VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 20 POSTED ON: 10/4/2013
Title: Biosecurity and Diversity of Foodborne Pathogen Populations on Poultry Farms. Project Summary: Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella spp. are among the leading foodborne bacterial pathogens in the USA . Poultry products are a major source of these organisms. Using cross-sectional and longitudinal study designs, we will assess the prevalence of these foodborne pathogens in commercial chicken and turkey production. For each pathogen we will determine the population diversity on farms, after transportation to the abattoir, and at the end of the processing line. Sampling will also occur on selected breeder farms and hatcheries in an effort to assess the relative importance of these sources of transmission. In addition, we will sample vectors such as arthropods, rodents, and feed; as well as other poultry houses, and non-poultry farms (swine and cattle) found in proximity to the study farms. We will survey each farm in order to determine management and environmental risk factors that may be associated with foodborne pathogens. The longitudinal study will allow us to assess the impact of a biosecurity extension program on the level of foodborne pathogens at the farm. Results from these studies will provide us with key information to improve our biosecurity and sanitation extension programs. We will also integrate the research findings into our educational programs, using multimedia technology, and assess their value as learning tools. Finally, a communication network will be established for the purpose of providing access to the information by all stakeholders, in particular, those directly involved in poultry production, since they are on the front line of any foodborne pathogen reduction efforts. 4 Introduction The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that about 5,000 people die and 75 million get sick each year from foodborne illness. Outbreaks of foodborne illness are associated with many different foods, yet contaminated meat, poultry, and egg products are the most frequently reported vehicles (around 37% of all outbreaks). Campylobacter jejuni, Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella spp. are among the leading foodborne bacterial pathogens in the US and worldwide (Mead et al., 1999, Hubbert W et al, 1996). Consumption of poultry products has often been among the major risk factors implicated in foodborne diseases due to these agents. Salmonella and Campylobacter, in particular, have been shown to be important both at pre- and post-harvest levels, whereas L. monocytogenes is particularly important as a post-harvest contaminant. Among Campylobacter spp, C. jejuni is known to be the most important species for two major reasons: first, this species is the foremost cause of human bacterial gastroenteritis in the world (Nachamkin, I, 2000, Hubbert W et al, 1996). Second, the recent emergence of fluoroquinolone resistant C. jejuni, mainly among isolates collected from poultry and humans (Smith, K et al., 1999), presents a growing public health risk. So far, there has been little work on the molecular epidemiology of Campylobacter spp.. The genomic diversity of this agent on farms, as well as for the other two foodborne pathogens mentioned above is not well known. The distribution of these agents in the poultry environment also needs to be studied as part of an effort to objectively determine environmental, management, and even bird factors that might be associated with their presence or higher prevalence. Arthropods, especially the housefly (Musca domestica), very likely contribute to the transmission and maintenance of bacteria associated with foodborne illnesses in the preharvest interval. Housefies have been shown to transmit Campylobacter experimentally and half of all flies captured near poultry houses containing naturally infected chickens were positive for the bacterium (Rosef and Kapperud, 1983; Shane et al., 1985). The housefly is the predominant pest in the southeastern US. Specifically, these highly mobile insects (flights up to 12 km within 24 hours; Greenberg, 1973) are capable of disseminating foodborne bacteria within and between poultry houses (Lysyk and Axtell 1986). The three major research components of this proposed study are 1) characterization of foodborne pathogens at phenotypic and genotypic levels; 2) determination of risk factors; and 3) assessment of the impact of biosecurity measures (on-farm interventions) on these pathogens. Our long-term goal is to increase our understanding of the epidemiology of foodborne pathogens in order to develop, implement, and evaluate extension and education programs targeted at people involved in the poultry industry, with the ultimate goal of contributing to a significant reduction of foodborne pathogens. The poultry industry is showing interest in this project because new diseases affecting poultry continue to emerge (an average of almost one per year over the past 20 years). The global movement of poultry, poultry products, equipment and people facilitate the spread of pathogenic agents. In addition, the intensive nature of modern poultry production aids in the development and spread of infectious diseases. Many of these diseases have immunosuppressive effects. There is growing evidence that they may have a substantial impact on poultry production. Furthermore, immunosuppressive diseases may also have an impact on the incidence and diversity of foodborne pathogens. For example, Campylobacter has been associated with enteric diseases in turkeys (Barnes et al, 2000). Unfortunately, there is still a paucity of information on the possible role of these poultry diseases relative to foodborne pathogens, and about the possible value that 5 biosecurity measures could contribute to the reduction of both categories of infectious agents (i.e. poultry and foodborne pathogens). Biosecurity is defined as “health plan or measures designed to protect a population from transmissible infectious agents”. This includes sanitation, pest control, and any measures intended to break the chain of infection (Toma and Vaillancourt, 1999). Our proposal aims at assessing an integrated biosecurity extension training program (e.g., sanitation, pest control, traffic control, etc.) under commercial field conditions. It has the merit of integrating newly developed multimedia extension material with on-farm and laboratory research activities designed to assess this extension effort, to determine whether it has a significant impact on foodborne pathogens, and lead to improved extension and educational material (Figure 1). Many critical pre-harvest foodborne pathogen issues have not yet been addressed because of the challenges associated with such research. Our research and extension teams have several unique advantages that will allow us to meet these challenges: 1. Because of important epidemics that have affected the North Carolina poultry industry over the past 7 years (poult enteritis mortality syndrome; Mycoplasma infections; turkey coronavirus enteritis; infectious laryngotracheitis), members of our group have developed privileged relationships with poultry companies and the NC Department of Agriculture. This unique partnership between state, industry, and academia was fostered by a USDA Fund for Rural America grant on emerging and reemerging infectious poultry diseases. We now have an extensive database that includes Geographical Information System coordinates for all farms, and environmental and management data for a several hundred chicken and turkey farms. We also have a weekly interaction via e-mail with all the poultry companies east of Raleigh, which represent an annual turkey production of about 40 million birds and an annual chicken production of about 350 million broilers. The main purpose of these contacts is data sharing among all members of this state-industry-academia alliance. 