Abstract
ABSTRACT The aim of this research is to appraise a newly patented method for control of chicken coccidiosis in comparison to a classical approach. The new method implements an invented Disinfectant (WSD) for decontamination of rearing surfaces, and a developed drinking water-herbal coccidiostat (EOBWE) supplement. The experimental design has 8 treatments (TRTs), with four pens/TRT, and 25 broiler chicks/pen. The floors of TRT1 to TRT7 are contaminated with 4.0 × 105 sporulated oocysts/m2 of each of E. acervulina, E. maxima, and E. tenella, while TRT8-floor is left uncontaminated. The floors of TRTs 1 and 2 are disinfected with chlorine, while that of TRTs 3–6 are disinfected by WSD. Floors of TRTs 7 and 8 are deprived of disinfection. Birds in TRTs 1, 6, 7, and 8 are deprived of coccidiostat, while birds in TRTs 2 and 3 are fed salinomycin in their feed; birds of TRT 4 are administered EOBWE in drinking water, while birds of TRT 5 are administered simultameously both, the salinomycin and EOBWE. Birds in TRT 4 (WSD/EOBWE treated) and TRT 5 (WSD/salinomycin + EOBWE) had improved protection (lowest oocyst output and intestinal lesions) and enhanced production (lowest mortality, lowest feed conversion ratio, and highest live body weight) compared to the other five challenged treatments, associated with significant improvements compared to positive controls (TRT 7) (P < 0.05).
Highlights
Coccidiosis is one of the most economic protozoan disease, affecting the poultry industry worldwide, with estimated losses, in the United Kingdom alone, of around £38 588 795, of which 98.1% of the losses involved the broilers sector (Williams 1999)
A concise overview of the nature of the eight treatments is presented in Table 2; briefly, TRT 1 had the oocyst-contaminated floor disinfected classically by chlorine, and birds of this treatment were offered feed free of any coccidiostat (Chlorine/No Coccidiostat); TRT 2 had the oocyst contaminated floor disinfected with Chlorine and its birds were offered feed supplemented with salinomycin (Chlorine/Salinomycin); TRT 3 had the oocyst contaminated floor disinfected by the invented Wide Spectrum Disinfectant (WSD) and its birds were offered continuously the salinomycin in feed (WSD/Salinomycin); TRT 4 had the oocyst contaminated floor disinfected by WSD and Salinomycin + Essential Oil Blend in Water Extract (EOBWE)
The 30% chloro-m-cresol polymeric biguanides of the WSD targets the disruption of microbial wall (Chindera et al 2016; EU 2012); the 15% of the organic peracetic acid in the WSD denatures the poultry microbial proteins (Tutumi et al 1974; Fathi et al 2016; Nosrati et al 2017); the 15% of the inorganic phosphoric acid in the WSD provides the buffering effect on different alkalinities in the water that is used for dilution of the WSD (Kross and Kere Kemp 2000; CDC 2016), while the 10% of the anionic dodecyl benzene sulphonic acid surfactant will help in detachment of developed biofilms on surfaces of the chicken rearing pens (Bridier et al 2011; Díaz De Rienzo et al 2015)
Summary
Coccidiosis is one of the most economic protozoan disease, affecting the poultry industry worldwide, with estimated losses, in the United Kingdom alone, of around £38 588 795, of which 98.1% of the losses involved the broilers sector (Williams 1999). The most prevalent method for control of poultry coccidiosis is by application of classical disinfection on surfaces of the farms, followed by supplementation of the offered feed with different coccidiostats (Tewari and Maharana 2011; Fatoba and Adeleke 2018) This adopted coccidiosis control programme by the poultry sector, since the year 1948, the time when the FDA had its first approval of coccidiostats (Sulphaquinoxaline and Nitrofurazone) (Conway and Mckenzie 2007; Peek and Landman 2011), revealed later in time a frequent emergence of resistance to the commercial disinfectants (Williams 1997; McDonnell and Russell 1999; Guimaraes et al 2007; Souza 2012), and to the cococcidiostats offered in the feed (Jeffers 1974a, 1974b, 1989; Chapman 1978, 1982, 1984, 1997; Ryley 1980; Hamet 1986; Litjens 1986; McDougald et al 1986, 1987; McDougald and Seibert 1998; Ruff and Danforth 1996; Zeng and Hu 1996; Zhou et al 2000; Peek and Landman 2003; Peek and Landman 2004; Kadykalo et al 2018). Most documented studies implemented in vitro assays for studying the oocysts susceptibility to disinfectants, by contacting the oocysts with the disinfectant in liquid medium, while ignoring the importance of disinfection on
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
