Investigations into Salmonella Contamination in Feed Mills Producing Rations for the Broiler Industry in Great Britain
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Premises
2.2. Sampling
2.3. Bacteriological Analysis
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Proportion of Salmonella-Positive Samples
3.2. Salmonella Serovars Recovered
4. Discussion
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hald, T.; Wingstrand, A.; Pires, S.M.; Vieira, A.; Coutinho Calado Domingues, A.R.; Lundsby, K.L.; Dalhoff Andersen, V.; Thrane, C. Assessment of the Human-Health Impact of Salmonella in Animal Feed; Danmarks Tekniske Universitet (DTU): Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- European Food Safety Authority [EFSA]. Microbiological risk assessment in feedingstuffs for food-producing animals-Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Biological Hazards. EFSA J. 2008, 6, 1–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs [Defra]. Code of Practice for the Control of Salmonella during The Production, Storage and Transport of Compound Feeds, Premixtures, Feed Materials and Feed Additives. Available online: https://www.foodstandards.gov.scot/downloads/copsal.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2022).
- Veldman, A.; Vahl, H.A.; Borggreve, G.J.; Fuller, D.C. A survey of the incidence of Salmonella species and Enterobacteriaceae in poultry feeds and feed components. Vet. Rec. 1995, 136, 169–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alvarez, J.; Porwollik, S.; Laconcha, I.; Gisakis, V.; Vivanco, A.B.; Gonzalez, I.; Echenagusia, S.; Zabala, N.; Blackmer, F.; McClelland, M.; et al. Detection of a Salmonella enterica serovar California strain spreading in spanish feed mills and genetic characterization with DNA microarrays. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 7531–7534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Papadopoulou, C.; Carrique-Mas, J.J.; Davies, R.H.; Sayers, A.R. Retrospective analysis of Salmonella isolates recovered from animal feed in Great Britain. Vet. Rec. 2009, 165, 681–688. [Google Scholar]
- Ge, B.; LaFon, P.C.; Carter, P.J.; McDermott, S.D.; Abbott, J.; Glenn, A.; Ayers, S.L.; Friedman, S.L.; Paige, J.C.; Wagner, D.D.; et al. Retrospective analysis of Salmonella, Campylobacter, Escherichia coli, and Enterococcus in animal feed ingredients. Foodborne Pathog. Dis. 2013, 10, 684–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, F.T.; Axtell, R.C.; Rives, D.V.; Scheideler, S.E.; Tarver, F.R.; Walker, R.L.; Wineland, M.J. A survey of Salmonella contamination in modern broiler production. J. Food Prot. 1991, 54, 502–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, R.H.; Wray, C. Distribution of Salmonella contamination in ten animal feedmills. Vet. Microbiol. 1997, 57, 159–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crump, J.A.; Griffin, P.A.; Angulo, F.J. Bacterial contamination of animal feed and its relationship to human foodborne illness. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2002, 35, 859–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Torres, G.J.; Piquer, F.J.; Algarra, L.; de Frutos, C.; Sobrino, O.J. The prevalence of Salmonella enterica in Spanish feed mills and potential feed-related risk factors for contamination. Prev. Vet. Med. 2011, 98, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, R.H.; Wales, A.D. Investigations into Salmonella contamination in poultry feedmills in the United Kingdom. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2010, 109, 1430–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Animal and Plant Health Agency [APHA]. Salmonella in Livestock Production in GB, 2018. Available online: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20200803212253/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/salmonella-in-livestock-production-in-great-britain (accessed on 10 June 2022).
- Animal and Plant Health Agency [APHA]. Salmonella in Livestock Production in GB, 2019. Available online: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20210803031053/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/salmonella-in-livestock-production-in-great-britain (accessed on 10 June 2022).