2. The Poultry Coordinating Committee (a group of faculty from the Departments of Poultry Science, Agriculture and Resource Economics, Entomology, Food Science, and Veterinary Medicine) has been involved with developing and offering a workshop that introduces the concepts of on-farm HACCP (hazard analysis critical control point) to the poultry industry. To date 4 workshops have been held throughout the state. These workshops have been well attended by representatives from major integrators, and participants have expressed an interest in having options to use the Internet for the second phase of training. Thus, the members of this committee, some of whom are also key personnel in this project, are in the process of developing an on-line on-farm food safety course, which incorporates HACCP principles. 3. Members of our extension team have received two grants that are directly relevant to the proposed project (US Poultry & Egg grant to design a multimedia biosecurity training program, $89,000); and a Delta grant entitled “Distance Learning for Educating Students in the Concepts of On-farm Production Practices Associated with Poultry Product Safety” ($15,000). 4. The NCSU-CVM teaching animal unit (TAU) is a commercial facility on the veterinary campus that can house up to 8000 broiler chickens or 2800 turkeys. It is also within 20 meters of a swine production facility. This facility will be used to test the hypothesis that organisms may be shared between poultry and swine production units. 5. We have the ability to produce extension material in Spanish, the most commonly spoken language among poultry farm workers, as well as English. We also have the ability to develop survey instruments in both languages. This has proven very useful when we investigated a major Mycoplasma gallisepticum epidemic last year. 6 6. The multidisciplinary composition of our team, from clinicians, extension experts, to basic scientists. Knowledge will be obtained about the phenotypic and genotypic diversity of foodborne pathogens in poultry flocks, relative to their environment (including neighboring farms) over time. This will provide us with key information to evaluate existing extension and educational programs to supportthe poultry industry in its effort to reduce the risk of contamination with foodborne pathogens. Our proposal is relevant to the first three priorities as outlined in the Federal Register: 1. analysis, assessment, and communication of risk (objectives 1 to 4 and 6 of this grant); 2. control measures for foodborne microbial pathogens (objective 5); 3. sources and incidence of microbial pathogens (objectives 1 to 3). Objectives: 1. Assess the prevalence of leading foodborne bacterial pathogens (Campylobacter, Salmonella,and Listeria) for two major commodities: chicken and turkey production. 2. Determine for each pathogen the diversity of its population on poultry farms, after transportation to the processing plant, and at post-chill (i.e., assessment of the different types of Salmonella, Listeria, and Campylobacter on farms and at the slaughter plant) 3. Assess the relative importance of sources of transmission of these foodborne pathogens including arthropods, rodents, feed, as well as establishing the significance of close proximity of poultry and non-poultry farms (i.e., do they share the same populations of bacteria?). 4. Determine risk factors associated with foodborne pathogens. 5. Determine the impact of a biosecurity (including sanitation) extension program on foodborne pathogens at the farm level. 6. Adjust our biosecurity and sanitation extension program, integrate the research findings in our educational programs, assess their value as learning tools and establish a communication network for the purpose of providing access to the information to all stakeholders. Methods: 1. Assess the prevalence of leading foodborne bacterial pathogens (Campylobacter, Salmonella, and Listeria) for two major commodities: chicken and turkey production. Farm selection: As part of the farm selection process for a cross-sectional study, we will have access to data on Salmonella monitoring from two turkey companies and one chicken company. These companies have birds on about 1200 farms. A subset of 90 farms (45 turkey and 45 chicken farms) will be sampled to confirm the Salmonella status of the current resident flocks, which will allow us to also establish the prevalence of Campylobacter and Listeria. The oldest flock on each farm will be sampled if more than one flock is present on any given farm (on-farm and processing plant sampling: see objective 2). This will provide us with a point prevalence assessment of the three foodborne pathogens. This sampling will also contribute to the final farm selection for a longitudinal (prospective) study (objective 5). This objective is essentially focusing on grow-out facilities. However, results from breeder farms and hatcheries will also be included in the analysis (comparison of pathogens between breeder farms, hatcheries, grow-out, and abattoir). 7 Using farms selected for the cross-sectional and the longitudinal studies, the NC Agricultural and Technical State University members of our team (Drs Willis and Worku) will assess the relative importance and significance of used vs unused litter in the colonization of chickens and turkeys with Campylobacter jejuni. Turkey and chicken farms (flock and environment) will be sampled at time of placement and at 3 and 6 weeks of age (end of grow-out for chickens). Samples for turkey flocks will also be taken at 10 and 15 weeks of age. Twenty fresh feces cecal droppings will be collected in the early morning. Sterile rayon-tipped applicators will be used to gather a part of each dropping. Caryr-Blair transport medium will be used to transport samples to the laboratory. In the lab, broth will be placed and spread on BBL- Campy plates. The plates will be incubated in controlled atmosphere of 5% 02, 10% C02, and 85% N2 for 24 hours at 42º C. Confirmation will be done by using the serological latex agglutination test. Bacterial isolates from these sources will be strain characterized by high- resolution genotyping. The relative importance of live haul transmission (crate sanitation) will also be determined. Crates will be sampled prior to bird pick up and after unloading at the processing plant. The isolates obtained from transport crates will be subjected to strain characterization for farm trace back. The effectiveness of pre-and post-sanitation intervention on Campylobacter jejuni survivability in transport crates will be assessed. Isolation and genomic fingerprinting will follow the same procedures as mentioned under objective 2. 2. Determine for each pathogen the diversity of its population on poultry farms, after transportation to the processing plant, and at post-chill (i.e., assessment of the different types of Salmonella, Listeria, and Campylobacter within farms and at the slaughter plant) On-farm and slaughter plant sampling strategy For each selected grow-out flock, five pooled samples of feces will be collected (five birds/pool) in one poultry house. Sampling will be performed at the following times: a) two weeks prior to processing; b) at arrival at the processing plant; c) at shackle time; d) post-chill carcasses (no feces available; five pooled carcass rinses). In order to identify biosecurity measures that will be effective in preventing food contamination, we must determine whether events that occur throughout the production process impact bacterial contamination. It is possible that the effectiveness of any measure implemented on the farm will be overwhelmed by increased bacterial shedding or by the introduction of new agents during transport. To study this, we will culture samples taken before transportation, from trucks, and pre-shackle, and post-chill. By performing phenotypic and genotypic analysis on these strains, we will determine whether the biosecurity measures we test are likely to have an important impact on foodborne pathogen contamination at different stages of production. Identification of Salmonella from fecal and environmental samples We will culture Salmonella using methods shown previously to be effective for bacterial isolation from animal and environmental sources (Bager et al., 1991). One gram of feces (or bacteria from pooled carcass rinses) will be pre-enriched in 10 ml buffer peptone water and incubated over night at 37ºC. Then, 100 l of this will then be enriched overnight in Rappaport Vassilliadas medium at a 1:100 ratio. Samples will then be plated on xylose lysine tryptone (XLT4) agar and suspected colonies will be identified as Salmonellae by fluorescence using MUCAP (Ref). Identification will be confirmed using triple sugar iron (TSI) and Urea media. 