This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
A LO H M A N N A N I M A L H E A LT H N E W S B R I E F
Rodents, poultry and Salmonella A direct Approximately 60% of contaminated layer farms, and alternatively SE was relationship all human pathogens not detected in mice on clean farms (17). A compariare zoonotic diseases son on the prevalence of Salmonella infection in layer has been that originate in animals hens from commercial farms showed a correlation (4). Success of industrial of high SE infection of layers in houses populated established poultry farming has led with high densities of roof rats (20). Garber et al to evolving zoonotic (10) reported that the persistence of SE in mice from diseases that do not necenvironmentally-positive houses was nearly four between essarily cause disease in times that in mice from environmentally-negative avian species but may houses. Conversely, some studies have indicated poultry, threaten public health. that infected poultry that initially infect mice with Mammals and wild birds salmonellae can serve as a reservoir for reinfection Salmonella are the main reservoir for Salmonella in the environof poultry (16). Regardless of whether Salmonella ment. Most Salmonella infections in man can be came from the chicken or the rodent, it has found a back to dairy, poultry and meat products, but synergistic niche in these two species. and rodents traced Salmonella can grow on just about any food. ChickAs rodents are one of the scourges of mankind, where both ens and eggs are particularly high risk foods (31). they have also been a boon for their contribution Poultry can acquire salmonellae from various sources to medical science research. Rats and mice are the rodents including rodents. A direct relationship has been most commonly used animals in research and testing established between poultry, Salmonella and rodents and account for 90% of all mammals used in scientific both rodents and poultry serve as reservoirs endeavors. As early as the 17th and 18th centuries, and poultry where for salmonellae. Both of these warm-blooded host mice were already being used in studies of anatomy systems provide access for salmonellae to amplify and respiration. Today rodents are used in medical serve as their numbers, and subsequently a continuous infecresearch as animal models to study human disease tion cycle is sustained through fecal-oral transmission Much has been studied and written in the reservoirs for as they coexist in the environment. Rodents carry Sal- conditions. understanding of disease pathogenesis, understandmonella bacteria in their intestinal tracts as commening immunity against disease and development of organisms without any obvious signs of disease. vaccines using rodent models (8). salmonellae. sal Infected rodents then shed the bacteria at up to 10
Sandra Kelly-Aehle, Technical Manager
CFU/fecal pellet (17), which can be picked up by birds through contaminated feed and water. Davies and Wray (7) showed that droppings from infected mice were infective for pullets up to 2 months. Early studies have shown the prevalence of Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) as high in rodents present on
As its name suggests, Salmonella Typhimurium (ST) causes a typhoid-like disease in mice. The early pioneer work of Ørskov and his colleagues established that mouse typhoid caused by ST runs a similar course to typhoid fever caused by Salmonella Typhi (26). Mice are often preferred for experimental studies in infection models because of their anatomic and
Rodents, poultry and Salmonella, p.1
Notes from the Director of Sales, US & Canada, p.4
immunologic similarities with humans. It is generally accepted that cellular immunity is primarily responsible for clearance of Salmonella infection (5) with a strong antibody response participating in protection (25). Salmonella invade and multiply in the mucosa and gut-associated lymphatic tissues (GALT) of intestinal tissues and then reach systemic sites through the mesenteric lymph nodes. This pattern of dissemination allows Salmonella to stimulate cellmediated, humoral and secretory antibody immune responses (2, 21). Attenuated live Salmonella have been tested extensively in mice toward the understanding of pathogenicity of the disease and the immunologic response against salmonellosis. Since Salmonella have the capability to invade cells and replicate intracellularly, their use as live vaccines has been exploited due to their capacity to induce local, humoral and cell-mediated immunity. Bacon et al (1) were first to investigate that purine-deficient mutants of S. Typhi had reduced virulence for mice. Gowen and Stadler (12) provided early information on the ability of metabolic ST mutants created by X-ray or ultraviolet treatment to immunize mice against challenge with virulent S. Typhimurium. A mutant of ST defective in the UPD-galactose epimerase gene, galE, required for LPS synthesis (11) was shown to protect mice and cattle (30). The galE mutation