Preliminary study: Health and performance assessment in broiler chicks following application of six different hatching egg disinfection protocols

As part of a Germany-wide project that evaluates strategies for the reduction of multi-resistant bacteria along the poultry production chain, the impact of different hatching egg disinfectants on hatchability and health of the broiler chicks was evaluated. Animal trials were conducted with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase- (ESBL) producing Escherichia (E.) coli contaminated hatching eggs and six disinfection protocols that used formaldehyde, hydrogen peroxide, low-energy electron irradiation, peracetic acid and an essential oil preparation. Each protocol was tested on a group of 50 chicks. Equally sized positive and negative control groups were carried along for each trial. Hatchability, mortality and body weight were recorded as performance parameters. During necropsy of half of the animals in each group on day 7 and 14 respectively, macroscopic abnormalities, body weight, weights of liver and gut convolute were recorded and a range of tissue samples for histological examination were collected as part of the health assessment. A decrease in hatchability was recorded for spray application of essential oils. Body weight development was overall comparable, in several groups even superior, to the Ross308 performance objectives, but a reduced performance was seen in the hydrogen peroxide group. Histologically, lymphoid follicles were regularly seen in all sampled organs and no consistent differences were observed between contaminated and non-contaminated groups. Significances were infrequently and inconsistently seen. In conclusion, remarkable findings were a decrease in hatchability caused by the essential oils spray application and a reduced body weight development in the hydrogen peroxide group. Therefore, the essential oils preparation as spray application was deemed inappropriate in practice, while the application of hydrogen peroxide was considered in need of further research. The other trial results indicate that the tested hatching egg disinfectants present a possible alternative to formaldehyde.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Electrostatic versus Conventional Sprayer with Commercial Antimicrobials To Inactivate Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and Campylobacter jejuni for Eggs and Economic Feasibility Analysis

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of antimicrobials sprayed by electrostatic versus conventional sprayer for inactivation of Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and Campylobacter jejuni on eggs and to determine the economic feasibility of these treatments. Eggs were dip inoculated with overnight cultures (18 h) of Salmonella Typhimurium, Salmonella Tennessee, a two-strain mixture of L. monocytogenes, and a three-strain mixture of C. jejuni (microaerophilic condition). Inoculated eggs were then not sprayed or subjected to electrostatic and conventional spraying with peroxyacetic acid (PAA; 0.1%), lactic acid (5.0%), lactic and citric acid blend (2.5%), sodium hypochlorite (SH; 50 ppm), and SaniDate-5.0 (SD [a mixture of PAA and H₂O₂]; 0.25%) for 30 s (15 s each side). Surviving bacteria on eggshells were recovered on xylose lysine Tergitol 4 agar ( Salmonella), modified Oxford agar ( L. monocytogenes), or Brucella agar ( C. jejuni). Compared with conventional spraying, electrostatic spraying of PAA, SD, and SH achieved significant additional reductions ( P < 0.05) of Salmonella, L. monocytogenes, and C. jejuni of 0.96 to 3.18, 1.19 to 3.05, and 0.96 to 1.62 log CFU per egg, respectively. A simple cost comparison suggests that regardless of the antimicrobial agent used, the cost of using an electrostatic sprayer is 20 to 40% lower than that of a conventional sprayer for a small poultry farm that produces 1,500 eggs per day. Among the five antimicrobials, the total sanitizing cost was lowest for SH, followed by PAA and SD. The results indicated that electrostatic spraying of commercial antimicrobials can be considered an effective and economical approach to enhancing the microbial safety of eggs, especially for small poultry processors.

Assessing the impact of egg sweating on Salmonella Enteritidis penetration into shell eggs

Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) prevalence in eggs is a major concern to the egg industry. Some research has shown that egg sweating can increase Salmonella penetration into egg contents when refrigerated eggs are moved to a warmer temperature. This occurs when eggs are tempered before wash, to minimize thermal cracks. The effect of egg sweating on SE penetration into shell eggs over a 6 week storage period at 4°C was assessed. A 2 × 2 factorial of SE inoculation and egg sweating was utilized. Treatments included (SES) nalidixic acid (NA)-resistant SE inoculated and sweated, (SENS) NA-resistant SE inoculated and not sweated, (NSES) buffered peptone water (BPW) inoculated and sweated, and (NSENS) BPW inoculated and not sweated. Eggs were inoculated with 108 SE. Eggs formed condensation for approximately 17 min in a 32°C incubator. Shell rinse, shell emulsion, and egg contents were sampled then enumerated and assessed for prevalence of SE over a 6 wk storage period at 4°C. After wk 1, the SENS shell rinse had higher SE counts (0.32 log10 CFU/mL) than the other 3 treatments, where no SE was enumerated. A significant week by treatment interaction was found for the shell rinse SE detection (P < 0.05). In subsequent weeks, no SE counts were obtained from the egg shell rinse, shell emulsion, or egg contents. The SENS shell rinses had significantly higher SE prevalence than the SES rinses in weeks 1 (100% vs. 34.3%), 2 (57.6% vs. 22.2%), and 3 (38.2% vs. 11.1%) (P < 0.05). In samples from weeks 4, 5, and 6, there was no difference in SE prevalence between SES and SENS. Egg sweating did not increase SE penetration into the shell emulsion across treatment or week (P < 0.05). The decreasing trend of SE prevalence obtained over the study period indicate that refrigeration is effective at inhibiting SE growth. These results indicate that egg sweating occurring under common US egg handling practices is not harmful to egg safety.

Alternative Antimicrobial Commercial Egg Washing Procedures

Commercial table eggs are washed prior to packaging. Standard wash procedures use an alkaline pH and warm water. If a cool water method could be developed that would still provide a microbiologically safe egg, the industry may save energy costs associated with water heating. Four wash procedures were evaluated for Salmonella reduction: pH 11 at 48.9°C (industry standard), pH 11 at ambient temperature (∼20°C), pH 6 at 48.9°C, and pH 6 at ambient temperature. Alkaline washes contained potassium hydroxide-based detergent, while pH 6 washes contained approximately 200 ppm of chlorine and a proprietary chlorine stabilizer (T-128). When eggs were inoculated by immersion in a cell suspension of Salmonella Enteritidis and Salmonella Typhimurium, all treatments resulted in a slight and similar reduction of Salmonella numbers (approximately 0.77 log CFU/ml of shell emulsion reduction). When eggs were inoculated by droplet on the shell surface, Salmonella counts were reduced by approximately 5 log CFU when washed with chlorine plus the chlorine stabilizer at both temperatures and with the alkaline wash at the high temperature. The reductions in Salmonella by these treatments were not significantly (P > 0.05) different from each other but were significantly (P < 0.05) more than the reduction observed for the 20°C alkaline treatment and 20°C control water treatments. Ambient temperature acidic washes reduced Salmonella contamination to the same degree as the standard pH 11 warm water wash and may be a viable option to reduce cost, increase shelf life, and slow pathogen growth in and on shell eggs.

Recovery of Salmonella serovar Enteritidis from inoculated broiler hatching eggs using shell rinse and shell crush sampling methods

This study compared the recovery of Salmonella from hatching eggs using 3 sampling methods (eggshell rinsing, eggshell crush following a previous rinse, and eggshell crush without previous rinse). Eggshells were drop-inoculated with approximately 10(1), 10(2), or 10(3) cfu/eggshell of Salmonella Enteritidis and allowed to dry at room temperature for 1 or 24 h. For the shell rinse groups, each inoculated egg was rinsed with buffered peptone water. These rinsed eggs were used for the shell crush with previous rinse groups, and each egg was aseptically cracked, the contents discarded, and the eggshell and membranes crushed with buffered peptone water. This same crush procedure was used for the shell crush without previous shell rinse eggs. The recovery of Salmonella 1 h after inoculation for shell rinse sampled eggs was 16% positive at 10(1), 49% at 10(2), and 93% at 10(3) cfu/eggshell challenge. For the shell crush with previous shell rinse, sampled egg recovery was 0% positive at 10(1), 3% at 10(2), and 17% at 10(3) cfu/eggshell. For the shell crush, sampled eggs had recovery of 23% positive at 10(1), 69% at 10(2), and 96% at 10(3) cfu/eggshell challenge. The recovery of Salmonella 24 h after inoculation for the shell rinse eggs was 3% positive at 10(1), 12% at 10(2), and 22% at 10(3) cfu/eggshell challenge; recovery for shell crush with previous shell rinse sampling was 2% positive at 10(1), 8% at 10(2), and 5% at 10(3) cfu/eggshell challenge; and for the shell crush sampling recovery was 2% at 10(1), 32% at 10(2), and 42% at 10(3) cfu/eggshell challenge. Eggshell crush was a more sensitive (∼10 percentage points) sampling method than eggshell rinse at both 1 and 24 h, but both methods were equally optimal when the inoculum was at 10(3) and samples were collected after 1 h. Waiting 24 h after inoculation to sample significantly lowered the recovery for both the shell rinse and shell crush sampling methods by ∼40 percentage points.