8 Isolates found to be positive will be sent to the National Veterinary Services Laboratory (NVSL) for serotyping. Phenotypic Characterization We will characterize strains at both the phenotypic and genotypic level. Phenotypic characterization includes two steps: antimicrobial resistance patterns (antibiograms) for all organisms, and phage resistance patterns for a subset of our isolates. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing will include both a semi-automated method (Vitek; Biomerieux) and Kirby- Bauer disc diffusion. In this way we can test for resistance to 14 antimicrobial agents used in veterinary and human medicine. Antimicrobial resistance testing has several advantages for this study. It both provides an initial discrimination among isolates and, in combination with genotypic testing, will provide a more complete characterization of the cultured strains. Further, information about resistance may be, in and of itself, valuable information. Data from antimicrobial susceptibility testing will thus be compiled, and strains will be classified based on their respective resistance patterns. These data will be combined with further genotypic characterization, as well as to distinguish isolates collected from different sources. The second phenotypic characterization method will be phage typing. This method can be performed only on two serovars of Salmonella; Typhimurium and Enteritidis. Based on the findings of our study, we will perform phage typing on representative isolates with different antibiograms to identify the presence of phage types with known public health significance. Genotypic Characterization In order to study the relatedness of Salmonella strains obtained from animal and environmental samples, it is essential to have a reproducible method to distinguish phenotypically identical strains from one another. Such a method must also be rapid and easy to employ, since this work requires analysis of a large number of strains. We have chosen a relatively new method; amplified fragment length polymorphism analysis (AFLP). AFLP is particularly sensitive in that it can detect genomic polymorphisms of as little as one base pair difference (Vos et al., 1995). With this technique, genomic DNA is cut with two restriction enzymes, EcoRI and MseI, then linkers specific to each end are ligated to the resulting fragments. PCR primers complementary to the linkers are then used to amplify the fragments. To limit the number of amplicons produced, a single adenine is included at the 3’ end of one primer, requiring that the genomic DNA have a complementary thymine adjacent to its EcoRI site. One primer is also infrared labeled so that resulting bands can be separated with great sensitivity using an automated infrared-reading sequencing apparatus. This technique produces up to 200 distinct bands, ranging in size from 50 to 700 bp. Different strains produce unique banding patterns, identified using computer-assisted analysis, allowing us to distinguish closely related strains from those that are more distantly related. The value of this technique is that it does not rely on a single locus to differentiate strains, but instead samples multiple loci from the bacterial genome. It has been successfully used to establish phylogenetic relationships among and between bacterial species, including Salmonella (Jackson et al, 1999; Janssen et al, 1996; Linstedt et al., 2000, De Sai et al., 2001). It has also been shown to be reproducible and to be at least comparable in differentiating strains to other typing techniques, such as PCR-based ribotyping and pulse-field gel electrophoresis (Janssen et al, 1996; Koeleman et al, 1998; Lindstedt et al., 2000). We have thus far completed AFLP profiles on over 1000 Salmonella strains for another project. We have found that we can differentiate strains obtained from 9 different sources and can find polymorphisms that characterize specific strains and antimicrobial resistance patterns. One disadvantage of AFLP is that, although it samples multiple loci for polymorphisms, it produces fragments that make up no more than 1-2% of the genome. It is obvious, therefore, that sequence differences among strains can be missed. Therefore, in order to ensure that strains with identical antibiograms and patterns on initial AFLP analysis are indeed identical (or at least very closely related), we will perform additional AFLP analyses on those strains using different primer extensions. We will substitute a cytosine, guanine, or thymine residue at the end of the EcoRI amplification primer, and thus create up to three additional fingerprints for each strain in question. In this way, we should be able to differentiate strains even when they are closely related. Data Analysis and Interpretation of Results We can analyze AFLP gels to produce implied phylogenetic trees with the software Quantity One 4.1 (Bio-Rad) and using the neighbor-joining method of this same program to create phylogenetic trees (Saitou and Nei, 1987). Our strategy will be to first establish general relationships among strains by scoring only a few of the polymorphisms present. These relationships will guide us in making comparisons among strains. We will then analyze all polymorphisms to determine which isolates are clonal, and which are closely related, but different by AFLP. Once we have created complete phylogenetic trees, we can make comparisons that will allow us to address the questions raised for the following objectives. Baseline data will provide information about bacterial prevalence. Phenotypic and genotypic analysis of isolates will additionally show the diversity of the cultured isolates, both in terms of important characteristics, such as antibiotic resistance, and at the genetic level. We will be able to determine whether strains isolated from different sources and over time (longitudinal study) are identical, suggesting the expansion of a clonal population, or whether they represent distinct strains of the same bacterial species. Identification and characterization of Campylobacter Fecal dropping sample collection will follow the same scheme as described above for Salmonella. Samples will be transported on ice to the laboratory where they will be processed with minimum delay. For isolation of Campylobacter, serial dilutions will be plated directly onto selective media (Campy-Cefex; Stern et al., 1992) and the plates will be incubated in a microaerobic atmosphere at 42C utilizing the Campy-Pac system. Plates will be examined following 24 hours incubation. Bacteria from colonies with appearance suggestive of Campylobacter will be examined by gram stain and by phase-contrast microscopy using wet mounts, to determine whether the darting motility and cell shape typical of Campylobacter are present. Campylobacter colony forming units (CFUs) in the original fecal sample will be enumerated, and 2 putative Campylobacter colonies will be subcultured at 42C microaerobically. Following 36 hours of growth, the subcultures will be catalogued, and the cell mass will be swabbed off the plates and preserved in freezing medium (Brucella broth with 15% sterile glycerol) at –70C. Campylobacter will be isolated from broiler carcasses (chill-tank) originating from the farms being monitored, following enrichments of carcass rinses in Bolton Broth (4 h 37C followed by 20h at 42C) and subsequent growth in direct plating on Campy-Cefex agar media 10 and incubation in a microaerobic atmosphere at 42C. Bacterial isolates will be processed as described above for fecal dropping isolates. Strain characterization will focus on the following: differentiation of C. jejuni from C. coli; high-resolution genotyping; and determination of antibiotic resistance. Differentiation of C. jejuni from C. coli. C. jejuni and C. coli have been estimated to cause 80-90% and 5-10% , respectively, of human Campylobacter infections (Nachamkin et al., 2000). The majority of Campylobacter isolates from