Advanced search
1 file | 1.04 MB Add to list

Comparison of competitive exclusion with classical cleaning and disinfection on bacterial load in pig nursery units

Author
Organization
Abstract
Background: Colonisation of the environment of nursery units by pathogenic micro-organisms is an important factor in the persistence and spread of endemic diseases in pigs and zoonotic pathogens. These pathogens are generally controlled by the use of antibiotics and disinfectants. Since an increasing resistance against these measures has been reported in recent years, methods such as competitive exclusion (CE) are promoted as promising alternatives. Results: This study showed that the infection pressure in CE units after microbial cleaning was not reduced to the same degree as in control units. Despite sufficient administration of probiotic-type spores, the analysed bacteria did not decrease in number after 3 production rounds in CE units, indicating no competitive exclusion. In addition, no differences in feed conversion were found between piglets raised in CE and control units in our study. Also, no differences in faecal consistency (indicator for enteric diseases) was noticed. Conclusion: These results indicate that the CE protocol is not a valuable alternative for classical C&D.
Keywords
Bacterial load, Pig nursery units, Cleaning and disinfection, Competitive exclusion, RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS-AUREUS, MULTIPLE ANTIBIOTIC-RESISTANCE, METHICILLIN-RESISTANT, ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE, SALMONELLA-ENTERICA, MULTIDRUG-RESISTANCE, BROILER HOUSES, ANIMALS, SWINE, FARM

Downloads

  • Comparison BMC VR 2016.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.04 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Luyckx, Kaat et al. “Comparison of Competitive Exclusion with Classical Cleaning and Disinfection on Bacterial Load in Pig Nursery Units.” BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH 12 (2016): n. pag. Print.
APA
Luyckx, Kaat, Millet, S., Van Weyenberg, S., Herman, L., Heyndrickx, M., Dewulf, J., & De Reu, K. (2016). Comparison of competitive exclusion with classical cleaning and disinfection on bacterial load in pig nursery units. BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH, 12.
Chicago author-date
Luyckx, Kaat, S Millet, S Van Weyenberg, L Herman, Marc Heyndrickx, Jeroen Dewulf, and K De Reu. 2016. “Comparison of Competitive Exclusion with Classical Cleaning and Disinfection on Bacterial Load in Pig Nursery Units.” Bmc Veterinary Research 12.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Luyckx, Kaat, S Millet, S Van Weyenberg, L Herman, Marc Heyndrickx, Jeroen Dewulf, and K De Reu. 2016. “Comparison of Competitive Exclusion with Classical Cleaning and Disinfection on Bacterial Load in Pig Nursery Units.” Bmc Veterinary Research 12.
Vancouver
1.
Luyckx K, Millet S, Van Weyenberg S, Herman L, Heyndrickx M, Dewulf J, et al. Comparison of competitive exclusion with classical cleaning and disinfection on bacterial load in pig nursery units. BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH. 2016;12.
IEEE
[1]
K. Luyckx et al., “Comparison of competitive exclusion with classical cleaning and disinfection on bacterial load in pig nursery units,” BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH, vol. 12, 2016.
@article{8122999,
  abstract     = {Background: Colonisation of the environment of nursery units by pathogenic micro-organisms is an important factor in the persistence and spread of endemic diseases in pigs and zoonotic pathogens. These pathogens are generally controlled by the use of antibiotics and disinfectants. Since an increasing resistance against these measures has been reported in recent years, methods such as competitive exclusion (CE) are promoted as promising alternatives. 
Results: This study showed that the infection pressure in CE units after microbial cleaning was not reduced to the same degree as in control units. Despite sufficient administration of probiotic-type spores, the analysed bacteria did not decrease in number after 3 production rounds in CE units, indicating no competitive exclusion. In addition, no differences in feed conversion were found between piglets raised in CE and control units in our study. Also, no differences in faecal consistency (indicator for enteric diseases) was noticed. 
Conclusion: These results indicate that the CE protocol is not a valuable alternative for classical C&D.},
  articleno    = {189},
  author       = {Luyckx, Kaat and Millet, S and Van Weyenberg, S and Herman, L and Heyndrickx, Marc and Dewulf, Jeroen and De Reu, K},
  issn         = {1746-6148},
  journal      = {BMC VETERINARY RESEARCH},
  keywords     = {Bacterial load,Pig nursery units,Cleaning and disinfection,Competitive exclusion,RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS-AUREUS,MULTIPLE ANTIBIOTIC-RESISTANCE,METHICILLIN-RESISTANT,ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE,SALMONELLA-ENTERICA,MULTIDRUG-RESISTANCE,BROILER HOUSES,ANIMALS,SWINE,FARM},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {10},
  title        = {Comparison of competitive exclusion with classical cleaning and disinfection on bacterial load in pig nursery units},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12917-016-0810-9},
  volume       = {12},
  year         = {2016},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: