Thursday, June 23, 2011

Poultry Disease Prevention Checklist

Poultry Disease Prevention Checklist

A useful checklist for poultry producers to rate their disease prevention practices and preparedness from Dr Casey W. Ritz of the Department of Poultry Science at the University of Georgia.

Disease prevention is much less stressful and costly than disease control and recovery. Biosecurity measures are a critical component of disease prevention. Use this list to rate your disease prevention practices and preparedness. Check the box for all questions to which you can answer ‘yes’. A score of 80 or better is outstanding, 70 to 79 excellent, 60 to 69 good, 50 to 59 just fair, and 49 or less indicates a definite need for improvement.

A. Score 5 points for each ‘yes’ answer.

My farm is isolated from other poultry facilities.
My poultry houses are set back at least 200 feet from public roads.
Access deterrents are in place such as warning signs at entrances, perimeter fencing or gated driveways.
My buildings are secured with locks.
My employees do not own poultry.
No other avian species are kept on my property.
I have a pest management programme to control mice, rats and other pests.
B. Score 4 points for each ‘yes’ answer.

My birds are observed every day for abnormal symptoms and overall flock health.
I routinely analyse my poultry production, feed consumption, and mortality records for signs of problems.
Dead birds are picked up daily from the houses for appropriate disposal.
My farm has secure dead bird disposal, with no access to birds or animals.
Vehicles or people cannot enter my farm or poultry houses without my permission or knowledge.
Visitors must park vehicles in a designated area and sign a logbook.
Score 3 points for each ‘yes’ answer.

My poultry housing is animal- and wild bird-proof.
All tools and equipment are cleaned and disinfected before coming on my farm.
Production houses are thoroughly cleaned and disinfected between flocks.
Production house entryways are routinely cleaned and disinfected.
Disinfectant footbaths are at each entryway of every facility and are routinely cleaned and recharged.
Debris and vegetation are cleaned up and kept clear of the production facilities.
Feed spills are cleaned up quickly when they occur.
For necessary visitors, I provide clean coveralls and boots.
My employees do not travel to other poultry premises not under my control.
Score 2 points for each ‘yes’ answer.

All utility and service vehicles entering my farm are properly sanitised before entry and the drivers do not enter the poultry houses.
Farm employees work only in assigned areas; they do not go to other areas of the farm.
Dead birds are not carried from house to house.
Poultry waste from other farms is never spread on the fields adjacent to my farm.
I have instructed my employees and service personnel about poultry disease and on-farm prevention measures.
Score 1 point for each ‘yes’ answer.

Household pets are kept away from the poultry buildings.
I have implemented a fly control programme for my farm.
I follow all company-implemented disease prevention measures on my farm.
I regularly attend educational programmes to keep abreast of new developments in disease control.
----------- Total (Perfect score = 100)

June 2011

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Prolapse, how to anticipate?

Prolapse during production is usually related to poor skeleton development during rearing, even if body weight during production is at target. In future, try to achieve upper limit of target weight from 4 to 8 weeks of age. The following tips may help to reduce losses in this flock.
1. Do not exceed 16 hours light duration (better 15 hours). Also reduce light intensity (maximum 40 lux in open house, 20-30 lux in environment control house).
2. Adjust ME in feed to lower limit of recommendations.
3. Supplement Vitamin C @ 1 g/l drinking water in morning hours.

Steps 1 and 2 may slightly decrease egg produciton and egg size BUT you have to opt mortality or reduced production. Adopt these measures until 28 weeks of age. Thereafter resume normal practices.
Source : Dr.Anjum

Six Top Tips we must know on water supply of poultry farm

Six Top Tips we must know on water supply of poultry farm
Profitability in poultry production can only be optimized when everything goes right, and that includes keeping the birds healthy.

Hygienic Water supply system is one of the most important key factors for good health and growth of poultry. It is important for water to remain hygienic all the way until it reaches the birds, and so water & drinker lines hygiene must be a focus of attention for the farm. Water lines should be thoroughly cleaned and sanitized at regular intervals.

1. Adjust drinkers to correct height

2. Fix leaks

3. Look out for air locks

4. Install a filter to prevent sediment build-up

5. Prevent bio-film by flushing

~ immediately after any intervention of medication

~ one minute for every 30 meters of pipe length

~ at least once a week

~ more than once a day during warm weather

~ use high pressure (1.5-3.0 bars)

6. Use high quality acidifier in water for desired pH level

Water source get contaminated with various organic and inorganic substances resulting in high pH thus chances of growing pathogens including salmonella sp., E. coli and fungi is high. Contamination of drinking water in poultry is formidable.

