1 / 30

Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 1 May 6, 2002 Food Safety Pathogens on the Farm

Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 1 May 6, 2002 Food Safety Pathogens on the Farm. David A. Dargatz DVM PhD USDA:APHIS Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health Ft. Collins, CO. Summary of Results from NAHMS Studies. NAHMS – National Animal Health Monitoring System

krisalyn
Télécharger la présentation

Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 1 May 6, 2002 Food Safety Pathogens on the Farm

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pathogen Reduction Dialogue Panel 1May 6, 2002Food Safety Pathogens on the Farm David A. Dargatz DVM PhD USDA:APHIS Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health Ft. Collins, CO

  2. Summary of Results from NAHMS Studies • NAHMS – National Animal Health Monitoring System • Program of USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) • Program Goal: Provide information on animal health of livestock and poultry throughout the U.S. • Approach to Pathogens • Estimate prevalence • Evaluate risk factors • Primary focus – Salmonella and E. coli O157

  3. Production Systems • Feedlot cattle (1994 and 1999) • Dairy (1996) • Layers (1999) • Swine (1995 and 2000)

  4. Pathogens in Feedlots - 1994 • 100 feedlots in 13 states • Samples collected from Oct – Dec • Laboratory evaluation • Salmonella • 2 pens of cattle • culture, serotype • E. coli O157 • 4 pens of cattle • historical culture methods

  5. Pathogens in Feedlots - 1994 • Results • Salmonella • 38% of feedlots with 1+ positive samples • 5.5% (273/4,977) of samples positive • Most common serotypes (65% of isolates) • S. Anatum • S. Montevideo • S. Muenster • S. Kentucky • S. Newington Fedorka-Cray et al. J. Food Protection 61:525

  6. Pathogens in Feedlots - 1994 • Results • Salmonella • Factors associated with positive pens • Tallow • Whole cottonseed or cotton seed hulls • Factors not associated with positive pens • Region • Operation size • Use of sprinklers • Time on feed • Type of cattle • Cattle density • Other feed ingredients Losinger et al. Prev. Vet. Med. 31:231

  7. Pathogens in Feedlots - 1994 • Results • E. coli O157 • 63% of feedlots 1+ positive samples • 1.8% (210/11,881) of samples positive Hancock et al. J. Food Protection 60:462

  8. Pathogens in Feedlots - 1994 • Results • E. coli O157 • Factors associated with positive pens OR • Short time in feedlot (<20 days) 3.39 • Barley feeding 2.75 • Light entry weights (<700) 1.85 • Steers 3.03 • Factors not associated with positive pens • Region • Operation size • Animal density • Ionophore use • Other feed ingredients Dargatz et al. J. Food Protection 60:466

  9. Pathogens in Feedlots – 1999/2000 • 73 feedlots in 11 states • Samples collected from Oct 1999 – Sept 2000 • Each feedlot visited twice • Laboratory evaluation • Salmonella • 3 pens • Culture, serotype • E. coli O157 • 3 pens • immunomagnetic bead separation

  10. Pathogens in Feedlots – 1999/2000 • Results • Salmonella • 51% of feedlots with 1+ positive samples • 6.3% (654/10,417) of samples positive • Most common serotypes (72% of isolates) • S. Anatum* • S. Montevideo* • S. Reading • S. Newport • S. Kentucky* • Risk factor evaluation underway http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/Beef_Feedlot/99sal.pdf

  11. Pathogens in Feedlots – 1999/2000

  12. Pathogens in Feedlots – 1999/2000 • Results • E. coli O157 • 100% of feedlots 1+ positive samples • 11% (1,148/10,415) of samples positive • Early 13.9% • Random 10.6% • Late 8.6% • Risk factor evaluation underway http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/Beef_Feedlot/coli.PDF

  13. Pathogens in Feedlots – 1999/2000

  14. Dairy 1996 • Operations in 19 states • 91 dairies • 97 markets • Samples collected from Feb – Jul • Milk cows (n=3,640) • Cull cows on farm (n=668) • Cull cows in markets (n=2,287) • Laboratory evaluation • Salmonella – culture, serotype • E. coli O157 – historical culture methods