is one of the modes of attenuation of the current live S. Typhi vaccine, Ty21a, currently available for human typhoid prophylaxis. Another rough Salmonella mutant, the 9R S. Gallinarum, first appeared as the poultry industry’s response to a rise in fowl typhoid during the 1950s (27). Europe led the way during the early 1980’s in evaluating attenuated ST strains as live vaccines for poultry to protect against zoonotic salmonellae. Most ST vaccines at the time originated from chemical mutagenesis or were developed on the principal of metabolic drift and were found to be safe and efficacious for poultry (23, 24). These vaccine strains are commercially available and are used extensively today in many parts of the world to stave off ST and SE infection and fowl typhoid in poultry and to reduce the burden
of salmonellae in the environment (29, 9, 22). As the understanding of Salmonella bacterial genetics advanced, more defined mutants of ST were developed and their use as live immunizing agents explored. Transposoninduced derivatives of Salmonella with deletions of the Tn10 and adjacent DNA sequences in the cya and crp regions were shown to be avirulent and conferred protection against challenge with virulent Salmonella in mice, chickens and swine (6, 28, 13, 19). Salmonella strains with Δcya and Δcrp mutations lack the ability to synthesize adenylate cyclase and the cyclase receptor protein (CRP), respectively, and are defective in their ability to grow and survive, but are still able to colonize and instigate a limited infection. When the Δcya Δcrp ST vaccine is administered to poultry by drinking water or coarse spray, strong and lasting immunity is mounted against infections by S. Typhimurium, S. Heidelberg and S. Enteritidis and other serotypes found in the poultry environment (14, 15). When used together, protection induced by the Δcya Δcrp ST vaccine strains protect the internal organs, intestines, ceca, ovaries and oviduct in layers and in molted hens (3, 18). Rodents have long been recognized as vectors of Salmonella and have been fully utilized in research as a disease model to evaluate the role Salmonella plays in disease, epidemiology and immunology. In the foreseeable future, vaccination is likely to take an increasingly central role in the control of Salmonella. As long as there is free access to food, water and harborage, rodents and poultry will continue to coexist. However, vaccination can break the chain of Salmonella infection and transmission between poultry and rodents by exploiting host immune systems to produce protection against infection and carriage of Salmonella. References 1. Bacon, G.A., T.W. Burrows and M. Yates. 1951. The effects of biochemical mutation on the virulence of Bacterium typhosum: The loss of virulence of certain mutants. Br. J. Exp. Pathol. 32:85-96. 2. Bienenstock, J., M. McDermott, D. Befus and M.
O’Neill. 1978. A common mucosal immunologic system involving the bronchus, breast, and bowel. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 107:53-59. 3. Burns, K.E., S.M. Kelly-Aehle and J.A. Lawrence. 2004. Review of recent research involving Megan® Egg – a new vaccine to protect commercial layers from challenge of Salmonella enteritidis. Avian Insight – A Lohmann Animal Health News Brief Vol. 2. 4. CDC. The National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases accessed April 2, 2013 http://www.cdc.gov/ ncezid/ 5. Collins, F.M. 1974. Vaccines and cell-mediated immunity. Bacteriological Reviews 38:371–374. 6. Curtiss, R., III, and S.M. Kelly. 1987. Salmonella typhimurium deletion mutants lacking adenylate cyclase and cyclic AMP receptor protein are avirulent and immunogenic. Infect. Immun. 55:3035–3043. 7. Davies, R.H. and C. Wray. 1995. Mice as carriers of Salmonella enteritidis on persistently infected poultry units. Vet. Rec. 137:337-341. 8. Eisenstein, T.K., L.M. Killar and B.M. Sulzer. 1984. Immunity to infection with Salmonella typhimurium: Mouse strain differences in vaccine- and serum-mediated protection. J. Infect. Dis. 150:425–435. 9. Gantois, I., R. Ducatelle, L. Timbermont, F. Boyen, L. Bohez, F. Haesebrouk, F. Pasmans and F. van Immerseel. 2006. Oral immunisation of laying hens with the live vaccine strains of TAD Salmonella vac E and TAD Salmonella vac T reduces internal egg contamination with Salmonella Enteritidis. Vaccine 24:6250-6255. 10. Garber, L., M. Smeltzer, P. Fedorka-Cray, S. Ladely and K. Ferris. 2003. Salmonella enterica serotype enteritidis in table egg layer house environments and in mice in U.S. layer houses and associated risk factors. Avian Dis. 47:134-142. 11. Germanier, R. and E. Fürer. 1975. Isolation and characterization of GalE mutant
