PREVALENCE AND ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY OF E. COLI
ISOLATED FROM AN OSTRICH FARM AND SLAUGHTER
HOUSE AT ISMAILIA GOVERNORATE
By
Metawea, Y. F 1; El-Shibiny, A. A2; Lobna M. A. Salem3, and Tulip A. Abd El-Ghaffar1
1
2
Dept. of Hygiene, Animal Behavior and Management
Dept. of Food Sciences (Fac. of Environ. Agricultural Sciences, El-Arish, Suez Canal Uni.)
3
Dept. of Zoonoses, Fac. of Vet. Med. Moshtohor, Benha University
ABSTRACT
This paper was conducted to determine the E. coli prevalence, the serotypes involved and
antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of isolated E. coli from ostrich farm environment as well
as from both ostrich eggs and carcasses (meat and liver). Three hundreds and fifteen samples
were collected during summer season, 2012 from ostrich farm and slaughter house located at
El-Kassaseen, Ismailia governorate. The obtained results indicated that, the overall
prevalence of E. coli in all examined samples was 14.9% (47/315). The prevalence of E. coli
in feed, water, ostrich dropping, egg shells, workers hands and rodents droppings were
12, 13.3, 17.3, 16.7, 13.3, and 33.3%, respectively, while the prevalence of E. coli in ostrich
liver and meat were 13.3 and 6.7%, respectively. The most predominant serotype of E. coli
was O126:K71 (10 strains), followed by O111:K58 (9 strains), O86:K61 (7 strains), O55:K59
(7 strains), O114: K90, O78:K70, and O26:K60 (4 strains of each), O119:K69 (3 strains),
O128:K67, and O124:K72 (one strain of each), and finally 2 untypable strains. Antibiogram
patterns showed that, both E. coli O111:K58 and O126 were high to moderate sensitive to
amoxicillin, kanmycin, norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin and neomycin. Furthermore, both E. coli
strains were resistant to erythromycin, nalidixic acid and tetracycline. The study concluded
that, both breeder and grower flocks were exposed to a high level of environmental
contamination with E. coli which resulted in the contamination of both hatching eggs and
ostrich products.
The suggested preventive measures for minimizing E. coli prevalence in ostrich products and
environment as well as to reduce the public health hazards of colibacillosis were discussed.
35
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, ostrich farms are considered to be among the most profitable agricultural projects.
They are often referred to as "the farms of the future" because of the large variety of possible
products and their expected high profit potential. Currently commercial farming is growing up
in about 100 countries in all continents and regions. Ostrich farming has been rapidly
expanding in Egypt to produce usable products such as meat, hides, feathers, and eggs.
Ostrich (Struthio camelus var. domesticus) raising needs experience and information from
farmers and the successful ostrich farming is largely dependent on the ability of farmers to
rear sufficient numbers of viable and healthy chicks (Christensen and Nielsen, 2004).
However, high mortality of ostrich chicks particularly during the first months of life is
a problem. Mortality can be reduced by correct housing, feeding and health management of
chicks at hatch and during the brooding period. Some microorganisms were isolated and
involved in ostrich chicks mortality, among microorganisms isolated from ostriches E. coli
and Staphylococci which may colonize and eventually cause diseases in the host (Glatz and
Miao, 2008).
Avian colibacillosis is an infectious disease of birds caused by Escherichia coli, which is
considered as one of the principal causes of morbidity and mortality, associated with heavy
economic losses to the poultry industry by its association with various disease conditions,
either as primary pathogen or as a secondary pathogen (Allan et al., 1993). It causes a variety
of disease manifestations in poultry including yolk sac infection, omphalitis, respiratory tract
infection, swollen head syndrome, septicemia, polyserositis, coligranuloma, enteritis,
cellulitis and salpingitis (Kabir, 2010). Colibacillosis of poultry is characterized by its acute
form by septicemia resulting in death and in its subacute form by pericarditis, air sacculitis
and peri-hepatitis (Calnek, 1997). The most important reservoir of E. coli is the intestinal
tract of animals, including poultry. In a single bird a large number of different E. coli types
are present, obtained via horizontal contamination from the environment, more specifically
from other birds, faeces, water and feed. Moreover, rodents may be carriers of E. coli and
hence a source of contamination for the birds (Barnes and Gross, 1997 and Kabir, 2010).
The system of housing and management practices can play a role in the incidence and severity
of E. coli infections. Low ventilation rates that lead to high atmospheric ammonia, increased
litter moisture, and high dust counts in the air, all will aid in carrying more E. coli deep into
36
the respiratory tissues. Increased litter moisture also has the effect of increasing the
survivability and reproduction of E. coli bacteria (Sahinduran, 2004 and Eric, 2011).
The reproductive failure in ostriches is often resulted from poor egg shells quality, allowing
egg contamination by bacteria present in the gut flora. Egg shell thickness, high pore density,
deficient cuticle deposition and low egg shell strength are associated with low hatchability
and high embryonic mortality during artificial incubation (Rajesh et al., 2001). An obvious
increase in the occurrence of poultry antibiotic resistance was observed as a result of
uncontrolled use of antimicrobial agents during drug treatment of many bacterial infections,
as well as their use as additives in rations, and this microbial resistance is similar to E. coli
isolated from people who have direct contact with these birds (Van der Bogaard and
Stobberingh, 1999).
