New federal regulations require most egg producers to take steps to prevent the spread of Salmonella enteritidis, reports the American Veterinary Medical Association.
The FDA rules affect the purchase of chicks and young hens, sanitation in production facilities, testing for the bacteria, and storage of eggs at farms with at least 3,000 laying hens. An FDA announcement states the rules are expected to reduce the number of S enteritidis infections by 60%, preventing about 79,000 cases of foodborne illness and 30 deaths annually.

The FDA also estimates the measures will decrease human health care costs and improve quality of life for consumers but cost egg producers about $81 mln annually.

Dr. Charles L. Hofacre, secretary-treasurer for the American Association of Avian Pathologists, said the FDA rules institutionalise practices that have reduced S enteritidis contamination in most of the industry, and he does not expect the regulations will have much impact on public health or on egg producers.

“For the table egg industry, it’ll be a very good way for them to showcase what they’ve been doing over the last few years,” Dr. Hofacre said.

Egg farmers began working with states and the United Egg Producers to develop quality assurance plans after S enteritidis contamination peaked in the late 1980s, Dr. Hofacre said. For companies that have not adopted measures similar to the new regulations, their most notable changes will likely relate to increased record keeping.

The regulations are published in a final rule that took effect on 8 September. Producers with more than 50,000 laying hens need to comply with the rule by July 2010, and those with more than 3,000 laying hens but fewer than 50,000 must comply by July 2012. The rules are expected to affect producers accounting for 99% of the nation’s egg production.

To comply with the new federal requirements, most egg producers must do the following:
- Have and implement a written S enteritidis prevention plan and document compliance.
- Buy only pullets tested for S enteritidis contamination or raise pullets under monitored conditions.
- Implement biosecurity and pest control programmes.
- Clean and disinfect poultry houses with positive S enteritidis test results.
- Refrigerate eggs at 45 F (9.44 C) during storage and transportation.
- Conduct environmental tests for S enteritidis and test eggs following positive environmental tests.
- Keep records related to flocks for one year after the flocks are permanently taken out of production.
- Make records available to the FDA within 24 hours of an official request.
- Producers must register with the FDA, which the Federal Register notice states will help the agency with annual inspections and resource allocation.

Dr. Hofacre said the regulations were the result of a few companies’ refusal to cooperate with the FDA and self-regulate to avoid egg contamination. He said it is unfortunate that a few producers’ actions led to increased regulation, but he does not disapprove of the new rules.

Dr. Eric N. Gingerich, a diplomate of the American College of Poultry Veterinarians and a staff veterinarian and adjunct assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s School of Veterinary Medicine, expects his state’s diagnostic laboratory system will need more-sensitive equipment and more staff members to handle the final rule’s requirements. He also expects an increase in material costs associated with laboratory tests.

“The cost, according to our lab people, is going to be significantly higher for Pennsylvania producers-say, three times higher-for either the manure swab tests or the egg tests,” Dr. Gingerich said.

He estimates materials will cost $35 for each manure drag swab and $36 for each egg test. Producers using the Pennsylvania state laboratories pay for the cost of materials, but not labor costs, he said.

However, he said a United Egg Producers figure indicates eggs will cost consumers only about one cent more per dozen under the new rules.

Dr. Gingerich still has questions about what producers should do after positive test results in areas where there are no buyers of pasteurized eggs, what training is planned for implementation of the rule, and whether recalls will be required following positive test results.

While Dr. Gingerich thinks the tests will remove some S enteritidis-positive eggs from the market, he said egg producers have largely gained control over the bacteria since the FDA rule was proposed in 2004.

The FDA proposal was similar when introduced in September 2004, and the agency held public meetings in 2004 and accepted comments through July 2005. The 2004 proposal and the 2009 final rule were developed as part of a series of farm-to-table egg safety efforts that the FDA and the Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service started in the 1990s, the Federal Register entry states.

SOURCE:  American Veterinary Medical Association

Chickens, like most animals, typically produce equal numbers of males and females. But this natural sex ratio doesn’t always work in the poultry industry’s economic favor. A University of Georgia researcher is working on ways to skew the chicken’s sex ratio to help the industry streamline production and make more money.

Chickens are big business in Georgia, worth $4.9 bln in 2008, or 41% of the state’s total agricultural value. For the broiler sector of the poultry industry, the females are less profitable. On average, male broilers weigh half a pound more than females at market age, and they eat 5% less feed. However, in the egg-laying sector, the females are prized over males, obviously, because males can’t grow up to produce eggs.

Kristen Navara, a poultry scientist with the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, is trying to determine how to control avian sex ratios.

“In nature, it is a necessary strategy to adjust offspring sex in relation to the environment,” she said. “Humans, rodents, birds all skew sex ratios. It is clear females need the ability to adjust offspring for the environment where they will be born or hatched into.”

Navara has recently studied skewed sex ratios in hamsters and humans in relation to day length. She is now looking for the mechanism that can control the ratios in poultry and finches. She’s using hormones, particularly corticosterone, to find that mechanism.

Injecting female birds with a burst of corticosterone just before ovulation produced a sex ratio skewed toward males, or 81%. She believes she can flip the ratio to favour males or females using hormones or aggravates, which stop the secretion of corticosterone.

Sara Beth Pinson, a graduate student in Navara’s lab, is coordinating studies to determine the optimal dose of corticosterone to produce the desired result. They are also testing different durations of the hormone treatment to determine how long-term treatments affect offspring sex. Research results could be available in 6 months.

This research “is something the industry has been looking for for years,” said Mike Lacy, head of the CAES poultry science department. “The US poultry and egg industry funded Dr. Navara to do this research because it is something the industry is very interested in.”

It is important to note that no chickens used for food are given hormones. Navara’s research is only using hormones to discover the mechanism. “Broilers are not treated with hormones. “So far, the hormone injections seem to work, but what we want to do is find the mechanism the hormone is working through and then produce a non-hormonal treatment for the birds. That is the optimal way to go,” she said.

SOURCE:  WorldPoutry.net

Tersedia materi penelitian ayam petelur. Bisa digunakan untuk penelitian skripsi bagi 2 orang mahasiswa.

Bagi yang berminat segera menghubungi Prof. Ir. Wihandoyo, MS., Ph.D. atau kepala Laboratorium Ilmu Ternak Unggas Fapet UGM.

Segera.

Baby chicks are really quite easy to raise. With a few pieces of equipment and a small place to put them, success in brooding and rearing is virtually assured. During this period of the bird’s life, the most important needs are for warmth, protection, feed, and water. When growing chicks of any species-chickens, turkeys, pheasants, or almost any other production bird-each of these aspects must be considered.

Natural vs. artificial brooding

In nature, chicks hatch after 2 to 4 weeks of incubation by the parents, most often the hen. The hatched chicks provide the stimulus to the hen to change her work from incubating eggs to brooding young. This form of brooding chicks is the easiest if only a few chicks are raised because the mother hen does all the work.

Hens that are “good mothers” include Rhode Island Red, New Hampshire, Plymouth Rock, Cochins, and Silkies. Under natural brooding, chicks can easily be fostered under a broody hen at night, and she will raise them as her own even if they are pheasants, turkeys, quail, or waterfowl.

When broody hens are not available, or large numbers of chicks are to be raised, artificial brooding is necessary. Chicks will perform equally well under artificial or natural brooding, providing they are precocial; that is, able to walk and feed themselves within hours of hatching, as baby chickens are.

Novice growers are not advised to try artificial brooding for altricial chicks; that is, chicks such as pigeons, doves, finches, and parrots that remain in the nest to be cared for and fed by the parents. Many of these chicks are naked, blind, and unable to walk for several weeks after hatching and require around-the-clock care and feeding.

Housing

Chick brooders can be elaborate pieces of equipment such as tiered battery brooders or as simple as a cardboard box  in the house or garage. In both cases, the most important aspect is to maintain conditions that allow the birds to thrive.

Battery brooding

Because birds in battery brooders are kept in multiple layers, many chicks can be brooded in a relatively small amount of floor space. There are many designs. Most include an electric heat source at one end, usually in an area that is somewhat enclosed; another area, about two to three times the size of the heated area, is not heated.

The walls and floor of each brooding area most often are wire. A droppings pan under the wire floor requires regular cleaning. In many cases, feed and water are provided outside the brooding space, making management easier.

Battery brooders are an excellent way to brood chicks in a small space. However, chicks can remain in these brooders only a few weeks before they outgrow them. In addition, the cost to purchase one of these units is high.

Floor brooding

Most growers will choose to brood chicks on the floor. Material requirements are minimal, but the environment is comparable to battery brooding.

Flooring. Some type of bedding material or litter is required. Litter must be absorbent and must insulate the chicks from the ground. Most important, litter must not be slippery. A slippery floor, such as newspaper, cardboard, or a glass-bottom aquarium, is disastrous for baby chicks. Many chicks will develop “spraddles,” a condition in which their hip joints become dislocated, which is nearly always fatal.

Ideal litter is sawdust or wood shavings; straw can be used if it is chopped into short lengths and is not moldy. Litter must be changed or top dressed (clean litter added over the dirty) if it becomes wet, and that must be done more often as the birds age.

Draft shield. A draft shield is cardboard or wire that surrounds the brooding area. The sides of a box used for brooding act as a draft shield. The draft shield provides two important functions. As its name implies, it reduces the possibility that drafts will reach the birds. It also keeps the birds close to feed, water, and heat. In some cases, young chicks become “lost” and succumb to the elements if brooded in too large an area. Draft shields can be removed after about 1 to 2 weeks, unless conditions are extremely cold or drafty.

Heat. For small numbers of birds, heat usually is provided by heat lamps or light bulbs. When large numbers (200 or more) are brooded together, it may be more economical to use propane hovers. Many types of hovers are available if desired.

Proper temperature must be maintained if the chicks are to thrive. During the first few weeks, chicks are cold blooded; that is, unable to maintain their body temperature. As they age, they become warm blooded; that is, able to maintain constant body temperature under normal environmental conditions.

Two methods of monitoring chicks’ environmental temperature are used successfully. First, start chicks at about 95°F (measured near the heat source at chick height), dropping the temperature about 5°F each week until the birds are feathered or ambient temperature is reached.

The second method relies on observing the chicks. If the chicks are all under the heat source, it is too cold; if they are all far away from the heat, it’s too hot; if they are clumped away from the heat, it is drafty; if they are milling about in all areas of the pen, the temperature is correct.

Note: When brooding in a small area, take care that both warm and cool areas are available to the chicks so they can move from warm to cool and back again at will. Otherwise, chicks can get chilled or over-heated when only cool or warm conditions are available.

Space requirements
Floor space

Baby chicks are small when they hatch but grow quite rapidly. Broiler chicks reach 5 pounds in little more than 6 weeks. Therefore, chicks need space to grow. Space usually is not limiting in most small-flock situations; in fact, most chickens reared in small flocks have plenty of space.

Minimum space requirements are as follows:

For broilers, 0.75 to 1 square foot per bird
For Leghorns and bantams, 1.5 to 2 square feet per bird
For heavy breeds, 2.5 to 3 square feet per bird
For turkeys, 3 to 4 square feet per bird
For game birds, double or triple the requirements for turkeys
Feeder and waterer space

Feeder space requirements vary with feeder type and the age of the birds. The rule of thumb is that all the birds should be able to eat or drink at the same time. Therefore, when using trough feeders or waterers, allow 1.5 to 4 inches per bird. When using circular feeders or waterers, allow about 1 to 2.75 inches per bird.

Lighting

Light is a powerful stimulus for most production birds. The small producer should consider both light intensity and photo-period (day length).

Light intensity is the brightness of the light as measured in footcandles (the amount of light a candle emits at a distance of 1 foot). Most chicks can be started at about 2 footcandles and reduced to 0.5 to 1 foot-candle at after 1 week. An easy rule is that if you can read a newspaper, there is enough light. If light in the brooder is too bright, the chicks may begin feather picking.

Photoperiod is the number of hours of light in a 24-hour period. Ideally, chicks that will be kept for laying should be raised under 24 hours of light for about the first week. Then, light should be dropped to about 16 hours a day until about 10 weeks of age.

Between 10 and 20 weeks, chicks should be placed either on short days (less than 12 hours of light a day) or a decreasing day length. In the latter case, reduce day length by 15 minutes each week.

Under natural light, spring-hatched chicks reach maturity under decreasing day lengths. The reverse is true of chicks hatched in the late summer and fall.