typhimurium as related to mutations in metabolic requirements. Genetics 38:531-549. 13. Hassan, J.O. and R. Curtiss III. 1990. Control of colonization by virulent Salmonella typhimurium by oral immunization of chickens with avirulent Δcya Δcrp S. typhimurium. Res. Microbiol. 141:839–850. 14. Hassan, J.O. and R. Curtiss III. 1994. Development and evaluation of an experimental vaccination program using a live avirulent Salmonella typhimurium strain to protect immunized chickens against challenge with homologous and heterologous Salmonella serotypes. Infect. Immun. 62:5519-5527. 15. Hassan, J.O. and R. Curtiss III. 1997. Efficacy of a live avirulent Salmonella typhimurium vaccine in preventing colonization and invasion of laying hens by Salmonella typhimurium and Salmonella enteritidis. Avian Dis. 41:783-791. 16. Healing, T.D. 1991. Salmonella in rodents: a risk of man. Commun. Dis. Rep. Rev. 1:114-116. 17. Henzler, D.J. and H.M. Opitz. 1992. The role of mice in the epizootiology of Salmonella enteritidis infection on chicken layer farms. Avian Dis. 36:625-631. 18. Holt, P.S., R.K. Gast and S. Kelly-Aehle. 2003. Use of a live attenuated Salmonella typhimurium vaccine to protect hens against Salmonella enteritidis infection while undergoing molt. Avian Dis. 47:656-661. 19. Kelly, S.M., B.A. Bosecker and R. Curtiss III. 1992. Characterization and protective properties of attenuated mutants of
Salmonella choleraesuis. Infect. Immun. 60:4881-4890. 20. Lapuz, R.R.S.P., D.V. Umali, T. Suzuki, K. Shirota and H. Katoh. 2012. Comparison of the prevalence of Salmonella infection in layer hens from commercial layer farms with high and low rodent densities. Avian Dis. 56:29-34. 21. Lee G.M., G.D.F. Jackson and G.N. Cooper. 1983. Infection and immune responses in chickens exposed to Salmonella Typhimurium. Avian Dis. 27:577–583. 22. Lee, Y.J., I.P. Mo and M.S. Kang. 2007. Protective efficacy of live Salmonella gallinarum 9R vaccine in commercial layer ﬂocks. Avian Pathol. 36:495-498. 23. Linde, K., I. Hahn and E. Vielitz. 1997. Development of live Salmonella vaccines optimally attenuated for chickens. Lohmann Information 20, 23-31. 24. Meyer H, H. Koch, U. Methner and G. Steinbach. 1993. Vaccines in salmonellosis control in animals. Zentralblatt Bakteriologie 278:407–415. 25. Mittrucker, H-W and S.H.E. Kaufmann. 2000. Immune response to infection with Salmonella typhimurium in mice. J. Leukoc. Biol. 67:457–463. 26. Ørskov, J., K.A. Jensen and K. Kobayashi. 1928. Studien uber breslauinfektion der mause, speziell mit rucksicht auf die bedentung des retikuloendothelialguvebes. Z. Immunitaetsforsch. Exp. Ther. 55:34-68. 27. Smith, H.W. 1956. The use of live vaccines in experimental Salmonella gallinarum infection in chickens with observations
on their interference effect. 54:419-432.
28. Stabel, T.J., J.E. Mayfield, D.C. Morfitt and M.J. Wannemuehler. 1993. Oral immunization of mice and swine with an attenuated Salmonella choleraesuis [Δcya-12 Δ(crp-cdt)19] mutant containing a recombinant plasmid. Infect. Immun. 61:610-618. 29. Vielitz, E., E.C. Conrad, M. Voss, U. Löhren, J. Bachmeier and I. Hahn. 1992. Immunization against Salmonella infections using live and inactivated vaccine preparations. In: Proc. World Poultry Congress, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 435-438. 30. Wray, C. and W.J. Sojka. 1977. Reviews of the progress of dairy science: Bovine salmonellosis. J. Dairy Res. 44:383–425. 31. WHO/FAO. 2002. Risk assessments of Salmonella in eggs and broiler chickens. World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland.
Notes from the Director of Sales:
Advances in poultry management have long ago shifted the approach to poultry health management from treatment to prevention. The Prevention First concept continues to drive much of the research and development at Lohmann Animal Health. Food safety has always been a concern for the poultry industry. Interventions on the live side of the production chain are being recognized and understood Tim Hopson as beneficial and necessary tools Director of Sales, US & Canada in a complete food safety program. Lohmann Animal Health
as well. It has enabled us to recognize common links and reservoirs. More important, research and good management practices have helped to break or reduce the transmission of foodborne disease. At Lohmann Animal Health, vaccines have been developed to help reduce the proliferation and transmission of one of the leading food safety concerns, Salmonella. AviPro® Megan® Vac 1, AviPro® Megan® Egg, AviPro® 109 SE-4, and AviPro® 329 ND-IB2-SE-4 are all USDA-approved vaccines available to the poultry industry to enhance food safety and Salmonella prevention programs. In addition, Lohmann Animal Health has the capability and technology to produce inactivated autogenous vaccines to meet specific disease challenges. Please go to our website at www.lahinternational.com or contact an Area Manager for more details. Always “Prevention First.”
Research has helped to better that don’t just cause disease in poultry, but can cause food safety issues for consumers
Lohmann Animal Health International 375 China Road Winslow, Maine 04901, USA Phone: (+1) 207-873 3989
for more information:
(+1) 207-873 3989 (+1) 800-655 1342 www.lahinternational.com
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.