1982
DOI: 10.2307/1589904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adherence of Salmonellae and Native Gut Microflora to the Gastrointestinal Mucosa of Chicks

Abstract: Adherence of salmonellae to the mucosa of the cecum was demonstrated using scanning electron microscopy. In the absence of other microflora, adherence was also shown at all other levels of the alimentary tract tested. Comparative development of native gut microflora in the ceca was also investigated in chicks treated with selected fecal microflora and in untreated chicks using scanning electron microscopy. In the treated chicks, there was early colonization by adherent bacteria interconnected with fibers, form… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0
1

Year Published

1987
1987
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
18
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Salmonellae usually infect their hosts via gastrointestinal tract. In the absence of other microflora, the organisms are apparently able to adhere, multiply and colonize at any point along the GI tract of chicks (Soerjadi et al, 1982). They may be shed in the faeces and form a source of contamination for other animals, humans and the environment (Poppe, 2000).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Salmonellae usually infect their hosts via gastrointestinal tract. In the absence of other microflora, the organisms are apparently able to adhere, multiply and colonize at any point along the GI tract of chicks (Soerjadi et al, 1982). They may be shed in the faeces and form a source of contamination for other animals, humans and the environment (Poppe, 2000).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…is rclated to the numbcr of eampylobaeter eeııs in eaeh part of intestine. This suggcstion has been canfirmed by the findings of Soeıjadi ct al (18). it ,,'as of interest to determine the isolation of C. eoli (i-om duodenum and the isolation of C. Je:jııııi from other parts of intestine in a ehİeken.…”
Section: Discussion and Condusionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…in their smaıı intestine but not in caecum havc been determined. Examination o[individual cloacal swabs or caecal content from arandam sample o[ birds is eonsidered as an effcctive method by several authors (6,18). This is true lor surveys with large samplc size, but when saınpling an individual chieken for culturing CamjJ);fobac!cr sp., it must be kept in mind that campylobaeters, evcn in smaıı numbers, may be calanize only in sınai in testine.…”
Section: Discussion and Condusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Competitive exclusion mechanism represents a status of physical barrier to the gut mucosa by creating a special integrity systems characterized by creation of a hostile microecology, elimination of available bacterial receptor sites, production and secretion of antimicrobial substances and selective metabolites, and competitive depletion of essential nutrients, preventing intestinal pathogens from becoming established. [168][169][170][171] The mechanisms used by one species of bacteria to exclude or reduce the growth of another species are varied due to strains variability of probiotics.…”
Section: 153mentioning
confidence: 99%