Investigation of the Effect of Three Commercial Water Acidifiers on the Performance, Gut Health, and Campylobacter jejuni Colonization in Experimentally Challenged Broiler Chicks

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of three commercial water acidifiers on the performance, gut health, and C. jejuni colonization in experimentally challenged broiler chicks. A total of 192 one-day-old broiler chicks (Ross 308^®) were randomly allocated into 6 treatment groups with 4 replicates according to the following experimental design: group A, birds were not challenged and received tap water; group B, birds were challenged and received tap water; groups C, D, E, and F, birds were challenged and received tap water treated with 0.1% v/v SPECTRON^®, with 0.1-0.2% v/v ProPhorce™ SA Exclusive, with 0.1-0.2% v/v Premium acid, and with 0.1-0.2% v/v Salgard^® Liquid, respectively. The continuous water acidification evoked undesirable effects on broilers' performance and to an increased number of birds with ulcers and erosions in the oral cavity and the upper esophageal area. ProPhorce™ SA Exclusive and Premium acid significantly reduced the C. jejuni counts in the crop, whereas Salgard^® Liquid significantly reduced the C. jejuni counts in the ceca of birds. At slaughter age, only Premium acid significantly reduced C. jejuni counts in the ceca of birds. All the tested products ameliorated the changes induced by C. jejuni infection in the pH in the ceca of birds. It can be concluded that besides the effectiveness of the tested products in controlling C. jejuni in broilers, their continuous application evoked undesirable effects on broilers' performance, leading to the need to modify the dosage scheme in future investigations.

Keywords: C. jejuni; One Health; biosecurity; broilers; gut health; poultry; toxicity; water additives; water sanitation.

Figure 2

Illustrative scheme of the seeder-bird model that was applied for the investigation of the effect of the commercial water acidifiers in the control of C. jejuni in experimentally challenged broilers.

Figure 1

Tested products dosage scheme [group A = birds were not challenged and received tap water without any treatment; group B = birds were challenged by C. jejuni and received tap water without any treatment; group C = birds which were challenged by C. jejuni and received tap water (0–15 d) treated with 0.1% v/v SPECTRON^®; group D = birds which were challenged by C. jejuni and received tap water treated with 0.1–0.2% v/v ProPhorce™ SA Exclusive; group E = birds which were challenged by C. jejuni and received tap water treated with 0.1–0.2% v/v Premium acid and group F = birds which were challenged by C. jejuni and received tap water treated with 0.1–0.2% v/v Salgard^® Liquid].

Figure 3

Effect of the tested products on the pH of the drinking water (daily measurements) during the entire experimental period.

Figure 4

Images from the gross and histopathological lesions that were recorded in the oral cavity or/and the esophagus of 15-day-old broiler chicks that received acidified water. (A) Palate: three small necrotic foci and one larger and fusiform are obvious. The latter, located parallel to the choana, has a coarse surface and is delineated by a yellowish halo. (B) An ovoid to round-shaped ulcer located at the root of the tongue, rostrally situated to the glottis, is also seen. (C) Histopathological section depicting an oral mucosal erosion [H–E, original magnification × 10]. (D) Histopathological section depicting an esophageal ulcer [H–E, original magnification × 10].