If chicks are given long or increasing day lengths too early, they will begin laying early and may have poor production their entire lives.

Broiler chicks should be raised in 24-hour light for maximum growth rate. Various lighting schedules can reduce energy usage while maintaining the birds’ growth rates. However, these schedules may be complicated, and they must be strictly followed or their effectiveness is greatly reduced.

Feeding

Chicks require a balanced diet if they are to grow and thrive. When starting chicks, always feed a starter diet that is formulated to give the birds the proper levels of nutrients. They should be fed free choice; that is, feed is available all the time. Supplement only minimally with other feeds.

Baby chicks do not need scratch. Heavy supplements of scratch, table scraps, or greens will reduce chicks’ nutrient intake and may result in poor growth or, worse, increased mortality.

After about 6 weeks of age, they can be fed a grower diet; generally this diet is lower in protein because the chicks are growing more slowly. Do not feed adult diets to baby chicks, especially layer diets. These feeds are very high in calcium for egg shell formation and are not suitable for baby chicks.

Water must be provided constantly. It should be room temperature, clean, and fresh. Supplemental vitamins added to the water are not necessary if the chicks are fed properly. When brooding, make sure the water does not become too hot from the heat source because many birds will refuse to drink warm water.

Sanitation and disease

For the most part, chicks are quite hearty. For maximum survival rate and to minimize disease problems, buy chicks from a reputable source. Most commercial hatcheries vaccinate their chicks for Marek’s disease at hatch, so this should not be a problem. Most starter feeds contain a coccidiostat to reduce the potential for coccidiosis in the flock. (Nonmedicated feeds are available.) Antibiotics are available at local feed stores but should be used only when absolutely necessary and then only according to the label instructions.

If birds get sick, get a proper diagnosis from your local avian veterinarian or your state avian pathologist. Call your county office of the OSU Extension Service for help in finding these veterinarians.

Sanitation is your best defense against disease problems. Keep your facility clean, feed only fresh, nonmoldy feed, clean waterers daily, and keep your flock relatively isolated from other birds. Bird and human traffic in and out of your facilities is the single most important means of bringing disease organisms to your birds.

Minor management needs
Sexing

Determining sex in chickens usually is easy. By about 4 to 6 weeks, males begin to show comb, waddle, and spur development, and they begin to grow larger than the females. Some species of game birds and waterfowl require “vent sexing,” a somewhat difficult procedure to examine their genitalia, to separate the sexes.

Flight prevention

Most chickens don’t fly well, so flight prevention usually is not necessary. However, most game birds and waterfowl may require grounding. The easiest method is to clip the flight feathers of one wing; those are the 10 or 15 large feathers on the end. Repeat the process regularly as feathers grow back after molting. Don’t clip feathers on exhibition chickens because that may disqualify or downgrade the birds.

Brailing uses a strap to prevent the bird from fully extending its wing for flying. The brail strap should be moved to the opposite wing at least monthly so as not to cause wing atrophy. Pinioning and tendonectimizing are permanent methods of flight prevention. They should be attempted only by experienced growers or a veterinarian.

Picking

In confinement, many birds may begin to pick on each other, causing poor feathering or areas of the body without feathers.

Various salves are available to reduce picking. Trimming about a quarter of the upper beak with a toenail or dog-nail clipper will greatly reduce picking. For serious cases, applying a plastic device called a spec, which prevents forward vision, is quite effective (Figure 5). For maximum effectiveness, trim beaks or apply specs on all the birds, not just on the aggressors.

PUBLICATION DATE: 02/07/2009

RATING

AUTHOR: James C. Hermes, Extension poultry specialist, Oregon State University

A Clemson University animal behaviourist is researching the impact cages and other confinement has on the development and well-being of hens.

“Cages were designed to keep hens clean, safe from predators, protected from adverse weather conditions and easily medicated to prevent disease,” said Peter Skewes, the department of animal and veterinary sciences researcher leading the 3-year project. “Initially, little thought was given to how cages affected behavioural or emotional needs.”

Recently, cage confinement has taken centre stage as egg producers and animal protectionists debate the kind of environment laying hens need.

More is at stake than just the comfort of chickens, though the well-being of 284 mln US laying hens is no small matter. Nearly 95% of the 90 bln table eggs produced in the US come from high-density cage systems. The value of all egg production in 2007 was $6.68 bln. In South Carolina egg sales tally about $90 mln annually. Changing production conditions are bound to affect the bottom the line.

Advocates for animal protection want the elimination of caged-layer egg production. What’s needed, say egg industry leaders, is scientific information to analyze the situation and provide the data for alternatives.

ithout data, designing management systems may be based on incomplete information about hen physiology and behaviour, according to Skewes.

“There isn’t a lot of data on the impact of cage systems on neural and behavioural development in chickens. Although some alternative systems are emerging in Europe, there are few alternatives being developed in the US,” said Skewes.

Skewes will compare cage- and non-cage-production systems for more than 900 chickens at Clemson’s Morgan Poultry Centre.

“We have commercial cage conditions in one area, and on the other side we have a pen or floor environment with a lot of enrichment and stimulation,” said Skewes. “What we’re going to do is look at physiological and behavioural differences as a result of the birds being in these 2 treatments, and, hopefully, that will lead us to have more knowledge and make better decisions about how we want to house these birds and manage them for the production of table eggs.”

The research is funded by a $348,000 National Research Initiative grant from the US Department of Agriculture. Animal and veterinary science department chairwoman Mary Beck was awarded the grant and named Skewes co-investigator.

Detailed information describing the categorization and incidence of embryo malpositions and deformities in commercial poultry is not readily available. Additionally, there is often little consistency in these data among hatcheries. Any decrease in the number of usable chicks may result in substantial economic loss to poultry integrations. In a typical hatch, it is common to lose about 1-2% of the chicks due to deformities and malpositions. Deformities manifest during the process of embryo development, while malpositions occur in the last week of incubation before hatch. At a commercial hatchery over a 5 year period, more than one-half million eggs had been broken out for quality control purposes and many thousands of unhatched embryos had been examined to determine the frequency of the various deformities and malpositions. The objective of this study was to determine the relative incidences of malpositions and deformities, and their economic impacts. Major factors affecting their occurrence will be explained. Obviously, in any population it is anticipated to encounter malpositions and deformities during embryonic development. However, the incidence must be within accepted limits and changes must be made when excessive losses occur.

Malpositions

Investigation has demonstrated that the incidence of embryos unable to hatch due to malpostions varies from 1.2 to 1.8%, with an average of 1.5%. Malpositioned embryos are unable to pip the eggshell and escape due to improper positioning within the egg in the hatcher. It is interesting to note that numerous malpositions have been described, with some embryos exhibiting only one form of malposition and others experiencing combinations of malpositions. The majority of eggs with malpositioned embryos, as found in hatch residue, included embryos dead in shell, probably resulting from exhaustion and/or lack of oxygen. A smaller number of eggs contained live embryos trying to pip. Loss of embryos due to malpositions may be costly; therefore, it is important to routinely monitor the percent of the embryos not hatching. If the incidence due to malpositions exceeds the standard, corrective measures must be taken. Table 1 summarizes the most common malpositions present in routine egg breakouts from the common broiler breeder crosses currently used in the industry. The incidences vary for the light and medium breeder cross lines.

An embryo provided an optimum environment for development will position itself around 17-18 days of incubation for hatch. The proper position is with the head under the right wing with the head directed toward the aircell in the large end of the egg. The results of this study demonstrate that malposition # 6, which is beak above the right wing, constitutes almost 50% of the malpositions, followed by position # 5, feet over head with a frequency of 20%.

Table 1.

Incidence of the common malpositions

There are numerous reasons that malpositions occur. In a normal population, the incidence should not exceed 2.0%. If the incidence is elevated, breeder and egg management practices must be investigated and appropriate changes made to resolve the problem. Common reasons for increased incidences of malpositions are:

• Eggs are set with small end up. As part of a monitoring program, check eggs in the egg room or in the setters to ensure that eggs have been set correctly.
• Advancing breeder hen age and shell quality problems.
• Egg turning frequency and angle are not adequate. Proper frequency of turning through a 45 degree angle assists the embryo to position for hatch. The standard turning rate in the setter is 1 per hour.
• Inadequate percent humidity loss of eggs in the setter. Acceptable weight loss of eggs from setting to transfer is 11-14%.
• Inadequate air cell development, improper temperature and humidity regulation, and insufficient ventilation in the incubator or hatcher.
• Imbalanced feeds, elevated levels of mycotoxins, and vitamin and mineral deficiencies.
• Exposure to lower than recommended temperatures in the last stage of incubation.

Deformities

In any animal population during embryonic development, there is a predictable incidence of embryos that die or are not able to hatch due to deformities. Based on this comprehensive investigation, data demonstrated that the percent of deformed embryos ranged from 0.22 to 0.30% of the total hatch. These findings suggest that hatchability declines on the average of 0.25% due to malformed chicks. A combination of deformities and malpositions can be manifested simultaneously. Table 2 shows the incidence of common deformities observed from embryos at 15 to 21 days of incubation. The most common deformities are those of exposed brain (29%), without eye(s) (25%) and with beak abnormalities (+/-35%).

The occurrence of deformities in a population is considered acceptable as long as it does not exceed the 0.30% limit in an average normal hatch of 85%. As with malpositions, there are many factors that contribute to an increased incidence of deformities including:

• Male and female age, cross and breed. Younger breeders and use of fresh sperm reduce incidence of deformities.
• Egg management and storage practices. Use caution to prevent physical abuse of fertile eggs. Set eggs soon after lay, not exceeding 3-4 days of storage.
• Ambient factors, especially temperature and humidity, that affect embryo development. An elevated incubator temperature accelerates embriogenesis, and organs might not grow in synchrony. High machine temperatures are associated with brain and eye development problems, while lower than normal temperatures retard growth.
• Breeder diets deficient in macro-nutrients such as proteins, or micro-nutrients such as vitamins and minerals. An embryo grows using the internal egg nutrient content, including the yolk, shell and albumen of the egg. Hens fed vitamin-deficient diets may produce embryos and chicks that exhibit classical nutritional deformities and an increased percent of malpositions. Dietary deficiencies may result in sudden declines in hatchability.

Conclusion

The objective is to produce the maximum number of healthy chicks from eggs set. The percent hatchability in the commercial poultry industry ranges from 78-88%. Many variables affect the level of success, including environmental temperature and humidity, lighting, body weight management, strain of breeder, etc. Normally, loss of about 1.8% of total hatch due to malpositions and deformities can be anticipated. However, if this is elevated, necessary corrective measures must be taken. The importance of a routine embryo diagnosis program can not be overstated. Without such a program and access to data generated, it is difficult to detect when increases in incidences of 0.5-1.0% deformities and malpositions occur. Thus, it is not possible to “know where to look” for the problem and make the necessary changes. The competent hatchery manager will consistently be able to obtain superior hatches by being able to identify even small problems and promptly resolve them. In most cases in the hatchery, problems with hatchabiltity are due to a combination of several unresolved smaller problems.

Tables

Table 2.

Incidence of common deformities

Footnotes

1.

This document is VM129, one of a series of the Veterinary Medicine-Large Animal Clinical Sciences Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication date May 1, 2002. Reviewed April, 2009. Visit the EDIS Web Site at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

2.

G. D. Butcher, DVM, Ph.D., Diplomate, American College of Poultry Veterinarians, University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine, Gainesville, FL., Amir H. Nilipour, Ph.D., Director of Investigation and Quality Assurance, Grupo Melo, Panama, Rep. of Panama

PUBLICATION DATE: 02/07/2009

RATING

AUTHOR: Gary D. Butcher, DVM, Ph.D, Amir H. Nilipour, Ph.D. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida.

Researchers at ARS’s Eastern Regional Research Center (ERRC) in Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania, have filed a patent on technology that can further protect pasteurized liquid eggs from food safety threats. These threats include both naturally occurring spoilage bacteria and pathogens such as Salmonella enteritidis, the primary cause of egg-related foodborne illness in the United States. The technology has also been successfully applied to milk.

But don’t go running for that dough just yet. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) still cautions against consuming any raw, unpasteurized eggs or products that contain them.

Despite adherence to pasteurization protocols prescribed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, illnesses related to consumption of raw egg products still occur. About 40,000 cases of salmonellosis are reported in the United States each year. The new ARS technology, developed by ERRC scientists Sudarsan Mukhopadhyay, Peggy Tomasula, and John Luchansky, may help reduce that number.