- Bains, B.S.; MacKenzie, M.A. Transmission of Salmonella through an integrated poultry organisation. Poult. Sci. 1974, 53, 1114–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baudart, J.; Lemarchand, K.; Brisabois, A.; Lebaron, P. Diversity of Salmonella strains isolated from the aquatic environment as determined by serotyping and amplification of the ribosomal DNA spacer regions. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2000, 66, 1544–1552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Davies, R.H.; Hinton, M.H. Salmonella in animal feed. In Salmonella in Domestic Animals; Wray, C., Wray, A., Eds.; CAB International: Oxford, UK, 2000; pp. 285–300. [Google Scholar]
- de Freitas, J.R.; Schoenau, J.J.; Boyetchko, S.M.; Cyrenne, S.A. Soil microbial populations, community composition, and activity as affected by repeated applications of hog and cattle manure in eastern Saskatchewan. Can. J. Microbiol. 2003, 49, 538–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jones, F.T. A review of practical Salmonella control measures in animal feed. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2011, 20, 102–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Humphrey, T.J.; Slater, E.; McAlpine, K.; Rowbury, R.J.; Gilbert, R.J. Salmonella enteritidis phage type 4 isolates more tolerant of heat, acid, or hydrogen peroxide also survive longer on surfaces. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1995, 61, 3161–3164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jones, F.T.; Richardson, K.E. Salmonella in commercially manufactured feeds. Poult. Sci. 2004, 83, 384–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grimont, P.A.D.; Weill, F.-X. Antigenic Formulae of the Salmonella serovars, 9th ed.; WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Salmonella: Paris, France; Available online: https://www.pasteur.fr/sites/default/files/veng_0.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2022).
- Davies, R.; Breslin, M.; Corry, J.E.; Hudson, W.; Allen, V.M. Observations on the distribution and control of Salmonella species in two integrated broiler companies. Vet. Rec. 2001, 149, 227–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Cruz Payão Pellegrini, D.; Paim, D.; Lima, G.; Pissetti, C.; Kich, J.D.; Cardoso, M. Distribution of Salmonella clonal groups in four Brazilian feed mills. Food Control 2015, 47, 672–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whyte, P.; McGill, K.; Collins, J.D. A survey of the prevalence of Salmonella and other enteric pathogens in a commercial poultry feed mill. J. Food Saf. 2003, 23, 13–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmidt, R.; Hoy, S. Untersuchungen zur staubemission aus geflügelintensivhaltungen [Investigations on dust emission from chicken and layer houses]. Berl. Munch. Tierarztl. 1996, 109, 95–100. [Google Scholar]
- Andino, A.; Pendleton, S.; Zhang, N.; Chen, W.; Critzer, F.; Hanning, I. Survival of Salmonella enterica in poultry feed is strain dependent. Poult. Sci. 2014, 93, 441–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bucher, O.; Holley, R.A.; Ahmed, R.; Tabor, H.; Nadon, C.; Ng, L.K.; D’Aoust, J.Y. Occurrence and characterization of Salmonella from chicken nuggets, strips, and pelleted broiler feed. J. Food Prot. 2007, 70, 2251–2258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Animal and Plant Health Agency [APHA]. Salmonella in Livestock Production in GB, 2020. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1060634/salm-livestock-prod-gb20.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2022).
