Volume 1, Winter 2010

avianinsight A LO H M A N N A N I M A L H E A LT H N E W S B R I E F

Outbreaks of VA in
Reducing Salmonella with Vaccination
unprotected chickens

can have economically

devastating conse-

quences. Should a

broiler breeder flock

By Charles L. Hofacre, John J. Maurer, Roy Berghaus and Stephan Thayer; University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602
fall victim to an
almonella has been the most common source of foodborne illness in people in the U.S. according to
outbreak of clinical S the Centers for Disease Control, Table 1. Poultry accounts for nearly 17% of these Salmonella illnesses.
The goal for the U.S. “Healthy People 2010” has been to have no more than 6.8 Salmonella cases per 100,000
people in the U.S. However, in 2008, CDC had the U.S. at 16.2 cases per 100,000 people. Therefore, both the
VA, the unprotected
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have both

progeny produced

over the course of Table 1. Foodborne Illness

CDC Data*
several weeks may 2008 2009
Salmonella 7444 cases 7039 cases
be severely affected Campylobacter 5825 cases 6033 cases
Shigella 3029 cases 1849 cases
with VA, sometimes
Cryptosporidium 1036 cases 1325 cases
with ancillary enteric E. coli 0157 513 cases 459 cases
E. coli 205 cases 264 cases
disease and even * 2008/2009 CDC Foodnet

immunosuppression.