“Current pasteurization technology is not adequate to remove all pathogens effectively from egg products,” says Tomasula, research leader of the ERRC Dairy Processing and Products Research Unit. “Though pasteurization eliminates heat-sensitive pathogens, some heat-resistant microorganisms can survive and spoil liquid egg whites.”

Consumers can avoid illness by properly handling and cooking eggs before consumption. But Tomasula, along with lead scientist Luchansky of the Microbial Food Safety Research Unit and chemical engineer Mukhopadhyay, has found that new technology can compensate for the shortcomings of thermal pasteurization.

The technology, called “crossflow microfiltration membrane separation” (CMF), removes more pathogens than thermal pasteurization does. And it does so without affecting the eggs’ ability to foam, coagulate, and emulsify-meaning that CMF-treated eggs could be safely substituted for pasteurized eggs in products where those characteristics are desired, such as angel food cake and mayonnaise. In a pilot-scale study, CMF was shown to remove about 99.9999 percent of inoculated S. enteritidis from unpasteurized liquid egg whites.

The technology can also be used to remove Bacillus anthracis spores from egg whites. This finding adds to previous work in which ERRC researchers used CMF to remove 99.9999 percent of B. anthracis spores inoculated into fluid milk. Microfiltration can also protect milk from more common bacterial pathogens, potentially extending its shelf life.

Though effective in its own right, CMF works best when treated as an accompaniment to pasteurization, not a replacement for it, says Tomasula. Combining the two processes significantly reduces the pathogen load.

Plague Defense

Using antibody- and DNA-based technology, ARS researchers in the ERRC Microbial Biophysics and Residue Chemistry Research Unit have developed a variety of methods for targeting dangerous pathogens in food. They’ve used these technologies to detect foodborne pathogens such as Escherichia coli O157:H7, Salmonella, and Listeria monocytogenes. Recently, microbiologist George Paoli and his colleagues have applied some of the same detection techniques to Yersinia pestis, the bacterium that causes bubonic plague.

“Many methods used to detect more common foodborne pathogens can be extended or modified for detecting organisms that are a concern with respect to food safety,” Paoli says.

The biological makeup of individual bacterial species varies considerably. Though the methods used to detect them are similar, they have to be altered to suit specific pathogens. Because antibodies bind to specific targets, antibody-coated immunomagnetic beads (IMBs) can be used to target and remove specific pathogens. The trick to IMB technology is finding an antibody that attaches to one, and only one, target-for example, a Y. pestis antigen. Paoli and his colleagues have developed IMBs to capture Y. pestis, and preliminary tests in milk samples have been successful.

In the early stages of testing the IMB technology, ERRC scientists found that their beads could pick Y. pestis out of a food mixture, but they also captured Staphylococcus aureus. Further research showed that the binding of S. aureus to the IMBs could be overcome by plating on media that were selective for growth of Yersinia. Use of these plates, along with the IMBs, significantly reduces the danger of false-positive results in samples that might also contain S. aureus.

The team is also using genetic methods that rely on a common DNA test known as the “polymerase chain reaction,” or PCR. The group has developed PCR-based methods to detect Y. pestis and differentiate it from other foodborne bacteria, including two closely related Yersinia species, Y. enterocolitica and Y. pseudotuberculosis. They have also developed a PCR method that targets genes related to the virulence of Y. pestis. This test could be used to determine a particular strain’s potential public health impact.

The scientists are currently working to combine the different areas of this research-the IMB detection, microbiological plating media, and genetic detection and typing of Y. pestis-to develop a complete set of tools for detection of Y. pestis in food, as part of a holistic approach to food security.

Warming Up to Food Security

The likelihood of B. anthracis or Y. pestis entering the U.S. food supply is very small-significantly smaller than the relatively low risk of contamination by Salmonella or other naturally occurring pathogens. Should that remote possibility occur, however, one of the easiest, most effective food safety tools-heat-lies in the hands of the consumer.

Previous ERRC studies have established and validated the use of thermal and nonthermal technologies to reduce the risk of foodborne pathogens. Luchansky and colleagues Vijay Juneja and Anna Porto-Fett recently led studies in which they applied thermal technology to ground beef inoculated with B. anthracis and Y. pestis-with encouraging results.

Patties made from inoculated ground beef were cooked on an open-flame gas grill and a “clam-shell” style electric grill. Both models are commonly used by consumers and the food industry. In both studies, the scientists found that cooking the ground beef on commercial grills, at the heat and time levels recommended by USDA and FDA, noticeably reduced the overall levels of both pathogens on or in the meat.

Research efforts like these ensure that U.S. consumers and food-industry professionals have the most advanced technology and information available to protect against potential pathogen threats.

PUBLICATION DATE: 06/30/2009
SOURCE: Agricultural Research magazine, May/June 2009

The following can be used as a guide in determining whether eggs are fertile, infertile, or if early embryonic death has occurred. In using this guide remember that the descriptions and diagrams are of ‘typical” infertile germinal discs, and fertile and early dead embryos. However, their appearance may vary from egg to egg, and may not look exactly as shown and described. It will take some practice and experience to become comfortable with distinguishing between infertile and fertile eggs. The following information is simply a guide.

The germinal disc is the area of the egg where sperm enter into the egg (Figure 1). This is the area of the egg which will form the embryo. The disc is 2-3 mm in diameter.

Figure 1. Structure of the egg.

Infertile

When the egg is not fertilized, the germinal disc is called a blastodisc (Figure 2). There are four main characteristics associated with an infertile germinal disc:

1. the germinal disc is a solid white spot on the yolk.
2. the germinal disc is not uniform. It is somewhat circular but has “jagged” or “ruffled” edges.
3. the disc is about 2-3 mm in diameter.
4. many vaculoes (bubbles or holes) may be found around the edge of the disc. Sometimes vaculoes are present inside the disc.

Fertile

When the egg is fertilized, the germinal disc is called a blastoderm (Figure 3). There are four main characteristics associated with a fertile germinal disc:

1. the germinal disc is faint: Not a solid white spot. The germinal disc consists of a faint white ring which may have a solid white spot in the center of the ring.
2. the germinal disc is about 2-3 times larger (5 – 9mm) than the infertile germinal disc.
3. Usually, there are no vacuoles visible in the center of the ring. A few vacuoles may be present on the edge of the ring.
4. the edge of the germinal disc is very smooth and uniform. Ring is predominantly circular with no “jagged” edges.

Early dead embryos

Early dead embryos (Figure 4) are similar in shape to the infertile germinal disk. The differences include:

1. the germinal disk is a mixture of solid and faint white areas.
2. the germ spot is approximately the same size as the blastoderm.
3. usually there are many vacuoles visible on the edges of the germinal disc and in the center of the germinal disc.
4. the germinal disc is not uniform. Has irregular edges and is usually not circular in shape.

Remember

The appearance of the germinal disc may vary from egg to egg. Eggs which are fertile may not have blastoderms which look exactly the same. The same holds true for the blastodiscs of infertile eggs.

By G. M. Fasenko, University of Alberta
Poultry Research Centre News (Vol. 7 No. 1)
Published by the Government of Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development

Today’s bird is genetically engineered for higher productivity. Selection of birds is based on production parameters. In the process, the health of the vital organs is ignored. This has resulted in increased incidence of metabolic disorders. The kidney is a vital organ of the bird with diverse metabolic and excretory function viz. maintaining the chemical composition of body fluids, removal of metabolic waste and toxic products, regulation of blood pressure and blood volume and conservation of fluids and electrolytes.

Excretion of metabolic waste products is important in poultry and this function is performed by the kidneys. The function of kidneys is affected by a number of specific diseases and disorders. One of the important disorders associated with kidney damage is GOUT. In birds uric acid is the end product of nitrogen metabolism. Uric acid is a nitrogenous waste from protein breakdown. In mammals, it is converted to less harmful substance with the help of the enzyme uricase. But in birds this enzyme is absent. Hence, uric acid is the final excretory product. Uric acid is produced mainly in the liver and is excreted by the kidneys. High blood levels of uric acid favour its precipitation in tissues. Uric acid is not toxic but precipitated crystals can cause mechanical damage to tissues like kidneys, heart, lungs, intestines and also in the joints. These crystals severely damage body tissues. So Gout is a condition in which kidney function decreases to a point where uric acid accumulates in the blood and body fluids. Avian gout is a metabolic condition where abnormal accumulation of white chalky uric acid or urates occurs in soft tissues of various organs of body. Gout is commonly observed in chicken as they are uricotelic and lack the enzyme uricase. In gout, blood levels of uric acid can be as high as 44mg/100ml as compared to 5-7mg/100ml in a normal bird.

There are two major forms of gout which are differentiated by the sites of uric acid deposition- visceral and articular gout. In both forms, deposits consist of needle shaped crystals called tophi. Articular gout is considered to be the chronic form of the disease and is less common. Lesions observed are urate deposition around joints, ligaments and tendon sheaths. There is a predilection for peripheral articulation. Clinical signs observed are shifting leg lameness with joints becoming warm, swollen and tender. It is a condition in chicken that has been recognized for more than 30 years. Visceral gout is considered to be the acute form of disease causing huge mortality characterized by the urate deposits on serosal surfaces, most often in the liver, kidney, pericardium, heart and air sacs. Visceral gout is more common in broilers as young as 2-3 days old. In layers, pullets above 14 weeks are more likely to be affected. whenever there is kidney damage, excretion of uric acid gets affected and uric acid starts accumulating in the blood and later in tissues.

CAUSES OF GOUT

The causes of gout are many as kidney damage occurs due to multietiological factors. These causes can be broadly categorized as:

• Nutritional and metabolic causes
• Infectious causes
• Other causes

NUTRITIONAL AND METABOLIC CAUSES:

1. Excess dietary calcium with low available phosphorus results in precipitation of calcium-sodium-urate crystals. High levels of vitamin D3 can also increase calcium absorption from the gut which can favour formation and deposition of urate crystals.
2. Excessive use of sodium bicarbonate when used to combat heat stress to improve egg shell quality in layers. This alkalinity of urine favours kidney stone formation.
3. Prolonged vitamin A deficiency causes sloughing of tubular epithelium and subsequent blockade resulting in accumulation of urates in the kidney. However, incidence of gout due to vitamin A deficiency is least under field conditions.
4. Gout due to sodium intoxication is seen in younger birds when the sodium levels exceed 0.4% in water and 0.8% in feed. This generally happens when fish meal is used in the diet (even with normal salt content), since fish meal is rich in salt content. Total content of sodium chloride in feed should not exceed 0.3%.
5. Feed containing more than 30% of protein causes uric acid production which in turn creates an excretory load on kidneys. At the same time the presence of sulphates decreases calcium resorption causing excessive calcium secretion through urine. This condition favours gout.
6. Water deprivation leads to concentration of uric acid and other minerals in the blood and later in the kidneys. Water deprivation especially in the summer is dangerous. This can happen during transportation of birds or due to blockage of nipples, inadequate number of waterers, extra height of water lines, overcrowding, water withholding for long durations during vaccination etc.
7. Hard water with higher salt content is also a load on the kidneys.

OTHER CAUSES:

Various chemicals and toxins are involved in kidney damage as;

1. MYCOTOXINS: Mycotoxins are the most common cause of kidney damage and among mycotoxins citrinin, ochratoxin and oosporin are important. The combination of ochratoxins with aflatoxin is found to be more dangerous. Because of kidney damage uric acid excretion is reduced resulting in accumulation of uric acid in the body.
2. ANTIBIOTICS: Certain antibiotics like gentamycin, sulphonamides and nitrofurosones are known to cause renal damage especially in young chicks. The drugs which get excreted through the kidneys have their own imbalancing effect on pH and renal metabolism.
3. DISINFECTANTS: Disinfectants like phenol and cresol if used erroneously cause residual toxicity.
4. CHEMICALS: Chemicals like copper sulphate used in water results in water refusal, dehydration and gout.

Gout is characterized by depression, dehydration and sometimes with greenish diarrhea. Affected chicks appear dull with ruffled feathers and moist vent. Mortality among young chicks is high. There is irregular and excessive enlargement of kidney lobules and cutting open the kidney reveals urate crystals chalky white deposition of urate crystals is seen all over the visceral organs like the heart, liver and kidney under the skin etc.

SEVERE VISCERAL GOUT – Note the  white chalky deposits around the heart (in the pericardium), on all major abdominal organs, including liver, gizzard and intestines, and even in the tissues of the thigh.

