The global cost of coccidiosis has been recently estimated to be >$3 billion per annum. This cost calculation is based on direct production losses and indirect costs for prevention measures. However, most of this financial loss comes from an increased feed conversion ratio (FCR) and decreased weight gain (Williams, 1999). In addition, clinical disease – in broilers mainly caused by Eimeria tenella – leads to increased mortality. Finally, Eimeria is also one of the most important predisposing factors for bacterial enteritis.
Anticoccidial feed additives or anticoccidial drugs have been and still are the most widely used prevention tool in broilers. These products have many merits but the two main issues associated with their use are (i) reduced sensitivity of Eimeria parasites when a certain product is used for too long or too often and (ii) cross resistance between certain compounds (Marien et al., 2007).
Recent regulatory developments – i.e. the reduction in withdrawal times of some monovalent ionophores and nicarbazin – have increased flexibility for broiler producers but also worsened the above-mentioned issues.
In fact, exposure of Eimeria to these compounds has increased – since they are used during the lifespan of a broiler flock – as has the use of products of the same category (monovalent ionophores), between which cross-resistance exists.
Therefore, there is an intensified need for alternative approaches to Eimeria prevention. Rotational programmes, where anticoccidial feed additives with different modes of action are used judiciously, are one such programme. Another increasingly popular approach is the regular use of Eimeria vaccines as part of a long-term prevention strategy.
In fact, the use of Eimeria vaccines as part of a rotation programme (alternating cycles with vaccination with cycles with anticoccidial programmes) has proved to restore the sensitivity of the Eimeria field population to anticoccidial drugs, as a consequence of the introduction of sensitive vaccine strains in the poultry houses (Chapman and Jeffers, 2015; Peek and Landman, 2011; Dardi et al., 2015).
In the study conducted by Dardi et al. (2015) the results indicate that three consecutive vaccinations changed the resistance profile of Eimeria spp. that populated the study farm and controlled the coccidiosis problems at least for two flocks after vaccination.
On the other hand, the 2nd cycle post-vaccination already showed the development of some resistance, indicating that three consecutive vaccinations may be insufficient to change the profile to full sensitivity. This could be because the farm had never been vaccinated before and for this reason Eimeria field strains had reached a marked level of resistance.
In general, there were never statistically significant differences between productive results before and during vaccination, shattering the popular belief that it is hard to obtain similar zootechnical results when preventing coccidiosis by vaccination, compared to using anticoccidial feed additives.
Flocks after vaccination always showed statistically significantly improved FCRs and EPEFs when compared to the cycles before vaccination, whereas numerically results always improved after vaccination.
Nowadays, rotation programmes with Eimeria vaccines realistically represent the best long-term strategy to prevent coccidiosis in broiler productions but also to continuously improve production results, which is the ultimate goal for every poultry producer.
Chapman H.D., 1997. Biochemical, genetic and applied aspects of drug resistance in Eimeria parasites of the fowl. Avian Pathology, 26 (2), 221-244.
Chapman H.D., and Jeffers T.K., 2015. Restoration of sensitivity to salinomycin in Eimeria following 5 flocks of broiler chickens reared in floor-pens using drug programs and vaccination to control coccidiosis. Poultry Science 94, 943–946.
Dardi M., Pagès M., Rubio J., Mathis G. F., De Gussem M., 2015. Anticoccidial Sensitivity test (AST) results from a farm vaccinated for three consecutive flocks with a coccidiosis vaccine. Proceedings of the XIX World Veterinary Poultry Association Congress. Cape Town, South Africa, 158.
Marien M., De Gussem M., Vancraeynest D., Fort G., Naciri M., 2007. Indication of cross-resistance between different monovalent ionophores as determined by an anticoccidial sensitivity test (AST). 16th European Symposium on Poultry Nutrition, Strasbourg, France.
Peek H.W., Landman W.J., 2011. Coccidiosis in poultry: anticoccidial products, vaccines and other prevention strategies. Veterinary Quarterly 31, 143-161.
Ronsmans S., Van Erum J., Dardi M., Rubio J., 2015. The use of a live coccidiosis vaccine in rotation with anticoccidial feed additives: results from the Belgian field. Proceedings of the XIX World Veterinary Poultry Association Congress. Cape Town, South Africa, 158.
Shirley, M.W., Harvey, D., 2000. A genetic linkage map of the apicomplexan protozoan parasite Eimeria tenella. Genome Res. 10, 1587–1593.
Shirley, M.W., Smith, A.L., Blake, D.P., 2007. Challenges in the successful control of the avian coccidia. Vaccine 25, 5540–5547.
Williams R.B., 1999. A compartmentalised model for the estimation of the cost of coccidiosis to the world’s chicken production industry. International Journal for Parasitology 29 , 1209 – 1229.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Description: This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category \'\'Necessary\'\'.
Duration: 1 years 1 days 1 hours
Description: The cookie is used by cdn services like CloudFare to identify individual clients behind a shared IP address and apply security settings on a per-client basis. It does not correspond to any user ID in the web application and does not store any personally identifiable information.
Duration: 1 years 30 days
Description: This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category \'\'Non-necessary\'\'.br />
Duration: 1 years 19 days 15 hours 19 minutes
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Description: This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to calculate visitor, session, campaign data and keep track of site usage for the site\'\'s analytics report. The cookies store information anonymously and assign a randomly generated number to identify unique visitors.
Duration: 1 years 20 days 8 hours 50 minutes
Description: This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the wbsite is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages viisted in an anonymous form.
Duration: 1 years 19 days 15 hours 21 minutes
Description: This cookies is installed by Google Universal Analytics to throttle the request rate to limit the colllection of data on high traffic sites.
Duration: 1 years 19 days 15 hours 19 minutes
The contents of this website are aimed exclusively at prescribing veterinarians. By clicking on ACCEPT you state that you are a veterinary professional. In other case, please contact a veterinarian and click on DECLINE.