Effect of photointensity, sound intensity, and ambient temperature on preening behavior and ingestion of spray-applied biologics

Journal of Applied Poultry Research

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 99-106

  Caldwell, D Y ^b   Moore, R W ^b   Caldwell, D J ^b   Hargis, B M ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Chicks; Environmental conditions; Ingestion; Preening; Spray application

Indexed keywords

GALLUS GALLUS;

EID: 0035636576     PISSN: 10566171     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/japr/10.2.99     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Nurmi, E., and M. Rantala. 1973. New aspects of Salmonella infections in broiler production. Nature 241:210-211.
2. Schneitz, C. 1992. Research Note: Automated droplet application of a competitive exclusion preparation. Poult. Sci. 71:2125-2128.
3. Corrier, D.E., A.G. Hollister, D.J. Nisbet, C.M. Scanlan, R.C. Beier, and J.R. DeLoach. 1994. Competitive exclusion of Salmonella enlerilidis in Leghorn chicks: Comparison of treatment by crop gavage, drinking water, spray, or lyophilized alginate beads. Avian Dis. 38:297-303.
4. Blankenship, L.C., J.S. Bailey, N.A. Cox, N.J. Stern, R. Brewer, and O. Williams. 1993. Two-step mucosal competitive exclusion flora treatment to diminish Salmonellae in commercial broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 72:1667-1672.
5. Corrier, D.E., D.H. Nisbet, A.G. Hollister, C.M. Scanlan, B.M. Hargis, and J.R. DeLoach. 1993. Development of defined cultures of indigenous cecal bacteria to control salmonellosis in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 72:1164-1168.
6. Corrier, D.E., D.J. Nisbet, J.A. Byrd II, B.M. Hargis, N.K. Keith, M. Peterson, and J.R. DeLoach. 1998. Dosage titration of a characterized competitive exclusion culture to inhibit Salmonella colonization in broiler chickens during growout. J. Food Prot. 61:796-801.
7. Hume, M.E., J.A. Byrd, L.H. Stanker, and R.L. Ziprin. 1998. Reduction of caecal Listeria monocytogenes in Leghorn chicks following treatment with a competitive exclusion culture (PREEMPT). Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 26:432-436.
8. Hume, M.E., D.E. Corrier, D.J. Nisbet, and J.R. DeLoach. 1998. Early Salmonella challenge time and reduction in chick cecal colonization following treatment with a characterized competitive exclusion culture. J. Food Prot. 61:673-676.
9. Schneitz, C., L. Nuotio, G. Mead, and E. Nurmi. 1992. Competitive exclusion in the young bird: Challenge models, administration and reciprocal protection. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 15:241-244.
10. Cole-Parmer Instrument Company, 625 East Bunker Court, Vernon Hill, IL 60061-1844 USA. Catalog #01588-60.
11. Radio Shack, a division of Tandy Corporation, Fort Worth, TX 76102. Catalog #33-2055.
12. Eberbach Corporation, Ann Arbor, MI.
13. Fluorescein, Sigma Chemical Company, P.O. Box 14508, St. Louis, MO 63178 USA. Catalog #F6377.
14. Nasco Whirl-Pac bags from VWR. Catalog #B00736WA.
15. Fluorolite 1000, Dynex Technologies, The Microtiter Company, 14340 Sullyfield Circle, Chantilly, VA 20151-1683.
16. BIOLINK, Version 2.20. Dynatech Laboratories, Inc., 14340 Sullyfield Circle, Chantilly, VA 22021, USA.
17. MS BioScience, Dundee, IL.
18. SAS Institute. 1987. SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers. 6th Edition. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.
19. Duncan, D.B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11:1-42.