There are very few studies on the prevalence of E. coli in the environment of ostrich farm,
and the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of E. coli in raw ostrich have been performed in
Egypt. Therefore, this study has been conducted to determine the prevalence of E. coli, and its
serotypes and the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of E. coli isolates recovered from
ostrich farm environment and from both ostrich eggs and carcasses (meat and liver).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
I-Ostrich farm and slaughter house:
a- Ostrich farm:
The present study was carried out in an ostrich farm located at El-Kassaseen, Ismailia
governorate. It had about 1500 birds. Ostrich flocks were divided into groups according to
their ages as follow: 1- 10 days old chicks; 10 - 60 days old, 2-6 months old; 6-12 months old
and over 2 years old. The ostrich chicks from day 1 to 10 days old were kept in rearing
unit I (environmentally controlled with rubber mat floor). After that, they transferred to
rearing unit II and III (run/pen) with concrete floor until they grow up to 2 months and over
2 months to 6 months old, respectively. Later on, they were transferred to the grower yard,
where ostriches stayed up to 12 months old (when they were ready to be slaughtered) or until
24 months old (when they could replace discarded breeders). From the grower yard, ostriches
were sent either to slaughter house or to the reproduction sector. The grower and production
yards were partially sheltered with sandy floor and are surrounded by wire mesh fence.
37
The ostriches’ drinking water comes from tap water (surface water, Ismailia canal).
All ostrich feeds {starter feed (22%), grower feed (16%) and breeder feed (20-22%) protein}
were obtained from a feed processing company (FPCo) at the 10th of Ramdan city.
The ratio of chopped green fodder to feed is maintained at 2:1 for both grower and breeder
flocks. The ostrich farm is located 500 meters far from many cultivated lands with fruits and
large animal farms (beef calves and dairy buffalos).
b- Slaughter house:
The slaughter house is located in the same geographical region and it is less than 500 meters
away from the ostrich farm. It is specialized in ratites processing and it has the ability to
slaughter and process around 30 ostriches per week.
II- Sampling:
Three hundred and fifteen samples were collected during summer season, 2012 after three
visits. All samples were collected after one month interval from both ostrich farm and
slaughter house.
a- Samples collected from ostrich farm:
Two hundred and eighty five samples including water, feed, ostrich dropping samples
(75 of each), egg shells swabs (30), workers hand swabs, and rodents’ droppings (15 of each)
were collected from the ostrich farm. Water, feed and ostrich dropping were collected from
ostrich flocks at different ages. Egg shells swabs were collected from breeder flocks over 2
years old. All samples were placed in clean plastic bags and transported aseptically to the lab
in an ice box for bacteriological examination.
b- Samples collected from slaughter house:
Thirty meat and liver samples (15 of each) were obtained from the slaughter house during the
same period. The weight of each sample was represented by 50-100 grams and placed in clean
plastic bags and transported aseptically to the lab in an ice box for bacteriological
examination.
III- Isolation and identification of E. coli:
a- Isolation:
The procedures of isolation of E. coli from different samples were carried out according to
Bailey and Scott (1994).
38
Identification of E. coli isolates:
1- The isolates were identified microscopically and by biochemical tests which carried out
according Bailey and Scott (1994).
2- Serological identification of E. coli isolates were carried out according to Edwards and
Ewing (1972) by slid agglutination technique for the determination of both O and k group
antigens. Serological identification was carried out at Food Analysis Lab. (Fac. Vet. Med.
Moshtohor, Benha University).
IV- Antibiogarm test:
In vitro antimicrobial susceptibility test for the most prevalent E. coli serotypes (O111:K58
and O126:K71) was performed by the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion methods using
Mueller-Hinton agar, according to the National Committee For Clinical Laboratory Standards
guidelines (NCCLS, 2002). The antimicrobial discs (Oxide) and their corresponding
concentrations were as follows: norfloxacin (10 µg), amoxicillin (10 µg), erythromycin
(15 µg), kanmycin (30 µg), doxycyline (30 µg), ciprofloxacin (5 µg), nalidixic acid (30 µg),
neomycin (30 µg) and tetracycline (10 µg).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Colibacillosis is considered to be one of the major bacterial disease problems in the poultry
industry world-wide and it constitutes a major public health burden and represents a
significant cost in many countries. The knowledge of the main sources associated with its
presence in the production system is very important for both prevention and control
(Otaki, 1995).
The results obtained in (Tables 1, 2) clarified that, the overall prevalence of E. coli in all
examined samples was 14.9 % (47/315). Nearly similar prevalence result was obtained by
Samaha et al. (2007) who detected E. coli in 19.38% of environmental samples (air, water,
feed, and litter) collected from broiler and layer farms. Higher prevalence rate of E. coli was
recoded by Nasef et al. (2003) who found that, the prevalence rate of E. coli in samples
collected from ostrich farm (buccal, faecal and nasal swabs, feed, water, liver, and heart)
was 40.9% (98/242).
