Comparisons of sampling procedures and time of sampling for the detection of Salmonella in danish infected chicken flocks raised in floor systems

Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 21-30

  Gradel, K O ^a,b   Andersen, J ^b   Madsen, M ^a  

^a Department of Poultry Fish and Fur bearing Animals ^*  (Denmark)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Sampling methods; Sampling time

Indexed keywords

GALLUS GALLUS; SALMONELLA; SALMONELLA ENTERICA;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; ANIMAL HOUSING; ANIMAL SALMONELLOSIS; ARTICLE; BIRD DISEASE; CHICKEN; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENMARK; ENZYME LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; EVALUATION; FECES; HEALTH SURVEY; IMMUNOLOGY; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; METHODOLOGY; MICROBIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; RISK; SALMONELLA ENTERICA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; TIME;

ANIMALS; CHICKENS; DENMARK; ENZYME-LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY; FECES; HOUSING, ANIMAL; ODDS RATIO; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; POULTRY DISEASES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SALMONELLA ENTERICA; SALMONELLA INFECTIONS, ANIMAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPECIMEN HANDLING; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0036043669     PISSN: 0044605X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1751-0147-43-21     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Anonymous: Microbiology - General guidance on methods for the detection of Salmonella. ISO 6579; 1993(E), 1-16. 1993.
2. Anonymous: Microsoft Access, version 97, 1989-1997. Microsoft Corporation. 1997a.
3. Anonymous: Microsoft Excel 97 SR-2. 1985-1997. Microsoft Corporation. 1997b.
4. Anonymous: Annual report on zoonoses in Denmark 1999, 1-28. 1999a.
5. Anonymous: S-plus 2000 professional Release 2, Mathsoft inc. 1999b.
6. Bisgaard M: A voluntary Salmonella control programme for the broiler industry, implemented by the Danish Poultry Council. Int. J. Food Microb. 1992, 15, 219-224.
7. Byrd JA, Carrier DE, DeLoach JR, Nisbet DJ: Comparison of drag-swab environmental protocols for the isolation of Salmonella in poultry houses. Avian Dis. 1997, 41, 709-713.
8. Caldwell DJ, Hargis BM, Corner DE, Vidal L, DeLoach JR: Evaluation of persistence and distribution of salmonella serotype isolation from poultry farms using drag-swab sampling. Avian Dis. 1995, 39, 617-621.
9. Caldwell DJ, Hargis BM, Carrier DE, DeLoach JR: Frequency of isolation of Salmonella from protective foot covers worn in broiler houses as compared to drag-swab sampling. Avian Dis. 1998, 42, 381-384.
10. Carr LE, Mallinson ET, Tate CR, Miller RG, Russek-Cohen E, Stewart LE, Opara OO, Joseph SW: Prevalence of Salmonella in broiler flocks: Effect of litter, water activity, house construction and watering devices. Avian Dis. 1995, 39, 39-44.
11. Cohen J: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 1960, 20, 37-46.
12. Desmidt M, Ducatelle R, Haesebrouck F: Serological and bacteriological observations on experimental infection with Salmonella hadar in chickens. Vet. Microbiol. 1998, 60, 259-269.
13. Feld NC, Ekeroth L, Gradel KO, Kabell S, Madsen M: Evaluation of a serological Salmonella Mix-ELISA for poultry used in a national surveillance programme. Epidemiol. Infect. 2000, 125, 263-268.
14. Fleiss JL: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 1981, 2. ed. Wiley. New York, 1981.
15. Gustafson RH, Kobland JD: Factors influencing salmonella shedding in broiler chickens. J. Hyg. Camb. 1984, 92, 385-394.
16. Higgins R, Malo R, René Roberge R, Gauthier R: Studies on the dissemination of Salmonella in nine broiler-chicken flocks. Avian Dis. 1982, 26, 26-33.
17. Hubert LJ, Arabie P: Comparing proportions. J. of Classification 1985, 2, 193-218.
18. Kingston DJ: A Comparison of culturiug drag swabs and litter for identification of infections with Salmonella spp. in commercial chicken flocks. Avian Dis. 1980, 25, 513-516.
19. Landis J, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977. 33, 159-174.
20. Muir WI, Bryden WL, Husband AJ: Comparison of Salmonella typhimurium challenge models in chickens. Avian Dis. 1998, 42, 257-264.
21. Opara OO, Carr LE, Russek-Cohen E, Tate CR, Mallinson ET, Miller RG, Stewart LE, Johnston RW, Joseph SW: Correlation of water activity and other enviromental conditions with repeated detection of salmonella contamination on poultry farms. Avian Dis. 1992, 36, 664-671.
22. Popoff Michel Y, Le Minor Léon: Antigenic formulas of the Salmonella serovars. 2-151. WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Salmonella. Paris, 1997.
23. SAS Institute Inc.: SAS STAT, version 8.00. 1999.
24. Skov MN, Carstensen B, Tornøe N, Madsen M: Evaluation of sampling methods for the detection of Salmonella in broiler flocks. J. Appl. Microbiol. 1999, 86, 695-700.
25. Skov MN, Feld NC, Carstensen B, Madsen M: The serological response to Salmonella Enteritidis and S. Typhimurium in experimentally infected chickens, followed with an indirect LPS-ELISA and bacteriological examinations through a oneyear period. Avian Dis. 2000 (submitted).
26. Snoeyenbos GH, Weinack Olga M, Smyser CF: Protecting chicks and poults from salmonellae by oral administration of "normal" gut microflora. Avian Dis. 1978, 22, 273-286.
27. Turnbull PCB, Snoeyenbos GH: The roles of ammonia, water activity, and pH in the salmonellacidal effect of long-used poultry litter. Avian Dis. 1973, 17, 72-86.
28. Weinack Olga M, Smyser CF, Snoeyenbos GH: Evaluation of several methods of detecting salmonellae in groups of chickens. Avian Dis. 1979, 23, 179-193.