banner



Home  ›  How Are Salmonella Spp. Typically Transmitted From Animals To Humans?

How Are Salmonella Spp. Typically Transmitted From Animals To Humans?

Written By Tuesday, May 10, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Salmonellosis in Animals

Submitted: May 24th, 2017 Reviewed: November 3rd, 2017 Published: December 20th, 2017

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72192

From the Edited Book

Salmonella

Edited past Maria Teresa Mascellino

IntechOpen

IntechOpen Downloads

one,920

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Abstract

Salmonella has long been recognized equally an important zoonotic pathogen of economic importance in animals and humans. The prevalent reservoir of Salmonella is the abdominal tract of a wide range of domestic and wild fauna which may conclude in a variety of foodstuffs of both fauna and plant origin becoming infected with faecal organisms either straight or indirectly. In spite of mounting concerns about other pathogens in recent years, Salmonella remains among the leading causes of food-borne disease throughout the world. Lots of both domestic and wild animals are infected by Salmonella spp., generally harboring the leaner in their gastrointestinal tracts with no obvious signs of illness. Therefore, Salmonella are commonly present in faeces excreted by salubrious animals and many times pollute raw foods of animal origin through faecal contact during production and slaughter. The organism may besides be transmitted through direct contact with infected animals or humans or faecal contaminated environments. Infected nutrient handlers may also act equally a source of contamination for foodstuffs. Because of increasing antibiotic resistance of organism and companion animals, animals are important source of Salmonella infection for human. The organism can be monitored and precautions should be taken regularly by new technological methods.

Keywords

  • salmonellosis
  • animals
  • zoonosis

i. Introduction

Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica can be separated into more than 2400 antigenically unlike serovars and the pathogenicity of near of these serovars is unspecified. The greater number of incidents of salmonellosis in humans and domestic animals originated from relatively few serovars and these tin be separated into three groups on the ground of host prevalence. Host-specific serovars are the commencement group. These typically result in systemic affliction in a pocket-size number of phylogenetically connected species. For example, S. enterica serovar Abortus ovis, serovar Paratyphi and serovar Pullorum are almost exclusively associated with systemic disease in sheep, fowl and humans, respectively. Host-restricted strains are the 2nd group. These are mainly connected with one or ii closely related host species just may also unusually result with disease in other hosts. For example, Due south. enterica serovar Choleraesuis and serovar Dublin are generally associated with severe systemic disease in pigs and ruminants, respectively [i]. However, these serovars are perchance efficient of infecting other animal species and humans. The tertiary group comprises of the extensive S. enterica serovars, such every bit Infantis and Enteritidis that commonly induce gastroenteritis to a large extent of unrelated host species. Obviously the nature and rigidity of Salmonella infections in unlike animal species varies hugely and is affected by many factors including the Salmonella serovar, dose, historic period, strain virulence, host animate being species, immune status of the host and the geographical region [2].

Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica remains a primary cause of infection and disease in human and animals worldwide. Much of the public wellness and economic problem originated from diseases or infected animals carriage. In Europe, beast salmonellosis as a crusade of human infection became increasingly of import as farm production started to intensify afterward Earth War Two. In the 1950s, the rapid intensification of the poultry industry in numerous countries was supported past importation of dried fish meal from S America which comprised many Salmonella serovars. And then, non-typhoidal salmonellosis is one of the leading causes of astute bacterial gastroenteritis in the USA, responsible for an estimated 1.4 million cases of illness annually. Widespread commercial distribution of contaminated foods can sometimes involve huge numbers of consumers in Salmonella outbreaks. For example, a 1994 Due south. Enteritidis outbreak associated with ice cream in the USA afflicted 224,000 people. Salmonella outbreaks can particularly take severe consequences for highly vulnerable populations in facilities such every bit day care centres and nursing homes [3, 4].

Although the genus Salmonella consists of more than 2400 serovars, about human cases of salmonellosis in the USA are caused by 5–viii serovars. United States (US) Centers for Affliction Command and Prevention (CDC) reported that approximately 60% of human being cases were acquired by Salmonella enterica ser Enteritidis (24.7%), S. ser Typhimurium (23.5%), S ser Newport (vi.two%) and S ser Heidelberg (5.one%). These aforementioned four serovars represented 46.4% of the isolates from nonhuman sources that yr. Too serotypes are changing with time, for example, CDC reported that many of Salmonella serotypes decreased in incidence compared with 2012, infections acquired by serotype 4, [five],12;I:- continued to rise [5].

Salmonella ser Enteritidis infections are by and large seen with fresh beat eggs and egg products, in which the bacteria contaminate the interior essences of the egg through transovarial infection. Salmonella ser Enteritidis infects the ova or oviduct of the hen'due south reproductive tract, which causes contamination of the albumen, vitelline membrane and possibly the yolk. Internal contamination of the egg's content performs egg-sanitizing practices, which focus on decreasing pathogen contagion on the eggshell surface, ineffective.

Salmonella Typhimurium definitive phage blazon DT104 appeared in the early 1990s every bit the dominant type of Salmonella spp. Most isolates have chromosomally encoded resistance to five antimicrobials, specifically sulfonamides, chloramphenicol, ampicillin, streptomycin and tetracycline (R-type ACSSuT). There is sign that some penta-resistant DT104 strains are also evolving resistance to quinolones and trimethoprim [half-dozen]. Prove in Europe indicates that the emergence of DT104 in cattle was the harbinger to its spread to other animals used for food production [two].

Although DT104 is currently the dominant penta-resistant clone of S ser Typhimurium, many other phage types (DT29, DT204, DT193 and DT204C) of this serovar take also exist seen with multi-drug resistance. Understanding the causes that influence the emergence of these prevalent serovars of Salmonella spp. and the factors leading to the distribution and persistence of Salmonella spp. in animals is beneficial for the occurrence of effective intervention strategies to decrease human exposure to salmonellae [seven].

Forms of livestock production and movement are varying equally the globe is changing. Advanced wages in the Due west conclude in increased product and importation of poultry meat and candy products from countries in South America and Asia. An improved standard of living in many countries is attended by increased meat ingestion, importantly pork and poultry just besides beef and dairy yields. Regulation of meat production in many countries is improving simply at that place are presently large problems of antibody resistance which is enhancing a global trouble. Poor control and hygiene conclude in the manual of many microorganisms of which Salmonella is merely one. Other changes connected with increasing living standards in earth contain the increasing importance of companion animals in people's lives which are adequately recognized as sources of infection. Correlated to global changes in trade and human populations, improvements in technology have allowed the states to obtain an unprecedented understanding of the biological science of Salmonella [vii].

However, many aspects of Salmonella biology and infection biological science remain tantalizingly unresolved after the last 10 years of research, and more than than l years later on Professor Buxton'due south volume [8] acted, such that the Salmonella should stay the center of worldwide investigation action for many more than years. In many details the study of this organism is now a global project. Shrinking investigation budgets in the West accept been changed with increasing concern in those countries with increasing budgets and where a value of the animal and public health Salmonella problem is increasing [7].

