Hauck R, Crossley B, Rejmanek D, Zhou H, Gallardo R A
A Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, 1089 Veterinary Medicine Drive VM3B, Davis, CA 95616.
B University of California, California Animal Heath and Food Safety Laboratory System, West Health Science Drive, Davis, CA, 95616.
Avian Dis. 2017 Mar;61(1):64-69. doi: 10.1637/11495-091916-Reg.
A questionnaire was designed in order to gather information about bedding material and footbath preparation and maintenance in different productive units across the state of California.This information was used to plan two experiments. In the first experiment, we tested the effectiveness of footbaths in inactivating highly pathogenic (HP) and low pathogenic (LP) avian influenza viruses (AIVs) on rubber boots. Surprisingly, quaternary ammonia- and quaternary ammonia + glutaraldehyde-based footbaths were not able to eliminate live HPAIV (H5N8) and LPAIV (H6N2) particles on boots, while a chlorine-based granulated disinfectant was able to destroy the virus at contact. These results demonstrated the potential of AIV, particularly the HPAIV isolate, to persist even if exposed to disinfecting footbaths, and suggest that footbaths, as a single tool, are not capable of preventing pathogen introduction into commercial flocks. In the second experiment, we investigated the persistence of HPAIV (H5N8) and LPAIV (H6N2) in bedding material and feces obtained from turkey, broiler, and egg-layer commercial productive units. Samples were collected at different times after spiking the bedding materials and feces. Results showed that HPAIV (H5N8) was more persistent than LPAIV (H6N2) in layer feces and bedding material obtained from commercial broilers and turkeys. Live HPAIV particles persisted 96 hr, the last time point measured, in layer feces and less than 60 hr in broiler and turkey bedding. In contrast, LPAIV persisted less than 24 hr after being spiked in all the different substrates. Further research in biosecurity practices such as footbath preparation and maintenance and better understanding of the mechanism of the increased persistence of AIV is warranted in order to identify effective litter treatments that destroy live virus in bedding material.
设计了一份问卷,以收集加利福尼亚州不同生产单位中垫料以及洗脚池准备和维护的相关信息。这些信息被用于规划两项实验。在第一项实验中,我们测试了洗脚池对橡胶靴上高致病性(HP)和低致病性(LP)禽流感病毒(AIV)的灭活效果。令人惊讶的是,基于季铵盐和季铵盐 + 戊二醛的洗脚池无法消除靴子上的高致病性禽流感病毒(H5N8)和低致病性禽流感病毒(H6N2)活颗粒,而一种氯基颗粒消毒剂能够在接触时杀灭病毒。这些结果表明,即使暴露于消毒洗脚池中,禽流感病毒,尤其是高致病性禽流感病毒分离株,仍有可能持续存在,这表明洗脚池作为单一工具,无法防止病原体传入商业鸡群。在第二项实验中,我们研究了高致病性禽流感病毒(H5N8)和低致病性禽流感病毒(H6N2)在从火鸡、肉鸡和蛋鸡商业生产单位获取的垫料和粪便中的持续存在情况。在向垫料和粪便中接种病毒后的不同时间收集样本。结果表明,在从商业肉鸡和火鸡获取的蛋鸡粪便和垫料中,高致病性禽流感病毒(H5N8)比低致病性禽流感病毒(H6N2)更持久。在蛋鸡粪便中,高致病性禽流感病毒活颗粒在测量的最后一个时间点(96小时)仍持续存在,在肉鸡和火鸡垫料中持续时间不到60小时。相比之下,低致病性禽流感病毒在所有不同基质中接种后持续时间不到24小时。有必要对诸如洗脚池准备和维护等生物安全措施进行进一步研究,并更好地了解禽流感病毒持续存在增加的机制,以便确定能破坏垫料中活病毒的有效垫料处理方法。