TREATMENT

Individual cases of gout may be ignored. In acute cases of gout mortality following prescription would be beneficial.

1. Provide plenty of water and adequate drinkers.
2. Avoid a diet higher in protein than the recommended level as per the age and breed. Provide low protein diet for 3-5 days based on need depending on severity of gout.
3. Review IB vaccination programme. In the areas where IB is endemic it is advisable to vaccinate with nephrotropic strain at around 4 days. Day one beak dip vaccination has proved to be beneficial in broilers.
4. Use of urine acidifiers: Any one of the following urine acidifiers may be given in water or feed.
   • Vinegar: 1-2 ml per litre water up to 24 hours.
   • Potassium chloride: 1gram per litre water up to 24 hours.
   • Ammonium chloride: Two and half kg/ton feed for 7 days.
   • Ammonium sulphate: Two and half kg/ton feed for 7 days.
5. Ensure adequate levels of A, D3, K and B complex vitamins.
6. Excessive use of sodium bicarbonate i.e. more than 2kg/ton should be avoided.
7. Use of electrolytes through water may assist in controlling mortality.
8. Provide broken maize at least for 3 days and jiggery 5g/litre for 3-5 days in case of mortality.
9. Provide 0.6% methionine hydroxyl analogue free acid with 3% calcium in the diet.

PREVENTION

For the prevention of gout in poultry it is necessary to have:

1. Scientifically balanced feed in respect of:
   • Calcium-phosphorus ration depending on the type of ration.
   • Vitamin A, D3 and other essential vitamins.
   • Required level of sodium, chloride and other ions.
   • Conventional sources of protein.
2. Analyse the feed for mycotoxin content and if found positive change the feed or use suitable toxin binders.
3. Judicious use of drugs such as antibiotics, sulpha drugs and anticoccidials to avoid kidney damage.
4. Fresh potable water accessible to birds all the time.
5. Copper sulphate should not be used for medication, if used should be used under the directions of a veterinarian or a poultry practitioner.

PUBLICATION DATE: 26/05/2009

RATING

AUTHOR: Dr. M.T.Banday, Dr. Mukesh Bhakt and Dr. Sheikh Adil Hamid – Srinagar, Kashmir, India

New research from Denmark suggests a promising method using air samples to continuously monitor broiler flocks for the presence of the foodborne pathogen Campylobacter. The findings are reported in the April 2009 issue of the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

Campylobacter is one of the most common cause of diarrheal illnesses in humans worldwide. Research estimates that about half of the cases of human Campylobacteriosis originate from livestock, with poultry considered to be the most important source of infection. The slow and complicated process of detecting Campylobacter through culture-based identification has emphasized the need for more efficient detection devices and methodologies.

In the study researchers used the PCR method to detect Campylobacter in feces, dust, and air samples during the lifetime of broiler flocks in two poultry houses. Results showed that the sensitivity of detection of Campylobacter in air samples was comparable to detection in the other sample materials. Further monitoring of airborne particles in six poultry houses suggested that aerodynamic conditions depended on the age of the chickens, but were very comparable among different poultry houses. Lastly, researchers found that Campylobacter could be detected by PCR method in air samples collected only during the hanging stage of the slaughter process.

“The exploitation of airborne dust in poultry houses as a sample material for the detection of Campylobacter and other pathogens provides an intriguing possibility, in conjunction with new detection technologies, for allowing continuous or semicontinuous monitoring of colonization status,” say the researchers.

Journal reference:

K.N. Olsen, M. Lund, J. Skov, L.S. Christensen, J. Hoorfar. 2009. Detection of Campylobacter bacteria in air samples for continuous real-time monitoring of Campylobacter colonization in broiler flocks. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 75. 7: 2074-2078.

Oleh Edi Suryanto

Untuk menghindari kerusakan, maka daging perlu diawetkan. Pengawetan daging dapat dilakukan dengan penambahan bahan pengawet yang termasuk dalam Bahan Tambahan Pangan (BTP). Namun masyarakat sekarang merasa ketakutan apabila mendengar istilah bahan pengawet atau bahan kimia yang dapat menimbulkan efek negatif bagi tubuh. Padahal, ketakutan ini tidak perlu terjadi. BTP sebenarnya adalah bahan aditif yang mengandung senyawa-senyawa kimia, misalnya natrium klorida, senyawa nitrit/nitrat, senyawa phosphate, dan lainnya yang telah diijinkan penggunaannya. Namun yang menjadi pertanyaan apa jenis pengawet yang cocok untuk produk olahan daging, bagaimana dengan keamanan dan ambang batas penggunaan, dan amankah bahan pengawet tersebut bagi kesehatan konsumen?

Bahan-bahan yang umum digunakan untuk pengawetan produk olahan daging antara lain adalah 1) garam (sodium chloride), 2) alkaline phosphates (sodium tripolyphosphate), 3) sweetener seperti dextrose, sukrosa dan sorbitol, 4) sodium atau potassium nitrite digabungkan dengan sodium atau potassium erythorbate atau ascorbate, 5) sodium laktat atau potassium lactate, 6) sodium acetate dan diacetate, 7) liquid smoke, antioxidan seperti butylated hydroxy anisole (BHA), butylated hydroxy toluene (BHT) propyl gallate (PG), alpha tocopherols. Terdapat pula beberapa asam yang digunakan untuk menghambat pertumbuhan mikroorganisme pada karkas unggas. Karkas ayam yang dicelupkan dalam larutan asam laktat atau asam sitrat mempunyai masa simpan yang lebih lama.

Bahan pengawet juga dapat berasal dari curing agents. Curing agents yang klasik untuk daging terdiri dari suatu campuran sodium chlorida, sodium nitrit dan/atau sodium nitrat, gula (dekstrosa, sukrosa, hidrolisat pati, dan lain-lain). Bumbu-bumbu dapat ditambahkan dengan tujuan utama untuk flavoring atau penambahan rasa. Dalam konsentrasi yang telah ditetapkan, campuran curing secara bersama berfungsi sebagai sumber pengawet yang efektif. Ketika digunakan secara bersama maka bahan curing bertindak sebagai pengawet yang lebih baik dibanding komponen-komponen individu pengawet.

Memilih pengawet untuk olahan daging harus memperhatikan jenis olahan daging. Daging olahan lokal seperti abon, dendeng, bakso mempunyai karakteristik produk yang berbeda. Abon adalah produk daging olahan kering yang mempunyai kadar air rendah. Menurut SNI 1995 maksimum kadar air abon adalah 7% dan dengan bahan pengawet gula sebesar maksimum 30%. Rendahnya kadar air dan tambahan bahan pengawet gula dan garam menyebabkan produk daging olahan dapat tahan berbulan-bulan (sekitar 6 bulan).

Dendeng merupakan produk daging olahan yang agak kering dengan kadar air maksimum 12%. Bahan pengawet yang umum digunakan untuk dendeng adalah gula, sendawa dan garam. Bakso dan sosis adalah produk olahan daging yang basah. Bakso biasa dibuat dengan bahan tambahan pangan seperti garam, phosphate, dan bumbu-bumbu. Kadar air maksimum yang diperbolehkan menurut SNI 1995 adalah 70%.

Pembuatan sosis biasanya menggunakan bahan pengawet garam, sodium phosphate, gula dan asam. Kadar air yang diperbolehkan maksimal 67%. Corned beef diproses dengan bahan-bahan pengawet antara garam, nitrat, atau nitrit, dan atau kombinasi nitrat dan nitrit.

Produk sosis, bakso dan corned beef merupakan produk olahan daging yang basah dan BTP yang ditambahkan dalam jumlah tidak ekstrem, sehingga masih memerlukan perlakuan lain untuk menghindari kerusakan seperti kemasan, pendinginan dan atau pembekuan.

Garam sodium klorida yang food grade seyogyanya di gunakan untuk pengawet daging. Namun, konsumen sekarang menghendaki pengurangan penggunaan garam sodium (NaCl) karena kaitannya dengan hipertensi. Untuk itu garam potasium klorida dapat digunakan untuk menstubsitusi NaCl sampai dengan level 40%. Namun pengawetan dengan garam ini perlu mendapat perhatian karena apabila garam dikonsumsi secara berlebihan dapat memicu penyakit darah tinggi. Untuk preservatif yang efektif, kandungan air produk akhir sebaiknya sekitar 50 – 55% dan kandungan garamnya sebaiknya antara 9-11%. Dengan kata lain pangan dalam keadaan mendekati titik jenuh dan ini akan menjaga good keeping quality.

Bahan pengawet yang dilarang digunakan antara lain adalah asam borat/ boric acid, asam salisilat/salicilic acid, kalium klorat, kloramfenikol dan formalin.

Bahan pangawet pangan harus digunakan sesuai dengan petunjuk dan regulasi yang telah ditetapkan pihak berwenang. Antioksidan seperti BHA, BHT, TBHQ (tertiary butyl hidro quinone), dan PG ditambahkan pada produk tidak melebihi 0,01% atau 0,02%. Batas maksimum penggunaan sodium atau potasium laktat di Amerika adalah 2,9%. Sodium acetate dan diacetate digunakan dengan level maksimum sampai dengan 0,25%. Konsentrasi asam laktat yang digunakan adalah 0,12%. Penelitian lain menunjukkan bahwa asam sorbat adalah bahan pengawet yang efektif (effective preservatives) dengan konsentrasi larutan 7, 5 % asam sorbat yang disemprotkan ke atas karkas dingin.

Pengaruh penggunaan pengawet terhadap karakter dan
mutu produk daging

Bahan pengawet mempunyai antioksidan BHA, BHT, TBHQ (tertiary butyl hidroquinone), dan PG menunda oksidasi lemak pada daging unggas. Sodium atau potassium laktate serta sodium acetate dan diacetate terbukti digunakan sebagai flavoring agents dalam daging, mereka berfungsi sebagai acidulants, flavoring agents dan sebagai agen antimikroba.

Garam sodium klorida merupakan bahan pengawet alami yang telah digunakan masyarakat luas selama bertahun-tahun. Di samping mempunyai fungsi sensoris dalam hampir semua produk daging, garam juga mempunyai aksi pengawet/ kemampuan mengawetkan produk olahan daging. Garam juga membantu dalam ektraksi protein-protein terlarut yang akan membantu dalam pengikatan produk daging restruktur (nugget, sosis, dan bakso).

Garam adalah ingridien yang terpenting dalam campuran bahan curing untuk daging dan berfungsi 1) untuk pemberi rasa produk, 2) menurunkan aktivitas air dan meningkatkan ionic strength (meningkatnya tekanan osmotik medium pangan) yang dapat menghambat pertumbuhan mikroba, 3) membantu solubilisasi protein otot yang berfungsi sebagai pengikat partikel daging, 4) penurunan air jaringan otot pada konsentrasi tinggi (5-8%), 5) bertindak sebagai sinergis dalam kombinasi dengan sodium nitrite untuk mencegah pertumbuhan Clostridium botulinum.

Konsentrasi garam yang digunakan dalam produk unggas biasanya berkisar antara 1,5 – 3%. Pada konsentrasi garam 2% sejumlah bakteri terhambat pertumbuhannya, namun mikroorganisme lain, yeast dan jamur masih dapat tumbuh. Berdasarkan akseptabilitas flavor maka konsentrasi garam yang dapat diterima adalah 2-3%. Untuk produk-produk yang mempunyai kadar air 60% atau lebih seperti franks, bologna, ham dan bakso, jelas bahwa kadar garam 1,5 – 3% tersebut tidak dapat memberikan efek pengawet yang signifikan. Meskipun demikian garam yang dikombinasikan dengan bahan lainnya dapat berguna untuk menjaga stabilitas produk.

Nitrit dan nitrat adalah bahan kimia yang sering digunakan sebagai bahan curing. Penggunaan nitrat mempunyai manfaat yaitu menghasilkan pigmen daging yang stabil dan flavor daging yang meningkat serta daya ikat air daging yang semakin kuat. Konsentrasi nitrit dalam produk tidak boleh melebihi 156 ppm. Bahkan untuk produk tertentu dibatasi < 120 ppm dan harus disertai sodium erythorbat/askorbat sebanyak 550 ppm untuk mencegah terbentuk senyawa karsinogenik nitrosamines.

Phosphates telah digunakan untuk memperpanjang masa simpan daging dengan cara menurunkan angka bakteri. Alkaline phosphate yang digunakan adalah sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium hexametaphosphate, sodium acid pyrophosphate, dan disodium phosphate dapat digunakan secara sendiri atau kombinasi. Perendaman karkas selama 6 jam dalam larutan fosfat pada konsentrasi 10 ounce (283,5 g) untuk satu galon air (4,55 l) atau 6,23% dapat meningkatkan masa simpan 1-2 hari. Alkaline phosphate untuk kyuring telah digunakan secara meluas di Amerika.

Sodium atau potassium tripolyphosphate yang ditambahkan pada produk olahan daging dapat digunakan 1) untuk mempertahankan warna produk (retensi warna), 2) mengurangi jumlah penyusutan ketika pemasakan (mereduksi cairan yang keluar), 3) meningkatkan kemampuan mengikat air atau menaikkan nilai WHC (Water Holding Capacity) protein otot, 4) menjaga juiciness, 5) menaikkan pH produk daging, 6) meningkatkan yield produk, 7) membantu dalam ekstraksi protein otot yang terlarut dalam garam, meningkatkan flavor daging, 9) menghambat ransiditas oksidatif. Konsentrasi phosphate dalam produk akhir tidak lebih dari 0,5%.

Sodium atau potassium laktate ditambahkan pada produk daging untuk memperpanjang masa simpan, mengontrol pertumbuhan pathogen, meningkatkan rasa garam, meningkatkan tekstur dengan menurunkan kehilangan air. Level maksimum penggunaan di Amerika adalah 2,9%.

Sodium acetate dan diacetate terbukti digunakan sebagai flavoring agents dalam daging dengan level maksimum sampai dengan 0,25%. Keduanya berfungsi sebagai acidulants, flavoring agents dan sebagai agen antimikrobia.

Gula dapat dijuga digunakan sebagai bahan pengawet, namun konsentrasi yang sangat tinggi diperlukan dalam pangan untuk dapat berfungsi sebagai suatu pengawet. Namun konsentrasi dalam daging curing biasanya jauh lebih rendah. Kombinasi gula dan asam asetat/ asam cuka dapat pula digunakan untuk mengawetkan daging giling. Dalam produk sosis yang difermentasi gula berfungsi sebagai preservatif tidak secara langsung sebagai hasil fermentasi menjadi asam laktat oleh bakteri asam laktat. Turunnya pH dalam daging olahan dan penambahan garam serta sedikit dehidrasi (turunnya kadar air) menghasilkan stabilitas yang tinggi dari produk ini.

Edi Suryanto, Ph.D.
Bagian Teknologi Hasil Ternak, Fakultas Peternakan UGM Yogyakarta

Referensi

• Anonimus, 2005. Produksi daging, telur dan olahannya. Kumpulan Standar Mutu, Direktorat Pengolahan dan Pemasaran Hasil Peternakan, Direktorat Jenderal Pengolahan dan Pemasaran Hasil Pertanian, Departemen Pertanian.
• Lehninger, A.L., 1982. Principles of Biochemistry. Worth Publishers Inc., New York.
• Price, J.F. And B.S. Schweigert, 1971. The Science of Meat and Meat Products. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.
• Sams, A.R., 2001. Poultry Meat Processing. CRC Press, London.
• Soeparno, 1998. Ilmu dan Teknologi Daging. Gadjah Mada University Press, Bulaksumur, Yogyakarta.

Poultry producers in the United States have to deal with numerous issues in the day to day operation of their facilities. One important issue is the disposal of their daily mortality. Several options are available to poultry producers, including: burial, incineration, rendering, and composting. Available options are becoming more restrictive with rising processing costs and continued concerns of environmental safety. The objective of this broiler tip is to inform readers of the viability of composting daily poultry mortality, not only as a means of dead bird disposal but also as a means of maintaining good environmental stewardship.

While there are several options available for mortality disposal, issues of environmental concerns have been raised regarding some of these alternatives. The use of burial pits has been eliminated as a disposal option in much of the United States due in part to the discovery of undecomposed carcasses unearthed years after burial. The utilization of rendering facilities have been limited due to high transportation costs to these facilities and the issue of incorporation of feathers during the rendering process. The use of incineration is now popular and is used by a large number of poultry producers where pits are outlawed. While it is one of the most biologically secure methods of dead bird disposal, the rising price of fuel globally is making incineration a very expensive method of disposal. Incineration also poses concerns of air quality due to particulate emission and odors associated with the process.

Composting is considered to be a positive method for disposing of daily mortality. It is simply a natural biological decomposition process that takes place under aerobic and thermophillic conditions. The composting process is achieved by combining carbon source (e.g. litter, including straw, wood shavings, peanut hull etc.) and nitrogenous sources (dead bird and manure), mixed with water and oxygen to meet aerobic microbial metabolic requirements. The carbon to nitrogen ratio should range from 25:1 to 40:1.

The process is achieved by layering the carbon source with the nitrogen source until the pile reaches 5-6 feet in height.

The process will proceed as the temperature of the pile rises to 140/ to 160/ F which will promote the growth of thermophillic microbes which promote rapid decay. The moisture content of the pile should be 40-60%; the process will not operate effectively if the material is too wet or too dry. Temperature is one of the most important factors in the composting process and the temperature of the pile should be monitored on a daily basis as this will inform you of the progress of the decomposition process. Oxygen and moisture content within the pile are also important since the microbes involved in the process are aerobic organisms which require oxygen in order to survive. Too much moisture in the pile will reduce the oxygen content and convert the environment to an anaerobic one thereby changing the microbial profile resulting in the cooling of the pile and slowing down of the decomposition process slows down.

For daily farm mortalities it is recommended that the composting be done in bins in a two phase composting process, which involves a primary phase and a secondary phase. The primary phase as the name suggests is the first stage of the process. It involves the rapid increase in temperature up to 140/ or more after which it will gradually decline. The primary phase can last from seven to twenty-one days depending on several factors including; temperature, size of birds and source of carbon material. When the temperature drops to below 120/ this marks the end of the primary phase and the pile is reconstituted and turned for the secondary phase.

The secondary phase is achieved by transporting the compost from the primary bin and placing it in the secondary bin (turning) for a second heating phase. Water is added to the pile if it is too dry and the pile is capped with additional litter to cover any un-decomposed carcass that may be exposed.

Setting up a compost facility on your farm for daily mortality composting can be as simple as modifying a section of your litter storage facility to a more complex process of constructing a structure specifically for composting. It is recommended that the structure have a roof and concrete floors. The walls of the bins can be either wood or concrete.

While composting your daily mortality requires more management than the other methods that are practiced, composting makes it possible to transform what would be considered waste into an end product that is easy to transport, easy to store and is in fact a valuable soil amendment.

By Claudia Dunkley, Extension Poultry Scientist
Poultry Tips newsletter – College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
The University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service

PUBLICATION DATE: 04/30/2009
SOURCE: Univ. of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service

Artificial incubation of poultry eggs is an ancient practice. Aristotle writing in the year 400 B.C. told of Egyptians incubating eggs spontaneously in dung heaps. The Chinese developed artificial incubation at least as early as 246 B.C. These early incubation methods were often practiced on a large scale, a single location perhaps having capacity of 36,000 eggs.

The application of incubation principles was a closely guarded secret, passed from one generation to the next. The proper temperature was judged by placing an incubating egg in one’s eye socket for accurate determination. Temperature changes were effected in the incubator by moving the eggs, by adding additional eggs to use the heat of embryological development of older eggs, and by regulating the flow of fresh air through the hatching area. Humidity was evidently not a problem as primitive incubators were located in highly humid areas, and the heat source, often burning materials, furnished water around the eggs. Turning was done as often as five times in a 24-hour period after the fourth day of incubation.

The construction, use, and patent of artificial incubators in the United States dates from about 1844. The Smith incubator, virtually a large room with fans for forcing heated air to all parts of the incubation chamber, was patented in 1918. It was the forerunner of today’s efficient, large-scale incubator, used for the hatching of chicken, turkey, duck, and other eggs.

Length of Incubation Periods

Incubation periods vary for different species of birds. In general, the larger the egg the longer the incubation period. However, there are individual differences. The incubation period may also vary with the temperature and humidity within the incubator. Average incubation periods for some species are:

Chicken-21 days
Pheasant-23 days
Duck-28 days
Peafowl-29 days
Quail (Coturnix)-16 days
Guinea-27 days
Duck (Muscovy)-36 days
Ostrich-42 days
Goose-32 days
Pigeon-18 days
Turkey-28 days
Quail-23 days
Canary-13 days
Parakeet-19 days
Prairie Chicken-23 days
Grouse-23 days

Incubation Conditions

Temperature

Temperature is extremely important during incubation. Variations of more than one degree from the optimum will adversely affect the number of eggs that will successfully hatch. In sectional or home-type incubators the temperature will vary considerably between the top and the bottom of the egg. With these types of incubators a temperature at the top of the eggs of 101°F for the first week, 102°F for the second week, and 103°F till hatching gives the best results with eggs of most species.

In modern, commercial, forced-draft incubators a temperature of 99-100°F is maintained throughout the incubation period. Most operators find that in the very large machines some provision must also be made for cooling to maintain this constant temperature. Embryonic development produces considerable heat. If this heat is not dissipated, injury to the embryos may occur.

Humidity

Eggs lose water during the incubation period, and the rate of loss depends on the relative humidity maintained within the hatching chamber. Metabolic balance must be maintained throughout the incubation period. Thus, humidity outside a relatively narrow range will affect the number of successfully hatched eggs.

Optimum growth for most species requires a relative humidity of 60 percent until the eggs begin to pip, after which the relative humidity should be raised to 70 percent. Best results occur with turkeys when these humidities are raised 2 to 3 percent. Under most Oklahoma conditions, moisture must be added to the hatching chamber to reach these relative humidity levels. This can be done by placing an open pan of water in the same area with the eggs. In sectional or convectional type incubators, it may be necessary to increase the water surface by suspending a piece of cloth from the water, providing wick action.

Relative humidity can be gauged by wrapping a wet cotton cloth around the bulb of a thermometer and suspending it in the hatching compartment. Due to evaporation, the "wet" bulb thermometer will have a temperature below that of a dry bulb thermometer in the same compartment. Table 1 shows the relative humidity for selected temperature readings.

Position and Turning of Eggs

Eggs should be placed in the incubation compartment large ends up for best results. However, a fairly good hatch can be obtained if the eggs are placed on their sides. An extremely poor hatch will occur if the eggs are placed in the incubator small end up.

The eggs must be turned several times a day for best hatchability. This will ensure that the embryo will not stick to the shell. The turning should be repeated throughout the entire 24-hour day. However, the night turning may be eliminated as long as there is a late evening and an early morning turning. Eggs should be turned at least four times during each 24-hour period. In large commercial machines turning is mechanically done, controlled by a time clock.

The eggs should be turned through a 90-degree plane as gently as possible. Turning should continue until one to three days prior to hatching and or until the eggs has "pipped;" position or turning will then have no effect on hatching.

Ventilation

Since the developing embryo receives oxygen from the atmosphere and releases carbon dioxide, the capability for ventilation must be incorporated in the incubator. The more eggs in the incubator compartment and the older the embryo, the more oxygen is required.

Embryonic Development

Embryo development from the single fertilized cell to the self-sustaining animal in a relatively short span is an interesting but complex process. Because of various incubation periods for different avian species, characteristic elements in the developing embryo occur at slightly different times. For the chicken, Table 2 indicates significant changes and the day on which each change is evident.

Embryo Mortality

Eggs can fail to hatch for many reasons. Among these are inadequate diet of the hen, incorrect environment within the incubator, and malposition of the embryo within the egg.

PUBLICATION DATE: 28/04/2009

RATING

AUTHOR: Joe G. Berry, Extension Poultry Specialist – Oklahoma State University Cooperative Extension Fact Sheets (ANSI-8100) – Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources

The first documented report of shell pigment loss in brown-shelled eggs was in 1944 when Steggerda and Hollander, while removing dirt from eggshells produced from a small flock of Rhode Island Red hens, made the surprising discovery that some of the brown pigment also rubbed off. This effect was even more evident when the eggs were rubbed vigorously. Most of the eggs gave up their pigment fairly easily except those possessing a glossy surface.