Generally it is recommended that optimum pH of drinking water of poultry should be around 4.5 to 5.5 and B value of feed should be low to maintain normal gastric pH of birds.

Since gastric pH is higher in chicks than in growers and adult birds, an utmost care should be taken during brooding period of chicks for:

-» Reducing chick mortality

-» Controlling E. coli, Salmonella and fungi

-» Improving FCR and weight gain

-» Reducing ammonia in litter

-» Reducing moisture in litter

To take care of the routine problems of poultry farm, we add sanitizers, acidifiers, medications, nutritional supplements & vaccines etc without understanding chemical interaction into the water which itself comes carrying its own baggage of organic & inorganic material.

We will have to keep in mind that while some chemical interaction could be synergistic, actually helping one another to work better but in the mean time making wrong solution may create problem by reducing effectiveness of the additives and some time leading to hazardous effect to birds & environment.

Following are some action & interactions which we must understand while preparing drinking water to poultry:

☞ Hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) and Chlorine (Cl) are not compatible so should not be used at the same time. Both are oxidizer and they will turn on each other.

☞ Copper sulfate is not compatible with Chlorine (Cl) however Copper sulfate which is an antimicrobial & antifungal agent actually enhances the effectiveness of H₂O₂ so they can be run at the same time with separate medicators.

☞ Organic iodine (Not the inorganic) is very compatible with Chlorine. This combination can help to prevent a full-blown respiratory infection if it is used early enough to treat sniffing, a loose croupy cough.

☞ Iodine, like Chlorine, works better at a lower pH.

☞ Chlorine is not compatible with any compound that act as reducing agent which would include most minerals water additives.

For example, products that contain copper, sulfur or iron will tie up the Chlorine and make it unavailable to work effectively as a sanitizer.

☞ Antibiotic like Chlortetracycline & tetracycline works best in low pH range. If you have alkaline water, adding good acidifier liquid actually enhances absorption of these products. But product like Penicillin & Sulpha drugs works better in pH above 7 so turning off the water acidifier during medication with penicillin & sulpha group is recommended.

☞ Vaccines are typically protein so at any time vaccines are used in water, the water pH should be above 4.

☞ All sanitizers lose efficacy at colder water temperatures. Chlorine, chlorine dioxide & peroxide/ozone are all temperature sensitive so colder water will slow down their reaction time.

☞ Peroxide is strong oxidant and contact with personnel is extremely dangerous. Peroxide deteriorates gradually even when stored correctly.

☞ There would be slime blooms in water system after the use of antibiotics. The antibiotic disrupts the microbial population in waterline system just as it does in the GI tract, allowing microbes such as yeast & mould to grow undisturbed.

So, thorough cleaning of water pipeline system to remove the slime using 3% hydrogen peroxide solution with high pressure flushing water routinely is recommended as & when required.

Regular use of best quality acidifier in fresh drinking water of poultry farm will solve routine problems but it should have following traits:

Ability to reduce pH of drinking water as well as GI tract content.
Should reduce B-value of ingredients for improvement of digestion & assimilation.
Must suppress bacteria that are "pH sensitive" like E.coli, Salmonella, Campylobacter, C. perfringens, Listeria etc.
Must work in fore gut as well as in hind gut
Should be stable in all pH ranges.
Make sure that you are using perfect hygienic water for your birds and not a complicated solution.
Published on: 06/21/2011
Rating:
Author : Ganesh Kumar Dahal

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Managing Fertility: Good Breeding Shows

Advice on how to promote enhanced fertility in the flock from Maciej Kolanczyk of Pas Reform.


