ISSUE FOCUS 38 FEED & ADDITIVE MAGAZINE June 2025 negatively charged molecules intercalate with the bacteria’s DNA so that it can no longer duplicate itself before bacterial death. S-prove’s antibacterial activity, combined with limiting the duplication of the bacteria, has a positive impact on the reduction of the excretion of Salmonella via the feces, reducing the total bacterial load in the poultry house and, as a consequence, reducing the risk of cross-contamination. In addition to this antibacterial effect on Salmonella, S-prove also impacts the gene expression that is responsible for the virulence of the bacteria, which greatly reduces their ability to invade the blood stream and spread to organs other than the gastro-intestinal tract. Thus, it also prevents muscles and organs from becoming contaminated before harvest. In vitro and ex-vivo studies have shown that, via this way, the transmission route can be blocked by 99.9% (Table 1). In vivo work (challenge trial, infected at day 7 with S. Enteritidis, 1.6* 10³ CFU/bird) shows that S-prove, at day 12, is capable of reducing the presence of Salmonella in the cloacal swabs (Mean Log CFU/g cloacal swab, p<0,053) of birds, reduces the number of birds with positive cecal content by 44%, and reduces the number of birds that became positive in the liver (indicating after invasion) by 57% compared to the control group (Figure 2). This research confirms that poultry are capable of resisting Salmonella contamination – and also that S-prove can further reduce the Salmonella contamination of organs (either meat or eggs) from 57% down to 12%. Besides the effect on Salmonella itself, how can S-prove have this significant effect on reducing the transmission to the animal? This is mainly due to the cell-mediated and humoral immune response of the innate and adaptive immune systems. Goblet cells, responsible for the secretion of mucus, are part of the first-line defense, reducing the possibility for Salmonella to adhere to the epithelial cells. As S-prove increases the number of Goblet cells, Mean log CFU/swab SE challenge strain per treatment group Kill of (%) Survive (%) Invasion efficiency (%) Virtual risk on salmonella contamination (%) 70,0 30,0 4,35 1,31 97,64 2,36 1,69 0,04 Butyric acid (0,03%) S-prove (0,03%) Table 1. Success rate of transmission of Salmonella 57% Figure 2. The effect of S-prove on Salmonella under challenging conditions (% of positive number of birds)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUxNjkxNQ==