Poultry Microbiological Safety and Processing Research Unit, U.S. National Poultry Research Center, Richard B. Russell Agricultural Research Center, USDA-ARS, Athens, GA, 30605-2702.
Department of Poultry Science, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602.
Poult Sci. 2018 Aug 1;97(8):2775-2784. doi: 10.3382/ps/pey150.
The impact of restrictive feeding programs on Salmonella and Campylobacter colonization and persistence after challenge was investigated for broiler breeder pullets housed in an experimental rearing facility. Pullet-chicks were placed on litter in 3 feeding program rooms and each room contained 2 replicate pens. The feeding programs were: (1) Skip-a-day in trough feeders (SAD); (2) Every-day in trough feeders (EDT); (3) Every-day on the pen litter (EDL). On d 1, an additional group of hatchmate chicks were housed in a separate room and gavaged with Salmonella Typhimurium, to later serve as seeder chicks. After seeders were confirmed Salmonella-positive at wk 4, at wk 5 seeders were placed into each feeding program pen to commingle with 135 penmates. At 7, 9, 11, 17, 18, and 20 wk the litter surface in each pen was sampled using intermittently stepped-on drag-swabs. At 8, 12, 16, and 20 wk of age the ceca were sampled from 10 penmates/pen and 2 pooled spleen samples/pen were collected. SAD litter remained Salmonella-positive through 20 wk of age while EDL and EDT pens had no detectible litter Salmonella recovery by 18 and 20 wk. EDL fed pens had no direct (<102 cfu/mL) litter Salmonella recovery during the entirety of the experiment. Salmonella prevalence for ceca from SAD pullets was significantly (P < 0.05) higher at 8 wk (70%) compared to EDT (40%) and EDL (30%). At wk 12, SAD pullets for both on and off-feed sampling days had significantly higher Salmonella recovery (40%), compared to EDT and EDL (both at 5% recovery). By 16 and 20 wk, only the SAD pullets on the on-feed day (48 h without feed) had recovery of Salmonella at 20%. Salmonella recovery in pooled spleen samples did not appear associated with feeding treatments (22% positive). The remaining pullets challenged with Campylobacter at 21 wk produced similar trends as was seen for Salmonella. SAD program pullets had significantly higher Campylobacter from ceca (80 to 100%) compared to pullets on EDL (30 to 60%) or EDT (40 to 95%). These results suggest that using a Skip-a-Day feeding program for broiler breeder pullets contributes to persistently higher Salmonella and Campylobacter ceca colonization and litter prevalence.
本研究旨在探讨限制饲养方案对沙门氏菌和弯曲杆菌定植和持续感染的影响，选用的实验饲养设施为肉鸡种鸡育雏舍。将雏鸡放置在 3 个饲养方案房间的垫料上，每个房间包含 2 个重复笼位。饲养方案如下：（1）在料槽中每天限饲（SAD）；（2）在料槽中每天不限饲（EDT）；（3）在笼位垫料上每天不限饲（EDL）。在第 1 天，另一组同窝雏鸡被安置在一个单独的房间中，并灌喂沙门氏菌 Typhimurium，之后作为接种雏鸡。在第 4 周确认接种雏鸡呈沙门氏菌阳性后，在第 5 周将接种雏鸡放入每个饲养方案笼位中，与 135 个同笼位的雏鸡混合。在第 7、9、11、17、18 和 20 周时，使用间歇性踩踏式拖拉拭子从每个笼位的垫料表面取样。在第 8、12、16 和 20 周龄时，从 10 个同笼位的雏鸡/笼位中取样，从 2 个混合脾脏样本/笼位中取样。在第 20 周龄时，SAD 饲养的笼位中仍可检测到沙门氏菌，而 EDL 和 EDT 饲养的笼位在第 18 和 20 周龄时没有检测到垫料中的沙门氏菌回收。在整个实验过程中，EDL 饲养的笼位没有直接（<102 cfu/mL）检测到垫料中的沙门氏菌回收。SAD 饲养的雏鸡盲肠中的沙门氏菌流行率在第 8 周（70%）显著（P < 0.05）高于 EDT（40%）和 EDL（30%）。在第 12 周时，无论在采食日还是停食日，SAD 饲养的雏鸡的沙门氏菌回收率（40%）均显著高于 EDT 和 EDL（均为 5%）。到第 16 和 20 周时，只有在采食日（48 小时不喂食）的 SAD 饲养的雏鸡在第 20 周时恢复了沙门氏菌。混合脾脏样本中的沙门氏菌回收率似乎与饲养处理无关（22%阳性）。在第 21 周时，用弯曲杆菌挑战剩余的雏鸡，发现与沙门氏菌相似的趋势。SAD 饲养方案的雏鸡盲肠中弯曲杆菌的阳性率（80%至 100%）明显高于 EDL（30%至 60%）或 EDT（40%至 95%）饲养的雏鸡。这些结果表明，肉鸡种鸡育雏舍中使用限饲 1 天的饲养方案可能会导致沙门氏菌和弯曲杆菌盲肠定植和垫料流行率持续升高。
