Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic

John Connor Padgett; Paul Thomas Price; James Allen Byrd; Christopher Anthony Bailey

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic

John Connor Padgett, Paul Thomas Price, James Allen Byrd, Christopher Anthony Bailey

Published in International Journal of Animal Science and Technology (Volume 5, Issue 1)

Received: 7 January 2021 Accepted: 19 January 2021 Published: 25 January 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

With food safety continuing to be a concern for both consumers and producers, especially when considering Salmonella, alternative control methods must be studied intensively to fully understand their effects in live poultry. To further understand the abilities of parietal yeast fractions and bacillus probiotics to each impact food safety, a study on mature laying hens was undertaken. 48 hens were obtained from a commercial production flock at 75 weeks of age and were transferred to the USDA ARS facility in College Station, TX. The hens were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups, and fed either a mash corn soy control diet (CON), a corn soy mash diet plus parietal yeast fration composed of a minimum of 20% mannan and 20% beta 1,3 1,6 glucans (YF), or a corn soy mash diet plus a three-strain bacillus probiotic (3B). After 3 weeks of receiving dietary treatment, all birds were orally challenged with 6.6 x 10⁹ CFU of Salmonella Enteritidis. One week after being challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis, birds were humanely euthanized, and ovary and cecal contents were removed and direct plated for both prevalence and enumeration. After plating cecal contents, a significant reduction of 1.26 log10 was observed from the CON to YF (p=0.03) and a 1.08 log10 reduction was observed from CON to 3B (p=0.04). Prevalence of ovaries was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 50% positive, while YF and 3B were 25% and 13% positive respectively. Prevalence in the ceca was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 75% positive, while YF and 3B were 44% and 53% respectively. While neither ovary or ceca prevalence were significantly reduced in this experiment with the inclusion of either treatment, both the YF and 3B treatment significantly reduced colonization of Salmonella Enteritidis in the ceca, indicating that both treatments possess excellent potential as food safety interventions against S. Enteritidis in the egg supply chain.

Published in	International Journal of Animal Science and Technology (Volume 5, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
Page(s)	1-6
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Salmonella, Enteritidis, Layers, Laying Hens, Yeast Cell Wall, Yeast Fraction, Bacillus, Probiotic