- Esterhuizen, J. Review of Salmonella control treatment: Is formaldehyde the only option? AFMA Matrix 2019, 28, 16–17. [Google Scholar]
Feed Mill Code | Visit Number | Number of Samples | Proportion of Salmonella-Positive Samples |
---|---|---|---|
F1 | 1 | 393 | 1.3 (CI 0.5–3.0) |
2 | 496 | 1.4 (CI 0.7–2.9) | |
F2 | 1 | 386 | 2.1 (CI 1.0–4.0) |
2 | 420 | 29.5 (CI 25.4–34.1) | |
F3 | 1 | 381 | 15.0 (CI 11.7–18.9) |
2 | 400 | 12.8 (CI 9.8–16.4) | |
F4 | 1 | 486 | 1.2 (CI 0.6–2.7) |
2 | 445 | 3.4 (CI 2.0–5.5) | |
F5 | 1 | 407 | 5.4 (CI 3.6–8.0) |
2 | 416 | 5.3 (CI 3.5–7.9) | |
3 | 412 | 2.2 (CI 1.2–4.1) | |
4 | 435 | 4.8 (CI 3.2–7.3) | |
F6 | 1 | 420 | 36.2 (CI 31.7–40.9) |
2 | 352 | 19.6 (CI 15.8–24.1) | |
F7 | 1 | 416 | 12.7 (CI 9.9–16.3) |
2 | 454 | 35.9 (CI 31.6–40.4) | |
F8 | 1 | 380 | 1.3 (CI 0.6–3.0) |
F9 | 1 | 404 | 0.0 (CI 0–0.9) |
F10 | 1 | 410 | 0.0 (CI 0–0.9) |
F11 | 1 | 428 | 0.7 (CI 0.2–2.0) |
F12 | 1 | 420 | 1.2 (CI 0.5–2.8) |
F13 | 1 | 420 | 0.2 (CI 0.0–1.3) |
F14 | 1 | 372 | 3.5 (CI 2.0–5.9) |
F15 | 1 | 405 | 6.9 (CI 4.8–9.8) |
F16 | 1 | 440 | 3.4 (CI 2.1–5.6) |
F17 | 1 | 317 | 3.2 (CI 1.7–5.7) |
F18 | 1 | 424 | 1.7 (CI 0.8–3.4) |
F19 | 1 | 408 | 1.0 (CI 0.4–2.5) |
F20 | 1 | 390 | 1.3 (CI 0.6 – 3.0) |
F21 | 1 | 439 | 0.2 (CI 0.0–1.3) |
F22 | 1 | 415 | 6.3 (CI 4.3–9.0) |
Mill Code (F)/Visit Code (v) | Intake Pit | Ingredient Handling | Ingredient Storage | Sieve | Grinder | Dust Aspiration/Cyclone | Weigher/Mixer | Conditioner/Press | Cooler | Crumbler | Fat Coater | Finished Product Handling | Finished Product Storage | Outloading | Interior Environment | Waste Handling | Lorry Wash/Vehicles | Outside |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F2/v2 | 24.4 (45) | 0.0 (4) | 11.8 (34) | 37.5 (40) | 3.1 (32) | 25.0 (8) | 6.3 (32) | 33.3 (36) | 50.0 (28) | 25.0 (4) | 78.6 (28) | 0.0 (4) | 2.8 (36) | 27.6 (58) | 100 (4) | 75.0 (20) | 60.0 (5) | 50.0 (2) |
F3/v1 | 11.5 (52) | 8.3 (36) | 0.0 (24) | 30.0 (20) | nd | 50.0 (8) | 2.8 (36) | 15.6 (32) | 29.2 (24) | nd | 25.0 (12) | 8.7 (46) | 16.7 (18) | 17.9 (56) | 50.0 (6) | 50.0 (2) | nd | 11.1 (9) |
F3/v2 | 3.6 (56) | nd | 9.4 (64) | 25.0 (24) | 0.0 (15) | 66.7 (12) | 16.7 (36) | 28.1 (32) | 29.2 (24) | nd | 20.7 (29) | nd | 0.0 (40) | 0.0 (56) | 25.0 (4) | 0.0 (8) | nd | nd |
F5/v1 | 43.8 (16) | 8.3 (84) | 3.8 (52) | 0.0 (8) | 10.0 (20) | 0.0 (24) | 0.0 (20) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (36) | 0.0 (4) | 0.0 (8) | 0.0 (8) | 0.0 (60) | 0.0 (28) | 0.0 (12) | 40.0 (10) | 0.0 (1) | nd |
F5/v2 | 0.0 (16) | 2.4 (84) | 1.9 (52) | 0.0 (8) | 0.0 (20) | 12.5 (24) | 6.3 (16) | 0.0 (16) | 19.4 (36) | 25.0 (4) | 37.5 (8) | 0.0 (8) | 6.7 (60) | 0.0 (32) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (8) | 0.0 (3) | 0.0 (5) |