The prevalence rates of E. coli in examined feed, water and ostriches droppings were
12.0, 13.3 and 17.3%, respectively. These results are in agreement with those obtained by
39
Samaha et al. (2007) who found that, the prevalence of E. coli in examined water, feed, and
litter samples collected from poultry farms were 14.58, 15, and 27.92%, respectively.
Additionally, Kadria et al. (2009) detected E. coli in 16 out of 100 water samples (16%)
from poultry farms, while Zahran (1981) found that, 15% of the examined poultry feed was
E. coli positive. Higher prevalence rate was reported by Metawea (2000) who detected E. coli
in 22.2, 20.8 and 72.2% of examined feed, water and litter, respectively. Essam et al. (2009)
examined a total of 1664 environmental samples from commercial broiler farms located in
Ismailia and Zagazig Governorates and they found that, the prevalence rate of E. coli in litter
and water samples were ranged between 21.3 - 67.7% and 12 - 50%, respectively according to
the season and system of housing (open, closed). On the other hand, Da Costa et al. (2007)
found that, E. coli was reported as a common microflora in raw feeding materials and poultry
feed and mentioned that, E. coli was detected in 50% and 32% of feed and raw feeding
materials, respectively. Chowdhuri et al. (2011) found that, the prevalence of E. coli
in poultry feed was 57.14%, while Draz et al., (1996) reported that, the prevalence of E. coli
in drinking water of poultry farm was 36.8%. Furthermore, Effat and Moursi (2003) found
that, the prevalence rate of E. coli in ostrich dropping and cloacal swabs of ostrich flocks over
3 - 4 month old and under 2-3 month old were 27 and 20%, respectively. In addition, Ali and
Ibrahim (2004) detected E. coli in 30 out of 80 faecal swabs (37.5%) of alive ostrich
showing diarrhea. In 2005, Moursi and Husien (2005) found that, the prevalence of E. coli in
cloacal swabs of ostrich breeder hens was 70%. Raida et al. (2005) reported that, the
prevalence of E. coli in examined poultry droppings and environmental samples (water and
house swabs) were 44.6 and 35%, respectively. Muhammad et al. (2009) detected E.coli in
66% and 82% of examined cloacal swabs and chicken droppings respectively, while Timur
et al. (2009) found that, E. coli was detected in 55 out of 135 (40.7%) droppings samples of
healthy ostrich. Badrul et al. (2012) mentioned that, the prevalence of E. coli in poultry
droppings regardless the species was 73.3%. Lower prevalence rate was recorded by
Boci et al. (2011) who detected E. coli in 0.26% (4 isolates) of examined ostrich droppings.
Also, El-Kabbany (1997) reported that, the prevalence rate of E. coli in poultry feed
was 2.3%, while Zaki (1994) detected E. coli in 9.14% of examined water samles from
poultry farms.
40
These variations in the prevalence rates may be attributed to the health state of flock, system
of housing and management, seasonal variations, location of farm and level of biosecurity
adopted and species. Moreover, lower prevalence of E. coli in our study in comparison to the
other reported results by many researchers may be attributed to the location of the farm of our
study as it is far at least 10 km from other poultry farms.
The highest prevalence rate (17.8%) of E. coli was detected in environmental samples that
collected from both breeder flocks over 2 years and grower flocks (2-6 months old).
While, the lowest prevalence rate (6.7%) was observed in environmental samples that
collected from rearing flocks less than 10 days age. This may be related to the exposure of
both breeders’ yards and grower run/pen to higher level of environmental contamination with
dust and ostrich and rodent droppings compared to the environmentally controlled rearing
pen. HuiYong et al. (2008) found that, some strains of E. coli isolated from downwind air
and indoor air were originated in the chicken fgeces but most of isolates obtained from
upwind air samples did not come from the chicken fgeces or indoor air. So, effective hygienic
measures should be taken in animal farms to prevent or minimize downwind spreading of
microorganism aerosol. Moreover, Rahman et al. (2004) reported that, avian colibacillosis
was found widely prevalent in all age group of chickens with especially high prevalence rate
in adult layer birds. Also, detection of E. coli in feed, water and droppings of ostrich flock
under 10 days old may be attributed to the ostrich chicks which may be obtained from
infected source with E. coli and / or the rearing pen was still infected with E. coli from
previous patch which resulted in the contamination of both feed and water. The obtained
results indicated that, there was a positive correlation between the shedding of E. coli in
ostrich dropping and the contamination of both feed and water. The contamination of ostrich
feed with E. coli may be attributed to the contamination of feed ingredients (plant and animal
origin) and /or from farm environment (ostrich droppings, rodent droppings, and wild birds
droppings, workers hands, improper cleaned feeders, and dust. The results concluded that,
both breeder flocks (over 2 years) and grower flocks (2-6 months) were exposed to the
highest level of environmental contamination with E. coli.