broilers appears to be C. jejuni, whereas C. coli has been found to be predominant in swine (Aarestrup et al., 1997;Saenz et al., 2000). Although both species are potential human pathogens, their differentiation is meaningful, as they appear to vary in the occurrence of resistance to different antibiotics (Aarestrup et al., 1997; Saenz et al., 2000). The two species may have additional, but currently poorly understood, differences in their physiology and pathogenesis. C. jejuni differs from C. coli in having hippuricase activity, and the corresponding genes (hip). To differentiate C. jejuni from C. coli, PCR utilizing the published hippuricase gene primers (Chan et al., 2000 ) will be used. In our own experience with isolates from broilers, such hip-based PCR has been reliable and reproducible, yielding clear results for all isolates, including those that gave ambiguous results with the enzymatic assay. The PCR products will be identified by agarose gel electrophoresis, and known C. jejuni and C. coli isolates will be included periodically as positive and negative controls, respectively. High-resolution genotyping AFLP has recently been shown to be an excellent high-resolution method for genotyping of Campylobacter. The AFLP protocols will be basically the same as those described above for Salmonella with modifications as described. Antimicrobial resistance of the Campylobacter isolates. Campylobacter strains will be tested for antibiotic resistance to nalidixic acid, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, azithromycin, and tetracycline by using the E-test method (AB Biodisk™ AB Biodisk of North America, Inc., Piscataway, NJ). Four E-test strips will be placed at ninety-degree angles onto a plate and incubation will be for 48 hours at 37C microaerobically. These conditions were chosen to conform with those in use by the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System: Enteric Bacteria (NARMS), specifically for Campylobacter (Tollefson et al., 1999). Our choice to focus on the five antibiotics of most clinical interest was also guided by the need to contain costs, considering that E-strips are expensive and a large number of isolates will be involved in the project. There are currently no recommended antibiotic breakpoint concentrations for Campylobacter, and results will be recorded in terms of MIC data. To allow for comparison of our data with those of others who have investigated antibiotic resistance in Campylobacter (Aarestrup et al., 1997; Saenz et al., 2000), we will use the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) breakpoints for resistance (NCCLS, 1994). Identification and characterization of Listeria monocytogenes Samples for Listeria analysis (fecal droppings and carcass rinses) will be sent by overnight delivery on ice to the laboratory of Dr. Elliott Ryser at Michigan State University and 11 analyzed within 24 hr of receipt. In the procedure, 25-g fecal and 25-ml rinse water samples will be enriched in 225 ml of UVM according to the VIDASTM L. monocytogenes enrichment procedure. After 40-48 h of incubation at 30oC, a portion of the sample will be boiled for 10 minutes and screened for the presence of L. monocytogenes using the mini-VIDAS System that is available and operational in the laboratory of Dr. Ryser. The VIDASTM LMO Assay is an automated enzyme-linked immunofluorescent assay that specifically detects the presence of L. monocytogenes. Unboiled enrichment cultures yielding positive results with VIDASTM LMO Assay will be streaked to Modified Oxford Medium (OXOID) for isolation of Listeria species, including L. monocytogenes. Since this plating medium will support the growth of other Listeria spp. in addition to L. monocytogenes, up to five Listeria colonies per plate will be subjected to a battery of morphological and biochemical tests (e.g. Gram stain, catalase, CAMP hemolysis, fermentation of rhamnose and xylose) for positive identification of L. monocytogenes. In addition, all isolates identified as L. monocytogenes will be serotyped using commercially available antisera. While of little threat to human health, Listeria spp. other than L. monocytogenes would still be of relevance as indicators in terms of evaluating the possible impact of biosecurity measures. High-resolution genotyping will be done by Pulsed-field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE). The PFGE subtyping data will be valuable for future incorporation into the PulseNet database. Currently the L. monocytogenes PulseNet database consists primarily of human clinical isolates, but typing data from animal and food-derived strains are becoming increasingly desirable for epidemiologic monitoring of the sources and reservoirs of the pathogen in nature and in the food chain. 3. Assess the relative importance of sources of transmission of these foodborne pathogens including arthropods, rodents, and feed, as well as establishing the significance of close proximity of poultry and non-poultry farms (i.e., do they share the same populations of bacteria?). Because we expect a high prevalence of Salmonella-positive flocks, we will seek a 2 positive to 1 negative ratio for the cross-sectional study, resulting in the selection of 40 positive farms and 20 negative ones. Additional testing will be conducted, if necessary, until these numbers are attained. Salmonella status was selected as the determinant factor for cohort selection because, of the three pathogens, it is the one that can be isolated with the most consistency. The 40 Salmonella-positive farms will be separated in two cohorts of 20 farms (10 turkey and 10 chicken units per cohort). One cohort will comprise farms whose growers and employees will participate in the multimedia biosecurity extension program (intervention group). The other cohort will also have 20 farms. However, the growers and their employees will not participate in the program (non-intervention group). For each chicken farm, we will follow 6 flocks; for each turkey farm, we will follow 3 flocks. This follow-up will take between 12 to 16 months, depending on the farm type. Therefore, we should gather data on 60 chicken flocks and 30 turkey flocks for each cohort. In this study, we will use other poultry houses on the same farm and swine and beef cattle farms proximal to poultry farms as a model to study the significance of other host animals as risks to poultry. The participating turkey companies are also involved in pig production. This will facilitate the process of getting authorization to sample these herds. We will consider vectors 12 (vehicles) that may transmit these organisms between different host species. These include arthropods such as flies, rodents, and fomites including transportation equipment. 3.1 Rodent monitoring: Mice will be the primary target species for the study. Twelve Victor Tin Cat Repeating MouseTraps will be placed in selected study houses in both intervention and non-intervention groups. Monitoring will be conducted over a 24-hour period at intervals of every 2-4 weeks. Trapped rodents will be tabulated and submitted for pathogen culture. Breeders: It will not be possible to monitor all of the breeder flocks producing the grow-out flocks included in this study. Hence, we will only select the breeder flocks that are at the origin of one turkey and one chicken grow-out flock, to a maximum of 8 breeder flocks (e.g., 3 turkey breeder flocks providing all the birds for a turkey grow-out flock included in the study and 5 chicken breeder flocks providing all the birds for one chicken grow-out flock). Each breeder house will receive 10 traps placed beneath slats along walls and 10 on top of slats distributed between walls and adjacent to nest boxes, and 1 each in the egg room and cooler. Chicken and turkey grow-outs: As for the breeders, it will not be possible to do pest monitoring for all the flocks. Five turkey and 5 chicken farms will be monitored (including the ones originating from the breeder farms selected for the study) Ten traps will be placed on floors along walls (wire enclosures if significant bird interference occurs), and 10 distributed on building exteriors along walls, feed bins and service buildings. Another type of trapping device (glue board) may also be used depending on the structure of each building. 