Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-24T17:55:53.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Further observations on the effect of feeding diets containing avoparcin on the excretion of salmonellas by experimentally infected chickens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

P. A. Barrow
P. A. Barrow
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology, AFRC Institute for Animal Health, Houghton Laboratory, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire PE17 2DA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Chickens which had been inoculated orally with a nalidixic acid-resistant strain of Salmonella typhimurium were reared on a diet containing different concentrations of avoparcin in an attempt to explain the variation in response to commercial levels of this antibiotic oberved by different workers. In one experiment small increases in faecal excretion of the inoculated salmonella occurred at 2·5 and 5·0 mg kg−1, with greater increases between 7·5 and 20 mg kg−1 In a second experiment there was a significant increase in excretion at 7'5 mg kg−1 and in a third experiment in which generally higher excretion rates were detected in all groups, significant increases were observed at 10 and 12·5 mg kg−1 only. In addition avoparcin significantly increased the faecal excretion of S. cholerae-suis, S. dublin and S. arizonae, serotypes not usually associated with poultry-derived food-poisoning in the United Kingdom. It did not increase faecal excretion of S. pullorum. Avoparcin at 10 mg kg−1 appeared to have little effect on the normal intestinal flora of S. typhimurium infected chickens despite the fact that when tested in vitro individual organisms were susceptible to this drug concentration. At 100 mg kg 1 viable counts of intestinal enterococci and Gramnegative anaerobic bacteria were considerably reduced while those of S. typhimurium and Escherichia coli increased. Antibiotic activity due to avoparcin was detectable in the alimentary tract and there was some increase in concentration of the antibiotic in the more distal regions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 102 , Issue 2 , April 1989 , pp. 239 - 252
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

References

REFERENCES

Barrow, P. A., Fuller, R. & Newport, M. J. (1977). Changes in the microflora and physiology of the anterior intestinal tract of pigs weaned at 2 days, with special reference to the pathogenesis of diarrhoea. Infection and Immunity 18, 586–595.Google Scholar
Barrow, P. A., Smith, H. W. & Tucker, J. F. (1984). The effect of feeding diets containing avoparcin on the excretion of salmonellas by chickens experimentally infected with natural sources of salmonella organisms. Journal of Hygiene 93, 439–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrow, P. A. & Tucker, J. F. (1986). Inhibition of colonization of the chicken caecum with Salmonella typhimurium by pre-treatment with strains of Escherichia coli. Journal of Hygiene 96, 161–169.Google Scholar
Barrow, P. A., Tucker, J. F. & Simpson, J. M. (1987). Inhibition of colonization of the chicken alimentary tract with Salmonella typhimurium by Gram negative facultativily anaerobic bacteria. Journal of Hygiene 98, 311–322.Google ScholarPubMed
Dutta, G. N. & Devriese, L. A. (1981). Sensitivity and resistance to growth promoting agents in animal lactobacilli. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 51. 283–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dutta, G. N. & Devriese, L. A. (1982). Susceptibility of faecal streptococci of poultry origin to nine growth-promoting agents. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 44. 832–837.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gustafson, R. H., Beck, J. R. & Kobland, J. D. (1982). The influence of avoparcin on the establishment of salmonella in chickens. Zentralblatt für Veterinärmedizin B 29, 119–128.Google Scholar
Hinton, M., Al-Chalaby, Z. A. M. & Linton, A. H. (1986). The influence of dietary protein and antimicrobial feed additives on salmonella carriage by broiler chickens. Veterinary Record 119, 495–500.Google Scholar
Impey, C. S., Mead, G. C. & George, S. M. (1982). Competitive exclusion of salmonellas from the chick caecum using a defined mixture of bacterial isolates from the caecal microflora of the adult bird. Journal of Hygiene 89, 479–490.Google Scholar
Mathes, S., Leuchtenberger, G. & Loliger, H. C. (1981). The effect of antimicrobial feed additives on the gut flora and the persistence of salmonellae in experimentally infected chickens. VIIth International Congress of the World Veterinary Poultry Association. Oslo, Norway, p. 74.Google Scholar
Smith, H. & Green, S. I. (1980). The effect of feed additives on the incidence of naturally acquired salmonella in turkeys. Veterinary Record 107, 289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, H. W. (1952). The evaluation of culture media for the isolation of salmonellae from faeces. Journal of Hygiene 50, 21–36.Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. (1965). The immunization of mice, calves and pigs against Salmonella dublin and Salmonella cholerae-suis infection. Journal of Hygiene 63. 322–332.Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. (1970). The transfer of antibiotic resistance between strains of enterobacteria in chickens, calves and pigs. Journal of Medical Microbiology 3. 165–180.Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. & Crabb, W. E. (1961). The bacterial flora of the faeces of young animals and man; its development in the young. Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology 82, 53–66.Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. & Tucker, J. F. (1975). The effect of antibiotic therapy on the faecal excretion of Salmonella typhimurium by experimentally infected chickens. Journal of Hygiene 75. 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, H. W. & Tucker, J. F. (1975). The effect of feeding diets containing permitted antibiotics on the faecal excretion of Salmonella typhimurium by experimentally infected chickens. Journal of Hygiene 75, 293–301.Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. & Tucker, J. F. (1978). The effect of antimicrobial feed additives on the colonization of the alimentary tract of chickens by Salmonella typhimurium. Journal of Hygiene 80, 217–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, H. W. & Tucker, J. F. (1980). Further observations on the effect of feeding diets containing avoparcin, bacitracin and sodium arsenilate on the colonization of the alimentary tract of poultry by Salmonella organisms. Journal of Hygiene 84. 137–150.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. & McCoy, J. H. (1969). Salmonella and Arizona infections. In Food-borne Infections and Intoxications ed. Riemann, H., pp. 3–72. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar