Evaluation of Spray Application of a Lactobacillus-based Probiotic on Salmonella enteritidis Colonization in Broiler Chickens


Authors

  • A.D. Wolfenden Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • C.M. Pixley Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • J.P. Higgins Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • S.E. Higgins Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • B.M. Hargis Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • G. Tellez Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • J.L. Vicente Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
  • A. Torres-Rodriguez Cobb-Vantress, Siloam Springs, AR 72761, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2007.493.496

Keywords:

Broiler chicks, probiotic, Salmonella enteritidis, spray application

Abstract

Spray application offers low-cost and efficient application of biologic and reduced concerns regarding diverse water quality and medicator/proportioner function. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the spray application of a Lactobacillus-based probiotic on Salmonella enteritidis (SE) colonization in broiler chickens. Day-of-hatch chicks were challenged with Salmonella enteritidis (SE) by oral gavage alone, challenged with SE and treated by coarse spray application of a commercially-availably Lactic-acid bacterial probiotic (FM-B11™), or challenged with SE and treated with B11 continuously in the Drinking Water (DW). Five days post-challenge, cecal tonsils were collected for presence or absence of SE. In Exp. 1, probiotic treatment by either spray or DW application significantly (p<0.05) reduced SE recovery (55% and 50% respectively; controls 85%) when chicks were held for 8h prior to challenge and placement. Similarly, when probiotic spray treatment or water treatment and challenge occurred simultaneously, with placement 8h after treatment, a marked and significant reduction of SE recovery was noted after 5d (10% and 40% respectively, controls 55%). In Exp. 2, when probiotic spray treatment and challenge occurred simultaneously, with placement 8h after treatment, a significant reduction of SE recovery was again noted in both the spray and DW application (80% controls, 15% spray, 15% DW). Taken together, these results suggest that spray application of B11, when performed in the manner described above, can be effective for protection of chicks against Salmonella infection.

Downloads

Published

2007-06-15

Issue

Section

Research Article

How to Cite

Wolfenden, A., Pixley, C., Higgins, J., Higgins, S., Hargis, B., Tellez, G., Vicente, J., & Torres-Rodriguez, A. (2007). Evaluation of Spray Application of a Lactobacillus-based Probiotic on Salmonella enteritidis Colonization in Broiler Chickens. International Journal of Poultry Science, 6(7), 493–496. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2007.493.496

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2 3 > >>