E. coli was isolated from 5 out of 30 (16.7%) egg shells samples collected from breeder
flocks. This result is nearly similar to that reported by Knöbl et al. (2012) who found that, the
prevalence of E. coli in internal and external parts of the ostrich eggs was 15% (4/15).
41
Also faecal contamination of eggs is considered to be the most important source of yolk sac
infection. Higher prevalence rate was reported by Muhammad et al. (2009) who found that,
21 out of 50 (42%) chicken egg shells were E. coli positive, while Palanivel et al. (2012)
detected E.coli in 14 out of 55 (25.5%) ostrich eggs (yolk and albumin). Moreover,
Jahantigh (2010) found that, the faecal contamination of the surface of eggs leads to the
penetration of organisms through the shell and shell membrane, particularly if the shell is
damaged; also it seems that, there is no transversal transmission for the isolated bacteria from
dead-in-shell embryos of the ostriches. On the other hand, Boci et al. (2011) found that, all
examined ostrich eggs were E. coli free. The contamination of egg shells with E. coli may be
attributed to the infected breeder flock with E. coli, in addition to the unhygienic measures
carried out in yards as well as during eggs collection, sanitation, and storage. Moreover,
Bruce and Drysdale (1990) reported that, the bacterial contamination of ostrich eggs may be
related to the improper cleaning of eggs from faecal matter in the farm. The obtained results
indicated that environmental contamination with E. coli greatly influences the contamination
level on egg shells.
E. coli was recovered from 2 out of 15 (13.3%) workers hand swabs and this may be
attributed to the contamination of workers’ hands with ostrich droppings, their stool and boots
and rodents droppings, which may be resulted in the contamination of eggs, water and feed.
Higher prevalence rate was reported by Mohamed et al. (2009) who found that, the
prevalence rate of E. coli in farm workers’ hand and stool samples were 32 and 87%,
respectively, while Muhammad et al. (2009) reported that, that the prevalence of E.coli in
hand wash of chicken handlers was 46% (23/50). These results indicated that, the farm
workers are considered one of the most important sources of E. coli infection in ostrich farm
as the unlimited movement of workers without restriction may be resulted in spreading the
infection throughout the farm.
The prevalence of E. coli in rodents droppings was 33.3% and this indicated that rodents
considered one of the most important source of E. coli in ostrich farm since it can
contaminates the environment (feed, water), moreover ostrich products. Barnes and Gross
(1997), Guenther et al. (2010) and Kabir (2010) mentioned that, the wild rodents can carry
the antimicrobial resistant E. coli in their dropping. Also rodents are known to be involved in
42
the transmission of bacteria to human and animal and they could likewise contribute to
the dissemination of antimicrobial resistant bacteria in the environment.
The prevalence of E. coli in both ostrich liver and meat were 13.3 and 6.7%, respectively.
These results are in agreement with those obtained by Khater and Abdel -Twab (2009)
who detected E. coil in 15 and 5% of examined ostrich liver and meat, respectively.
Cuiwei et al. (2001) detected E. coli in 82 out of 212 (38.7%) chicken meat samples in the
Greater Washington. On the other hand, Karama (2005) found that, the prevalence rate of
E. coli in ostrich meat at a South African abattoir was 18.8% (17/90), while Abdullah et al.
(2010) reported that, from 119 chicken meat samples, 37 samples (31.1%) showed a
contamination with E. coli. Modestas et al. (2010) detected E. coli in 41.7% of examined
chicken liver sold in retail markets. Alternatively, lower prevalence was recorded by Medani
et al. (2007) who found that, the prevalence rate of E. coli in apparently health quail liver and
muscles were 3.3% of each. The obtained results indicated that, the ostrich may have been
contaminated at the rearing farm environment, during transportation and even at slaughter
house environment.
The data illustrated in (Table 3) clarified that, the most predominant serotype of E. coli was
O126:K71 (10 strains), followed by O111:K58 (9 strains), O86:K61 (7 strains), O55:K59
(7 strains), O114: K90, O78:K70 and O26:K60 (4 strains of each O119:K69 (3 strains),
O128:K67 and O124:K72 (one strain of each), and finally 2 untypable strains.
Many researches isolated the same serotypes in addition to more serotypes from ostrich,
poultry and their environment such as Khafagy and Kamel (2001) who reported that, the
most predominant E .coli isolates from infertile and dead in shell ostrich eggs were
O78, O1, O127 and O166. Futhermore, Ali and Youssef (2003) detected E. coli O1, O6, O18,
O26, O44, O55, O78, O86, O114, O119, O125, O142, O152, and O157 in ostrich showing
respiratory problems and Effat and Moursi (2003) detected E. coli O2, O6 and O78 in
cloacal swabs and droppings of ostrich. Additionally, Ali and Ibrahim (2004) reported that,
the most predominant serotypes of E. coli that isolated from ostrich were O164, O144, O18
O1, O119, O15, O26, O112, O143, O169, O168, and O157, while Moursi and Husien
(2005) found that, the most pediment serotypes of E. coli isolated from infertile and dead in
shell ostrich eggs were O1, O2, O55 and O78. They also found that, the most predominant
E. coli serotypes isolated from ostrich showing respiratory problems were O2, O78, O9 and
43
O21. Khater and Abdel -Twab (2009) detected six E. coli serotypes in ostrich liver and meat
which include O2, O78, O113, O128, O9 and O112. Moreover, Ouf et al. (2009) detected
E. coli serotypes O119, O55, O114 and O128 in ostrich meat products, and Allam et al.
(2009) found that, 9 serovars in 281 fecal swabs and internal organs samples of diarrheic field
cases collected from cattle and ostrich private farms include O1,O8, O20, O25, O78, O127,
O146, O153 and O157.
