Skip to main content
ARS Home » Midwest Area » Ames, Iowa » National Animal Disease Center » Food Safety and Enteric Pathogens Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #170318
Title: ON-FARM PREVALENCE OF ARCOBACTER SPECIES IN MARKET-WEIGHT COMMERCIAL TURKEYS AS DETERMINED BY TWO ISOLATION PROTOCOLS

Author
item ANDERSEN, M - IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY
item Wesley, Irene
item Muraoka, Wayne
item Nestor, Emily
item Bouchard, Christopher
item TRAMPEL, D - IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY

Submitted to: Food Safety Consortium Proceedings
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 10/3/2004
Publication Date: 10/3/2004
Citation: Andersen, M., Wesley, I.V., Muraoka, W.T., Nestor, E.J., Bouchard, C.T., Trampel, D. 2004. On-farm prevalence of Arcobacter species in market-weight commercial turkeys as determined by two isolation protocols [abstract]. In: The Food Safety Consortium Annual Meeting, October 3-5, 2004, Ames, Iowa. 2004 CDROM.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: GOAL: We have previously described Arcobacter butzleri, which is a human foodborne pathogen, from turkey carcass rinses. The purpose of this study was to optimize a protocol for its recovery from live market-weight turkeys. METHODS: Six Midwestern commercial turkey farms were selected for sampling in 2003 to determine the best protocol for the isolation as well as to estimate the prevalence of Arcobacter in turkeys. A questionnaire was used to identify diverse managerial strategies utilized by individual producers. Initially, cloacal (n = 298) and feather swabs (n = 75), cecal (n = 70) and crop (n = 50) contents, and drinker water (n = 46) and environmental (n=25) samples were evaluated in the summer 2003 using two different isolation protocols. The best protocol was then used to evaluate the prevalence of Arcobacter in the same region during the early spring and summer 2004. Multiplex-PCR was used to identify all Arcobacter species and to differentiate Arcobacter butzleri. RESULTS: The two protocols were comparable in their detection rates. EMJH-P80 and CVA isolated 40/564 positive samples (7.09%), while Arcobacter enrichment broth and selective agar recovered Arcobacter in 23/489 samples (4.70%). EMJH-P80 recovered Arcobacter more frequently, but the selectivity of the modified Arcobacter agar facilitated the identification of Arcobacter colonies. The prevalence of Arcobacter detected by cloacal swab (2%; 6/298) and cecal contents (2%; 3/145) suggests that Arcobacter colonizes the intestinal tract at very low levels. The overall prevalence of Arcobacter in the drinker water decreased from 63.04% (29/46) in the summer of 2003 to 24.66% (18/73) in the spring of 2004. There was also a shift in the species of Arcobacter during this time period. Environmental sampling on-farm and estimation of prevalence of Arcobacter in the crop of birds, as an indicator of environmental contamination, as well as extensive carcass sampling were recently completed during the summer of 2004 and will be presented. CONCLUSION: Whereas Arcobacter is infrequently recovered from live turkeys, it is readily isolated from poultry carcasses and environmental samples. In this study, the prevalence of Arcobacter may be seasonal and its recovery in the water was related to the chlorination level present in the drinker water.