Chemical Treatment to Remove or Prevent Salmonella Contamination of Poultry Feed

Introduction: Salmonella may contaminate livestock feed at several stages of production, transport and storage. Formaldehyde is an effective anti-Salmonella feed treatment, but it is now banned for this use in Europe. Organic acid-based additives are an alternative. Gap Statement: The efficacy of organic acid feed additives against natural Salmonella feed contamination is uncertain due to a paucity of reported work investigating low levels of infection that may be relevant for real-world situations. Aim: To compare the anti-Salmonella effects of feed additives based on formaldehyde versus those based on organic acids. Methodology: Experimental contamination of poultry feed with one of three Salmonella serovars at moderate (between 10 and 200 CFU/g) or low (around 1 CFU/g) levels was preceded (‘prevention’ mode) or followed (‘decontamination’ mode) by application of commercial antimicrobial additives. Storage at room temperature for 24 h was followed by pre-enrichment then culture. Results: Organic acid-based products at recommended application rates only eliminated detectable Salmonella from samples with the lowest degree of contamination. The effect was partial, with a proportion of samples still yielding Salmonella in most experiments, and only one such product showed efficacy above 50% of samples for the decontamination mode. The two formaldehyde-based products showed partial efficacy against moderate contamination, and one was entirely effective against low-level contamination even at its lower inclusion rate. Conclusions: Organic acid-based feed additives have a lesser anti-Salmonella effect than formaldehyde-based products at their respective recommended inclusion rates. However, some non-formaldehyde products may be substantially effective against a low, natural degree of contamination. Impact Statement: Chemical suppression of Salmonella in animal feed is an important element of measures to safeguard livestock health and, consequentially, public health too. The European ban on using formaldehyde for this purpose has necessitated the use of alternative products. The present work includes very low levels of Salmonella in feed, possibly mimicking natural contamination, to show that under these circumstances some such alternatives may be as efficacious as formaldehyde products.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Microbiology Research
Published
2026-03-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/microbiolres17030064
Primary Topic
Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Chemical Treatment to Remove or Prevent Salmonella Contamination of Poultry Feed

Rob Davies, Andrew Wales, Tom Huby, Shaun Cawthraw
Microbiology Research
Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
article

Chemical Treatment to Remove or Prevent Salmonella Contamination of Poultry Feed

Rob Davies, Andrew Wales, Tom Huby, Shaun Cawthraw
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Salmonella may contaminate livestock feed at several stages of production, transport and storage. Formaldehyde is an effective anti-Salmonella feed treatment, but it is now banned for this use in Europe. Organic acid-based additives are an alternative. Gap Statement: The efficacy of organic acid feed additives against natural Salmonella feed contamination is uncertain due to a paucity of reported work investigating low levels of infection that may be relevant for real-world situations. Aim: To compare the anti-Salmonella effects of feed additives based on formaldehyde versus those based on organic acids. Methodology: Experimental contamination of poultry feed with one of three Salmonella serovars at moderate (between 10 and 200 CFU/g) or low (around 1 CFU/g) levels was preceded (‘prevention’ mode) or followed (‘decontamination’ mode) by application of commercial antimicrobial additives. Storage at room temperature for 24 h was followed by pre-enrichment then culture. Results: Organic acid-based products at recommended application rates only eliminated detectable Salmonella from samples with the lowest degree of contamination. The effect was partial, with a proportion of samples still yielding Salmonella in most experiments, and only one such product showed efficacy above 50% of samples for the decontamination mode. The two formaldehyde-based products showed partial efficacy against moderate contamination, and one was entirely effective against low-level contamination even at its lower inclusion rate. Conclusions: Organic acid-based feed additives have a lesser anti-Salmonella effect than formaldehyde-based products at their respective recommended inclusion rates. However, some non-formaldehyde products may be substantially effective against a low, natural degree of contamination. Impact Statement: Chemical suppression of Salmonella in animal feed is an important element of measures to safeguard livestock health and, consequentially, public health too. The European ban on using formaldehyde for this purpose has necessitated the use of alternative products. The present work includes very low levels of Salmonella in feed, possibly mimicking natural contamination, to show that under these circumstances some such alternatives may be as efficacious as formaldehyde products.

Microbiology ResearchVol. 17(3)
Animal and Plant Health Agency (GB), University of Surrey (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.