The obtained results indicated that, rodent droppings, feed and water may import different
strains of E. coli into ostrich flock such as O119:K69, O128:K67, O124:K72, and O55:K59.
Moreover, there was inter-transmission of E. coli isolates between ostrich and their
environment as many serotypes such as O126:K71, O111:K58, and O86:K61 were isolated
from ostrich dropping as well as most of all environmental samples in addition to the ostrich
meat and liver.
The antibiogram patterns (Table 4) showed that both, E. coli O111:K58 and E. coli O126
were high to moderately sensitive to amoxicillin, kanmycin, norfloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and
neomycin. Also, both E. coli strains were resistant to erythromycin, nalidixic acid, and
tetracycline. Moreover, E. coli O126 was resistant to doxycyline, while E. coli O111 was
moderately sensitive. These results may show variations in antibiotic sensitivity among
various strains of E. coli, and this may be attributed to the fact that some strains may be
acquired antibiotic resistance due to the extensive use of antibiotics for therapeutic or
preventive purposes in veterinary medicine in addition to their use as growth promoters in
animal feed. Such resistant bacteria in animals, including zoonotic pathogens can be
transmitted to human via food chain. Nearly similar results were obtained by Ali and Youssef
(2003) who found that, E. coli isolates were sensitive to enerofloxacin, neomycin and
gentamicin, but they were resistant to erythromycin, oxytetracyclin and ampicillin. Moursi
and Husien (2005) found that, E. coli isolates were resistant to erythromycin, amoxicillin and
penicillin and showed intermediate sensitivity to tetracycline, neomycin, chloramephenicol,
and oxytetraycline but they were highly sensitive to enrofoxacin, ciprofloxacin, and ofloxacin.
On the other hand, Moursi and Husien (2007) reported that, E. coli isolates were sensitive to
enfrofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, and nalidixic acid but they showed intermediate
sensitivity to neomycin, and tetracycline but were resistant to amoxicillin, and erythromycin.
Palanivel et al. (2012) found that, E. coli isolates from ostrich eggs were sensitive to
44
amoxicillin, gentamicin, ceftrioxone, ciprofloxacin, and enrofloxacin, but were resistant to
tetracycline, and kanamycin. On the other hand, Gabriela, et al. (2012) reported that, E. coli
isolated from many surfaces of poultry slaughterhouse was resistant to quinolones (nalidixic
acid, ciprofloxacin, and enrofloxacin, while Ali and Ibrahim (2004) reported that, E. coli
isolates were resistant to erythromycin, ciprofloxacin but highly sensitive to enrofloxacin and
chloramphenicol.
This study concluded that, there are many sources for E. coli contamination and persistence in
ostrich production system, also breeder and grower flocks were exposed to high level of
environmental contamination with E. coli which resulted in the contamination of both
hatching eggs and ostrich products.
The suggested preventive measures for minimizing E. coli prevalence in ostrich products
and environment include:
The prevention of egg contamination by fumigation within two hours after lay, and by
removing cracked eggs or eggs soiled with faecal material.
It is recommended to vent the incubators and hatchers to the outside and to have as few
breeder flocks as possible per breeding unit.
In chicks, contamination with E. coli from the environment must be controlled by the
reduction and control of intestinal infection; this can be achieved by using competitive
exclusion.
Birds also need to be protected from pathogens infection that promotes the infections with
E. coli, and this is possible by using Mycoplasma-free birds and by protecting the birds
against mycoplasmas and viral diseases by vaccinations.
Disease introduction must be avoided by a suitable house infrastructure, the correct use of a
transition zone (for changing clothes and shoes, and washing hands), and the control of both
pests and rodent faeces which is considered a source of infection with pathogenic E. coli.
The housing climate (rearing and grower) must be kept optimal for bird density, humidity,
ventilation, dust, and ammonia.
The suggested preventive measures to reduce the public health hazards of colibacillosis
include:
1- Cleaning the ostrich houses.
45
2- Ensure the proper ventilation of the ostrich houses (rearing and grower houses) and
chlorine the drinking water.
3- Wash hands carefully before and after food preparation and after toileting.
4- Wrap fresh meats in plastic bags at the market to prevent fluids from dripping on other
foods.
5- Avoid eating raw or undercooked ostrich meat and liver.
6- Ensure the correct internal cooking temperature especially when using a microwave.