It is well established that no single factor is responsible for the loss of shell pigment in brown-shelled eggs. Variation in pigmentation among brown-shelled eggs is more pronounced in broiler breeders than in commercial brown egg-type layers. In flocks of broiler breeders, it is common to have a variation in eggshell pigmentation, resulting in hues ranging from dark brown to almost bleached white. This contrast occurs because genetic selection for uniform brown-colored eggs in broiler breeder flocks is of little importance compared to eggshells of commercial brown egg-type birds. Most commercial producers and university personnel serving the poultry industry understand that the loss of shell pigment from brown-shelled eggs can be caused by numerous factors. Many individuals, however, still prematurely jump to conclusions and blame shell pigment loss and variability on only a single factor. The most common scapegoat is bronchitis. Statements such as “I know my hens had bronchitis because their shells are pale” or “All you have to do to determine if your hens had bronchitis is to look at their eggshell color — if the shells are pale they had a bronchitis challenge” are still often heard in the field. Such statements are made even without knowledge of the flock’s bronchitis antibody titer, bronchitis vaccination schedule, or supporting necropsy findings.

More often than not, the cause of shell pigment loss is not bronchitis but some stressor to which the flock has been exposed. Fear, for example, is a common cause of eggshell pigment loss. It is not until all the contributing factors to pigment loss are considered that the exact reason can be identified and the problem resolved. Many times the exact cause of periodic, flock-wide pigment loss is never identified.

The purpose of this article is to identify and discuss the various factors that are known to contribute to the loss of eggshell pigment. A general review, however, of the pigments and the process involved in their deposition aids the reader in better understanding shell pigmentation problems.

Eggshell Formation and Pigment Disposition

Once the egg reaches the site of the reproductive tract known as the uterus (shell gland), it resides there for approximately 20 hours. During this time the shell is deposited, mostly as calcium carbonate, onto the shell membranes that envelop the albumen and yolk. As shell formation progresses in the brown egg layer, the epithelial cells lining the surface of the shell gland begin to synthesize and accumulate the pigments. The three main pigments are biliverdin-IX, its zinc chelate, and protoporphyrin-IX. The most abundant pigment in today’s commercial brown-shelled eggs is protoporphyrin-IX. It is not until the final 3 to 4 hours of shell formation that the bulk of the accumulated pigment is transferred to the protein-rich, viscus fluid secretion known as the cuticle. The degree of brownness of the hen’s eggshell is dependent on the quantity of pigment directly associated with the cuticle. The pigment-rich cuticle is deposited onto the eggshell at about the same time shell deposition reaches a plateau, about 90 minutes prior to oviposition. Therefore, pigment distribution is not uniform throughout the thickness of the eggshell. Even though the eggshell contains traces of pigment, its contribution to the intensity of brown color is negligible compared to that of the cuticle.

Factors Responsible for Decreasing the Intensity of Brown Shell Color

Stress. Since the majority of the pigment is localized in the cuticle, anything that interferes with the ability of the epithelial cells in the shell gland to synthesize the cuticle will affect the intensity of eggshell pigmentation. This is especially true during the final 3 to 4 hours of shell deposition since it is during this time in the egg-laying cycle that cuticle synthesis and accumulation occur most rapidly.

Stressors in poultry flocks such as high cage density, handling, loud noises, etc., will result in the release of stress hormones, especially epinephrine. This hormone, when released into the blood, is responsible for causing a delay in oviposition and the cessation of shell gland cuticle formation. The above stressors, which result in hen nervousness and fear, can cause pale eggshells to be produced. The paleness is often the result of amorphous calcium carbonate deposited on top of a preexisting fully formed cuticle or of an incomplete cuticle caused by premature arrest of cuticle formation.

Brown-shelled birds, especially broiler breeders, housed in experimental floor pens for research purposes often become fearful each time the pen is entered for such things as egg collection, vaccination, uniformity, and frame and fleshing measurements. When this occurs, production of pale-shelled eggs should be expected, especially if the fearfulness occurs during the last 3 to 4 hours of the egg-laying cycle when the cuticle formation is interrupted. In fact, the relationship between stress and the production of pale eggs by laying hens is so great that researchers have suggested that loss of shell pigment may provide a basis for a noninvasive method of assessing stress in hens.

Age of the bird. As the brown egg-type bird ages, there is a corresponding decrease in eggshell pigment intensity. The exact reason for this is unknown. It is possibly due to the same quantity of pigment being dispersed over a larger surface area of shell as egg size increases with bird age or less pigment synthesis. As the hen ages it is normal for the tapered end of the egg to contain less pigment than the rounded end. Stress-related egg retention in the shell gland and subsequent amorphous calcium carbonate deposition on the shell surface have been identified as a major cause of pale eggs in older hens.

Chemotherapeutic agents. A rapid decline in shell pigmentation is common following the ingestion of certain drugs by the hen, such as the sulfonamides. The coccidiostat Nicarbazin, administered to hens at a dose of 5 mg per day, can result in the production of pale eggs within 24 hours. Higher doses can lead to complete depigmentation of the eggshell cuticle.

Disease. Viral diseases, such as Newcastle and infectious bronchitis, affect egg production in poultry. These viruses have a specific affinity for the mucus membranes of the respiratory and reproductive tracts. Because the virus directly infects and damages the reproductive tract, the signs of disease are manifested indirectly in the product of the tract, the egg. Thus, total egg numbers decline and eggshells become thinner and abnormally pale and have irregular contour. Internal quality is also adversely affected (watery whites). These egg production and quality problems can persist for extended periods of time.

Summary

Most eggshell pigments are located in the cuticle and outer portion of the calcified eggshell. Premature arrest of cuticle formation or release of stress-related hormones (epinephrine) will result in the production of pale brown-shelled eggs. Age of the bird, use of certain chemotherapeutic agents, and disease also can affect the intensity of pigmentation. No one factor, especially infectious bronchitis, should be diagnosed as the cause of the reduced pigmentation of eggshells until all possible differentials that may affect pigmentation have been considered.

References

• Baird, T., S. E. Solomon, and D. R. Tedstone. 1975. Localisation and characterisation of egg shell porphyrin in several avian species. Brit. Poultry Sci . 16:201-208.
• Burley, R. W., and D. V. Vadehra, eds. 1989. The Avian Egg-Chemistry and Biology . John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.
• Cook, J. K. A. 1986. Pale shelled eggs can be caused by IB virus. Misset International Poultry 2:38-39.
• Hughes, B.O., and A. B. Gilbert. 1984. Induction of egg shell abnormalities in domestic fowl by administration of adrenaline. IRCS Med. Sci . 12:969-970.
• Hughes, B.O., A. B. Gilbert, and M. F. Brown. 1986. Categorisation and causes of abnormal egg shells: Relationship with stress. Brit. Poultry Sci . 27:325-337.
• Hunton, P.1992. The brown egg revolution-brown versus white: A fascinating comparison. Shaver Focus 21(2):1-2.
• Kennedy, G. Y., and H. G. Vevers. 1975. A survey of avian egg shell pigments. Comp. Biochem. & Physiol . 55B:117-123.
• Lang, M. R., and J. W. Wells. 1987. A review of eggshell pigmentation. World’s Poultry Sci. J . 43(3):238-246.
• McCartney, E. 1989. Infectious bronchitis update. Poultry Health Rept. Egg Industry (August): 12-16.
• Mills, A. D., J. M. Faure, M. Picard, and M. Marche. 1987. Reflectometry of wet and dry eggs as a measure of stress in poultry. Med. Sci. Res . 15:705-706.
• Mills, A. D., M. Marche, and J. M. Faure. 1987. Extraneous eggshell calcification as a measure of stress in poultry. Brit. Poultry Sci . 28:177-181.
• Mills, A. D., Y. Nys, J. Gautron, and J. Zawadzki. 1991. Whitening of brown shelled eggs: Individual variation and relationships with age, fearfulness, oviposition interval and stress. Brit. Poultry Sci . 32:117-129.
• Nys, Y., J. Zawadzki, J. Gautron, and A. D. Mills. 1991. Whitening of brown-shelled eggs: Mineral composition of uterine fluid and rate of protoporphyrin deposition. Poultry Sci . 70:1236-1245.
• Polkinghorne, R. W. 1983. Factors affecting eggshell colour in crosses between Australorp and Rhode Island Red chickens. Aust. J. Agric. Res . 34:593-597.
• Solomon, S. E. 1992. A question of color. Shaver Focus 21(2):2-3.
• Solomon, S.E., B.O. Hughes, and A. B. Gilbert. 1987. Effect of a single injection of adrenaline on shell ultrastructure in a series of eggs from domestic hens. Brit. Poultry Sci . 28:585-588.
• Steggerda, M., and W. F. Hollander. 1944. Observations on certain shell variations of hen’s eggs. Poultry Sci . 23:459-461.
• Sykes, A. H. 1959. The effect of adrenaline on oviduct motility and egg production in the fowl. Poultry Sci . 34:622-628.

Footnotes

1. This document is VM94, one of a series of the Veterinary Medicine-Large Animal Clinical Sciences Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Original publication date May, 1995. Reviewed May, 2003.

2. Gary D. Butcher, Poultry Veterinarian, and Richard D. Miles, Poultry Nutritionist, Department of Dairy and Poultry Sciences, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611.

Scientists have identified a small family of lab-made proteins that neutralize a broad range of influenza A viruses, including the H5N1 avian virus, the 1918 pandemic influenza virus and seasonal H1N1 flu viruses. These human monoclonal antibodies, identical infection-fighting proteins derived from the same cell lineage, also were found to protect mice from illness caused by H5N1 and other influenza A viruses. Because large quantities of monoclonal antibodies can be made relatively quickly, after more testing, these influenza-specific monoclonal antibodies potentially could be used in combination with antiviral drugs to prevent or treat the flu during an influenza outbreak or pandemic.

A report describing the research, supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of

Health as well as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, appears online today in Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. Wayne Marasco, M.D., Ph.D., associate professor of medicine at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School in Boston led the research team, which included collaborators from the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in La Jolla, Calif., and the CDC in Atlanta.

“This is an elegant research finding that holds considerable promise for further development into a medical tool to treat and prevent seasonal as well as pandemic influenza,” notes NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “In the event of an influenza pandemic, human monoclonal antibodies could be an important adjunct to antiviral drugs to contain the outbreak until a vaccine becomes available.”

Using standard methods of production, initial doses of a new influenza vaccine to fight pandemic influenza would be expected to take four to six months to produce.

Key to their research, Dr. Marasco and his colleagues discovered and described the atomic structure of an obscure but genetically stable region of the influenza virus to which their monoclonal antibodies bind. The hidden part of the influenza virus is in the neck below the peanut-shaped head of the hemagglutinin (HA) protein. HA and neuraminidase are the two main surface proteins on the influenza virus.

The scientists also identified a new mechanism of antibody action against influenza: Once the antibody binds, the virus cannot change its shape, a step required before it can fuse with and enter the cell it is attempting to infect.

Dr. Marasco, Jianhua Sui, M.D., Ph.D., and other Dana-Farber colleagues began their study with avian flu viruses. They scanned tens of billions of monoclonal antibodies produced in bacterial viruses, or bacteriophages, and found 10 antibodies active against the four major strains of H5N1 avian influenza viruses. Encouraged by these findings, they collaborated with Ruben O. Donis, Ph.D., of the CDC Influenza Division, and found that three of these monoclonal antibodies had broader neutralization capabilities when tested in cell cultures and in mice against representative strains of other known influenza A viruses.

Influenza A viruses can include any one of the 16 known subtypes of HA proteins, which fall into two groups, Group 1 and Group 2. Their monoclonal antibodies neutralized all testable viruses containing the 10 Group 1 HAs-which include the seasonal H1 viruses, the H1 virus that caused the 1918 pandemic and the highly pathogenic avian H5 subtypes-but none of the viruses containing the six Group 2 HAs.

Simultaneously, Dr. Marasco’s group teamed up with Robert C. Liddington, Ph.D., professor and chair of the Infectious and Inflammatory Disease Center at Burnham, to determine the atomic structure of one of their monoclonal antibodies bound to the H5N1 HA. Their detailed picture shows one arm of the antibody inserted into a genetically stable pocket in the neck of the HA protein, an interaction that blocks the shape change required for membrane fusion and virus entry into the cell.

When they surveyed more than 6,000 available HA genetic sequences of the 16 HA subtypes, they found the pockets to be very similar within each Group but to be significantly different between the two Groups. The genetically stable pockets, they note, may be a result of evolutionary constraints that enable virus-cell fusion. This could also explain why they did not detect so-called escape mutants, viruses that elude the monoclonal antibodies through genetic mutation.

“One of the most remarkable findings of our work is that we identified a highly conserved region in the neck of the influenza hemagglutinin protein to which humans rarely make antibodies,” says Dr. Marasco. “We believe this is because the head of the hemagglutinin protein acts as a decoy by constantly undergoing mutation and thereby attracting the immune system to produce antibodies against it rather than against the pocket in the neck of the protein.”

