Cleaning and disinfection programs against Campylobacter jejuni for broiler chickens: productive performance, microbiological assessment and characterization

Abstract

Detailed cleaning and disinfection programs aims to reduce infection pressure from microorganisms from one flock to the next. However, studies evaluating the benefits to poultry performance, the sanitary status of the facilities, and the sanitary quality of the meat are rarely found. Thus, this study was designed to evaluate 2 cleaning and disinfecting programs regarding their influence on productive performance, elimination of Campylobacter, and characterization of Campylobacter jejuni strains when applied to broiler chickens’ facilities. Two subsequent flocks with 960 birds each were distributed into 32 pens containing 30 birds each. In the first, the whole flock was inoculated with a known strain of Campylobacter jejuni in order to contaminate the environment. In the second flock, performance and microbiological evaluations were done, characterizing an observational study between 2 cleaning and disinfection programs, regular and proposed. The regular program consisted of sweeping facilities, washing equipment and environment with water and neutral detergent. The proposed cleaning program consisted of dry and wet cleaning, application of 2 detergents (one acid and one basic) and 2 disinfectants (250 g/L glutaraldehyde and 185 g/L formaldehyde at 0.5% and 210 g/L para-chloro-meta-cresol at 4%). Total microorganism count in the environment and Campylobacter spp. identification were done for the microbiological assessment of the environment and carcasses. The positive samples were submitted to molecular identification of Campylobacter spp. and posterior genetic sequencing of the species identified as Campylobacter jejuni. The birds housed in the facilities and submitted to the proposed treatment had better performance when compared to the ones in the regular treatment, most likely because there was a smaller total microorganism count on the floor, walls, feeders and drinkers. The proposed program also resulted in a reduction of Campylobacter spp. on floors, drinkers and birds. Moreover, it was possible to identify 6 different Campylobacter jejuni strains in the facilities. The proposed treatment resulted in a positive influence on the birds’ performance and reduction of environment contamination for broiler chickens.

Field Interventions Against Colonization of Broilers by Campylobacter

“…A related study (Battersby et al, 2016b) found viable Campylobacter organisms in staff access areas of houses just before flock placement, but not from bird accommodation. Burbarelli et al (2017) examined environmental contamination following an enhanced C&D regime in an experimental facility; they reported that Campylobacter was still recovered from water in the drinker supply despite flushing the system with disinfectant. Follow-on flocks were similarly colonized by Campylobacter regardless of whether enhanced or control C&D techniques were used.…”

“…Furthermore, there is some evidence that poultry-related strains commonly are exceptionally tolerant of aerobic conditions (O'Kane & Connerton, 2017;Oh, McMullen, & Jeon, 2015). They can be surprisingly persistent in certain environmental niches, including in drinking water supplies, and when colocated with other micro-organisms such as in biofilms or protozoal hosts (Agunos et al, 2014;Bronowski et al, 2014;Burbarelli et al, 2017;Humphrey et al, 2012;Whiley, van den Akker, Giglio, & Bentham, 2013). This, together with a wide range of host species that allow multiplication and shedding, presents a persistent environmental reservoir to challenge biosecurity and hygiene defenses.…”

Estudio de los caracteres epidemiológicos y control experimental de "Campylobacter jejuni" en el entorno de la producción de pollos para carne = Study of the epidemiological characteristics and experimental control of "Campylobacter jejuni" in the area of poultry for meat production

“…El objetivo principal en las naves de engorde consiste en asegurar que al inicio del ciclo productivo, las instalaciones se encuentren libres de microorganismos patógenos (Orihuel et al, 2015). Este tipo de prácticas preventivas son fundamentales en los programas de bioseguridad (de Castro et al, 2017) y para que resulten eficaces es imprescindible que, tanto la técnica utilizada como los productos empleados, sean los más adecuados y de calidad probada (Maertens et al, 2018).…”

“…En primer lugar, se lleva a cabo la limpieza de la nave y las instalaciones, para lograr la eliminación más completa posible de los residuos, tanto de las instalaciones como de los equipamientos, con el propósito de que el desinfectante pueda realizar su función correctamente (Ward et al, 2006), siendo para ello necesario adecuar el producto utilizado al tipo de suciedad. En función de su pH, los detergentes pueden ser alcalinos, ácidos o neutros; los primeros son los más indicados para la eliminación de residuos orgánicos, mientras que los ácidos actúan principalmente frente a materias minerales y los neutros se suelen utilizar en superficies delicadas, con pocos residuos adheridos (de Castro et al, 2017). En esta etapa, se deben humedecer abundantemente todas las superficies con la solución limpiadora, que luego tendrá que ser eliminada con abundante agua, una vez se haya reblandecido la suciedad (Orihuel et al, 2015).…”

“…La selección de los desinfectantes más apropiados, fáciles de aplicar y eficaces después de periodos cortos de exposición, resulta fundamental para la eliminación de los microorganismos patógenos en general, y en particular de C. jejuni (Gutiérrez-Martín et al, 2011). Existe una gran variedad de ingredientes activos utilizados como desinfectantes en la producción avícola, como el glutaraldehído, el ácido peracético o los cresoles (de Castro et al, 2017). Desde hace décadas se ha comprobado que, en determinadas condiciones, C. jejuni es sensible a la mayoría de los productos utilizados normalmente para la desinfección de superficies, como el hipoclorito de sodio, el etanol, el glutaraldehído y los productos yodados y fenólicos (Wang et al, 1983a).…”