The percentage of fertile eggs is one of the most important parameters influencing the economic performance of a breeder flock. An embryo can, of course, only develop from a fertile egg.
Fertilisation takes place – and thus can only be influenced on – the breeder farm. When we consider fertility, we usually think of the males. Yet in reality, the percentage of fertile eggs is a synthetic expression describing the condition and activity of the males, the condition of the females – and the propensity of both sexes to behave as nature intended. Sexual behaviour is closely allied to the contentment and welfare of the flock. Or put another way, fertility can be seen as a reliable measurement of the flock’s overall well-being.
A flock performing well in respect to fertility is in which both cockerels and hens are healthy and well developed. Both groups (sexes) should be uniform, with similar levels of maturity and well matched in size, good feathers and healthy, strong legs. These tend to be the characteristics of flocks in a low-stress environment, with sufficient space to promote natural behaviour and an optimum diet.
With these conditions, the inevitable changes related to the advancing age of the birds will be synchroninised. In this sense, fertility is a trait that can be regarded as a dynamic process, rather than as a single characteristic. From the economic point of view, the deciding factor is the level of fertility that can be delivered in the late production period, after 45 weeks. This is also a time when the most differences between the flocks can be observed.
Advice
To promote enhanced fertility in the flock:
Give special attention to development and uniformity in rearing: a good start in the first week, harmonic, steady growth, maintaining body weight standards from the beginning of the chick’s life and especially at 11 weeks are essential.

Synchronise the maturity of males and females. Many potential problems arise from differences in development between the sexes. Males tend to mature earlier and may behave too aggressively for successful breeding.

Observe behaviour in the poultry house in the afternoons – and be prepared to respond quickly. A good flock should remain active and well mixed at this time.

Restrict water consumption at any age and take care of litter as a key factor in determining the house environment. Dry, loose litter helps the birds to remain clean and well feathered with healthy legs. Maintain feed to water ratio as 1:1.7 to 1.9 in rearing and 1:1.8to 2.2 in the production period. Always ensure that the house is dry and warm.

Avoid stress by limiting factors like diseases, drastic changes of housing conditions, feed composition or quantity, temperature and other basic parameters. Stick to routines.

Stimulate mating by sprinkling grain on the litter in the afternoons. Let the males play the role of landlords, so they have the chance to show their leading position in the flock.

Never keep too many males in the flock. Quantity cannot replace quality.

It is better to keep fewer good cockerels than many of varying quality.

If possible, replace old cockerels with new, mature males after 45 weeks of age. Alternatively, introduce ’intra-spiking’, i.e. exchange males between different houses. This creates a new social order that encourages increased activity and renewed fights for social position. Replace or exchange at least 40 per cent of the males in a house.
June 2011
Source :http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/2026/managing-fertility-good-breeding-shows

Sunday, June 5, 2011

Diagnosis of infectious bursal disease by immunoperoxidase technique*

Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ondokuz Mayıs, Samsun, Turkey; 2Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Ankara, Ankara, Turkey; 3Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Kirikkale, Kirikkale, Turkey; 4Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Kafkas, Kars, Turkey
Summary: The diagnosis of infectious bursal disease of naturally infected 21-day-old chickens was investigated with im-munoperoxidase method. Viral antigens were observed in the macrophages and lymphocytes of the bursa of Fabricius. It was ob-served that the method was sensitive and specific and it could be used in the diagnosis of this disease.
Key words: Immunohistochemistry, infectious bursal disease, polyclonal antibody,