REFERENCES
Abdullah, D. A.; Youssuf, A. G. and Sabry A. H. (2010): Antibiotic Resistance in Escherichia coli
Isolated from Retail Raw Chicken Meat in Taif, Saudi Arabia. Foodborne pathogens and
disease, 7, (3):281 - 285.
Ali, A. and Ibrahim, H. (2004): Bacteriological and serological studies on enteritis of ostriches.
J. Egypt. Vet. Med. Ass., 64 (1): 247- 261.
Ali, A. and Youssef, E. (2003): Bacteriological studies and biochemical parameters of respiratory
infection of ostrich. Vet. Med. J. Giza, 51, (2): 189-203.
Allam, N.; Abd Ellatif, S. and Hamouda, R. (2009): Genetic Typing and Antigenic Characterization
of Egyptian Field Shiga Toxigenic Escherichia coli Isolates with Regard to Profile of Virulence
Proteins. Global Veterinaria 3 (6): 457- 464.
Allan, B.J.; van den Hurk, J.V.; Potter, A.A. (1993): Characterization of Escherichia coli isolated
from cases of avian colibacillosis. Can. J. Vet. Res., 57, (1): 146-151.
Badrul, H.; Linus, S.; Asa, M.; Mirva, D.; Jorge, H.; Jonas W.; Munirul, A. and Björn, O.
(2012): Antimicrobial Drug Resistant Escherichia coli in Wild Birds and Free-range Poultry,
Bangladesh. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 18, (12): 2055 - 2058.
Bailey, W. R. and Scott, S. G. (1994): Diagnostic microbiology. 7th Ed. C.V. Mosby Co. USA
Barnes, H.J. and Gross, W. B. (1997): Colibacillosis, In Diseases of Poultry (10th ed.; Calnek, B.W.,
Barnes, H.J., Beard, C.W., McDougald, L.R., Saif, Y.M., Eds.; Iowa State University Press:
Ames, IA, USA; 131-141.
Boci, J.; Çabeli, P.; Shtylla, T. and Kumbe, I. (2011): The Presence of Enterobacters (E. coli and
Salmonella spp.) in Industrial Growing Poultry in Albania. World Academy of Sci., Engineering
and Tech. 59: 87-89
Bruce,. J. and Drysdale, M. (1990): Egg Hygiene (Route of infection), In Avian incubation, Poul.
Sci. Symposium, 22: 262.
46
Calnek, B.; Barnes, H.; Beard, C.; McDougald, L. and Saif, Y. (1997): Diseases of Poultry,
10th ed.; Iowa State University Press: Ames, IA, USA.
Chowdhuri, A.; Giasuddin, M. and Bhuiyan, A. (2011): Study on Isolation and Identification of
Salmonella and Escherichia coli from different poultry feeds of savar region of Dhaka,
Bangladesh. J. Sci. Res., 3 (2): 403- 411
Christensen JW, Nielsen BL (2004): Environmental enrichment for ostrich, Struthio camelus, chicks.
Animal Welfare 13, (2): 119-124.
Cuiwei, Z.; Beilei, G.; Juan,D.; Robert, S.; Emily Y.; Shohua, Z.; David, G.; David, W. and
Jianghong, M. (2001): Prevalence of Campylobacter spp., Escherichia coli, and Salmonella
Serovars in Retail Chicken, Turkey, Pork, and Beef from the Greater Washington, D.C., Area .
App. and Environ. Micr, 67, (12):5431–5436.
Da Costa, P.; Oliveira, M.; Bica, A.; Vaz-Pires, P. and Bernardo, F. (2007): Antimicrobial
resistance in Enterococcus spp. and Escherichia coli isolated from poultry feed and feed
ingredients. Vet. Micro, 120 (1): 122-131.
Draz, A.A.; El-Gohary, A. H. and Samaha, H. A. (1996): Environmental pollution with certain
pathogens of zoonotic importance in some poultry farms.7th Sci Cong. Fac. Vet. Med. Assiut
Univ., Egypt.
Edwards, P. and Ewing, W. (1972): Identification of Enterobacteriaceae. 3rd Ed. Burgers Publishing
Company, USA.
Effat, A. and Koursi, M. (2003): Studies on diarrhea in ostrich in Ismailia province with reference to
cloacal prolepse. J. Egypt. Vet. Med. Ass., 63 (6): 271-287.
El-Kabbany, M. (1997): Studies on the sanitary conditions of some poultry houses in Menofia and
Qualubia provinces. Ph. D. (Hygiene), Fac. Vet. Med. Alex. Univ.
Eric, G.(2011): E. coli Infections in Poultry. Nutrit. Line, Poult. Diamond V: 1-3
Essam S.; Mohamed, A.; Ahmad, Z.; Hussein, M.; Abdel-Latiff, H. and Moneim, A.A. (2009):
Seasonal Epidemiological Surveillance on Bacterial and Fungal Pathogens in Broiler Farms in
Egypt. Intern. J. of Poul. Sci., 8 (8): 720-727.