3.2 Insect monitoring: Our efforts will concentrate on the housefly. Two fly monitoring devices (spot cards and sticky cards) will be used. A full complement of monitoring devices (20) will be placed in study houses. Half of the cards in each house will be distributed at random locations at 2-3 meters above the litter or manure surface (height A). The remaining half of the devices will be randomly distributed approximately 1 meter above the litter or manure surface (height B). Devices will be replaced at maximum intervals of 7 days for the duration of the study. Retrieved devices will be counted (spots or flies per card) and recorded for analysis. Trapped flies will be submitted for pathogen culture. 3.2.1. Determine the potential of houseflies to support and harbor Salmonella, Listeria, and Campylobacter (SLC). 3.2.1a. Evaluate time course survival of bacteria in the crop and gut of the housefly: We will evaluate the potential of SLC bacteria to be supported and survive in the crop or gut of the fly. We will provide adult houseflies with foods inoculated with one of four treatments including a control and either Salmonella spp., L. monocytogenes, or C. jejuni selected for study by Altier and Kathariou labs. Housefies will be provided with the selected treatment at a single feeding. Flies will be sacrificed at 0.5, 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 24 hr intervals and subsequent days. Insects will be surface sterilized and the crops removed aseptically and placed intominimal medium. Crop tissues will be homogenized and serially passed on selective medium. Cultures will be confirmed by methodology developed presented under objective 2. 3.2.1b. Evaluate the potential of housefies to transmit bacteria to eggs: Housefies will be provided with foods inoculated with pure cultures of SLC. Flies will be held in cages. Fresh eggs will be collected from laying hens while moist. The moist egg will be placed in an 13 inoculation cup in the fly cage to allow the fly to come to the surface of the moist egg. Eggs will be removed after 5 minutes in the cage. A group of exposed eggs will also be treated with quaternary ammonia to determine the effect of disinfectants on the passage of bacteria into the egg. Treatments will be compared to positive and negative controls. Eggs will be incubated for 7 days to allow the embryo to develop at which time it will be sacrificed for culturing and identification of bacteria. 3.2 .2. Evaluate the inter-relationship between Salmonella spp., Listeria monocytogenes, and Campylobacter jejuni fecal shedding, and muscoid fly prevalence in meat bird production. 3.2.2a. Monitor the movement and dispersal potential of muscoid flies in the transmission of selected strains of bacteria within and between farms: Housefly associated bacterial cultures will be identified using phenotypic/genotypic characterization as described previously. Adult flies will be collected from five broiler farms and five turkey farms (10 total) monthly using sweep-net or sticky cards. Freeze killed flies will be surface sterilized and the crops aseptically removed. Fly crops will be stored in minimal medium until homogenized and tissues serially passed and plated on selective medium. Cultures of bacteria will be identified according to the methods previously described. 3.2.2b. Monitoring of the density dependent relationship of flies to bacterial prevalence in adjacent poultry houses on the 10 farms above (a): The relationship of fly, bird, and bacteria will be directly compared using phenotype/genotype characterizations described previously. Muscoid fly densities will be monitored using spot cards and sticky cards (Lysyk and Axtell 1986, and Hogsette et al. 1993). Spot cards will be placed for 7 days and sticky cards for 24 hours. Fecal samples (cloacal swabs) will be taken from 10 birds randomly selected from the flock. Fly and fecal samples will be stored in whirl-pac bags and transported on dry ice to the laboratory for culturing and characterization. 3.2.2c. Seasonal prevalence of foodborne and antibiotic resistant foodborne bacteria within poultry houses. The role of the housefly in the transmission of foodborne bacteria is limited by the seasonal abundance of pathogens and the flies themselves. During this monitoring period we will obtain data on the seasonal abundance, prevalence and transmission potential of flies for these important bacteria. Using the aforementioned methodology we will monitor flies and the presence of characterized bacteria throughout the longitudinal study. 4. Determine risk factors associated with foodborne pathogens. Each of the 90 farms included in the cross-sectional study will be surveyed using a standardized pre-tested questionnaire designed to obtain information such as: pets, breeder flocks and age of breeder flocks, litter condition, treatment of litter, farm traffic, mortality disposal, etc. Water properties and water activity of the litter will also be assessed at the time of the survey visit (Hayes et al., 2000). The dependent variables will be the foodborne pathogen status of each farm based on the sampling performed for objective 2. Field trial as part of the assessment of the role of breeder flocks on foodborne pathogen contamination: The NCSU-CVM Teaching Animal Unit (TAU) raises 5000 broilers per year in an isolated unit using all-in-all-out production. This facility is unique, in that it is well isolated and is managed under optimal biosecurity standards. It is located at least 20 miles from other domestic poultry. 14 A breeder flock will be identified and sampled for the presence of Salmonella spp. and Campylobacter spp. Progeny of this breeder flock will be placed at the TAU (no other breeder flock contributing to this grow-out flock). Likewise, 20,000 chicks from the same breeder flock will be placed in one commercial house in eastern North Carolina to serve as a paired flock from the original breeders. Flock and environmental sampling will be performed as previously described at time of placement and weekly thereafter until processing and cultured for Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp., and Listeria. These isolates will also be characterized as described above. All isolates will be saved and compared to determine 1) the relationship between pathogens isolated from the breeder flock and the paired grow-out flocks; 2) when positive samples are first obtained for both broiler flocks; and 3) duration of the positive status for specific pathogens. Finally, we will test pigs housed near the TAU poultry unit for the presence of the same organisms. 5. Determine the impact of a biosecurity extension program on foodborne pathogens at the farm level. In this study, we will assess the effectiveness of the biosecurity program by characterizing isolates collected pre- and post-intervention. We will also conduct pre/post- intervention assessment of pest status on selected farms. Finally, we will compare the two cohorts intervention versus non-intervention groups: a sample size of 40 positive versus 20 negative farms will allow the detection of a significant factor given a risk ratio of 3 (based on a 95% confidence and 80% power) (Epi-info 2000, Center for Disease Control and Prevention). This would be for farm level factors. However, we will have data on 120 chicken flocks and 60 turkey flocks. The analysis at the flock level will use adjustment for clustering (farm) as described by McDermott et al., 1994) The biosecurity program may be immediately recognized as effective if the numbers of pathogenic bacterial present in the birds or the environment are greatly reduced. However, stronger conclusions about these measures may be possible based upon genotypic analysis of cultured organisms. For example, pre-intervention flocks may carry Salmonella of a number of serovars representing many strains. A successful intervention program might not only reduce the total number of bacteria, but also decrease flock contamination from an outside source, a fact that could be shown by the clonal nature of remaining strains by genomic fingerprinting. 