References

[1]	CDC https://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/.
[2]	European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonoses, zoonotic zgents and food-borne outbreaks in 2012. EFSA Journal. 2014; 12: 3547.
[3]	Foodnet https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6917a1.htm?s_cid=mm6917a1_w.
[4]	Underwood, W. J., R. Blauwiekel, M. L. Delano, R. Gillesby, S. A. Mischler, A. Schoell. Chapter 15 - Biology and Diseases of Ruminants (Sheep, Goats, and Cattle). Editor (s): Fox, JG Anderson, LC, Otto, GM, Pritchett-Corning, KR. Whary, M. T. In American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine, Laboratory Animal Medicine (Third Edition), Academic Press, 2015. 623-694.
[5]	Giannella RA. Importance of the intestinal inflammatory reaction in Salmonella-mediated intestinal secretion. Infect Immune. 1979; 23: 140.
[6]	Giannella RA, Formal SB, Dammin GJ. et al. Pathogenesis of salmonellosis. Studies of fluid secretion, mucosal invasion, and morphologic reaction in the rabbit ileum. J Clin Invest. 1973; 52: 441.
[7]	Finlay BB, Leung KY, Rosenshine I. et al. Salmonella interactions with the epithelial cell. A model to study the biology of intracellular parasitism. ASM News. 1992; 58: 486.
[8]	Gast RK, Guard-Bouldin J, Holt PS. Colonization of reproductive organs and internal contamination of eggs after experimental infection of laying hens with Salmonella heidelberg and Salmonella enteritidis. Avian Dis. 2004 Dec; 48 (4): 863-9.
[9]	Foley SL, Nayak R, Hanning IB, Johnson TJ, Han J, Ricke SC. Population dynamics of Salmonella enterica serotypes in commercial egg and poultry production. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011; 77 (13): 4273-4279.
[10]	Velge P, Cloeckaert A, Barrow P. Emergence of Salmonella epidemics: the problems related to Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis and multiple antibiotic resistance in other major serotypes. Vet Res. 2005 May-Jun; 36 (3): 267-88.
[11]	Food and Drug Administration 2010. Guidance for industry: prevention of Salmonella Enteritidis in shell eggs during production, transportation, and storage; small entity compliance guide. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FDA, Rockville, MD.
[12]	Fernández-Rubio C, Ordóñez C, Abad-González J, Garcia-Gallego A, Honrubia MP, Mallo JJ, Balaña-Fouce R. Butyric acid-based feed additives help protect broiler chickens from Salmonella Enteritidis infection. Poult Sci. 2009 May; 88 (5): 943-8.
[13]	Van Immerseel, F., Cauwerts, K., Devriese, L., Haesebrouck, F., & Ducatelle, R. (2002). Feed additives to control Salmonella in poultry. World's Poultry Science Journal, 58 (4), 501-513.
[14]	Bailey, J. S., Blankenship, L. C. and Cox, N. A. (1991) Effect of fructooligosaccharide on Salmonella colonization of the chicken intestine. Poultry Science 70: 2433–2438.
[15]	Collins, M. D. and Gibson, R. (1999) Probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics: approaches for modulating the microbial ecology of the gut. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 69: 1052S–1057S.
[16]	Girgis G, Powell M, Youssef M, Graugnard DE, King WD, et al. (2020) Effects of a mannan-rich yeast cell wall-derived preparation on cecal concentrations and tissue prevalence of Salmonella Enteritidis in layer chickens. PLOS ONE 15 (4): e0232088.
[17]	Charles L. Hofacre, Roy D. Berghaus, Sangita Jalukar, Greg F. Mathis, John A. Smith. Effect of a Yeast Cell Wall Preparation on Cecal and Ovarian Colonization With Salmonella enteritidis in Commercial Layers. 2018. Jour Applied Poul Research 27: (4), 453-460, ISSN 1056-6171.
[18]	Attia, Y. A., Ellakany, H. F., Abd El-Hamid, A. E., Bovera, F., Ghazaly, S. A. Control of Salmonella enteritidis infection in male layer chickens by acetic acid and/or prebiotics, probiotics and antibiotics. 2012. Arch. Geflügelk., 76 (4). S. 239–245.
[19]	Price P. T, Gaydos T, Padgett J. C, Gardner K, Bailey C. Salmonella colonization of production hens fed a parietal yeast fraction with high levels of mannan and beta-glucan. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2019; 18 (9): 410–415.
[20]	Lourenço M. C, Kuritza L. N, Hayashi R. M, Miglino L. B, Durau J. F, Pickler L, Santin E. Effect of a mannanoligosaccharide-supplemented diet on intestinal mucosa T lymphocyte populations in chickens challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2015; 24 (1): 15–22.
