4.4 Article

Prevalence of Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli in Market-Weight Turkeys On-Farm and at Slaughter

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
Volume 72, Issue 1, Pages 43-48

Publisher

INT ASSOC FOOD PROTECTION
DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-72.1.43

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service [3625-32000-053-00D]
  2. Iowa State University Food Safety Consortium
  3. Merck-Merial Summer Research program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To monitor the effects of feed withdrawal on the prevalence of Campylobacter, market-weight turkeys from six farms were examined before and after perimarketing events (feed withdrawal, transport, and holding at the slaughterhouse). Prior to transport, birds (n = 30 per farm) were slaughtered on-farm, and viscera (crops, duodenum, jejunum, ileum, colon, ceca, gallbladder, and spleen) were removed on the premises. Within ca. 48 h, cohorts (n = 30 per farm) from the same flock were transported to a commercial abattoir, maintained in holding sheds, slaughtered, and the viscera were removed. No differences in the prevalence of Campylobacter spp. were evident when individual flocks were compared pre- and posttransport. However, when data for the six farms were combined, Campylobacter spp. were recovered (pre- versus posttransport) at comparable rates from the duodenum (74.7 versus 74.7%), ileum (87.3 versus 92.7%), ceca (64 versus 7%), colon (86.7 versus 80%), and spleen (0 versus 0%). After feed withdrawal, transport, and holding at the abattoir, there was an overall increase in Campylobacter spp. isolated from the gallbladder at the abattoir (14.7%) when compared with on-farm levels (0%, P < 0.05). When compared with on-farm levels (3%), the overall increase in Campylobacter spp. recovered from the crops of birds at the abattoir (24%) was significant (P < 0.05), which may be associated with a detectable decline in lactic acid in the emptied crop.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available