Advert

two. Infection in animals

Salmonella infections occur in lizards, snakes and turtles (including tortoises), in birds such every bit parrots, canaries, finches and pigeons and in mammals such equally dogs and cats. They are less common in small-scale caged animals. In dogs, cats and reptiles, infection may be unapparent and salmonellae can be found in the faeces of normal animals. These organisms tin live happily in the intestine of some animals. They are called carrier animals. Salmonella infections most oft cause enteritis and diarrhoea. The bacteria tin too invade the torso to cause septicaemia. This invasion results in fever that commonly accompanies the enteritis caused by Salmonella infection. Affected animals are lethargic, practise non eat and have diarrhoea. The diarrhoea is oft not distinguishable from that caused by other microbes. The diarrhoea may be profuse and commonly house-trained dogs and cats may become incontinent and foul the house unintentionally. In birds, the illness can be less apparent and may merely exist seen every bit pasting of the vent.

Very young, old or immunosuppressed animals or birds may exist severely afflicted by the aridity accompanying the diarrhoea, develop septicaemia or fifty-fifty die. Survivors may accept diarrhoea for a time, but about become on to recover completely. Whatever recovering animal may be a carrier for a varying length of time. The organism tin can live in the gut lining in small numbers and within local lymph nodes, particularly in the lymphoid areas such as the caecum of birds. Persistence inside the animal can pb to reappearance of infection if the animal develops a different illness [9].

Advertisement

3. Salmonella infections in the domestic fowl

Four diseases induced by Salmonella are meaning in poultry; pullorum disease caused by Salmonella enterica serovar Pullorum, fowl typhoid (FT) acquired by South . Gallinarum, paratyphoid acquired past several serovars and subspecies of Salmonella almost specially S . Typhimurium, South . Enteritidis, S. Infantis to proper name a few and arizonosis caused by S. enterica subsp. arizonae [7]. The poultry'due south specific S. enterica serovars Gallinarum and Pullorum have mostly been eradicated from the industries of Europe and N America. Nevertheless, in parts of the globe with less developed industries, and particularly in systems with poor bio-security, these serovars nevertheless stand for larger threats to bird wellness and welfare. Even though chickens are the normal hosts of S. enterica serovars Gallinarum and Pullorum, natural outbreaks induced by these serovars have been explained in turkeys, guinea fowl and other several species. There are many sources of infection in poultry containing vertical manual, contaminated feed and the environment. Asymptomatic excreting of Salmonella from the intestine causes the contamination of eggs concluding in vertical transmission. Equally soon equally after hatching, oral intake by the chicks results in very loftier numbers of Salmonella in the gut and great shedding in the faeces. This causes rapid horizontal spread effectually the hatchery [2].

Domestic fowl compose one of the largest reservoirs of Salmonella and is significant as a risk to public wellness through consumption of polluted eggs and meat. Arizonosis acquired by South . enterica subsp. arizonae is an egg-transmitted infection mainly of young turkey poultries that nevertheless happens sporadically in commercial flocks and which may as well infect and unusually induce illness in chickens or other species of birds. Reptiles can be a reservoir of S. arizonae for birds and for human. The leaner to identify in the ovary and oviduct of breeder turkeys and the poults hatched from infected breeders develop disease. The disease is described by diarrhoea with pasting of faeces in the vent, huddling near the rut source, anorexia and boosted bloodshed sometimes accessing 50% [10].

Ad

4. Salmonella infection in poultry

Poultry products are frequently identified as important sources of salmonellae that cause human being illness. An estimated 182,060 Americans became infected with S. Enteritidis during 2000 after consuming contaminated eggs [11]. Approximately 80,010 of South. Enteritidis outbreaks occurring in the USA betwixt 1985 and 1999 with an identified food source were attributed to eggs [12]. Eating contaminated craven has also been identified equally a significant risk factor for Southward. Enteritidis infection [13]. Illustrating the importance of poultry as a reservoir for the transmission of salmonellae to humans, many of the serotypes that are most prevalent in humans (such as Southward. Typhimurium and S. Enteritidis) are besides found common in poultry [4].

The ability of Salmonella to cause disease in poultry is closely related to the infecting serovar and the age and genetic background of the bird. Fowl typhoid (FT) is a disease acquired by S. enterica serovar Gallinarum that is commonly transmitted by the oro-faecal road and mainly affects developed birds [two]. The kickoff described outbreak of FT was characterized past high bloodshed, especially during the first two months of the outbreak [seven]. The pullorum illness (PD) is caused by Due south. enterica serovar Pullorum, is egg transmitted and occurs primarily in the commencement few days of life, high numbers of expressionless-in-shell chicks are seen (white bacillary diarrhoea). The power of serovars other than Gallinarum and Pullorum to crusade disease is relatively poorly understood [2].

Poultry may be infected with a wide multifariousness of Salmonella serovars with the infection largely bars to the alimentary canal with faecal excretion [7]. Southward. enterica serovar Typhimurium is primarily known for producing clinical salmonellosis in very young birds. Bloodshed rates vary enormously, from less than ten% to more than 80% in astringent outbreaks. Resistance to infection develops rapidly over the first 72 hours of life and has been attributed to maturation of macrophages and the development of a commensal flora in the gut leading to competitive exclusion of Salmonella [vii]. Strains of Southward. enterica serovar Enteritidis are likewise highly virulent for young chicks [fourteen]. S. enterica serovar Enteritidis, and in particular strains of phage type four (PT4) tin also crusade asymptomatic and chronic infections in older birds including commercial layers and broiler breeders [15, 16, 17]. Epidemiological data demonstrate a clear association betwixt food poisoning acquired past serovar Enteritidis PT4 and the consumption of undercooked eggs [18]. The extent to which egg contamination occurs before or after egg germination is unclear [2].

Many Southward. enterica serovars have been associated with food poisoning in humans, however the potential for such serovars to infect poultry has been little studied in controlled experiments. A chick isolate of South. enterica serovar Kedougou colonized the gut, but did non intrude on the mucosa of tentatively infected mean solar day old chicks [19]. Likewise, strains of serovars Heidelberg, Senftenberg, Infantis, Montevideo and Menston all expeditiously colonized the intestines of youth birds, but were less invasive than a strain of serovar Typhimurium [20]. Lately, the virulence of diverse different serovars of Salmonella was evaluated in mean solar day old specific pathogen-complimentary chicks. The host-specific serovar Pullorum affirmed to be the most virulent, pursued by the omnipresent serovars Typhimurium and Enteritidis. Three out of the four strains of serovar Heidelberg made low levels of mortality, whereas birds infected with isolates of Kentucky, Hadar and Montevideo all lived. Nevertheless, these latter serovars all colonized the intestines expeditiously and caused a reduction in body weight, showing that subclinical Salmonella infections can even be harmful to bird health, welfare and productivity [21]. The reasons why such serovars are conspicuously much less virulent in chicks, nonetheless retain the ability to induce homo food poisoning are non seen [two].