[21]	Wenrui Zhen, Yujing Shao, Xiuyan Gong, Yuanyuan Wu, Yanqiang Geng, Zhong Wang, Yuming Guo. Effect of dietary Bacillus coagulans supplementation on growth performance and immune responses of broiler chickens challenged by Salmonella enteritidis. Poult Sci. 2018. 97 (8): 2654-2666.
[22]	Murate, Letícia & Paião, Fernanda & Almeida, Adriana & Jr, Angelo & Shimokomaki, Massami. (2015). Efficacy of Prebiotics, Probiotics, and Synbiotics on Laying Hens and Broilers Challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis. The Journal of Poultry Science. 52. 52-56.
[23]	Adhikari B, Hernandez-Patlan D, Solis-Cruz B, et al. Evaluation of the Antimicrobial and Anti-inflammatory Properties of Bacillus-DFM (Norum™) in Broiler Chickens Infected With Salmonella Enteritidis. Front Vet Sci. 2019; 6: 282. Published 2019 Aug 27.
[24]	Khan, S., Chousalkar, K. K. Salmonella Typhimurium infection disrupts but continuous feeding of Bacillus based probiotic restores gut microbiota in infected hens. 2020. J Animal Sci Biotechnol 11, 29.
[25]	R. Shanmugasundaram, T. J. Applegate, R. K. Selvaraj. Effect of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus licheniformis probiotic supplementation on cecal Salmonella load in broilers challenged with salmonella. 2020. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 29 (4): 808-816.
[26]	A. Knarreborg, E. Brockmann, K. Høybye, I. Knap, B. Lund, N. Milora, T. D. Leser. Bacillus subtilis (DSM17299) modulates the ileal microbial communities and improves growth performance in broilers. 2008. Int. J. Probiotics Prebiotics, (3) pp. 83-88.
[27]	I. Knap, A. B. Kehlet, M. Bennedsen, G. F. Mathis, C. L. Hofacre, B. S. Lumpkins, M. M. Jensen, M. Raun, A. Lay. Bacillus subtilis (DSM17299) significantly reduces Salmonella in broilers. 2011. Poult. Sci., (90) 1690-1694.
[28]	Price PT, Gaydos TA, Berghaus RD, Baxter V, Hofacre CL, Sims MD. Salmonella Enteritidis reduction in layer ceca with a Bacillus probiotic. Vet World. 2020; 13 (1): 184-187. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2020.184-187.
[29]	Price, PT, Gaydos, TA, Berghaus, RD, Hofacre, CL. Reduction of Salmonella Enteritidis Colonization in Production Layers Fed High Levels of Mannan and Beta-glucan. 2020. Asi. Jour. Poult. Sci. 14 (1): 1-5.
[30]	Humphrey T. J., Naskerville A., Mawer S., Rowe B., Hopper S. Salmonella Enteritidis phage type 4 from the contents of intact eggs: A study involving naturally infected hens. Epidemiol. Infect., 104 (1989), pp. 415-423.
[31]	Gast R. K., Beard C. W. Production of Salmonella Enteritidis-contaminated eggs by experimentally infected hens. Avian Dis., 34 (1990), pp. 438-446.
[32]	Posadas, G. A., Broadway, P. R., Thornton, J. A., Carroll, J. A., Lawrence, A., Corley, J. R., Thompson, A., & Donaldson, J. R. (2017). Yeast Pro- and Paraprobiotics Have the Capability to Bind Pathogenic Bacteria Associated with Animal Disease 1. Translational Animal Science, 1 (1), 60-68.
[33]	Akhtar T, Ara G, Ali N, Ud Din Mufti F, Imran Khan M. Effects of dietary supplementation of mannanoligosaccharide on virus shedding in avian influenza (H9N2) challenged broilers. Iran J Vet Res. 2016; 17 (4): 268-272.
[34]	Kabir, S. M. L. (2009). The Role of Probiotics in the Poultry Industry. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 10 (8), 3531-3546.
[35]	Al-Khalaifa, H., Al-Nasser, A., Al-Surayee, T., Al-Kandari, S., Al-Enzi, N., Al-Sharrah, T., Ragheb, G., Al-Qalaf, S., & Mohammed, A. Effect of dietary probiotics and prebiotics on the performance of broiler chickens. 2019. Poultry Science, 98 (10), 4465-4479.
[36]	Al-Khalaifah, H. S. Benefits of probiotics and/or prebiotics for antibiotic-reduced poultry. Poultry Science. 2018. 97 (11), 3807-3815.
[37]	Wang W, Li Z, Han Q, Guo Y, Zhang B, D'inca R. Dietary live yeast and mannan-oligosaccharide supplementation attenuate intestinal inflammation and barrier dysfunction induced by Escherichia coli in broilers. Br J Nutr. 2016 Dec; 116 (11): 1878-1888.
[38]	Nopvichai C, Charoenwongpaiboon T, Luengluepunya N, Ito K, Muanprasat C, Pichyangkura R. Production and purification of mannan oligosaccharide with epithelial tight junction enhancing activity. PeerJ. 2019; 7: e7206. Published 2019 Jul 2.
[39]	Gharib-Naseri, K., de Paula Dorigam, J. C., Doranalli, K. et al. Modulations of genes related to gut integrity, apoptosis, and immunity underlie the beneficial effects of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens CECT 5940 in broilers fed diets with different protein levels in a necrotic enteritis challenge model. J Animal Sci Biotechnol 11, 104 (2020).

