Submitted to: Journal of Applied Poultry Research
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: 3/9/1999
Publication Date: N/A
Citation: N/A Interpretive Summary: Salmonella enteritidis (SE) remains a major problem for the layer industry because of its ability to infect hens and ultimately contaminate the internal contents of their eggs. It is therefore important to establish management practices which limit flock contact with this organism. Recent studies have shown that Salmonella species, including SE, are capable of traveling through the air and infecting individuals a distance away. Intervention schemes to prevent this route of transmission would be helpful in reducing hen exposure to, and possible infection by, SE. One potential method to prevent this transmission is the negative air ionizer. Such a device functions by imparting a negative charge to airborne particles which causes them to be attracted to grounded surfaces such as walls and floors and therefore removes them from the air environment. In a group of experiments, we used an ionizer to charge the air in a room containing hens sinfected with SE and examined how effectively this device decreased the level of SE found in the air. The efficiency of SE removal by the negative air ionizer averaged 96.5% over ten days and dropped the air SE numbers to levels below those normally capable of causing infection. These results indicate that air ionization could be an effective method for removing disease agents from a room air environment and could have direct industry applications for improving flock health.
Technical Abstract: Removal of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis (S. enteritidis) circulating in the air can be important in reducing S. enteritidis problems in a flock. A potential method to perform this removal is the negative air ionizer. Such a device imparts a negative charge on airborne particles causing them to be attracted to grounded surfaces & effectively taken out of circulation.Two trials were conducted to determine whether such a devic could lower levels of S. enteritidis in a room containing infected caged laying hens. In both trials, the negative air ionizer effectively decreased the room airborne levels of S. enteritidis compared to levels in a room lacking a device. This was particularly evident in trial 2 where an S. enteritidis reduction efficiency by the ionizer averaged 96.5% during the last 6 days of the sampling period. Failure to brush dust off the ionizer every other day resulted in reduced efficiency. These results demonstrate the potential efficacy of negative air ionization in removing poultry bacterial pathogens in a layer room situation.