Advertisement

5. Salmonella infections in cattle

Salmonella infections are an important cause of bloodshed and morbidity in cattle and subclinically infected cattle are often found. Cattle thus constitute an important reservoir for homo infections. In that location have been numerous reviews over the years [22] increasingly reporting about multi-drug resistant strains [23] equally well every bit the importance of Salmonella for the food industry. Interestingly, despite decades of research into salmonellosis, the disease and its public health consequences are not actually resolved [7]. Salmonellosis occurs worldwide in cattle and has been associated primarily with serovars Dublin and Typhimurium. Other serovars are sporadically associated with bovine infections [2]. During the period 1968–1974, Sojka et al . [one] recorded the isolation of 101 different Salmonella serovars, usually at a low prevalence, detected annually in cattle [7]. Salmonellosis reached a top in the British cattle manufacture in the 1960s with over 4000 incidents in 1969 [1, two]. In the United states, 48% of the 730 Salmonella , other than S. Dublin and Due south. Typhimurium, isolated from cattle were represented by 7 serovars [24]. In the UK, in 2009, there was 10 Salmonella reports of not-GB origin reported from cattle, these included South . Typhimurium DT104, S . Mbandaka, S . Anatum and Due south . Dublin, clearly showing that importation of new strains remains a constant risk [vii].

In the recent times, there has been a abrupt reduction in the number of Salmonella outbreaks and over the last 5 years at that place have been only 400–500 cases annually, with like numbers of events acquired by S. enterica serovar Typhimurium and serovar Dublin in developed cattle and calves. S. enterica serovar Dublin and serovar Typhimurium are endemic in northern Europe, despite the divisions of these serovars vary. The origin of virtually outbreaks of salmonellosis in cattle is possibly faecal to oral contact. Infected cattle may excrete upwardly to 108 CFU Salmonella /g of faeces and pollution of the environment in the nearness of other animals is a potent source of infection. Subclinical belch of Salmonella aggravates the trouble of pollution. Cattle that discharge an active Salmonella infection but show no clinical symptoms (frequently convalescing animals) are known every bit "active carriers". These may spread Salmonella constantly in quantity greater than 105 cfu/g of faeces and thus can be determined past routine bacteriological examination. Agile wagon is commonly the sequel to clinical enteritis or systemic infection, and infected animals may excrete Salmonella for years or as well for life. "Passive carriers" are immunized animals that consume Salmonella with feed and subsequently pass them in their faeces with no active infection of the intestines. Hence, when eliminated from a muddied environment these animals will stop excreting Salmonella . "Latent carriers", Salmonella remains subclinically in the tissues merely is merely randomly excreted in faeces [2]. Excretion may exist initiated by stress, for instance, at parturition. Understanding the biology of this true "carrier state" is likely to be key to ultimately controlling this of import pathogen in cattle and may too provide insight into, for example, the asymptomatic carriage of S. enterica serovar Typhi past humans [7].

The spread of Southward. enterica serovar Dublin to reproductive tissues is non well understood and may originate either from a systemic infection or mayhap from faecal contamination of the vagina. Adult survivors of Southward. enterica serovar Dublin infections ofttimes get latent carriers, a state which may last for life. The outcome of infection with other serovars seldom results in the latent carrier state although active excretion may continue for years. The reasons for this remain unclear [2].

Advertizing

half dozen. Salmonella infections in pigs

The organism now known as Salmonella enterica serovar Choleraesuis was offset isolated from pigs by [25], when they considered it to be the cause of swine fever (squealer cholera). The ability of Salmonella to cause disease in pigs depends on numerous factors including the infecting serovar and the age of the pig. Regional variation in salmonellosis incidence is loosely correlated to squealer density, husbandry practices and co-mingling of pigs [7]. The serovars of Salmonella associated with clinical disease in pigs can be divided into two groups: the host-restricted serovars typified by S . Choleraesuis and the ubiquitous serovars typified by Southward. Typhimurium. So the being of S . Choleraesuis has macerated dramatically and it is now but isolated sporadically. In contrast, this serovar stays a major threat to the squealer industry in the USA. The fall of serovar Choleraesuis in the UK was non linked with any specific intervention measure out. Information technology was later understood that a diversity of antigenically distinct Due south. enterica serovars can be isolated from pigs, some of which are of zoonotic equally they transferred through the food chain and farm surround to humans, where they typically cause astute merely self-limiting gastroenteritis [viii]. S . Typhimurium is the most usual serovar isolated from pigs both in Europe and in the USA. As well, S. Derby has a strong linked with pigs on both sides of the Atlantic Sea, and for the past xx years it has been the second most predominant serovar in pigs in the UK. Oral ingestion is thought to be an of import route of infection as Salmonella are shed in loftier numbers in the faeces of clinically infected pigs.

Consistent results are only received applying a lower portion if the gastric pH is first neutralized with antacids [26]. This showed that the low pH of the stomach is a productive barrier to infection by Salmonella . Aspiration of infected material into the upper respiratory tract is another possible route of infection. Pneumonia is a general feature of S. Choleraesuis infections in pigs [27] and several works have shown that pigs tin can be experimentally infected by intranasal inoculation. Pigs infected with S. Choleraesuis via the intranasal route improve more astringent clinical signals than those infected via the oral route [28]. Together these observations indicate that the tonsils and lungs are probable to be pregnant sites of invasion. Clinical salmonellosis in pigs is standardly of two forms; septicaemia caused by host limited S. enterica serovars such as Choleraesuis, and enterocolitis originated past broad host limit serovars such as Enteritidis. Unsurprisingly, weaned pigs that are intensively reared are nigh ofttimes influenced by Salmonella infections. Like other host-specific serovars, Due south. Choleraesuis has the capacity to induce affliction in both young and older animals, whereas S. Typhimurium typically lead to disease in pigs aged between half-dozen and 12 weeks, merely seldom in adult animals. In older animal, subclinical infections with S. Typhimurium are frequent, leading to high transmission rates if active carrier animals are not detected. S. Choleraesuis typically cause septicemic forms of infection. S. Typhimurium typically causes enterocolitis [2].

A year-long work during 2006–2007 determined Salmonella in the ileocaecal lymph node of 21.2% of pigs at slaughter in the United kingdom, with S. Typhimurium past far the most ascendant serovar. This correlated to a usual across Member States of the European Spousal relationship of x.3% [29]. European Community-broad information technology is estimated that 10–twenty% of homo non-typhoidal salmonellosis may be linked to pigs [thirty]. In the USA, the most common serovars isolated from pigs during the National Animal Health Monitoring Survey in both 2000 and 2006 were Typhimurium, Derby, Agona, Typhimurium-Copenhagen and Heidelberg, iii of which were too in the top v serotypes isolated from humans in the same period [31]. The number of investigation of some other serovars has developed during the last 20 years, just it is non understood whether this is the result of better monitoring or whether information technology indicates increased disease or environmental prevalence. Information technology is axiomatic that the problem of Salmonella in pigs is not limited geographically, and this is valuable considering the range of global trade in pork as personal countries are no longer isolated from world events [7].