6. Adjust our biosecurity and sanitation extension program, integrate the research findings in our educational programs, assess their value as learning tools and establish a communication network for the purpose of providing access to the information to all stakeholders. Findings of these studies will be developed into recommendations and made available to growers, extension agents, and integrators in a timely fashion and a variety of formats (written, electronic, presentation, etc.) to facilitate their inclusion in pathogen reduction activities. Selected forms of information will be provided in both English and Spanish. The information will become part of a media asset management system (Cumulus, Canto Inc.) and database currently being implemented by D. Ley at NCSU-CVM. Target audiences for this and other forms of information transfer will be: growers and their employees; company farm service people; county extension agents; other relevant integrator representatives (e.g., feed delivery and farm maintenance personnel); poultry industry associations (e.g. National Turkey Federation, etc.), allied poultry industries (e.g. biologics and pharmaceutical companies), State and Federal 15 animal health and diagnostic officials, and clinical and research experts. Modular instructional material is being developed through cooperation with NCSU Faculty in Food Science, Poultry Science, Entomology, Agriculture and Resource Economics, and the CVM. The material will be delivered as a formal on-line and classroom course for students in Poultry Science, Food Science, Entomology, Veterinary Medicine, or for on-farm HACCP certification of industry personnel (growers, integrator service/management personnel, extension). Individual modules may also be utilized as stand alone training packages for training growers, integrators, agents, etc. and can easily be modified based on research findings. A recent survey of the North Carolina poultry industry revealed that most integrators realize the need for pre-harvest pathogen reduction training. Approximately half of those surveyed requested that if offered, they would prefer to receive training via the Internet. Additionally, the industry expressed a need for graduates who are certified in HACCP training (9 CFR Part 304, et al. Pathogen Reduction; Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point Systems, Final Rule). Where appropriate evaluation is practical, a pre-test/post-test retention assessment will be conducted and tabulated for each module and according to each educational delivery method and student background. Smaller focus groups will be organized to test short term and long term retention (written questionnaire and interviews). We will also develop a questionnaire to gather user opinions of the material (Web based information; printed materials; guide sheets; manuals; multimedia). A continually updated directory of stakeholders and resources will be established and maintained at the lead institution (NCSU) with input from all partners. This information will be compiled into computer-based information management systems or databases. The primary storage devices will be NCSU-CVM servers. The software programs for these purposes are already available to the investigators and/or central service facilities (e.g. Biomedical Communications at the NCSU-CVM). These databases and associated software will facilitate effective development and dissemination of information by traditional media (e.g. fact sheet, newsletters, 35mm slide sets and video tapes) and Internet-based electronic media (e-mail lists, list servers, Web pages, CDs etc.). Data entry and analysis: All data will be entered into a database file (STATISTIX, version 7; Analytical Software, Tallahassee, Fla.). Simple descriptive statistics (frequency distribution, mean, standard deviation, minimum, median, maximum) will be done using STATISTIX. The data will then be exported to a formatted ASCII file. The Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) will be used for multivariate analyses. Given dichotomous outcomes [presence versus absence of a pathogen], logistic regression will be used. This will include a two-step procedure: first, univariate analyses will be conducted to screen independent variables. Pearson’s chi-square test will be used to screen categorical variables. Continuous variables will be regressed on the outcome using unconditional logistic regression. A p-value of < 0.15 will be considered to enter the multivariate analysis (backward stepwise logistic regression). Flock level analyses (with up to 6 flocks per farm) will be adjusted for clustering (farm). Potential problems and limitations: Although farms will be divided into two cohorts for the longitudinal study, it is possible that growers from the intervention cohort (biosecurity training) will communicate with growers 16 from the non-intervention (status quo) group. Thus, there could be transfer of intervention strategies to this cohort. This could effectively minimize the opportunity to detect a significant difference between the two groups. We should be able to determine whether or not this occurred when we survey both groups at the end of the project. Identification of stakeholders and compiling information into appropriate computer databases are primarily clerical efforts requiring time but are otherwise easily achievable. The challenge is to keep the information up to date and inclusive, which also requires constant attention and time. Collating and developing biosecurity/foodborne pathogen-related information for development as educational material will require coordination, and contributions from the research partners. Dr. Ley (NCSU-CVM) has agreed to coordinate all of the activities under this specific aim. The limitation of what can be accomplished will be imposed primarily by time and money. Therefore, realistic priorities have been set to include newsletters and informational Web pages. Electronic communications and dissemination of educational materials is likely to have the most cost effective bottom line, and be readily achievable by the project partners. However, some stakeholders do not have the Internet access necessary to take advantage of electronic communications. This limitation may be partially overcome by encouraging stakeholders to ‘buy in’ to the necessary technology, or by making such technology accessible. For example, a poultry company could make a computer terminal with access to the internet (at its main office) available to growers. Cooperation and Institutional Units Involved: Three institutions are involved in the proposed project. North Carolina State University is the lead institution where researchers and extension specialists from 5 different departments are collaborating. This group has field and laboratory expertise in all key disciplines (epidemiology, microbiology, molecular biology and epidemiology, pathology, entomology, poultry science, communication, and extension). In addition to this core group, two members of the North Carolina Agricultural and Technical (NC A&T) State University (Worku and Willis) and one from Michigan State University (Ryser) complete the project team. The NCSU group requested the participation of Drs Worku, Willis, and Ryser. Dr Ryser has collaborated with Dr Kathariou on other Listeria projects. His laboratory can perform analyses not available in Dr. Kathariou’s laboratory. Drs Willis and Worku are from a historically black institution located in Greensboro, North Carolina. This institution is located close to farms that will be included in the study. But more importantly, and like the NCSU group, they have a well-established relationship with the poultry industry. Dr. Willis’ research on litter and sanitation complements our field work. Dr Worku will characterize at the molecular level the Campylobacter isolates collected by Dr Willis. All data generated by the three institutions will be merged to cover our research objectives. Finally, since the NC A&T State University is part of the cooperative extension system, the extension and educational programs developed during this project can be implemented there as well. Equipment and Facilities: All equipment and facilities needed for this project are already in place in the 5 departments associated with this proposal. Laboratory facilities: The microbiologists participating in this study each have laboratories equipped fully for bacterial culturing and identification, and for molecular biology. One of them (C. Altier) is also the director of the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory at the NCSU College of 17 Veterinary Medicine where bacterial identification and susceptibility testing will be performed using a Vitek computerized bacterial identification and susceptibility system (bioMerieux Vitek, Inc.). AFLP analysis will be performed using a Li-Cor 4000 sequencer maintained by the College of Veterinary Medicine. All of the software required for gel analysis is maintained on site, and is available to us. Computer hardware and software: The department of Farm Animal Health and Resource Management already has all the computers and software packages to enter the data (Excel spreadsheet) and complete the statistical analysis (SAS; Statistix). Communication equipment and facilities: The College of Veterinary Medicine at North Carolina State University houses the Biomedical Communication Group. This group has two professional photographers, four multimedia specialists with expertise in web design, one professional video specialist, and two additional technicians. These professionals already have the network of computers (including an in-house server dedicated to the storage of images) and the necessary authorwares required to produce the extension and educational training programs. In addition, the Learning Technology Service Department at NCSU provides extensive support for on-line course development and improvement. Mr. Gene Lambert from Paradigm Media in California is the communication specialist leading the technical production of the biosecurity and sanitation material funded by the United States Poultry and Egg Association, and his company also has all the needed equipment and facilities for multimedia production and post-production. Transportation: North Carolina State University has an extensive motorpool available for farm visits. The state of North Carolina motorpool will also be available if needed. Access to chicken, turkey, and swine farms: We have a long-standing relationship with poultry companies in the state. They have all participated in field research with our institutions for well over a decade. More recently, they were involved in epidemiological investigation on respiratory and enteric diseases that included a survey of all farm employees; sampling (blood, feces, tissues) of affected and non-affected birds; and the communication of all laboratory results (including farm names and locations) to all other poultry companies in the region. All turkey companies are also involved in swine production. A few also own slaughter plants. Therefore, we do not anticipate any restrictions for farm and processing plant access. Project Timetable: Development of biosecurity multimedia training program: Ongoing; completion date: May 2002 Selection of farms based on company data: December 2001 – January 2002 Testing of flocks on selected farms to confirm status: November 2001 – February 2002 Survey of farms (cross-sectional study): March 2002 – September 2002 Selection of Salmonella-positive farms for prospective study: September 2002 – October 2002 Application/evaluation of biosecurity training program (extension): October 2002 – March 2003 Sampling and surveys for prospective study: November 2002 – March 2004 Data entry (including validation): November 2002 – May 2004 Analysis: May 2004 – July 2004 Clinical trials: February 2002 – February 2004 Production of next generation of extension and educational programs based on cross-sectional and prospective study: May 2004 – September 2004 Evaluation of extension and educational material: September 2004 – December 2004 18 References: Aarestrup, F. M., E. M. Nielsen, M. Madsen, and J. Engberg. 1997. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of thermophilic Campylobacter spp. from humans, pigs, cattle, and broilers in Denmark. 4 Patterns of thermophilic Campylobacter spp. from humans, pigs, cattle, and broilers in Denmark. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 41:2244-2250. Bager, F. and J. Petersen. 1991. Sensitivity and specificity of different methods for the isolation of Salmonella from pigs. Acta Vet. Scand. 32:473-481 Barnes HJ, Guy JS, Vaillancourt JP. 2000. Poult Enteritis Complex. Organisation Internationale des Epizooties publication Cason, J. A., J. S.Bailey, N. J. Stern, A. D. Whittemore, and N. A. Cox. 1997. Relationship between aerobic bacteria, Salmonellae and Campylobacter on broiler carcasses. Poultry Sci. 76:1037-1041. Chan, V. L., E. K. Hani, A. Joe, J. Lynett, D. Ng, and,F. M. Steele. 2000. The hippurate hydrolase gene and other unique genes of Campylobacter jejuni. pp. 455-463, . In. I. Nachamkin and M. J. Blaser (ed.) Campylobacter, 2nd edition., American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, D.C. Desai, M., Threllfall, E.J., and Stanley J. 2001. Amplified-fragment length polymorphism subtyping of the Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis phage type 4 clone complex. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39:201- 206. Greenberg, B, 1973. Flies and disease, Vol. II. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 447 p. Henzler, D. J. and H. M. Opitz. 1992. The role of mice in the epizootiology of Salmonella enteriditis infection on chicken layer farms. Avian Diseases 36:625-631 Hogsette, J. A., R. D. Jacobs, and R. W. Miller. 1993. The sticky card: device for studying the distribution of adult house fly (Diptera: Muscidae) populations in closed poultry houses. J. Econ. Entomol. 86(2):450-454. Hubbert, W.T., H.V. Hagstad, E. Spangler, M.H. Hinton, and K.L. Hughes. 1996. Foodborne diseases. P 140. In Hubbert, W. Et al., (ed), Food Safety and Quality Assurance. 2nd edition. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. Jackson, P.J., K.K. Hill, M.T. Laker, L.O. Ticknor, and P. Kaim. 1999. Genetic comparison of Bacillus anthracis and its close relatives using amplified fragment length polymorphism and polymerase chain reaction analysis. Appl Microbiol. 87:263-269. Janssen P, Coopman R, Huys G, Swings J, Bleeker M, Vos P, Zabeau M, and Kersters K. (1996) Evaluation of the DNA fingerprinting method AFLP as an new tool in bacterial taxonomy. Microbiology 142:1881-1893. Lysyk, T. J. and R. C. Axtell. 1986. Field evaluatiion of three methods of monitoring populations of house flies (Musca domestica) (Diptera: Muscidae) and other filth flies in three types of poultry housing systems. J. Econ. Entomol. 79:144-151. 19 Lysyk, T. J. and R. C. Axtell. 1986. Movement and distribution of house flies (Diptera: Muscidae) between habitats in two livestock farms. J. Econ. Entomol. 79:993-998. Koeleman, J. G. M., J. Stoof, D. J. Biesmans, P. H. M. Savelkoul, and C. M. J. E. Vandenbrouke-Grauls. (1998) Comparison of amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis, random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis, and amplified fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting for identification of Acinetobacter genomic species and typing of Acinetobacter baumannii. J Clin Microbiol 36:2522-2529. Lindstedt, B-A, Heir, E, Vardund, T, and Kapperud, G. (2000) Fluorescent amplified- fragment length polymorphism genotyping of Salmonella enterica supsp. enterica serovars and comparison with pulse-field gel electrophoresis typing. J Clin Microbiol 38:1623-1627. McDermott, J.J., and Y.H. Schukken, and M.M. Shoukri. Study design and analytic methods for data collected from clusters of animals. Prev. Vet. Med. 18: 175-191. Mead, P.S., L. Slutsker, V. Dietz, L.F. McCaig, J.S. Bresee, C. Shapiro, P.M. Griffin, and R. V. Tauxe. 1999. Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerging Infectious Diseases 5:607- 625. Nachamkin, I., J. Engberg, and F. M. Aarestrup. 2000. Diagnosis and antimicrobial susceptibility of Campylobacter species. pp. 45-66, . In. I. Nachamkin and M. J. Blaser (ed.) Campylobacter, 2nd edition., American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, D.C. National Committee for Clinical laboratory Standards. 