Copyright © 2016 Sheila Yubero Delgado (syubd@unileon.es) Evaluation of in vitro efficacy of several disinfectants against Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis and Escherichia coli strains in poultry S. Yubero- Delgado1, E.F. Rodríguez-Ferri1, S. Martínez-Martínez1, Á. Álvarez-Estrada1, Rafael Frandoloso1,2 , C.B. Gutiérrez Martín1 1 Microbiology and Immunology Section, Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of León, Spain. 2 Laboratory of Immunology, Faculty of Agronomy and Veterinary Medicine, University of Passo Fundo, Brazil Introduction The poultry industry is intensive and consistently applies an all-in, all-out system with the aim of minimizing infection pressure and targeting specific organisms such as Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis (SE) and Escherichia coli (EC), which are two of the pathogens that cause heavy economic losses worldwide(1). Disinfectants are employed during production breaks as a routine part of the management of poultry farms(2). The efficacy of 16 individual dsinfectants and 12 commercial formulations against avian SE and EC are described, including those most routinely used for cleansing in the avian industry. Please export the PowerPoint document as a PDF) and upload the PDF into the system. Do not use a font size smaller than 16. Materials & Methods An in vitro suspension test in the presence and absence of serum as organic material was conducted(3). The activity of chloramine-T, sodium hypochlorite, povidone-iodine, iodophor, H2O2, KMnO4, benzalkonium and cetylpiridinium chlorides, ethanol, isopropanol, chlorhexidine digluconate, formaldehyde, phenol, phosphoric acid, zinc sulphate and thimerosal as well as that of 12 commercial formulations (CR-36 Mural, Darodor-9000, Limoseptic, Limoseptic Plus, Limoseptic SF, Totalcide, Virkon S, Proxitan 15, DVA 2000, UCI 414, Daronit 4000 and Polimorfo) is described. The SE ATCC 13076 reference strain; the SE Le-01; the EC C12P19 serogroup O91, and the EC C12P17, serogroup O102 were tested. These organisms were passaged not more than three times on culture media, recovered in TSA agar at 37ºC for 24 h, and then inoculated onto the same conditions. The cells were suspended in either sterile saline solution or undiluted sterile bovine fetal serum to reach 109 CFU/ml, and reactions were carried out by mixing 0.1 ml of each organism with 0.9 ml of each disinfectant, whose activity was determined by comparing growth on the control and disinfectant plates. Each product was tested for its capacity to cause up to a 106 reduction in CFU of strains. At least a 103 decrease (3-log10, 99.9% reduction in CFU) was regarded as the minimal acceptable effective value(3). Results Conclusions Ethanol, chlorhexidine digluconate, CR-36 Mural, Darodor-9000 or UCI 414 performed best in terms of efficacy and this in vitro method against the four strains of SE / EC tested. Nevertheless, further in vivo studies are needed for confirming our in vitro results because the efficacy of a given disinfectant is influenced by several environmental factors. E. coli C12 P19 S. Enteritidis ATCC 130 E. coli C12 P17 S. Enteritidis Le-01 References 1. Luftul, Kabir, S.M. Avian colibacillosis and salmonellosis: a closer look at epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, control and public health concerns. 2010. International J Environ Res Public Health. 7: 89-114. 2. Jonhson, T.J. Prevalence of avian-pathogenic Escherichia coli strain O1 genomic islands among extraintestinal and commensal E. coli isolates. 2012. Journal of Bacteriology. 194: 2846-2853. 3. Gutiérrez, C.B., Rodríguez, Barbosa, J.I., Suárez, J., González, O.R., Tascón, R.I., Rodríguez, Ferri, E.F. 1995. Efficacy of a variety of disinfectants against Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae serotype 1. Am J Vet Res. 56:1025-1029. Copyright © 2016 Sheila Yubero Delgado (syubd@unileon.es)