Poult. Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fulton, R.
Right arrow Articles by Reed, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fulton, R.
Right arrow Articles by Reed, W.
Poultry Science, Vol 81, Issue 1, 34-40
Copyright © 2002 by Poultry Science Association


Articles

Prevention of Salmonella enteritidis infection in commercial ducklings by oral chicken egg-derived antibody alone or in combination with probiotics

RM Fulton, BN Nersessian, and WM Reed

Department of Veterinary Pathology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824, USA. fulton@ahdl.msu.edu

Ducklings were given egg-derived antibody against Salmonella enteritidis (Ab) in drinking water daily to determine if infection could be prevented. Pekin ducklings in all experimental groups were infected on Day 1 or 5 with 0.7 x 10(6) Salmonella enteritidis (SE). Spleen, liver, and intestine of each bird were collected and cultured on Days 7, 14, 21, and 28. Only livers and spleens were culture positive for SE. Ducklings infected on Day 1 had more SE infections than controls at each observation. Ducklings infected on Day 5 had fewer SE infections than controls on Days 7, 14, and 21. The same experiment was repeated to determine if SE infection could be prevented under production conditions. Only 10 ducks per group were infected with 1.02 x 10(7) SE. In addition to Ab, one group each, infected on Day 1 or 5, received a proprietary probiotic (Pro) daily to determine if Pro was synergistic to Ab. Groups receiving Ab and Pro and infected on Day 1 had fewer birds infected than Ab alone in Day 1-infected birds. Both Day 1-infected groups had more birds infected than controls. Birds infected on Day 5 had fewer ducks infected than controls on Days 7, 14, and 21. Except for Day 14, birds receiving both Ab and Pro and infected on Day 5 had fewer birds infected than Ab alone on Day 21 and 28. Probiotics act synergistically with oral Ab. Oral antibodies may serve as a tool to prevent salmonella infection in poultry.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the Poultry Science Association.