4.6 Review

Potential strategies for controlling necrotic enteritis in broiler chickens in post-antibiotic era

期刊

ANIMAL FEED SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 129, 期 1-2, 页码 60-88

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2005.12.003

关键词

necrotic enteritis; Clostridium perfringens; broiler chicken; antibiotics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of in-feed antibiotics has until now been the main strategy for controlling Clostridium perfringens-associated necrotic enteritis in poultry. But approvals for the inclusion of non-therapeutic antibiotics in poultry feed are fast disappearing worldwide due to fear of development of antibiotic-resistant microbes. Public concern about the threat of antibiotic-resistant pathogens has forced the poultry industry to consider various other alternatives. Strategies to control necrotic enteritis in the absence of antibiotic growth promoters, without resorting to the use of prophylactic or therapeutic treatment, have centered upon dietary and management practices. Among the candidate replacements for antibiotics are competitive exclusion products, probiotics, prebiotics, organic acids, enzymes, plant extracts, hen egg antibodies, bacteriophages and vaccination. Chemical composition of the diet related to cereal grain selection, protein source and amino acid profile may influence disease propensity and consideration of diet chemical composition might be helpful in formulation of poultry diets that reduce the incidence of necrotic enteritis. To date, no single satisfactory non-antibiotic measure against C. perfringens has been identified. Combined with good hygiene management of poultry houses, consideration of diet composition and application of antibiotic alternatives might be effective to some extent in maintaining production and controlling necrotic enteritis. This paper will review some of the potential strategies that are available for controlling necrotic enteritis in broiler chickens without using antibiotic growth promoters. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据