Their findings could also assist vaccine developers. Current influenza vaccines target the constantly mutating head of the HA protein and do not readily generate antibodies against the conserved region in the neck.

“An important goal is to redirect the immune response of vaccines to this invariable region of the hemagglutinin to try to obtain durable lifelong immunity,” Dr. Marasco states.

The monoclonal antibodies identified in their paper are very well-characterized, Dr. Marasco notes, and he is optimistic about their further clinical development. “These are fully human monoclonal antibodies that are ready for advanced preclinical testing,” he says. He currently is arranging to use NIAID research resources to take the next steps: first, testing the antibodies in ferrets, the gold standard animal model for influenza, and then developing a clinical grade version of one antibody that could enter human clinical trials as soon as 18 months from when the development program begins. Should the antibodies prove safe and effective in humans, it could take several years to develop a licensed product.

Despite the availability of influenza drugs and vaccines, seasonal influenza still kills more than 250,000 people worldwide each year. During seasonal flu outbreaks, monoclonal antibodies could be used to treat individuals with impaired immunity due to pre-existing medical conditions or advanced age. In the event of an influenza pandemic, these individuals plus others at risk-for example, first responders and medical personnel and exposed family members and coworkers-could also benefit from this type of therapy.
NIAID conducts and supports research-at NIH, throughout the United States, and worldwide-to study the causes of infectious and immune-mediated diseases, and to develop better means of preventing, diagnosing and treating these illnesses. News releases, fact sheets and other NIAID-related materials are available on the NIAID Web site.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH)-The Nation’s Medical Research Agency-includes 27 Institutes and Centers and is a component of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. It is the primary federal agency for conducting and supporting basic, clinical and translational medical research, and it investigates the causes, treatments and cures for both common and rare diseases.

Reference:

J Sui et al. Structural and functional bases for broad-spectrum neutralization of avian and human influenza A viruses. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology DOI: 10.1038/nsmb.1566 (2009).

Everyone is familiar with the word “protein”, because it turns up so frequently in everything from food to shampoo. Whether we are dealing with commercial or backyard flocks, all poultry need protein in the feed. Because of its tremendous importance, it is worthwhile to gain a basic understanding of this important nutrient.

The range of different substances that are composed of proteins is so varied it is difficult to remember we are talking about the same basic thing. To illustrate, animal tissues as different from each other as meat, hair, hooves and nails, egg white, cells in the blood, leather and skin, and feathers are almost all solid protein. Plants, and especially seeds like corn and soybeans, contain protein, but are mixed with carbohydrates like sugars, starch, and fiber.

The reason proteins can be so different from each other is that they are assembled out of 20 different building blocks, called amino acids. If we think about it, we can probably come up with a list of 20 different construction materials such as red bricks, cement blocks, concrete slabs, wooden beams, steel rods, and the like. While all are what we would call “building materials”, they can be used to construct an astonishing variety of structures. The same is true with the 20 amino acids…there is no end to the different types of proteins that can be made from them. Here we should mention that all acids are not like the fuming flasks in Dr. Frankenstein’s laboratory, and amino acids are not like that at all. They are simply white powders. The two most common that we add to poultry feeds are lysine and methionine.

The protein in poultry feeds comes mainly from plant sources, such as soybean meal. Oil is extracted from the soybean for human use, with the remaining solid portion having almost 50% protein after the fibrous hull is removed. Many by-products of animal processing, such as meat and bone meal from cattle and swine, and poultry and feather meal from chickens and turkeys, have 50% or more protein (i.e., amino acids, which collectively are called protein). Grains are mostly made up of starch and fiber, but are about 10% protein.

At this point a very reasonable question might be asked: “If the protein in poultry feeds comes from the ingredients mentioned in the above paragraph, and if all proteins are composed of amino acids, then why do we have to add to the feed extra synthetic amino acids like lysine and methionine, which are extremely expensive? If the feed needs additional amino acids, why not simply add more soybean meal?”.

The answer lies in the fact that in the diverse proteins, such as those mentioned above, the 20 amino acids are present in wildly different concentrations. It should not be a surprise that the proteins in plants have a very different combination of amino acids than do those in tissues of animals. Thus, when the chicken converts soybean protein into meat and eggs, it is reasonable to find that the concentrations of the 20 amino acids don’t exactly match up. Research has found that the animal needs more lysine and methionine than is present in a feed made mostly of corn and soybean meal.

While expensive, it is more economical to provide the birds with these amino acids in synthetic form. This is logical…if we only need to top off the levels of lysine and methionine to reach the bird’s requirement. Therefore, there is no reason to add all 20 amino acids which is what would happen if we simply added more of a high-protein ingredient. Synthetic amino acids allow us to more precisely meet the birds nutritional needs, and do so more economically.

By Nicholas M. Dale, Extension Poultry Scientist
Poultry Tips – College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
The University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service

PUBLICATION DATE: 03/27/2009
SOURCE: Univ. of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service

Managing egg production

Emus begin breeding at about 20-24 months. Young adults and other unpaired adults should be run in groups in large pens allowing each emu to choose its own mate thus forming compatible pairs; this increases egg fertility. (Selective pairing will begin to take place from December/January each year.) If each pen has only one pair of emus, they may be incompatible and poor matings will result, so decreasing egg fertility and possible bird injury.

When pairs form, they can then be separated into individual breeding pens. If the pair performs well, they can be left as a pair or, if you wish to split them, they can be put into the large group pen after the breeding season has finished.

Alternatively, breeding emus can be left as a group in a large pen and not segregated into individual breeding pens. If this option is chosen it is important to give them sufficient space to avoid fighting and to sex the birds so that the male:female sex ratio is about equal.

Hens will begin to lay from mid to late April each year, and most females will have finished laying by October/November.

Most adults are not physically aggressive to farm personnel when they are collecting the eggs. The few that get ‘too close for comfort’ can be bluffed by facing them and holding up an arm or other object to make you taller than the bird. Walking towards them will usually make them turn away.

However, as a basic safety rule, do not stand in front of an emu within range of its feet; keep at least 1 m away. Emus kick and strike forwards if they feel threatened or are caught but can’t kick sideways or backwards. The beak can pinch but generally causes little damage. Keep an eye on the feet.

Incubation

Two basic types of incubation can be used – natural and artificial. To date, most emu farmers use artificial incubation.

Natural incubation

In natural incubation, the male emus go broody and are allowed to sit on the eggs.

When young females begin to lay, eggs are commonly laid at random throughout the pen. After a time or the onset of maturity, a nest site will be chosen and eggs are then laid at this site. Dispersed eggs are rolled together and often camouflaged with dry grass, sticks and leaves, etc. by the male emu.

The rate of lay is slow initially with several days between the early eggs. The rate increases to one egg every two days or so towards the end of the clutch.

After some 6-10 eggs have been laid, the mature male will go broody and begin sitting on the eggs. Further eggs laid near him are rolled under to join the others. Over a few days, the male will slow his metabolic rate to a point where he sits on the eggs full-time, will not eat or drink, and only stands several times a day to roll the eggs. It is advisable to remove other birds from the pen when a male begins to sit because group penning may result in fighting and egg damage and the male will not settle properly.

Once a male is fully broody, he can be approached quietly, and gently lifted to check the condition of the eggs.

The incubation period for emus is 56 days but it is good policy to check daily from day 50 to see if any chicks have hatched.

If chicks are to be reared in a brooder house, they should be removed at this daily check and taken to the brooder house. If you are leaving the chicks for the male to rear, you should remove all unhatched eggs after the male moves off the nest. At an early age the chicks are prone to wander and care is needed to prevent predators such as crows, hawks and foxes killing them.

Natural incubation requires more space and pens to move birds into; especially if the male is left to rear the chicks. If you plan to do this, you should get further information on this subject before starting because it will require different procedures.

There are problems associated with natural incubation including the potential for bacterial contamination of eggs, especially in wet conditions. Some eggs will be in the pen for two to four weeks before the male sits. During this time, daily temperature fluctuations may trigger the embryo to begin developing and the low night temperatures may kill the embryo – this is known as pre-incubation.

Despite these problems, reasonable hatching rates are possible using natural incubation.

Artificial incubation

For artificial incubation, eggs are collected once or twice daily and placed in an incubator.

Eggs should be collected daily if possible to reduce pre-incubation problems and disinfected using a recognised egg-sanitation process and stored in a cool room at a temperature of 10-16^oC for up to 10 days. Batches are then set in the incubator at regular intervals (setting batches at 10 day intervals is a common practice).

Specific emu egg incubators are available; however, poultry incubators can be converted to hold emu eggs with good results. The eggs should be taken out of cool storage, allowed to return to room temperature for approximately 12-18 hours, then placed in the incubator. As a guide, the incubator will need to be run at a constant temperature of 35.25-35.5^oC (dry bulb) and a relative humidity of 45-50% [26-27^oC] (wet bulb) throughout the first 50 days of incubation.

The eggs will require turning a minimum of three times per day. This can be done manually or by using automatic turning devices in the incubator. Automatic turning methods can be installed in most incubators. Note, however that eggs should always be turned an odd number of times per day when turned manually. This makes sure that the embryo does not go into the same position each night with the risk of it becoming stuck to the side of the shell and subsequently dying.

At day 50, the eggs are transferred to a separate, clean, hatching compartment. The hatcher should be operated at a slightly lower temperature, 35^oC, and higher humidity, 28-29^oC (wet bulb). The higher humidity helps to moisten the internal membranes and soften the shell to assist in the hatching process. Eggs are not turned during this period in the hatcher.

Emu eggs, like all other eggs, are susceptible to bacterial contamination and should be sanitised immediately after collection by using a recommended fumigant or egg washing product. Eggs can also be fumigated at certain stages during incubation. Empty incubators and hatching compartments also need to be sanitised between batches using the same products.

Artificial incubation is a specialised procedure and problems may occur if:

• eggs are not collected regularly, fumigated or stored prior to being placed in the incubator
• incorrect temperatures and humidities are used during incubation and hatching
• incubator and hatching compartments are not cleaned or fumigated adequately.

The egg is a living organism and needs to breathe. Fresh air (oxygen) is absorbed through the shell and stale air carbon monoxide and other gases are dispersed. It is extremely important that each day clean fresh air is allowed into the incubator and hatching chambers in order to satisfy this requirement. This is achieved by opening the doors for short periods of time, which occurs during manual turning or using the normal ventilation mechanisms of the machine.

Authors: Paul Kent and Simon Newg
Queensland Government – Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries

Modern broilers grow at an extremely rapid rate and convert feed to meat with exceptional efficiency. However, this rapid growth rate and conversion efficiency have been associated with an increased susceptibility to heat stress. While a variety of genetic, nutritional, feeding and environmental strategies have been examined, much of the burden for dealing with the effects of heat falls to the producer and, in turn, the housing environment (Linn et al., 2006).

Evaporative pads, fogger pads and fogger nozzles are commonly used to control heat and its effects in broiler houses (Weaver, 2002). Except in extreme conditions poultry production personnel have tended to avoid systems that deposit moisture directly on the birds. Yet, cattle and hogs are often cooled in hot weather by sprinkling with water and many poultry producers have occasionally cooled chickens by sprinkling with water hoses during extremely hot periods to avoid catastrophic mortality. In practice, the effectiveness of conventional, low-pressure misting systems in broiler houses partially depends on the deposition of much of the released water onto the chickens and their immediate surroundings. Pad systems require large volumes of water to cool birds and many producers are concerned about the availability and cost of water to operate cool cell systems. An alternative sprinkling system for cooling broiler chickens was investigated at the Applied Broiler Research Farm (ABRF).

History
Sprinkling with controlled amounts of water on a regular basis directly on the birds was tested in 1989 in a laboratory study with promising results (Berry et al., 1990). In that study, sprinkling water was applied at the rate determined by:

The control algorithm was based on data from Reece and Lott (1982), who found that the sensible heat production of broiler chickens at 80° F was nearly constant at 5.0 Btu/hr/lb bird after four weeks of age. The equation assumes that the heat transfer from the chicken body core remains at a constant 5.0 Btu/hr/lb bird as long as the wetted surface is cooled to 92°F by the addition of water with increasing air temperature. The use of 92°F for TS was based on radiometer measurements of chicken surface temperatures, recognizing that these surfaces were not necessarily the same as the wetted surfaces.