Infectious bursal disease (IBD) virus is the causa-tive agent of a highly contagious disease of young chick-ens. The disease is widespread in chickens and has a great economic importance for both broiler and pullet growers (4,6,7). IBD is normally diagnosed in veterinary laboratory by the isolation of causative virus in eggs and/or cell cultures and demonstration of bursal lesions. However, these procedures can be relatively time con-suming and some strains either can not adapt themselves or not show characteristic changes on embryos. There-fore, diagnosis of the disease might be difficult and dem-onstration of viral antigen by immunoperoxidase (IP) method useful for differential diagnosis and confirmation of histopathological changes (2,3,5). Present study describes detection of IBD virus in the bursa of Fabricius (bF) within naturally infected 21 days old chickens by the indirect IP method using polyclonal antibodies. Twenty one days old 30 chickens showing clinical signs of IBD virus infection were collected from com-mercial flocks. All chickens were euthanasied by cervical dislocation and systemically necropsied. Tissue speci-mens were collected from bF, spleen, liver, cecal tonsil, kidney, lung, heart and brain, than fixed in buffered for-malin and processed for paraffin embedding. Two sec-tions were cut from each block, one for IP method and the other for hematoxyline and eosin staining. The con-trol group was sampled at the same intervals and in-cluded 30 specific pathogen free chickens.
For the IP method, formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissue sections from field cases and SPF chickens were deparaffinized and hydrated. Hydrated samples were reacted with 3% hydrogen peroxide in methanol for 30 minutes at room temperature to quench endogenous peroxidase activity and blocked with normal goat serum for 30 minutes. Serum was blotted and slides were incubated with polyclonal chicken anti serum to IBD virus (1/100) for 30 minutes in a humidified chamber. The slides were incubated with peroxidase labelled rabbit anti-chicken IgG (1/1000 sigma) for 30 minutes and reacted for 5 minutes in DAB, counterstained with hematoxyline. Macroscopically, no significant gross lesions were observed in organs except bF. The basic finding was a slight increase in the weight of bF (bF mean weight was 3,1 gr and 2,8 gr, in naturally infected chickens and control group, respectively). Microscopically, the main pathological alterations were degenerative and multifocal necrotic changes in the lymphocytes belonging to the medullar zone of bF. In the interstitial tissue, acute in-flammation characterised by heterophil accumulation and edema was observed. Cystic cavities were found in the medulla of some follicles. In control chickens, no mac-roscopic and microscopic lesions were seen bF or the other organs.
Immunohistochemically, IBD virus antigens were detected in lymphoid cells in the cortex and medulla of lymphoid follicles of the bF (Figure 1). Strong stain intensity and great numbers of positive cells were ob-served. In addition of these findings, antigens were found mainly in macrophages within all follicles and the inter-stitium. No antigen was observed in the other organs and the control chickens.
In the experimental studies, IBD virus antigens have been detected in macrophages within follicles, the interstitium and the lymphoid cells of bF (1,6,8). This antigen localisation was confirmed by our study. IBD virus antigens have also been observed in lymphocytes of spleen, thymus and cecal tonsil (8). However, in the present study, antigens could not been observed in these organs of naturally infected chickens. This may be due to the field cases of IBD virus have a high virulence and/or acute infections.
It has been recorded that the indirect IP method with polyclonal antibodies were used for detecting viral antigens in the bursae of chickens experimentally in-fected with IBD virus (6). These method findings were confirmed by the present study in naturally infected chickens. The protocol used in this work was verified high sensitivity of the IP test. It can be performed very rapidly, a large number of specimens can be processed quickly. Moreover, subclinical infection of IBD may be diagnosed by this technique.
References

1. Cruz-Coy JS, Giambrone JJ, Hoerr FJ (1993): İmmu-nohistochemical detection of infectious bursal disease vi-rus in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded chicken tissues using monoclonal antibody. Avian Dis, 37, 577-581.

2. Eterradosi A, Picault J, Drouin P (1992): Pathogenicity and preliminary antigenic characterisation of six infec-tious bursal disease virus strains isolated in France from acute outbreaks. J Vet Med, 39, 683-691.

3. Fernandes A, Martin M, Sierra M (1989): Immunohis-tological identification of both infectious bursal and Marek virus antigens in the bursa of Fabricius. Dtsch Tierarzl Wschr, 96, 157-160.

4. Haziroglu R, Maeda M, Nakamura K, Haritani M, Narita M (1988): Diagnosis of infectious bursal disease (IBD) by immunofluoresence. Ankara Univ Vet Fak Derg, 25, 289-298.

5. Jonson L, Engstrom B (1986): Immunocytochemical detection of infectious bursal disease and infectious bron-chitis viral antigens in fixed, paraffin embedded chicken tissues. Avian Pathol, 15, 385-393.

6. Kovacevic SA, Gagic M, Lazic S, Kovacevic M (1999): Immunohistochemical detection of infectious bursal dis-ease virus antigen in the bursa of fabricius of experimen-tally infected chickens. Acta Vet. (Beograd), 49, 13-20.

7. Lukert PD, Saif YM (1997): Infectious bursal disease. 721-738. In: BW Calnek, H J Barnes, CW Beard, McDou-gald L R, Saif M Y (Eds.): Disease of Poultry. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.

8. Tanimura N, Tsukamoto K, Nakamura, K, Narita M, Maeda M (1995): Association between pathogenicity of infectious bursal disease virus and viral antigen distribu-tion detected by immunohistochemistry. Avian Dis, 39, 9-20.
Geliş tarihi: 31.10.2003 / Kabul tarihi: 16.02.2004
Yazışma Adresi:
Doç.Dr.Tolga Güvenç
Ondokuzmayıs Üniversitesi,
Veteriner Fakültesi, Patoloji Anabilim Dalı,
Kurupelit Kampüsü, Samsun.