chicken colonization by Salmonella and Campylobacter.

Campylobacter jejuni adhere to and invade chicken intestinal epithelial cells in vitro

“…However, the mucus used in these experiments was buffered to a neutral pH, and therefore increased acidity was not the cause of the altered pathogenicity profile demonstrated in these experiments. Chicken intestinal flora was present in the crude mucus and previously has been shown to reduce or delay chick colonization in vivo (Stern et al, 2001). Although a role for chicken microflora in attenuating virulence in our experiments cannot be discounted, it is noteworthy that intestinal pathology does not usually occur when day-ofhatch chicks are experimentally infected , suggesting that the acquisition of normal gut flora alone is unlikely to account for the absence of pathology in poultry.…”

Phylogenetic Analysis of Cecal Microbiota in Chicken by the Use of 16S rDNA Clone Libraries

“…For these reasons, detailed studies of intestinal microbiota are important for an improvement of animal husbandry. Furthermore, lactic acid bacteria originating from chicken intestine can be selected and used as probiotics for chicken with the aim of restoring the balance of intestinal flora to support digestion, to suppress pathogens such as salmonellae and campylobacteria colonizing in the chicken intestine (26), and to improve the immune system (9). Salanitro et al (22 24) reported the diversity of bacteria from the cecum of chicken or chick based on phys- iological and chemical characterization.…”

New probiotic strain Lactobacillus fermentum AD1 and its effect in Japanese quail

“…(Pascual et al, 1999), Campylobacter sp. (Stern et al, 2001) and, more recently, Eimeria acervulina (Dalloul et al, 2003). Proposed mechanisms of pathogen inhibition by the probiotic microorganisms include competition for nutrients, production of antimicrobial conditions and compounds (volatile fatty acids, low pH, and bacteriocins), competition for binding sites on the intestinal epithelium, and stimulation of the immune system (Rolfe, 2000).…”