Gabriela, G.; Marta, K.; Vladimír, K.; Jan, V.and Alexander F. (2012): Antibiotic resistance of
Escherichia coli isolated from a poultry slaughterhouse. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental
Medicine, 19, (1): 75-77.
Glatz, P. and Miao, Z. (2008): Reducing mortality rates in ostrich chicks. Rural Industries Research
and Development Corporation. 08, (187): 1-27.
47
Guenther, S.; Grobbel, M.; Heidemanns, K,; Schlegel, M.; Ulrich, R.; Ewers, C., and Wieler,
L. (2010): First insights into antimicrobial resistance among faecal Escherichia coli isolates from
small wild mammals in rural areas. Sci. Total Environ., 408, (17):3519-22.
HuiYong, D.; TongJie C.; ZhaoBing Z.; Meiling, Y. and XingXiao Z. (2008):Transmission
identification of Escherichia coli aerosol in chicken houses to their environments using
ERIC-PCR. Science in China Series C: Life Sciences, 51, (2): 164 -173
Jahantigh, M. (2010): Bacteriological study of dead-in-shell embryos of ostrich. Iranian J. of Vet.
Res., Shiraz University, 11, (1), (30): 88 - 90
Kadria, G; Samaha, H.A. and Hassan, A.M. (2009): Microbial contents of air and water in poultry
farms. J. Egypt. Vet. Med. Ass. 69 (2): 127-141.
Khafagy, A.R. and Kamel, A.M. (2001): Microbial contamination and other hatching problems
causing dead in shell in ostrich (Struthio Camelus) eggs during artificial incubation. Vet Med.
J. Giza, 49, (3): 401 - 411.
Kabir, S. M. (2010): Avian Colibacillosis and Salmonellosis: a closer look at epidemiology,
pathogenesis, diagnosis, control and public health concerns Int. J. Environ. Res. Public
Health, 7, (1): 89-114
Karama, M. (2005): The microbial quality of ostrich carcasses produced at export a proved South
African abattoir. MVsc, Fac. Vet. Med. Univ. Pretoria.
Khater, D. F. and Abdel-Twab, A. (2009): Bacterial quality of ostrich meat and Edible offal.
3rd international Sci. Conf., Fac. Vet. Med. Benha Univ. 632-645
Knöbl, T.; Cappellete, C.P. and Vigilato, M. (2012): Enterobacteria Isolation in Ostrich Eggs
(Struthio camelus). Brazilian J. of Poul. Sci., 14 (1): 33-36.
Lutful, S. and Kabir, M. (2010): Avian Colibacillosis and Salmonellosis: A Closer Look at
Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Control and Public Health Concerns. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health, 7, 89-114.
Medani, G.; Mostafa, M.; Amina, A.; Sohair S. and Helal, I. (2007): Studies on some bacterial
isolates affecting quails. SCVMJ, XII (1):137-150
Metawea, Y. F. (2000): Some epidemiological studies on Escherichia coli in poultry farms. M.V.Sc.
Thesis, Fac. of Vet. Med., Moshtohor, Benha University
Modestas, R.; Rita, Š.; Ričardas, K.; Marius, V. and Dainius, Z. (2010): Prevalence and
antimicrobial resistance of E. coli isolated from chicken sold in retail markets. Vet. Med.
Zoot., T., 52 (74): 1392-2130
Moursi, M. K. and Husien, M. M. (2005): Microbial causes of reduction of hatchability in ostrich
farms and some trials of control. SCVMJ, VIII (2):25- 38
48
Moursi, M.K. and Husein, M.M. (2007): Studies on bacterial causes of respiratory problems in
ostrich and some appropriate treatments. SCVMJ, XII (1):151- 165.
Mohamed, E.; Maysa, A.; Labib, E. and Magda, A. (2009): Studies on zoonotic bacterial food
borne infection. J. Vet. Med. Ass. 69, (1): 135-149.
Muhammad, A.; Saidul, A.; Hassan, R. and., Momena, S. (2009): Antibiotic Resistance of
Escherichia Coli isolated from poultry and Poultry Environment of Bangladesh.
Internet. Journal of Food Safety, 11 (1):19 -23.
NCCLS (2002): Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilution susceptibility tests for
bacteria isolated from animals; approved standard 2nd Ed. NCCLS document M31-A2. NCCLS,
PA, USA.
Otaki, Y. (1995): Poultry disease control programme in Japan. Asian Livestock, 20, 65 - 67.
Ouf, J. M.; Elbassouny, R.A. and Shabana, E. S. (2009): Microbial criteria of ostrich meat
products. J. Vet. Med. Ass. 69 (3): 175-183.
Palanivel, K.; Selvam, S.; Veeramani, P. and Rishikesavan, R. (2012): Epidemiological
investigation on poor egg hatchability in an ostrich (Struthio Camelus) farm- Case report egg
peritonitis. Inter. J. of Food, Agri. and Vet. Sci., 2 (3): 71-73
Rahman, M.A.; Samad, M.A.; Rahman, M.B. and Kabir, S.M. (2004): Bacterio pathological
studies on Salmonellosis, Colibacillosis and Pasteurellosis in natural and experimental
infections in chickens. Bangl. J. Vet. Med., (2): 1 - 8.