Advertisement

7. Salmonella infections in sheep

In most countries of the earth with a big sheep population, including the Great britain, Commonwealth of australia, New Zealand and the USA, sheep salmonellosis is plainly rare and does non represent a relevant economical upshot. Illness distribution and prevalence of infections due to ubiquitous serovars is typically seasonal and associated with fauna movement and shipping [32, 33]. Exposition to prolonged environmental stress, including cold, poor diet and concurrent diseases, might be important to activate latent infection and Salmonella shedding in faeces [33].

Serovar Abortus ovis strains, being host restricted to ovines, are expected to be introduced into a flock by an infected sheep and transmitted by the faecal-oral route [34]. There is no disarming proof of bacterial spread past h2o, feed or other host's faeces. Therefore, precaution has to exist taken when transferring animals from a flock with history of infection into not-infected ones. Especially, while many authors have published faecal shedding of culturable infectious bacteria up to 3 months following abortion [35], S. Abortus ovis DNA has also been detected in faeces up to 12 months from ballgame [36], suggesting that sheep may exist long-term asymptomatic carriers. Experimental infection studies accept demonstrated that sheep may become infected by the conjunctival and vaginal routes [34, 35], simply their significance in natural transmission has not been evaluated. Due to serovars Dublin, Abortus ovis and others induce pneumonia in young lambs, infection of grazing animals considering of the nasal path might also be possible and respiratory secretion may distribute the infection to other individuals. High bacterial load in aborted foetuses and discharged placenta, elimination of bacteria with vaginal emissions following ballgame and by scouring lambs are the main source of manual throughout a flock during the lambing flavour [36].

Test of slaughter-age healthy sheep and identification of Salmonella species accept been frequently reported in the by few years, due to public health concerns of these serovars entering the human food chain [37]. Ovine salmonellosis might be an important zoonotic reservoir for human being infection and a number of studies accept reported food-borne transmission to humans [30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40].

Advertisement

8. Salmonella infections in horses

Past the 1950s, Salmonella enterica serovar Abortus equi had disappeared from the USA following widespread utilize of bacterin and other command measures. The non-host adapted serovar S. Typhimurium was beginning recognized every bit a cause of colitis in 1919 [41] and has since dominated globally equally a cause of equine salmonellosis. Antibiotic usage in combination with stressors associated with hospitalization has proved to be potent influences in increasing susceptibility of the equus caballus to invasion by Salmonella spp. and in selection of resistant strains. Anorexia, antimicrobial assistants, intestinal surgery and marked changes in diet increase the susceptibility of horses to Salmonella claiming [42].

Salmonella Abortus equi, the crusade of equine paratyphoid, is the sole Salmonella host adapted for equids. A notable feature of the epidemiology of equine salmonellosis in the USA has been the rise and fall in incidence of infection past specific serovars. This may result in growing of herd amnesty and/or reduction of virulence of the specific serovar. The latter may exist conducting past the choosing force per unit area of antibody equally herd immunity progresses. Topical spikes in the rate of isolation of detail serovars is often correlated with nosocomial outbreaks in local veterinary hospitals where in at that place is improved transmission. Control methods including closure of affected facilities will decrease the number of new cases finally providing to disappearance of the epidemic serovar.

The widespread dispersion of Salmonella spp. in wild and domestic animals and their surround is an important barrier to the persistence of a Salmonella -costless horse population on a farm or post-obit admission to a veterinary infirmary. The origin of infection is frequently non understand in the first stages of an outbreak and so chief control efforts must be focused on rigid isolation of clinically problematical animals with diarrhoea or colic or those known to be shedding Salmonella spp. control measures on farms differ in some pregnant considerations from what are needed in a infirmary surroundings [7].

Advertisement

ix. Salmonella infections in dogs and cats

Wagon of Salmonella in dogs and cats may be asymptomatic, with intermittent shedding. Illness occurs intermittently, and ranges from mild to astringent gastroenteritis, with occasional occurrence of abortion, systemic spread or septicaemia [43]. Recovered animals may shed Salmonella for several weeks, and chronic carriage with periods of recrudescence is possible. The challenges joined with making a diagnosis of bacterial associated diarrhoea in the lack of objective advices for faecal testing and the fact that identical isolation ratio have been found for presumed bacterial entero pathogens in some populations of animals with and without diarrhoea [44]. Both selective and non-selective serovars take potential for zoonotic spread, and may likewise be of import in the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in the bacterial population [45]. About of the infections were clinically silent, only mild diarrhoea without fever adult in simply nine dogs from one kennel. Latest studies take demonstrated dogs eaten raw meat diets tin can go on to shed the organism in the faeces for a while time. Xx-eight research dogs were entered to detect the prevalence of Salmonella shedding after ingestion of a Salmonella- contaminated commercial raw food diet meal [46]. Cats have also been detected to carry Salmonella . Studies of the prevalence of Salmonella shedding in normal, asymptomatic cats take identified a prevalence typically of between 0.8 and two.1% in cats [47, 48]. The epidemiology, prevalence, clinical signs, diagnosis and pathological findings and sources of salmonellosis in 100 cats in Scotland and England during 1955–2007 were reported [49]. Of the 49 isolates, 28 (57%) were from kittens less than 6 months of age. From the point of their function in the manual of salmonellosis, cats were discovered to be the most abundant ecological section (125 of all samples positive) in a 2-year investigation of the circulation of Salmonella on 12 pig production units in the U.s.a. [fifty]. In addition, the presence of cats on the farm was identified as a meaning risk cistron for outbreaks of clinical salmonellosis on Dutch dairy farms [51]. Tauni and Osterlund [52] reported an outbreak of Southward. Typhimurium in cats and humans continued with infection in wild birds in Sweden in 1999. A full of 62 ill cats were investigated. Birthday were anorectic and lethargic, 31% had diarrhoea and 57% were vomiting. It was thought similar that salmonellosis was passed on from cats to humans, but there were just a few such cases. These studies indicate that Salmonella shedding is comparatively desultory in cats and that clinical signals such as diarrhoea are not trusted predictors of whether a cat is potently shedding enteric organisms. All the same, when infection does happen, cats may take part in a significant role in the manual of the organism. That is, the prevalence of Salmonella spp. in healthy dogs and cats is very similar to the prevalence in diarrhoeic dogs and cats while the prevalence in stray or kennelled dogs and cats is frequently higher. The prevalence of Salmonella infection in kennelled or stray cats and dogs is frequently excessive. Almost events of salmonellosis in dogs and cats are subclinical. Following contact to Salmonella , the organism is unremarkably discharged past the host'southward immune organisation. Nevertheless, in a small-scale rate of cases the organism may continue leading to the formation of a transmitter state. A small pct of cases of human salmonellosis are related to contact with infected dogs and cats.