F6/v1 | 4.2 (24) | 29.2 (48) | 34.1 (44) | 12.5 (8) | 25.0 (12) | 25.0 (8) | 6.3 (32) | 50.0 (24) | 60.0 (20) | 75.0 (24) | 20.8 (24) | 8.3 (12) | 22.9 (48) | 63.3 (60) | 50.0 (10) | 50.0 (4) | 50.0 (2) | 56.3 (16) |
F6/v2 | 4.2 (24) | 17.9 (28) | 6.8 (44) | 33.3 (12) | 15.0 (20) | 0.0 (8) | 12.5 (32) | 35.0 (20) | 29.2 (24) | 55.0 (20) | 33.3 (24) | 0.0 (8) | 2.1 (48) | 20.0 (20) | 75.0 (4) | 33.3 (12) | nd | 100 (4) |
F7/v1 | 18.2 (44) | 50.0 (8) | 12.5 (64) | 20.0 (20) | 0.0 (12) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (44) | 0.0 (16) | 37.5 (32) | 0.0 (12) | 0.0 (16) | nd | 0.0 (48) | 7.1 (56) | 0.0 (8) | nd | 100 (2) | 61.1 (18) |
F7/v2 | 12.5 (32) | 50.0 (8) | 12.5 (32) | 35.0 (20) | 41.7 (24) | 45.5 (22) | 26.5 (34) | 64.0 (25) | 64.3 (56) | 100 (6) | 50.0 (16) | nd | 9.7 (72) | 43.8 (73) | 9.5 (21) | 63.6 (11) | 50.0 (2) | nd |
F15/v1 | 75.0 (16) | 6.3 (48) | 5.8 (69) | nd | 0.0 (20) | 0.0 (8) | 0.0 (20) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (36) | 0.0 (20) | 0.0 (8) | 8.3 (12) | 0.0 (96) | 0.0 (20) | nd | 100 (8) | nd | 0.0 (8) |
F22/v1 | 12.5 (40) | 0.0 (16) | nd | 0.0 (20) | nd | 41.7 (12) | 6.3 (16) | 0.0 (18) | 6.9 (29) | 0.0 (8) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (16) | 0.0 (140) | nd | 50.0 (24) | 0.0 (2) | 2.4 (42) |
Mill | Persistent Serovar | Visit | Number of Salmonella-Positive Samples | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Persistent Serovar | Other Serovars | |||
F1 | None | 1 | - | 5 |
2 | - | 7 | ||
F2 | S. 4,12:d:- | 1 | 4 | 4 |
2 | 115 | 9 | ||
F3 | S. Ohio | 1 | 38 | 19 |
2 | 35 | 16 | ||
F4 | S. Kedougou | 1 | 3 | 3 |
2 | 0 | 15 | ||
F5 | S. Ohio | 1 | 0 | 22 |
2 | 19 | 3 | ||
3 | 6 | 3 | ||
4 | 15 | 6 | ||
F6 | S. Kedougou | 1 | 145 | 7 |
2 | 66 | 3 | ||
F7 | S. 13,23:i:- | 1 | 35 | 11 |
2 | 152 | 18 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gosling, R.; Oastler, C.; Nichols, C.; Jackson, G.; Wales, A.D.; Davies, R.H. Investigations into Salmonella Contamination in Feed Mills Producing Rations for the Broiler Industry in Great Britain. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 307. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9070307
Gosling R, Oastler C, Nichols C, Jackson G, Wales AD, Davies RH. Investigations into Salmonella Contamination in Feed Mills Producing Rations for the Broiler Industry in Great Britain. Veterinary Sciences. 2022; 9(7):307. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9070307
Chicago/Turabian StyleGosling, Rebecca, Claire Oastler, Christopher Nichols, George Jackson, Andrew D. Wales, and Robert H. Davies. 2022. "Investigations into Salmonella Contamination in Feed Mills Producing Rations for the Broiler Industry in Great Britain" Veterinary Sciences 9, no. 7: 307. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9070307