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

John Connor Padgett, Paul Thomas Price, James Allen Byrd, Christopher Anthony Bailey. (2021). Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic. International Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 5(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

John Connor Padgett; Paul Thomas Price; James Allen Byrd; Christopher Anthony Bailey. Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic. Int. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 2021, 5(1), 1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

John Connor Padgett, Paul Thomas Price, James Allen Byrd, Christopher Anthony Bailey. Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic. Int J Anim Sci Technol. 2021;5(1):1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11,
  author = {John Connor Padgett and Paul Thomas Price and James Allen Byrd and Christopher Anthony Bailey},
  title = {Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic},
  journal = {International Journal of Animal Science and Technology},
  volume = {5},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-6},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijast.20210501.11},
  abstract = {With food safety continuing to be a concern for both consumers and producers, especially when considering Salmonella, alternative control methods must be studied intensively to fully understand their effects in live poultry. To further understand the abilities of parietal yeast fractions and bacillus probiotics to each impact food safety, a study on mature laying hens was undertaken. 48 hens were obtained from a commercial production flock at 75 weeks of age and were transferred to the USDA ARS facility in College Station, TX. The hens were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups, and fed either a mash corn soy control diet (CON), a corn soy mash diet plus parietal yeast fration composed of a minimum of 20% mannan and 20% beta 1,3 1,6 glucans (YF), or a corn soy mash diet plus a three-strain bacillus probiotic (3B). After 3 weeks of receiving dietary treatment, all birds were orally challenged with 6.6 x 109 CFU of Salmonella Enteritidis. One week after being challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis, birds were humanely euthanized, and ovary and cecal contents were removed and direct plated for both prevalence and enumeration. After plating cecal contents, a significant reduction of 1.26 log10 was observed from the CON to YF (p=0.03) and a 1.08 log10 reduction was observed from CON to 3B (p=0.04). Prevalence of ovaries was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 50% positive, while YF and 3B were 25% and 13% positive respectively. Prevalence in the ceca was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 75% positive, while YF and 3B were 44% and 53% respectively. While neither ovary or ceca prevalence were significantly reduced in this experiment with the inclusion of either treatment, both the YF and 3B treatment significantly reduced colonization of Salmonella Enteritidis in the ceca, indicating that both treatments possess excellent potential as food safety interventions against S. Enteritidis in the egg supply chain.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic
AU  - John Connor Padgett
AU  - Paul Thomas Price
AU  - James Allen Byrd
AU  - Christopher Anthony Bailey
Y1  - 2021/01/25
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
T2  - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology
JF  - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology
JO  - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology
SP  - 1
EP  - 6
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1312
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
AB  - With food safety continuing to be a concern for both consumers and producers, especially when considering Salmonella, alternative control methods must be studied intensively to fully understand their effects in live poultry. To further understand the abilities of parietal yeast fractions and bacillus probiotics to each impact food safety, a study on mature laying hens was undertaken. 48 hens were obtained from a commercial production flock at 75 weeks of age and were transferred to the USDA ARS facility in College Station, TX. The hens were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups, and fed either a mash corn soy control diet (CON), a corn soy mash diet plus parietal yeast fration composed of a minimum of 20% mannan and 20% beta 1,3 1,6 glucans (YF), or a corn soy mash diet plus a three-strain bacillus probiotic (3B). After 3 weeks of receiving dietary treatment, all birds were orally challenged with 6.6 x 109 CFU of Salmonella Enteritidis. One week after being challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis, birds were humanely euthanized, and ovary and cecal contents were removed and direct plated for both prevalence and enumeration. After plating cecal contents, a significant reduction of 1.26 log10 was observed from the CON to YF (p=0.03) and a 1.08 log10 reduction was observed from CON to 3B (p=0.04). Prevalence of ovaries was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 50% positive, while YF and 3B were 25% and 13% positive respectively. Prevalence in the ceca was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 75% positive, while YF and 3B were 44% and 53% respectively. While neither ovary or ceca prevalence were significantly reduced in this experiment with the inclusion of either treatment, both the YF and 3B treatment significantly reduced colonization of Salmonella Enteritidis in the ceca, indicating that both treatments possess excellent potential as food safety interventions against S. Enteritidis in the egg supply chain.
VL  - 5
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

John Connor Padgett

Department of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, United States
Paul Thomas Price

Phileo by Lesaffre, Milwaukee, United States
James Allen Byrd

Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, College Station, United States
Christopher Anthony Bailey

Department of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, United States

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

John Connor Padgett, Paul Thomas Price, James Allen Byrd, Christopher Anthony Bailey. (2021). Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic. International Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 5(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

John Connor Padgett; Paul Thomas Price; James Allen Byrd; Christopher Anthony Bailey. Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic. Int. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 2021, 5(1), 1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