Field Tests Procedures

Field tests were conducted from 1995 through 2005 in commercial 40 by 400-ft curtain sided broiler houses at the ABRF. A variety of more conventional misting systems were normally used with cross-ventilation in Houses 1 and 3 during this period. Houses 2 and 4 were arranged as tunnel ventilated houses and contained identical fan  configuration patterns. Chickens in House 4 were cooled by the modified tunnel ventilation system with 200 ft of 4-in pads 4-ft in height. The pad cooling system seemed to work adequately, but air velocity in about half the house was not desirably high for tunnel ventilation. Additional heat stress may have resulted from some blockage of natural ventilation by the wall sections with cooling pads during evening hours. Water was applied in House 2 directly to the birds in a coarse mist sprinkled from 63 plastic spinner nozzles (Meter-Man UCS23) placed at 19-ft intervals along three longitudinal 3/4-in PVC pipes in House 2. The nozzles on the center pipe were staggered from those on the outside pipes, which were placed 10 ft from the side walls. Nozzles were placed about 2 in. above the pipes on risers that contained check valves. The pipes were suspended from the roof framing by a winched system so that nozzle height could be adjusted. Water was supplied to the nozzles through a pressure regulator set to 20 psi, so that each nozzle emitted about 0.25 gallons/min over a circle of about 22-ft diameter. The amount of water was metered by controlling the on-time of the nozzles in every 10-min cycle. Separate solenoid valves alternated water pressure to the three pipes to prevent overloading of the house water supply system. During this period, the maximum air velocity was maintained through the entire 400-ft length. Litter removal from all houses was via a farm tractor and pull behind single axle decaking machine (Lewis Brothers Mfg. Co., Model #2; Baxley, GA) capable of hauling 3,500 to 4,000 lbs per load.

Field Test Results

Table 1 shows the average daily mortality (dead chickens per day per house) from age 35 days until the day before harvesting. Average daily mortality was lowest in House 2 (direct sprinkling system) while House 4 (pad cooled house) had the next to highest mortality rate. The relative failure of House 4 was partially blamed on the low air velocity in part of that house. During Flocks 39 and 44, higher mortality in House 1 was probably averted by hand spraying with a garden hose.

Table 2 compares Houses 2 and 4 with respect to water used for cooling birds and loads of caked litter removed at the end of the grow-out period. While the average number of caked litter loads removed was approximately equal, House 2 used just over 85% less water to cool birds as compared to House 4. While fan electricity use was similar in both houses, feed conversion, average weight, and integrator pay rate showed a general trend in favor of the direct sprinkling system in House 2 as compared to House 4 (Table 3). These data suggest that, direct sprinkling of chickens was as effective at cooling birds as tunnel ventilation.

Observations

Tunnel ventilation is thought by many to be the best available management tool to prevent heat related stress and mortality in broiler flocks. Such houses have been reported to reduce the effective ambient temperature in the vicinity of the birds by more than 35ºF on a typical summer day. However, water usage in tunnel houses is nearly double that of conventional houses on warm days (Lacy and Czarick, 1992). Water usage in the direct sprinkler house was about 85% lower than that used in the tunnel house, while loads of caked litter removed at the end of the flock were approximately equal (Table 2).

Random temperature observations with the direct sprinkler house suggest that this approach typically reduced the temperature of the ventilation air by less than 2°F. This is primarily because much of the water was applied directly to the birds. The lack of association between inside air temperature and the cooling benefits of the direct sprinkler system meant that the system benefits were not obvious to the casual observer unless he was actually sprinkled. In addition, inside air temperature could not be used to provide feedback for controlling water application rates. Instead, water application rates were based on outside air temperature and predicted body temperatures of birds using the previously presented algorithm. Earlier testing with the direct sprinklers has suggested that the system effectively removes heat directly from the birds (Xin et al., 2001). However, the increasing growth rates of broilers, solid sidewall housing and improvements in production methods suggest that an updated algorithm will be necessary under current production conditions. This work is currently underway.
Summary

Cool cell pad systems use large volumes of water to cool the air temperature inside poultry houses during hot weather. Producers are increasingly concerned about the availability of their water supply and the cost of water, especially on large farms that may have 5 to 10 houses or more. An experimental method of cooling broilers in hot weather utilizing a low cost sprinkling system that consumes only a fraction of the water of a pad system was field tested at the ABRF with promising results. Such a system developed commercially could possibly offer an effective, viable, inexpensive alternative to current strategies used for summer cooling of broiler chickens.

References

Berry, I. L., T. A. Costello and R.C. Benz. 1990. Cooling broiler chickens by surface wetting. ASAE paper, St. Joseph, Mich: ASAE

Lacy, M. P. and M. Czarick. 1992. Tunnel-ventilated broiler houses: Broiler performance and operating costs. J. App. Poultry Res. 1:104-109.

Linn, H., H. O. Jiao, J. Buyse and E. Decuypere. 2006. Strategies for preventing heat stress in poultry. World’s Poult. Sci. J. 62:71-85.

Reece, F. N., and B. D. Lott. 1982. The effect of environmental temperature on sensible and latent heat production of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 61(8):1590-1593.

Weaver, W. D. 2002. Fundamentals of ventilation. In: Bell, D. D. and W. D. Weaver eds. Commercial Chicken Meat and Egg Production. Fifth ed..Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA

Xin, H., I. L. Berry, G. T. Tabler, and T. A. Costello. 2001. Heat and moisture production of broiler chickens in commercial housing. Pp 309-318 in: Livestock Environment VI: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium. Richard R. Stowell, Ray Bucklin, and Robert W. Bottcher (Eds.). 21-23, May 2001, Louisville, KY.

Table 1. Average Daily Mortality of Chickens during Summer Flocks.¹

Table 2. A Comparison of Summer Cooling Water Usage and Caked Litter Removal from House 2 (Direct Sprinkler System) and House 4 (Pad Cooled).

Table 3. Production Figures, Flock Water Consumption and Fan Electricity Use for Summer Flocks.

* Mention of trade names does not constitute endorsement by the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture and does not imply their approval to the exclusion of other products or vendors that may be suitable.

Authors: G.T. Tabler², I.L. Berry³, Y.Liang³, T.A. Costello³, and H. Xin^4
2Department of Poultry Science,
³Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture; and
⁴Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa State University

Published at AVIAN Advice newsletter (Winter 2008, Volume 10 Number 4)
University of Arkansas Cooperative Extension Service, Division of Agriculture

Chlorine in the form of sodium hypochlorite, calcium hypochlorite tablets or chlorine gas is by-far the most commonly used carcass and equipment disinfectant in the U.S. poultry industry. The USDA, Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) allows for addition of chlorine to processing waters at levels up to 50 ppm in carcass wash applications and chiller make-up water. The FSIS also requires that chlorinated water containing a minimum of 20 ppm available chlorine be applied to all surfaces of carcasses when the inner surfaces have been reprocessed (due to carcass contamination) other than solely by trimming.

With recent emphasis by USDA-FSIS on further reducing Salmonella, poultry plants have increased their reliance on the water chlorination program in the processing plant including pre-scald bird brushes, equipment rinses, inside/outside bird washers, carcass washes, and as a disinfectant during chilling. However, there remains a limited understanding of water chlorination and proper management of water chlorination in the poultry industry. Thus, a review of chlorination is needed.

At recommended levels, hypochlorite (chlorine derivative) based sanitizers reduce enveloped and non-enveloped viruses. Chlorine is also effective against fungi, bacteria, and algae. However, under traditional conditions of use, chlorine does not affect bacterial spores.

Chlorine was first used in water treatment by the municipal water treatment facilities in Chicago and Jersey City in 1908. Chlorine is used in three common forms for water treatment: elemental chlorine (chlorine gas), sodium hypochlorite (bleach) solution and dry calcium hypochlorite pellets. The amount of hypochlorite (OCl-) varies depending on the type of chlorine used. One pound of Cl2 generates an amount equal to one gallon of 12.5% NaOCl, and 1.5 pounds of Ca(OCl)2 (65%).

Types of chlorine used in the poultry industry

Chlorine gas

Chlorine in its elemental state is a halogen gas (Cl2) which is highly toxic and corrosive. Because of safety concerns with chlorine gas, many food processing facilities have changed to either sodium hypochlorite or calcium hypochlorite for water treatment.

Chlorine gas and sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) can be produced in an electrochemical process depending on the process conditions (Equation 1). For NaOCl production, Cl2 gas is passed through sodium hydroxide solution (NaOH). The NaOH reacts with the Cl2 to produce NaCl, NaOCl and water as shown below.

Equation 1: 2 NaOH + Cl2 (g) º NaCl + NaOCl + H2O

Sodium hypochlorite

In most food plant applications, chlorine is purchased as sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) solution. Sodium hypochlorite solutions used in poultry processing contain between 5 and 12% pure sodium hypochlorite. Household bleach typically contains 5.25% NaOCl.

It should be noted that household cleaners and sanitizers are not acceptable for USDA-FSIS inspected food plants unless accepted by USDA. Commercial forms of sodium hypochlorite are provided in a range of concentrations from 3-50%. The most commonly used form in poultry processing plants is commercial bleach which contains 12.5% NaOCl. This is the most common or popular form of chlorine used in poultry plants worldwide.

Calcium hypochlorite

Available in granular or pellet form, calcium hypochlorite is generally more expensive to use than other hypochlorite forms. Some companies use calcium hypochlorite because the concentration can be controlled more effectively than other forms of chlorine used.

Chlorine based sanitizers are low in cost and can control bacteria in food processing plants when used appropriately. The advantages and disadvantages to using chlorine sanitizers are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. The advantages and disadvantages of sodium hypochlorite use in poultry processing.

By Scott M. Russell, Ph.D., Extension Poultry Scientist
Poultry Tips – College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
The University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service

Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists have uncovered genetic evidence about the evolutionary path that transformed Salmonella enteritidis from an innocuous bacterium into a virulent pathogen.

S. enteritidis, like many bacteria, reproduces very quickly–every 20 minutes in optimal conditions, according to veterinary medical officer Jean Guard-Bouldin in the ARS Egg Safety and Quality Research Unit in Athens, Ga.

“To reduce current levels of infection, we’re studying how S. enteritidis evolves and infects hens on the farm,” says Guard-Bouldin. “Using mutational changes in the Salmonella genome as a sort of ‘breadcrumb trail,’ we’ve tried to determine the first time this bacterium became capable of getting inside the egg from hen reproductive organs.”

Such a fast reproductive pace allows the organism to accumulate genetic variations. Only healthy competitors go on to reproduce, survive and develop the mechanisms needed to infect the egg. Using DNA analysis, Guard-Bouldin is looking at evolutionary evidence to determine how some S. enteritidis strains became pathogenic. Studying how S. enteritidis evolves and infects hens on the farm may someday help reduce levels of infection.

Guard-Bouldin and her colleagues found S. enteritidis strains to be so similar genetically that they appear identical, yet they may behave differently inside the hen. To distinguish between the apparently identical genomes, researchers must use a technique called “whole-genome mutational mapping” to analyze multiple strains.

Through these analyses, the researchers developed a timeline of when S. enteritidis first became capable of getting inside the egg from hen reproductive organs–approximately 36 years ago. It appears that a large-scale swap of DNA between strains, in association with the emergence of egg contamination, created a hybrid strain of S. enteritidis.

This hybrid strain had the ability to contaminate the internal contents of eggs. Later, it also split very quickly into two lineages, each carrying one virus. Both of the newly split lineages continued to evolve and eventually began to vary in their ability to contaminate eggs and to survive on the farm.

The data from this research is being entered into a publicly available database by the National Center for Biotechnology Information, part of the National Institutes of Health.

“This information about differences between genomes could help streamline the process of finding out how human disease organisms evolve to become more virulent,” says Guard-Bouldin. “The main focus for us now is to continue sequencing entire genomes and searching for more genetic changes that help us understand the Salmonella organism.

“Up until recently, genomic techniques for delving this deeply into the genetic code of multiple Salmonella strains weren’t available or cost effective.

“If we can understand how Salmonella evolved to become pathogenic, perhaps we can apply the same principles to other foodborne pathogens and begin to study foodborne illness the way influenza is being monitored-with equal emphasis on the importance of small, as well as large, genetic changes.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 40,000 cases of salmonellosis are reported in the United States every year. Most result in diarrhea, fever, and abdominal cramps lasting 4 to 7 days, but severe cases caused about 70 deaths in 2000. Adequate cooking eliminates the risk of infection from eggs.