Advert

ten. Salmonella infections in exotic pets

Reptiles are known to release Salmonella often [53] and reptile-associated salmonellosis has been recognized every bit an emerging zoonosis. From the epidemiological point of view [54] and in improver to an before recommendation ('Reptile-Associated Salmonellosis', RAS, [55] nosotros suggest to call this particular blazon of epidemic 'Reptile-Exotic-Pet-Associated Salmonellosis' (REPAS). The primary statement for this proposal is that by several years the arroyo of trading reptiles has changed substantially and this will probable go on in the future. The item risk of Salmonella dissemination from reptiles to humans is not due to European wild species but, as result of this report also demonstrate, at present is mainly due to 'exotic' imported reptile species. Moreover, following new investigations Salmonella shedding is higher in reptiles kept in captivity in comparison to wild reptiles [53, 56] and 'pet' reptiles are patently in closer contact to humans. These arguments justify the inclusion of 'exotic pet' into the term describing the trouble. The risk to human being wellness connected with the reptile pet market has been highlighted recently [57] and the exact definition of the problem using REPAS might exist significant to contribute the problem in education and support the European Commission to contribute suggestions to harmonize animal welfare and public health [7].

Each twelvemonth infections are also obtained through direct or indirect animal contact in homes, subcontract environments, veterinary clinics, zoological gardens, or other public, professional or private settings. Clinically infected animals may propagate a higher prevalence of shedding than seemingly good for you animals, but both tin exhibit Salmonella over long periods of time. Also, environmental contagion and indirect broadcasting through contaminated food and water may complex control efforts. The public wellness risk varies by mammals, birds and reptile species, age group, husbandry practice and health status [58]. A study from Canada conducted between 1994 and 1996 illustrated the potential problem of reptile-associated salmonellosis for the first fourth dimension. In 2011, a 13-month-quondam child from Austria passed away on the transport to the hospital with vomiting and diarrhoea. A multi-state outbreak in the Usa in 2008 was associated with pet turtle exposure. In well-nigh half of the 135 cases, children ≤five years were affected. This outbreak was the tertiary turtle-associated outbreak since 2006 [59].

11. Salmonella detection

Diagnosis is based on the identification of the Salmonella either from faeces or from tissues collected aseptically at necropsy, ecology samples or rectal swabs, feedstuffs and food products; prior or electric current infection of animals by some serovars may besides be detected serologically. If reproductive organs are infected, abortion or conceptus occurs, it is essential to culture vaginal swabs, placenta, foetal tummy contents and embryonated eggs. Organism may be identified using a diversity of techniques that may include pre-enrichment to resuscitate sublethally damaged salmonellae , enrichment media that comprise inhibitory substances to inhibit competing organisms, and selective agars to differentiate salmonellae from other enterobacteria. Various biochemical, serological and molecular tests can be used to the pure culture to let for a reliable verification of an isolated strain. Organism has antigens named somatic (O), flagellar (H) and virulence (Vi), which may be identified by special typing sera, and the serovar may be assignated by reference to the antigenic formulae in the Kauffman-White scheme. Many laboratories may crave to send isolates to a reference laboratory to ensure the full serological identity and to verify the phage blazon and genotype of the strain, where suitable [60].

Serological tests should be carried on a statistically representative sample of the population, but results are not at all times signifier of active infection. In the laboratory, the tube agglutination test is the procedure of choice for consign and diagnostic plans for samples from all species of farm animals. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays are usable for some serovars and may be used for serological diagnosis and observation, especially in pigs and poultry. Vaccination may chance the diagnostic worth of serological tests [60].

Since some of the common serovars such as S . Enteritidis and S . Infantis non only solely induce human infections but are also important livestock colonizers, the Salmonella subclassification needs more discriminative methods than serotyping. During the past l years, phage typing gets a very worthful device for epidemiological aims. The scheme for S . Typhimurium developed by Felix in 1956 (England) played a big role in many outbreak investigations and the S . Enteritidis scheme from Ward [61] and Lalko/Laszlo [62] has been invaluable in the investigation of egg- and poultry-associated outbreaks that have been accomplished worldwide from the 1980s till today [7].

In 1929, White developed a typing scheme consisted on this antigenic chancing, which was afterward changed by Kauffmann. This investigation immune the separation of Salmonella into serovars. In 1934, the beginning Kauffmann-White scheme comprising 44 serovars was reported past Kauffmann and the Salmonella Subcommittee [63].

Phage typing supplies a worthful epidemiological work for greater sub-stardom of different serovars and is of exceptional importance in outbreak research. At the NRC, this method has been accomplished for serovars Enteritidis, Typhimurium and some others. Moreover, molecular techniques such as ribotyping (for Due south . Enteritidis) and pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) (for S. Typhimurium and others) are utilized to presumed outbreak isolates [7].

Whole of the methods; the gold standard diagnostic method for Salmonella is culture.

  • Civilisation.

The culture techniques and media that may result all-time in a specific diagnostic condition subject to a variety of factors, including the Salmonella serovar, type and source of specimens, exercise of the microbiologist, animal species of origin, availability of selective enrichment and selective plating media. Salmonella determination past bacteriological methods generally requires 5–11 days, and samples with low numbers of Salmonella cells, generally seen in subclinically infected chickens, may give false-negative results. The increasing application of external quality balls programmes has led to larger use of international standard methods, such as ISO 6579:2002; [64] while this has not been validated for faecal and environmental samples and was intended for foodstuffs and feeding stuffs. Latest years a standard method for determination of Salmonella from primary beast production has been adult and assessed, and an ISO method (ISO 6579:2002 Annex D) has now been accustomed (ISO, 2002). The core of the standard method is pre-enrichment in buffered peptone water, enrichment on modified semi-solid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) and isolation on xylose-lysine-deoxycholate (XLD) and an boosted plate medium of choice. This method has likewise been demonstrated to exist greatly effective for animal feed and meat products, and is simpler and less plush than the full ISO method [61].

  • Immunological and nucleic acid recognition methods.

Numerous alternative Salmonella detection methods have non been fully validated for faecal and environmental samples, although progress has been fabricated [65, 66] and are more suited for analysis of homo foodstuffs where inhibitors of the PCR reactions are non so problematic fifty-fifty though there is a role for quick methods in test and release of batches of Salmonella -free animal feedstuffs. The quick methods are generally more costly than conventional culture, but can be economically user-friendly for screening materials where a low prevalence of transmission is expected or where materials, such every bit feedstuffs, are held pending a negative test. An enrichment/IMS method associated with ELISA or PCR can identify about transmission within 24 hours but faecal and ecology samples can be problematic for quick methods. At present none of the quick methods has been proved to be adequate for direct detection of Salmonella so non-selective or selective enrichment stages are necessary [67]. Standardly, this introduces more actions and operator time in the detection procedure. For Deoxyribonucleic acid-based methods, inhibition of the PCR reaction by components of the examination sample substance, especially in the case of faeces, is problematic and needs advisable Deoxyribonucleic acid extraction techniques and controls to make up one's mind inhibition, which may reduce the sensitivity of the test in some cases [65]. Quick isolation methodologies may also exist linked with sophisticated detection systems, such as biosensors [68]. There are many variations and developments in rapid methods for Salmonella detection, merely none has been shown to satisfactorily replace culture in all circumstances [60].

Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica is an interesting pathogen varying in its pathogenesis and virulence in different fauna species. Some serovars have a broad host range and typically crusade subclinical intestinal infections and/or acute enteritis. In contrast, host-restricted and host-specific serovars have narrower host ranges and associated infections tend to exist of the more severe systemic course. Past targeting the intestines and/or reproductive tracts of animals, Salmonella are disseminated between animals in loftier numbers concluding in maximum levels of illness and transmission. Loftier costs are met annually past public health services and farming industries in monitoring and trying to command Salmonella . Cognition of the pathogenesis of Salmonella infections in divergent animal species would support to observe measures to hinder the spread of these pathogens between animals. The mechanisms of pathogenicity of a S. enterica serovar have been mainly studied in rodent models of infection. Withal, the behaviour of these microorganisms in one particular brute species is not necessarily predictive of its behaviour in another host species. Therefore, the application of modernistic molecular genetics to strains of defined virulence, together with infection studies in natural target animate being species volition enable a more comprehensive agreement of the determinants Salmonella serovar host-specificity and of the biological science of these pathogens in private beast species.

Southward. Enteritidis, S. Infantis, S. Typhimurium and lots of serovars are most commonly continued with human being disease. Man S. Enteritidis cases are most oftentimes related with the consumption of contaminated eggs and poultry meat, while South. Typhimurium cases are mostly associated with the consumption of contaminated poultry, pig and bovine meat. In animals, subclinical infections are common. Salmonella may hands spread between animals in a herd or flock without detection and animals may get intermittent or persistent carriers. All animal and human perform the below precautions to forbid from companion animals and other food-associated Salmonellosis. Clean and disinfect utensils such as food dishes, feed foods that are more than likely to be gratuitous from Salmonella such as candy foods, for instance, those that are tinned, packaged or bagged. If you lot are buying a pet ensure that it is healthy outset, go on dogs away from carrion, animate being faeces and prevent them from drinking suspected contaminated water as far as possible, consider any case of diarrhoea as a potential source of infection for other animals, make certain that diarrhoea is treated properly, always disinfect after cleaning up diarrhoea, consider all diarrhoeas in your pet equally potentially infective, dispose of diarrhoea safely, wrapped and double polythene bagged into a bin, washed downwards the lavatory, burned or buried in a safe place after disinfection, disinfect the contaminated area, wash your easily after handling your pet at all times, do not permit infected pets to come into contact with young children, quondam people or those already ill and keep infected dogs abroad from nutrient preparation area.

