Prevalence of Arcobacter species in market-weight commercial turkeys

Abstract

The prevalence of Arcobacter in live market weight turkeys was determined for six Midwestern commercial flocks at three intervals. Samples (n = 987) were collected from cloaca, feathers, ceca, crop, drinkers and environmental samples on farms and from carcasses at slaughter. Initially, EMJH-P80 and CVA isolated Arcobacter from 7.1% (40 of 564) of samples, while Arcobacter enrichment broth and selective agar recovered the microbe in 4.7% of samples (23 of 489 samples). Although EMJH-P80 coupled with CVA yielded Arcobacter more frequently, the selectivity of the modified Arcobacter agar enhanced the recognition of Arcobacter colonies. A multiplex PCR was used to identify all Arcobacter species and to differentiate Arcobacter butzleri. The low prevalence of Arcobacter detected in cloacal swab (2.0%, 6 of 298 samples) and cecal contents (2.1%, 3 of 145 samples) suggests that Arcobacter infrequently colonizes the intestinal tract. Despite its low prevalence in live turkeys, Arcobacter spp. were identified in 93% of carcass swabs (139 of 150 samples). The overall prevalence of Arcobacter in drinker water decreased from 67% (31 of 46 samples) in the summer of 2003 to 24.7% (18 of 73 samples) during resampling in the spring of 2004 and was inversely related to the chlorination level.

Taxonomy, Epidemiology, and Clinical Relevance of the Genus Arcobacter

“…For instance, a watery diarrhea similar to that seen in humans was observed in naturally infected macaques (63,162) and histological lesions compatible with colitis were observed in A. butzleri-infected animals, while no isolates from the feces of healthy animals were obtained (6). These results, together with data obtained from experimental animal models such as the Beltsville White turkey and the pig, where the same challenge mi- In comparison with the case for Campylobacter, almost nothing is known about which Arcobacter genes are involved in the virulence mechanisms.…”

“…This hypothesis relies on the high prevalence of those microbes in the intestinal tract and fecal samples of healthy farm animals and in many retailed meat products (6,22,64,89,101,157). The results on the prevalence of Arcobacter found in 15 studies that investigated chicken, pork, and beef meat have been summarized previously (25).…”

“…However, it has been reported that the enrichment step reduces the diversity of Arcobacter species recovered in the plating medium in comparison with direct plating (68,71). In summary, it can be said that the methods for recovering Arcobacter are very diverse (Table 4) and that there is a lack of consensus about which of them is the most useful (depending on the type of sample), because few comparative studies have been performed (6,85,134) and, to our knowledge, there is no study in which they were all compared simultaneously. Some of the recovery problems reported include the inhibition of some Arcobacter species when using certain antibiotics (11,72) and insufficient inhibition of the accompanying microbiota (6,44).…”

“…In summary, it can be said that the methods for recovering Arcobacter are very diverse (Table 4) and that there is a lack of consensus about which of them is the most useful (depending on the type of sample), because few comparative studies have been performed (6,85,134) and, to our knowledge, there is no study in which they were all compared simultaneously. Some of the recovery problems reported include the inhibition of some Arcobacter species when using certain antibiotics (11,72) and insufficient inhibition of the accompanying microbiota (6,44). Generally, although not in clinical microbiology, Arcobacter isolation includes an enrichment step (which usually takes 48 h) in a broth containing several antibiotics followed by isolation on agar media (with or without antibiotics) for an additional incubation period of 48 to 72 h ( Table 4).…”

The Family Campylobacteraceae

“…Problems for recovery may include inhibition of some Arcobacter spp. with antibiotics (Atabay et al 2006;Houf et al 2001) as well as insufficient inhibition of contaminating microflora (Andersen et al 2007;Fera et al 2004). An enrichment step could reduce the diversity of Arcobacter species as it may favor the growth of faster growing species (Ho HT et al 2006).…”