  15. Dairy 1996 – Salmonella • Overall cow-level prevalence • Milk cows 5.4% • Expected culls 18.1% • Culls at markets 14.9% • Most common serotypes (63.2%) • S. Montevideo • S. Cerro • S. Kentucky • S. Menhaden • S. Anatum • S. Meleagridis Wells et al. J. Food Protection 64:3

  16. Dairy 1996 - Salmonella • 21.1% of operations had milk cows shedding • 25.9% of operations had expected culls shedding • Salmonella shedding on dairies related to OR • Larger herd size – 100 or more cows 5.8 • Southern region 5.7 • Use of recycled flush water 3.5 • Brewer’s products fed 3.4 Kabagambe et al. Prev Vet Med 43:177-194

  17. Percent of Samples with VT E. coli O157 NAHMS Dairy ‘96 Study http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/Dairy_Cattle/ecosalm98.htm

  18. Percent of Operations with VT E. coli O157 NAHMS Dairy ‘96 Study http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/Dairy_Cattle/ecosalm98.htm

  19. Dairy 1996 • Factors associated with dairy operations positive for E. coli O157 OR • Samples collected after May 1 7.7 • Flush alleyways with water 8.0 Garber et al., J Food Protection 62:307

  20. Dairy 1996 • Factors not associated with shedding of E. coli O157 on dairy farms • Manure handling practices • Chlorination of water tanks • Grazing • Housing type • Diet components (protein, fat, byproducts, probiotics, alfalfa) Garber et al., J Food Protection 62:307

  21. Layers - 1999 • 200 layer houses – environmental samples • Manure • Egg belts • Elevators • Walkways • 129 layer houses – rodents collected • Laboratory evaluation • Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis

  22. Layers - 1999 • 7.1% of layer houses positive • 3.7% of house mice were positive • Factors associated with positive houses • Flocks < 60 weeks • Not cleaning feeders or hoppers between flocks • Higher number of rodents http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/Poultry/lay99SEhi.htm

  23. Layers - 1999 http://nahms.aphis.usda.gov/Poultry/lay99SEhi.htm

  24. Swine – 1995 and 2000 • Swine 1995 • 152 operations in 16 states • At least 300 grower/finishers • Up to 50 samples per site from late finishers • Total of 6655 samples • Swine 2000 • 124 operations from 17 states • At least 100 head inventory • Up to 50 samples per site from late finishers • Total of 5509 samples

  25. Swine – 1995 and 2000

  26. Swine 1995 Derby Agona Typhimurium cop Brandenberg Mbandaka Typhimurium Heidelberg Anatum Enteritids BA Worthington Swine 2000 Derby Agona Typhimurium cop Heidelberg Brandenberg Typhimurium Worthington Anatum Infantis Tennessee Salmonella serotypes

  27. Swine – 1995 • Salmonella Factor Level OR (95% CI) Mix on farm Yes .4 (.2 -.9) AO (never) Some, most, all 2.5 (1.1 – 5.9) Resp Culls (0) .01 - .25 .3 (.1 – 1.3) > .25 .2 (.1 - .8) Pen Sex (mixed) Single only 2.8 (1.0 – 7.8) Both types 5.4 (1.8 – 16.3) Region (SE) North .2 (.1 - .6) Midwest .2 (.1 - .7) Meal (Yes) No 26.4 (2.8 – 249)

  28. Swine 1995 – E. coli O157 • E coli O157:H7 • Tested a subset (4,229) of Salmonella fecal samples • All were negative

  29. Pathogens on the Farm - Conclusions • Widely distributed geographically and by operation type • Region generally not a factor • Similar prevalence for Salmonella across operation types • Mostly present in low numbers or low prevalence • Inconsistent risk factors identified across epidemiologic studies • Data from large epidemiologic studies should be used to generate hypotheses to be evaluated in more controlled experiments • More research is needed to evaluate interventions (biosecurity and active measures)

  30. More Information Available USDA:Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health 555. S. Howes Ft. Collins, CO 80521 970 490-8000 NAHMSWEB@aphis.usda.gov nahms.aphis.usda.gov

More Related