References

  1. 1. Sojka WJ, Wray C, Shreeve J, Benson JA. Incidence ofSalmonellainfections in animals in England and Wales, 1968-74. Journal of Hygiene. 1977;78:43-56. DOI: ten.1017/S0022172400055923
  2. ii. Mastroeni P, Maskell D.SalmonellaInfections, Clinical, Immunological and Molecular Aspects. 1st ed. Uk: Cambridge University Printing; 2006. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511525360.002
  3. 3. Hennessy TW, Hedberg CW, Slutsker L, White KE, Besser-Wiek M, Moen ME, Feldman J, Coleman WW, Edmonson LM, MacDonald KL, Dsterholm MT. A national outbreak ofSalmonellaenteritidis infections from ice foam. New England Periodical of Medicine. 1996;334:1281-1286. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199605163342001
  4. 4. Gast RK.Salmonellainfections. In: Saif YM, editor. Diseases of Poultry. twelfth ed. The states: Blackwell Publishing; 2008. pp. 619-674. DOI: 10.7589/0090-3558-45.1.251
  5. 5. Centers for Disease Command and Prevention.Salmonellasurveillance: Annual tabulation summaries. Available from:http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/phlisdata/salmonella.htm[Accessed: May 21, 2002]
  6. 6. National enteric disease surveillance:SalmonellaAnnual Study. 2013. Bachelor from:https://www.cdc.gov/nationalsurveillance/pdfs/NationalSalmSurveillOverview_508.pdf[Accessed: Aug 24, 2017]
  7. 7. Barrow PA, Methner U.Salmonellain domestic animals. second ed. Germany: CABI; 2013. DOI: ten.1079/9781845939021.0000
  8. viii. Buxton A. Public health aspects of salmonellosis in animals. Veterinarian Record. 1957;69:105-109
  9. 9. Salmonellosis. [Net]. 2008. Available from:http://www.pethealthcouncil.co.united kingdom/images/file/Pet%20Health%20Council%20-%20Salmonellosis%twenty-%20May%2008.pdf[Accessed: Aug fourteen, 2017]
  10. 10. Kahya Southward, Tuğ B, Temelli S, Carlı KT, Eyigör A. Detection ofSalmonellafrom layer flocks and typing of the isolates. The Journal of Faculty of Veterinary Medicine. 2014;20(half-dozen):939-944. DOI: 10.1501/Vetfak_0000002549
  11. eleven. Schroeder CM, Naugle AL, Schlosser WD, Hogue AT, Angulo F, Rose S, Ehe ED, Disney WT, Holt KG, Goldman DP. Judge of illnesses fromSalmonellaEnteritidis in eggs, United States, 2000. Emerging Communicable diseases. 2005;11:113-115. DOI: 10.3201/eid1101.040401
  12. 12. Patrick ME, Adcock PM, Gomez TM, Altekruse SF, Holland BH, Tauxe RV, Swerdlow DL.SalmonellaEnteritidis infections, United States, 1985-1999. Emerging Infectious Disease. 2004;ten:i-7. DOI: 10.3201/eid1001.020572
  13. thirteen. Kimura Air conditioning, Reddy V, Marcus R, Cieslak PR, Mohle-Boetani JC, Kassenborg Hd, Segler SD, Hardnett FP, Barrett T, Swerdlow DL. Chicken consumption is a newly identified chance gene for sporadicSalmonella entericaserotype Enteritidis infections in the United states of america: A case-control report in FoodNet sites. Clinical Infectious Disease. 2004;38:244-252. DOI: 10.1086/381576
  14. 14. Desmidt M, Ducatelle R, Haesebrouck F. Pathogenesis ofSalmonella enteritidisphage type four later on experimental infection of young chickens. Veterinary Microbiology. 1997;56:99-109. DOI: x.1016/S0378-1135(96)01350-8
  15. fifteen. Hinton 1000, Pearson GR, Threlfall EJ, Rowe B, Woodward M, Wray C. ExperimentalSalmonella enteritidisinfection in chicks. Veterinary Record. 1989;124(20):145-153. DOI: 10.1080/03079459108418749
  16. 16. Hopper SA, Mawer S.Salmonella enteritidisin a commercial layer flock. Veterinary Record. 1988;123:351. DOI: 10.1136/vr.123.13.351
  17. 17. Lister SA.Salmonella enteritidisinfection in broilers and broiler breeders. Veterinary Record. 1988;123:350. DOI: 10.1136/vr.123.13.350
  18. 18. Coyle EF, Palmer SR, Ribeiro CD.Salmonella enteritidisphage type 4 infection: Clan with hen's eggs. Lancet. 1988;2:1295-1297. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(88)92902-9
  19. 19. Brito JRF, Xu Y, Hinton M, Pearson GR. Pathological findings in the intestinal tract and liver of chicks after exposure toSalmonellaserotypes Typhimurium or Kedougou. British Veterinarian Journal. 1995;151:311-323. DOI: 10.1016/S0007-1935(95)80181-2
  20. twenty. Barrow PA, Simpson JM, Lovell MA. Intestinal colonisation in the craven by food-poisoningSalmonellaserotypes; microbial characteristics associated with fecal excretion. Avian Pathology. 1988;17:571-588. DOI: 10.1080/03079458808436478
  21. 21. Roy P, Dhillon As, Shivaprasad HL. Pathogenicity of different serogroups of aviansalmonellaein specific-pathogen-free chickens. Avian Affliction. 2001;45:922-937. DOI: 10.2307/1592871
  22. 22. Mohler VL, Izzo MM, Firm JK.Salmonellain calves. Veterinarian Clinics: Food Animal Practice. 2009;25:37-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.cvfa.2008.10.009
  23. 23. Alexander KA, Warnick LD, Wiedmann One thousand. Antimicrobial resistantSalmonellain dairy cattle in the United States. Veterinarian Enquiry Communications. 2009;33:191-209. DOI: 10.1007/s11259-008-9170-vii
  24. 24. Ferris KE, Miller DA.Salmonellaserovars from animals and related sources reported during July 1995–June 1996. Proceedings of the United states Animal Health Association. 1996;100:505-526
  25. 25. Salmon DE, Smith T. The bacterium of swine plague. American Monthly Microbiology Journal. 1886;7:204
  26. 26. Watson PR, Gautier AV, Paulin SM.Salmonella entericaserovars Typhimurium and Dublin can lyse macrophages by a mechanism singled-out from apoptosis. Infection and Immunity. 2000;68:3744-3747. DOI: ten.1128/IAI.68.vi.3744-3747.2000
  27. 27. Baskerville A, Dow C. Pathology of experimental pneumonia in pigs produced bySalmonella cholerae-suis. Jounal of Comparative Pathology. 1973;83:207-215. DOI: x.1016/0021-9975(73)90044-iii
  28. 28. Grey JT, Fedorka-Cray PJ, Stabel TJ, Ackermann MR. Influence of inoculation route on the carrier state ofSalmonella choleraesuisin swine. Veterinary Microbiology. 1995;47:43-59. DOI: 10.1016/0378-1135(95)00060-N
  29. 29. EFSA (European Nutrient Safety Agency). Study of the task strength on zoonoses information: Collection on the analysis of the baseline survey on the prevalence ofSalmonellain slaughter pigs in the European union, 2005-2007, Part A. EFSA Journal. 2008;135:one-111. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2008.135r
  30. thirty. EFSA (European Nutrient Condom Agency). Scientific opinion on a quantitative microbiological risk assessment ofSalmonellain slaughter and breeder pigs. EFSA Journal. 2010;8:1547. DOI: ten.2903/j.efsa.2010.1547
  31. 31. Haley CA, Dargatz DA, Bush EJ, Erdman MM, Fedorka-Cray PJ.Salmonellaprevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility from the National Fauna Health Monitoring System Swine 2000 and 2006 studies. Journal of Nutrient Protection. 2012;75:428-436. DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-363
  32. 32. Richards RB, Norris RT, Dunlop RH, McQuade NC. Causes of death in sheep exported live by sea. Australian Veterinarian Journal. 1989;66:33-38. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.1989.tb03011.ten
  33. 33. Higgs AR, Norris RT, Richards RB. Epidemiology of salmonellosis in the alive sheep consign industry. Australian Veterinarian Journal. 1993;70:330-335. DOI: x.1111/j.1751-0813.1993.tb00874.10
  34. 34. Jack EJ.Salmonellaabortusovis: an atypicalSalmonella. Veterinary Tape. 1968;82:558-561
  35. 35. Uzzau South, Dark-brown DJ, Wallis T, Rubino S, Leori G, Bernard Southward, Casadesus J, Platt DJ, Olsen JE. Host adjusted serotypes ofSalmonella enterica. Epidemiology and Infection. 2000;125:229-255
  36. 36. Belloy 50, Decrausaz L, Boujon P, Hachler H, Waldvogel AS. Diagnosis by culture and PCR ofSalmonellaabortusovis infection under clinical conditions in aborting sheep in Switzerland. Veterinary Microbiology. 2009;138:373-377. DOI: x.1016/j.vetmic.2009.03.026