John Connor Padgett, Paul Thomas Price, James Allen Byrd, Christopher Anthony Bailey. Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic. Int J Anim Sci Technol. 2021;5(1):1-6. doi: 10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11,
  author = {John Connor Padgett and Paul Thomas Price and James Allen Byrd and Christopher Anthony Bailey},
  title = {Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic},
  journal = {International Journal of Animal Science and Technology},
  volume = {5},
  number = {1},
  pages = {1-6},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijast.20210501.11},
  abstract = {With food safety continuing to be a concern for both consumers and producers, especially when considering Salmonella, alternative control methods must be studied intensively to fully understand their effects in live poultry. To further understand the abilities of parietal yeast fractions and bacillus probiotics to each impact food safety, a study on mature laying hens was undertaken. 48 hens were obtained from a commercial production flock at 75 weeks of age and were transferred to the USDA ARS facility in College Station, TX. The hens were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups, and fed either a mash corn soy control diet (CON), a corn soy mash diet plus parietal yeast fration composed of a minimum of 20% mannan and 20% beta 1,3 1,6 glucans (YF), or a corn soy mash diet plus a three-strain bacillus probiotic (3B). After 3 weeks of receiving dietary treatment, all birds were orally challenged with 6.6 x 109 CFU of Salmonella Enteritidis. One week after being challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis, birds were humanely euthanized, and ovary and cecal contents were removed and direct plated for both prevalence and enumeration. After plating cecal contents, a significant reduction of 1.26 log10 was observed from the CON to YF (p=0.03) and a 1.08 log10 reduction was observed from CON to 3B (p=0.04). Prevalence of ovaries was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 50% positive, while YF and 3B were 25% and 13% positive respectively. Prevalence in the ceca was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 75% positive, while YF and 3B were 44% and 53% respectively. While neither ovary or ceca prevalence were significantly reduced in this experiment with the inclusion of either treatment, both the YF and 3B treatment significantly reduced colonization of Salmonella Enteritidis in the ceca, indicating that both treatments possess excellent potential as food safety interventions against S. Enteritidis in the egg supply chain.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Salmonella Enteritidis Control in Mature Laying Hens Through Dry Fed Parietal Yeast Fraction or Bacillus Blend Probiotic
AU  - John Connor Padgett
AU  - Paul Thomas Price
AU  - James Allen Byrd
AU  - Christopher Anthony Bailey
Y1  - 2021/01/25
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
T2  - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology
JF  - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology
JO  - International Journal of Animal Science and Technology
SP  - 1
EP  - 6
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1312
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijast.20210501.11
AB  - With food safety continuing to be a concern for both consumers and producers, especially when considering Salmonella, alternative control methods must be studied intensively to fully understand their effects in live poultry. To further understand the abilities of parietal yeast fractions and bacillus probiotics to each impact food safety, a study on mature laying hens was undertaken. 48 hens were obtained from a commercial production flock at 75 weeks of age and were transferred to the USDA ARS facility in College Station, TX. The hens were randomly divided into 3 treatment groups, and fed either a mash corn soy control diet (CON), a corn soy mash diet plus parietal yeast fration composed of a minimum of 20% mannan and 20% beta 1,3 1,6 glucans (YF), or a corn soy mash diet plus a three-strain bacillus probiotic (3B). After 3 weeks of receiving dietary treatment, all birds were orally challenged with 6.6 x 109 CFU of Salmonella Enteritidis. One week after being challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis, birds were humanely euthanized, and ovary and cecal contents were removed and direct plated for both prevalence and enumeration. After plating cecal contents, a significant reduction of 1.26 log10 was observed from the CON to YF (p=0.03) and a 1.08 log10 reduction was observed from CON to 3B (p=0.04). Prevalence of ovaries was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 50% positive, while YF and 3B were 25% and 13% positive respectively. Prevalence in the ceca was not significantly different, but numerically CON samples were 75% positive, while YF and 3B were 44% and 53% respectively. While neither ovary or ceca prevalence were significantly reduced in this experiment with the inclusion of either treatment, both the YF and 3B treatment significantly reduced colonization of Salmonella Enteritidis in the ceca, indicating that both treatments possess excellent potential as food safety interventions against S. Enteritidis in the egg supply chain.
VL  - 5
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download