Raida S.; John, B.; Yvette J. and Rose, A. (2005): Patterns of Antimicrobial Resistance Observed in
Escherichia coli Isolates Obtained from Domestic- and Wild-Animal Fecal Samples, Human
Septage, and Surface Water. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 71, (3):1394–1404.
Rajesh, C; Rao, V.; Gomez, J.; Shukla, S. and Banerjee, P. (2001): Diseases of poultry and their
control. 1st Ed., Uttar Pradesh, India, International Book Distributing Co., 68-70.
Samaha, H.; Haggag,Y. and Ayoub, M. (2007): Epidemiological studies on Escherichia coli in
some poultry farms. 5th international Sci. Conf. Fac. Vet. Med., Mansoura, 197-214.
Nasef, S. A.; Badr, J. M. and Tanios, N. I. (2003): Isolation, identification and pathogencity of some
bacterial agents isolated from poultry. Assiut. Vet. Med. J. Vol. 49, No. (99): 194-206
Sahinduran, S. (2004): Isolation of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus from ostriches with
conjunctivitis and respiratory disease. Revue Méd. Vét, 155, (3): 167-169
Timur, G.; Ziya, I; Abdulbaki, A. and Hasan, S. (2009): Detection of heat-stabile and heat-labile
enterotoxins of E. coli strains isolated from healthy animals. J. of Animal and Vet. Adv., 8 (10):
2058-2062
49
Van der Bogaard, A. E. and Stobberingh, E. E. (1999): Antibiotic usage in animals: impact on
bacterial resistance and public health. Drugs, 58: 589 - 607.
Zahran, O. M. (1981): Studied on airborne infection in poultry houses. Ph D. (Hygiene), Fac. Vet.
Med. Cairo Univ.
Zaki, S. F. (1994): Epizootiological studies on E. Coli in fection in broiler chickens. Ph.D. (Poultry
diseases), Fac. Vet. Met. Cairo Univ.
50
Table (1): Overall prevalence of E. coli in all samples collected from ostrich farm and
slaughter house
Site
Ostrich farm
Sample
No. of sample
Feed
Total
No +ve
%
75
9
12.0
Water
75
10
13.3
Ostrich dropping
75
13
17.3
Egg shell swabs
30
5
16.7
Workers hand swabs
15
2
13.3
Rodent dropping
15
5
33.3
Liver
15
2
13.3
Muscles
15
1
6.7
Total
315
47
14.9
Ostrich
Table (2): Prevalence of E. coli in feed, water, and ostrich dropping collected from ostrich
flocks at different ages
No. of
Samples
Flock age
Feed
No.
+ve
%
Water
No.
+ve
%
Ostrich
Total
dropping
No.
+ve
%
No.
No.
+ve
%
1-10 days
15
1
6,7
1
6.7
1
6.7
45
3
6.7
10 -60 days
15
1
6,7
2
13.3
3
20.0 45
6
13.3
2 -6 months
15
2
13.3
3
20.0
3
20.0 45
8
17.8
6 -12 months
15
3
20.0
2
13.3
2
13.3 45
7
15.6
Over 2years
15
2
13.3
2
13.3
4
26.7 45
8
17.8
Total
75
9
12.0
10
13.3
13
17.3 225
32
14.2
51
Table (3): Frequency of isolated strains of E. coli from ostrich farm and slaughter house
Water
Eggs
Hand swabs
Rodent drop.
Liver
Muscles
No
1
O126:K71
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
10
2
(B16)
1
2
3
1
1
1
-
-
3
O111:K58 (B7)
-
2
3
1
-
1
-
-
9
14.89
4
O86:K61 (B7)
2
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
7
8.51
5
O55:K59 (B5)
2
-
1
-
-
1
-
-
4
8.51
6
O114: K90
-
-
2
1
-
-
1
-
4
8.51
7
O78:K70
1
1
1
-
-
-
-
-
4
6.38
8
O26:K60 (B6)
-
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
3
4.26
9
O119:K69
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
2.13
10 (B19)
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
2.13
11 O128:K67
-
-
1
1
-
-
-
-
1
4.26
Drop.
Strain
Ostrich.
Feed
Total
(B12) O124:K72
52
21.28
19.15
2
(B17) Untypable
Total
%
9
10
13
5
2
5
2
1
47
100.0
Table (4): Antibiogram of both of both E. coli O111:K58 and O126:K71
E. coli
Antibiotic
Conc.
O111:K58
O126:K71
norfloxacin
(10 µg)
M
S
amoxicillin
(10 µg)
SS
S
erythromycin
(15 µg)
R
R
kanmycin
(30 µg)
S
M
doxycyline
(30 µg)
S
R
ciprofloxacin
(5 µg)
M
SS
nalidixic acid
(30 µg)
R
R
neomycin
(30 µg)
M
M
tetracycline
(10 µg)
R
R
SS = High Sensitive, S = Sensitive, M = Moderate Sensitive, and R = Resistant
53