Effects of feed-supplementation and hide-spray application of two sources of tannins on enteric and hide bacteria of feedlot cattle.

Pathogenic bacteria attached to the hide or shed in the feces of cattle at slaughter can contaminate carcasses intended to be processed for human consumption. Therefore, new pre-harvest interventions are needed to prevent the carriage and excretion of foodborne pathogens in cattle presented to the processing plant. The objectives of this study were to examine the antimicrobial effects of hydrolysable tannin-rich chestnut and condensed tannin-rich mimosa extracts on bacterial indicators of foodborne pathogens when applied as a hide-intervention and as a feed additive to feedlot cattle. Water (control) or solutions (3 % wt/vol) of chestnut- and mimosa-extract treatments were sprayed (25 mL) at the left costal side of each animal to a 1000 cm² area, divided in four equal quadrants. Hide-swabs samples obtained at pre-, 2-min, 8-h, and 24-h post-spray application were cultured to enumerate Escherichia coli/total coliforms and total aerobic plate counts. In a second experiment, diets supplemented without (controls) or with (1.5 % of diet dry matter) chestnut- or mimosa-extracts were fed during a 42-day experimental feeding period. Weekly fecal samples starting on day 0, and rumen fluid obtained on days 0, 7, 21 or 42 were cultured to enumerate E.coli/total coliforms and Campylobacter. Tannin spray application showed no effect of treatment or post-application-time (P > 0.05) on measured bacterial populations, averaging 1.7/1.8, 1.5/1.6 and 1.5/1.7 (log10CFU/cm²) for E. coli/total coliforms, and 4.0, 3.4 and 4.2 (log10CFU/cm²) in total aerobes for control, chestnut and mimosa treatments, respectively. Mean (± SEM) ruminal E. coli and total coliform concentrations (log(10) CFU/mL) were reduced (P < 0.01) in steers fed chestnut-tannins (3.6 and 3.8 ± 0.1) in comparison with the controls (4.1 and 4.2 ± 0.1). Fecal E. coli concentrations were affected by treatment (P< 0.01), showing the highest values (log10 CFU/g) in fecal contents from mimosa-fed steers compared to controls (5.9 versus 5.6 ± 0.1 SEM, respectively). Total coliforms (log CFU/g) showed the highest values (P < 0.01) in feces from chestnut- and mimosa-fed steers (6.0 and 6.1 ± 0.1 respectively) in comparison with controls (5.7 ± 0.1). Fecal Campylobacter concentrations (log10CFU/g) were affected by treatment (P < 0.05), day (P < 0.001) and their interaction (P < 0.01) with the controls having lower concentrations than chestnut- and mimosa-fed steers (0.4, 1.0, and 0.8 ± 0.3, respectively). It was concluded that under our research conditions, tannins were not effective in decreasing measured bacterial populations on beef cattle hides. Additionally, chestnut tannin reduced E. coli and total coliforms within the rumen but the antimicrobial effect was not maintained in the lower gastrointestinal tract. Further research is necessary to elucidate the possible antimicrobial effects of tannins at site-specific locations of the gastrointestinal tract in beef cattle fed high-grain and high-forage diets.

Prevalence and concentration of Campylobacter in rumen contents and feces in pasture and feedlot-fed cattle.

Campylobacter are important human foodborne pathogens known to colonize the gastrointestinal tract of cattle. The incidence of Campylobacter in cattle may be seasonal and may vary among age groups and type (beef versus dairy). Less is known about other factors that could influence the prevalence, colonization site, and shedding of Campylobacter in cattle. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the prevalence and enumerate Campylobacter at two sites along the digestive tract of beef and dairy type cattle consuming either grass or feedlot diets. In an initial study, Campylobacter was not recovered from rumen samples of any of 10 ruminally cannulated (six dairy and four beef type) pasture-reared cattle and there was no difference (p > 0.05) between cattle types on fecal Campylobacter recovery, with 50% of each type yielding culture-positive feces (overall mean +/- SE, 0.75 +/- 0.001 SEM log(10) colony-forming units [CFU]/g feces). When calculated from Campylobacter culture-positive animals only, mean fecal concentrations were 1.50 +/- 0.001 SEM log(10) CFU/g. In a follow-up study with feedlot and pasture-reared cattle (n = 18 head each), 78% of rumen and 94% of fecal samples from pastured cattle were positive for Campylobacter while 50% of the rumen and 72% of the fecal samples were positive in concentrate-fed animals. Overall mean concentration of Campylobacter was greater in feces than ruminal fluid (p < 0.05). When only Campylobacter-positive animals were analyzed, concentrations recovered from feces were higher (p < 0.05) in concentrate-fed than in pasture-fed cattle (4.29 vs. 3.34 log(10) CFU/g, respectively; SEM = 0.29). Our results suggest that the rumen environment and its microbial population are less favorable for the growth of Campylobacter and that concentrate diets may provide a more hospitable lower gastrointestinal tract for Campylobacter.