4.6 Article

Use of bioluminescence imaging to monitor Campylobacter survival in chicken litter

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 109, Issue 6, Pages 1988-1997

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04828.x

Keywords

bioluminescence; Campylobacter; chicken; environment; litter

Funding

  1. Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC), The Ohio State University
  2. USDA [2007-03109]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: The aim of this study was to develop a novel approach for characterizing the growth and persistence of Campylobacter in different poultry-rearing environments. Specifically, we constructed bioluminescent Campylobacter strains and used them to monitor the survival of these pathogens in litter (bedding) material. Methods and Results: We inserted shuttle plasmids carrying the luminescence genes (luxCDABE) into C. jejuni and C. coli to construct bioluminescent strains of these pathogens. The strains were spiked into microcosms containing samples of litter-washings and dry litter collected from different enclosures that housed broiler chickens. Our results show that C. jejuni and C. coli survived for at least 20 days in reused (old) litter while the growth of these pathogens was inhibited in clean (new) litter. Furthermore, our results suggest that the availability of nutrients and the condition of the litter (reused vs new) are important factors in the persistence of these pathogens. Conclusions: Reused litter can potentially predispose chickens to Campylobacter contamination and maintaining clean litter might reduce the incidences of colonization with these pathogens. Significance and Impact of the Study: Bioluminescence provided a simple, sensitive, and rapid approach for analysing the growth dynamics of Campylobacter. Using this technology, we highlighted the potential role of litter material in maintaining these pathogens in the chicken environment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available