1994. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk and dilution susceptibility tests for bacteria isolated from animals; proposed standard M31-P. National Committee for Clinical laboratory Standards, Villanova, Pa. Rosef, O. and G. Kapperud. 1983. Housefies (Musca domestica) as possible vectors of Campylobacter fetus var. jejuni. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 45:381-383. Ryser, E. T., S. M. Arimi, M. M. Bunduki, and C. W. Donnelly. 1996. Recovery of different Listeria ribotypes from naturally contaminated, raw refrigerated meat and poultry products with two primary enrichment media. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 62:1781-1787. Saenz, Y., M. Zaarazaga, M. Lantero, M. J. Castanares, F. Baquero, and C. Torres. 2000. Antibiotic resistance of Campylobacter strains isolated from animals, foods and humans in Spain in 1997- 1998. Antimicrob. Agents Chem. 44:267-271. Saitou N, and Nei M. (1987) The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylognetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 4:406-425. Shane, S.M., M.S. Montrose, and K.S. Harrington. 1985. Transmission of Campylobacter jejuni by the housefly (Musca domestica). Avian Dis. 29:384-391. Smith, K.E., J.M. Besser, C.W. Hedberg, F. T. Leano, J.B. Bender, J.H. Wicklund, B. P. Johnson, K.A. Moore, M. T. Osterholm, and the investigation team. 1999. Quinolone resistant Campylobacter jejuni infections in Minnesota, 1992-1998. N Engl J Med. 340: 1525-1532. 20 Stern, N. J., B. Wojton, and K. Kwiatek. 1992. A differential selective medium and dry-ice generated atmosphere for recovery of Campylobacter jejuni. J. Food Prot. 55:514-517. Tollefson, L., P. Fedorka-Cray, N. Marano, and F. Angulo. 1999. Informal information meeting on antimicrobial resistance surveillance in foodborne pathogens .WHO Geneva, 31 March – 1 April 1999 U.S. National antimicrobial resistance monitoring system for enteric bacteria http://www.who.int/emc/diseases/zoo/meetings/AMRfoodmeeting.html USDA. 2000. Salmonella enterica serotype Enteritidis in table egg layers in the U. S. USDA:APHIS:VS, CEAH, National Animal Health Monitoring System. Fort Collins, CO. #N333.1000 Vos, P., R. Hogers, M. bleeker, M. Reijans, T. van de Lee, M. Hornes, A. Frijiters, J. Pot, J. Peleman, M. Kuiper et al. 1995. AFLP: a new technique for DNA fingerprinting. Nucleic Acids Res. 23:4407-14. Toma, B, Vaillancourt, J-P, et al. 1999. Dictionary of Veterinary Epidemiology. Iowa State University Press. Ames, Iowa. 284 pages. Key personnel: Jean-Pierre Vaillancourt (Epidemiologist): Principal investigator. Responsible for the design of the biosecurity extension program. Responsible with others for the development, pre-testing, and administration of surveys and the conduct of the cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. (Time commitment: 30%). Jesse Grimes (Extension Poultry Specialist) Dr Grimes will be involved with the teams involved in the epidemiology/survey work directed at the turkey, the turkey hatchery and turkey breeder segments. He will also be a member of the team that has responsibility for taking the research findings and utilizing them in development of the educational components directed at reducing the incidence of microbiological food safety hazards from contributing to consumer illness. This will involve development of published bulletins, multimedia formatted information and incorporation of the information into a distance leaning course emphasizing on farm HACCP principles. (Time commitment: 9%) Michael Wineland (Extension Poultry Specialist): Dr Wineland will be involved with the teams involved in the epidemiology/survey work directed at the broiler, the broiler hatchery and broiler breeder segments. He will also be a member of the team that has responsibility for taking the research findings and utilizing them in development of the educational components directed at reducing the incidence of microbiological food safety hazards from contributing to consumer illness. This will involve development of published bulletins, multimedia formatted information and incorporation of the information into a distance leaning course emphasizing on farm HACCP principles. (Time commitment: 9%) Wes Watson (Entomologist): Research and Extension. Dr. Watson is responsible for the entomological component of the study, pest surveillance, preliminary isolation and culturing of bacteria, coordination of the graduate students program. Results of this study will be utilized in Medical Veterinary Entomology courses taught by Dr.Watson, and extension programs coordinated and developed by Livestock and Poultry Extension Entomologist, Mike Stringham. (Time commitment: 15%) 21 Michael Stringham (Entomologist): Co-PI. Responsible for arthropod and rodent sampling studies with W. Watson. Responsible with others for the developoment and pre-testing of surveys and development and delivery of Extension training programs and assessment (Time commitment: 10%) Craig Altier (Microbiologist): Responsible for identification and characterization of Salmonella obtained in this study, including both phenotypic analysis and molecular fingerprinting of isolates (Time commitment: 10%). Wondwossen Gebreyes (Molecular epidemiologist): Co-principal investigator. Responsible for isolation, identification, phenotypic characterization and genotypic fingerprinting of Salmonellae and Campylobacter, analysis of strains to study diversity of the pathogens and identification of risk factors, and study the impact of biosecurity measures on the selection of strains. (Time committment: 20%) David Ley (Microbiologist and media asset management): Co-investigator. Responsible for information and media asset management. Responsible with others for communications with stakeholders and development of extension and distance learning content, particularly via electronic media (internet, WWW). Responsible with others for implementation of DNA fingerprinting gel analysis system and database, and molecular epidemiology (Time commitment: 10%) John Barnes (Pathologist): responsible to determine flock health status (pathology lab) for selected farms; also involved in the educational and extension programs (Time commitment 5%). Andrea Miles (Poultry veterinarian and outreach professional): Involved in development of on- line pre-harvest food safety course, member of NCSU Poultry Coordinating Committee. Will act as liaison between extension team, research team and poultry companies in delivery and revision of educational programs (Time commitment: 5%). Dennis Wages (Poultry veterinarian, director of the Teaching Animal Unit, NCSU): Co- Investigator: Responsible for sample collection in and use of Teaching Animal Unit flocks for bacterial monitoring and isolation (Time commitment: 5%). Sophia Kathariou (Microbiologist): Responsible for the isolation and characterization (including molecular subtyping) of Campylobacter from poultry fecal dropping and carcass samples. (Time commitment: 10%) Elliot Ryser (Microbiologist, Michigan State University): Collaborator. Responsible for Listeria isolation, identification and characterization by serotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis in conjunction with the Michigan Department of Community Health (Time commitment: 5%). Willie Willis (Poultry scientist, A&T): Co- investigator. Responsible for conducting litter and live haul studies at the various production sites. Data will be collected on the prevalence of Campylobacter jejuni in chicken and turkeys reared on used and unused litter. Seasonal varability will be observed. Additionally, sanitation in the live haul division will be assessed. (Time commitment: 10%). Mulumebet Worku (Biotechnologist, A&T): Dr Worku will work with Dr Willis for Campylobacter studies (molecular characterization of strains). (Time commitment: 5%) 22 Collaborative and/or Subcontractual Arrangements The collaboration between the three institutions is described in the text of the grant and under the “Cooperation and Institutional Units Involved” and the “Key Personnel” sections. Please see the letters from Drs. Willis, Worku and Ryser (attached).
Pages to are hidden for
"grant"Please download to view full document