Reducing Salmonella
inside with Vaccination, p.1
Notes from the
CEO, p.3
IPE / IFE 2011,
p.4
 Table 2. Correlation Between Vaccination of Pullet Flocks and Salmonella Prevalence in Broiler Chicken Meat Birds
for Two Poultry Integrators
Bird Type Sample
Pullets Dragswabs
Breeder Environment
Carcasses
Broiler Box Liners
Dragswabs
Carcasses
begun new initiatives to lower the level of
Salmonella in broilers and Salmonella En-
teritidis (S.E.) in commercial layers.
We have recently evaluated the effective-
ness of a Salmonella vaccination program
at reducing broiler carcass contamination
with Salmonella, comparing two broiler
companies in the same region of the U.S.
One of the companies participating in the
study had failed a USDA HACCP 51-bird
sample set for carcass contamination
with Salmonella and began a Salmonella
vaccination program in response. Their
vaccination regimen involved the adminis-
tration of a live, attenuated S. Typhimurium
vaccine (AviPro® Megan® VAC1) and two killed
autogenous bacterins consisting of S. berta
and S. Kentucky to the pullets at 10 and 18
weeks of age. Placement of this interven-
tion step at the breeder level was made
under the assumption that a significant
amount of the carcass contamination was
due to vertical transmission of Salmonella
from breeders to their broiler progeny.
The company vaccinating pullets against
Salmonella will be referred to as Company
VAX. The second company was passing
their Salmonella performance standards.
NO-VAX VAX
40.7% 40.6%
34.0% 35.4%
57.9% 26.2%
33.8% 18.5%
30.5% 15.1%
29.1% 17.0%
This company, referred to as Company NO
VAX, did not vaccinate their breeders or
broilers against Salmonella. We observed
for Company VAX a marked decrease in
Salmonella prevalence in both breeder
flocks (25% VS 57%; p <0.0001) and their
broiler progeny (23% VS 33%; p = 0.005)
compared to Company NO VAX (see Table
2). Fewer Salmonella positive flocks were
placed on broiler farms, originating from
the breeder flocks vaccinated against
Salmonella (18% vs. 33%; p <0.001). We also
observed lower Salmonella prevalence
for broiler chicken farms contracted with
Company VAX (14% vs. 30%; p <0.001). The
most pronounced reduction in Salmonella
prevalence was observed for broiler chick-
ens originating from vaccinated breeder
flocks at the early to mid point in their egg
laying production cycle. It also appears the
vaccination identified proportion of car-
cass contamination attributed to vertical
transmission of Salmonella from breed-
ers to their broiler progeny was reduced.
Salmonella isolates are currently being
“fingerprinted” by pulsed-field gel electro-
phoresis to estimate how much of carcass
contamination is due to vertical trans-
mission. No other management practices
P Value
0.987
0.741
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
were identified between the two poultry
companies that accounted for reduction in
carcass, other than vaccination.
To date, Company VAX is into their 4th
year of vaccination. The composition
of the killed, Salmonella bacterin has
changed from year to year in accordance
with USDA autogenous regulations and
Salmonella serotypes circulating in breeder
and broiler chicken flocks. This company
does their own “in-house” monitoring for
carcass contamination with Salmonella.
They did not observe any significant
change in Salmonella prevalence until
after 6 months of vaccination. This delay
may reflect the time it takes to replace
older breeder flocks with new, vaccinated
birds. Presently, Company VAX is report-
ing zero Salmonella-positive carcasses for
their most recent 51-bird, FSIS sample set.
In a follow-up study that has not yet been
published, Company NO VAX began to
vaccinate their breeders. We followed
6 vaccinated breeders and 6 non-vacci-
nated breeders from day 1 and 29 broiler
flocks from each group. The results of this
study, all within the same company, were
nearly identical to the previous study with
the vaccinated broilers having 50% less
positive ceca than the broilers from the
non-vaccinated breeders. Additionally, the
broilers from the vaccinated breeders that
did have Salmonella had 50% lower Salmo-
nella counts (MPN’s) in their ceca than the
broilers from non-vaccinated breeders.
Vaccination in these studies does appear
to be an effective intervention that is quite
successful in reducing Salmonella contam-
ination of broiler chicken carcasses. Toya-
ta-Hanatani et al. (2009) have also demon-
strated the effectiveness of vaccination in
reducing S. Enteritidis in commercial table
egg operation (Applied and Environmen-
tal Microbiology volume 75: 1005-1010).
Notes from the CEO
Lohmann is at the center of Salmonella
prevention in poultry meat and eggs via
vaccination.
Dave Zacek
CEO,
Lohmann Animal Health
Research is needed to correlate Salmo-
nella antibody titers with protection in
vaccinated flocks vs. un-vaccinated birds.
Immunological tools are also needed
to assess and measure a poultry flocks’
immune response, immune status, and
antibody titers to Salmonella and deter-
mine whether a vaccination regimen is
working. While Salmonella vaccination
is promising for reducing Salmonella
contamination of meat birds and table
eggs, it should be used as one part of a
comprehensive prevention program that
includes other control measures, and not
as the sole intervention step for control-
ling Salmonella in poultry.
Lohmann Animal Health GmbH in
Germany pioneered live Salmonella
vaccination with our AviPro® Salmonella
Vac E, a safe and effective protection
of laying chickens against Salmonella
enteritidis for the duration of the laying
period after 3 vaccinations.
In the USA, Lohmann Animal Health
International developed and currently
markets two live Salmonella vaccines:
AviPro® Megan® Vac 1 for application
to young growing chickens and AviPro®
Megan® Egg for older birds. AviPro®
Megan® Egg is supported by data show-
ing Salmonella enteritidis protection
throughout the laying period after three
vaccinations. AviPro® Megan® Vac 1 for
application to chicks and young birds
References
1. Dórea FC, Cole DJ, Hofacre C, Zamperini
K, Mathis D, Doyle MP, Lee MD, Maurer JJ.
2010. Effect of Salmonella vaccination
of chicken breeders on reducing car-
cass contamination of broiler chickens
in integrated poultry operations. Appl
Environ Microbiol. [E-pub ahead of
print] PMID: 20889797. (http://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20889797 )
provides protection of organs, intes-
tinal tract and ceca from Salmonella
enteritidis, Salmonella typhimurium and
Salmonella Heidelberg.
In addition to our live vaccines, we
also provide AviPro® 109 Se4 inactivated
vaccine alone and in combination with
Newcastle and Infectious Bronchitis for
use in broiler breeders or layers as a final
vaccination(s) in a live-killed program.
Finally, we work directly with large inte-
grations creating autogenous vaccines tai-
lored to fit the specific needs of the site.
We are your avian professionals, with
decades of global experience in Salmo-
nella control for poultry meat and eggs.
Contact us for details.
Lohmann Animal Health International Features Salmonella
Prevention Products at IPE/IFE 2011
Come See Us at Booth 1953 Hall A and at the Tech Xchange Seminars.
According to the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention
(CDC), Salmonella infections remain as one of the major causes
of human food poisoning in the United States, with domestic
poultry considered as a main reservoir for Salmonella infections
in humans.
For your complete Salmonella prevention program, we offer
the only proven live vaccine, AviPro® Megan® Egg, to provide
unsurpassed protection from SE infections. Our patented AviPro®
avianinsight for more information:
(+1) 207-873 3989
Megan® Vac 1 and AviPro® Megan® Egg vaccines are backed by
numerous academic and US FDA and USDA clinical studies.
In addition, learn more about Salmonella prevention pro-
grams from Lohmann Animal Health International Technical
Services Veterinarian Dr. Ivan Alvarado. As part of the IPE/
IFE Tech Xchange series on topical industry subjects, Ivan will
present Control of Poultry Salmonellosis: Role of Live Attenuated
Vaccines, on Wednesday, Jan. 26 at 11:40 am in Hall A. He will
focus on how an effective prevention and control program must
involve several simultaneous approaches with vaccination being
a major component.
We look forward to seeing you at the show.
Lohmann Animal Health International
375 China Road
Winslow, Maine 04901, USA
(+1) 800-655 1342 www.lahinternational.com