  37. 37. Vanselow BA, Hornitzky MA, Walker KH, Eamens GJ, Bailey GD, Gill PA.Salmonellaand on-subcontract hazard factors in healthy slaughter-age cattle and sheep in eastern Australia. Australian Veterinary Journal. 2007;85:498-502. DOI: x.1111/j.1751-0813.2007.00233.x
  38. 38. Evans MR, Salmon RL, Nehaul L, Mably S, Wafford L, Nolan-Farrell MZ, Gardner D, Ribeiro CD. An outbreak ofSalmonellatyphimurium DT170 associated with kebab meat and yoğurt savour. Epidemiology and Infection. 1999;122:377-383. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268899002253
  39. 39. Baker MG, Thornley CN, Lopez LD, Garrett NK, Nicol CM. A recurring salmonellosis epidemic in New Zealand linked to contact with sheep. Epidemiology and Infection. 2007;135:76-83. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268806006534
  40. 40. Hess IM, Neville LM, McCarthy R, Shadbolt CT, McAnulty JM. ASalmonellaTyphimurium 197 outbreak linked to the consumption of lambs' liver in Sydney, NSW. Epidemiology and Infection. 2008;136:461-467. DOI: x.1017/S0950268807008813
  41. 41. Graham R, Francois VC, Reynolds HK. Bacteriologic studies of a peracute disease of horses and mules. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 1919;56:378-393
  42. 42. Traub-Dargatz JL, Salman MD, Jones RL. Epidemiologic study ofsalmonellaeshedding in the faeces of horses and potential chance factors for development of the infection in hospitalized horses. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Clan. 1990;196:1617-1622
  43. 43. Stiver SL, Frazier KS, Mauel 1000, Styer EL. Septicemic salmonellosis in two cats fed a raw meat diet. Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association. 2003;39:538-542. DOI: ten.5326/0390538
  44. 44. Stavisky J, Radford Advertizement, Gaskell R, Dawson S, High german A, Parsons B, Clegg S, Newmann J, Pinchbeck G. A case-control written report of pathogen and lifestyle run a risk factors for diarrhoea in dogs. Preventive Veterinarian Medicine. 2011;99:185-192. DOI: ten.1016/j.prevetmed.2011.02.009
  45. 45. Lynne AM, Dorsey LL, David DE, Foley SL. Characterisation of antibiotic resistance in host adaptedSalmonella enterica. International Periodical of Antimicrobial Agents. 2009;34:169-172. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2009.02.018
  46. 46. Finley R, Ribble C, Aramini J, Vandermeer M, Popa Thousand, Litman G, Reid-Smith R. The risk ofsalmonellaeshedding by dogs fedSalmonella-contaminated commercial raw nutrient diets. Canadian Veterinarian Journal. 2007;48:69-75. DOI: 10.3410/f.1083920.536865
  47. 47. Gow AG, Gow DJ, Hall EJ, Langton D, Clarke C, Papasouliotis One thousand. Prevalence of potentially pathogenic enteric organisms in clinically healthy kittens in the UK. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery. 2009;11:655-662. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfms.2008.12.007
  48. 48. Spain CV, Scarlett JM, Wade SE, McDonough P. Prevalence of enteric zoonotic agents in cats less than one year old in Central New York Land. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. 2001;15:33-38. DOI: ten.1111/j.1939-1676.2001.tb02294.10
  49. 49. Philbey AW, Dark-brown FM, Mather HA, Coia JE, Taylor DJ. Salmonellosis in cats in the United Kingdom: 1955 to 2007. Veterinary Record. 2009;164:120-122. DOI: 10.1136/vr.164.4.120
  50. 50. Barber DA, Bahnson PB, Isaacson R, Jones CJ, Weigel RM. Distribution ofSalmonellain swine production ecosystems. Journal of Nutrient Protection. 2002;65:1861-1868. DOI: 10.4315/0362-028X-65.12.1861
  51. 51. Veling J, Wilpshaar H, Frankena K, Bartels C, Barkema HW. Gamble factors for clinicalSalmonella entericasubsp.entericaserovar Typhimurium infection on Dutch dairy farms. Preventive Veterinarian Medicine. 2002;54:157-168. DOI: x.1016/S0167-5877(02)00023-5
  52. 52. Tauni M, Osterlund A. Outbreak ofSalmonella typhimuriumin cats and humans associated with infection in wild birds. Journal of Small-scale Beast Practice. 2000;41:339-341. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5827.2000.tb03214.x
  53. 53. Geue 50, Loschner U.Salmonella entericain reptiles of German and Austrian origin. Veterinary Microbiology. 2002;84:79-91. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1135(01)00437-0
  54. 54. Robert Koch Institut.Salmonellainfection in infants and young children by contact to exotic reptiles. Epidemiologishes Message 2013;9:71. Available from:https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/Infekt/EpidBull/Archiv/2013/Ausgaben/09_13.pdf?__blob=publicationFile[Accessed: Aug 24, 2017]
  55. 55. De Jong B, Andersson Y, Ekdahl K. Issue of regulation and education on reptile-associated salmonellosis. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2005;11:398-403. DOI: 10.3201/eid1103.040694
  56. 56. Scheeling TF, Lightfoot D, Holz P. Prevalence ofSalmonellain Australian reptiles. Journal of Wildlife Disease. 2011;47:ane-xi. DOI: x.7589/0090-3558-47.1.i
  57. 57. Arena PC, Steedman C, Warwick C. Amphibian and reptile pet markets in the European union: An investigation and Assessment. [Internet]. Available from:http://animalpublic.de/2012/05/wissenschaftler-fordern-verbot-vonterraristikborse[Accessed: Dec 15, 2012; Aug 24, 2017]
  58. 58. Hoelzer M, Moreno Switt AI, Wiedmann Yard. Animal contact as a source of human not-typhoidal salmonellosis. Veterinary Research. 2011;42:34. DOI: 10.1186/1297-9716-42-34
  59. 59. CDC. Multistate outbreak of humanSalmonellaTyphimurium infections associated with pet turtle exposure – United States, 2008. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2010;59:191-196. [Accessed: Aug 24, 2017]
  60. lx. Part International Epizootic. Salmonellosis. Terrestrial manual, Chapter: 2.9.nine. 2008
  61. 61. Ward LR, de Sa JD, Rowe B. A phage-typing scheme forSalmonellaenteritidis. Epidemiology and Infection. 1987;99:291-294. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268800067765
  62. 62. Laszlo VG, Csorian ES, Paszti J. Phage types and epidemiological significance ofSalmonellaenteritidis strains in Hungary betwixt 1976 and 1983. Acta Microbiologica et Immunologica Hungarica. 1985;32:321-340
  63. 63. Kelterborn E.Salmonella Species. First isolation, names and occurrence. Federal republic of germany: Due south. Hirzel-Verlag, Leipzig, Karl-Marx-Stadt; 1967
  64. 64. International Arrangement for Standardization (ISO). ISO 6579: Microbiology of food and creature feeding stuffs – Horizontal method for the detection ofSalmonellaspp. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization; 2002
  65. 65. Jensen Due north, Hoorfar J. Optimal purification and sensitive quantification of Deoxyribonucleic acid from fecal samples. Journal of Rapid Methods Automation in Microbiology. 2002;x:231-244. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-4581.2002.tb00258.ten
  66. 66. Malorny B, Hoorfar J, Bunge C, Helmuth R. Multicenter validation of the analytical accuracy ofSalmonellaPCR: Towards an international standard. Applied Environmental Microbiology. 2003;69:290-296. DOI: 10.1128/AEM.69.1.290-296.2003
  67. 67. Oliveira SD, Rodenbusch MCCE, Rocha SLS, Canal CW. Evaluation of selective and non-selective enrichment PCR procedures forSalmonelladetection. Letters in Practical Microbiology. 2003;36:217-221. DOI: 10.1046/j.1472-765X.2003.01294.x
  68. 68. Olsen Due east, Pathirana ST, Samoylov AM, Barbaree JM, Chin BA, Neely WC, Vodyanoy V. Specific and selective biosensor forSalmonellaand its detection in the environment. Jounal of Microbiology Methods. 2003;53:273-285. DOI: x.1016/S0167-7012(03)00031-9

Written By

Serpil Kahya Demirbilek

Submitted: May 24th, 2017 Reviewed: November 3rd, 2017 Published: December 20th, 2017

© 2017 The Writer(southward). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Source: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/58593

Posted by: johnsonhatome.blogspot.com

0 Response to "How Are Salmonella Spp. Typically Transmitted From Animals To Humans?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel