Avian Coryza: Etiology, Diagnosis, and Control in Poultry

Introduction

Avian coryza, also known as infectious coryza, is an acute respiratory disease of chickens and other avian species caused by the bacterium Avibacterium paragallinarum [1]. The disease is characterized by catarrhal inflammation of the upper respiratory tract, including the nasal passages and sinuses, leading to significant economic losses in the poultry industry due to reduced egg production, increased mortality, and increased culling rates [2, 1]. While primarily a disease of chickens, A. paragallinarum has been isolated from other avian hosts, including quail and pheasants [1]. The global distribution of avian coryza is well documented, with outbreaks reported across Asia, Africa, the Americas, and Europe [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. The disease is particularly problematic in multi-age layer flocks and in regions with high poultry density and suboptimal biosecurity [8, 9].

Etiology

Taxonomic Classification

Avibacterium paragallinarum is a Gram-negative, non-motile, pleomorphic rod belonging to the family Pasteurellaceae [1]. The bacterium is catalase-negative, oxidase-positive, and requires nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD, V factor) for growth, a characteristic it shares with other members of the Avibacterium genus [1]. The organism is fastidious and grows slowly on enriched media, often requiring microaerophilic conditions [10, 1].

Serotyping and Genotyping

Classical serotyping of A. paragallinarum is based on the Page scheme, which identifies three serovars: A, B, and C [1]. A fourth serogroup, serovar D, has been proposed but is not universally accepted [1]. The serovar is determined by the antigenic properties of the hemagglutinin protein, HMTp210 [11, 12]. The HMTp210 gene encodes a large outer membrane protein responsible for hemagglutination activity, and specific regions of this protein are critical for serovar specificity [11]. Molecular genotyping methods, including sequence analysis of the HMTp210 gene, have been developed as alternatives to classical serotyping [12]. These methods have revealed significant genetic diversity among isolates, including the identification of novel genotypes in various geographic regions [13, 4, 14]. A standardized, genome-guided multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) scheme has been developed to enhance epidemiological typing and has been validated against existing methods [15].

Pathogenic and Nonpathogenic Strains

A critical advancement in the understanding of A. paragallinarum is the recognition of both pathogenic and nonpathogenic strains [16, 17, 18]. Nonpathogenic isolates have been recovered from naive, healthy layer flocks in the United States, and these strains lack the ability to cause clinical disease in experimental infection models [16, 17, 18]. The genetic basis for this lack of pathogenicity is under investigation, and these nonpathogenic strains may have potential as live vaccine candidates [16]. The differentiation of pathogenic from nonpathogenic strains is essential for accurate diagnosis and is a focus of molecular diagnostic development [19].

Epidemiology

Host Range and Transmission

The primary host for A. paragallinarum is the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus), although the bacterium has been isolated from other avian species [1]. Transmission occurs horizontally through direct contact, aerosolized respiratory droplets, and contaminated fomites [1]. The bacterium can survive for a limited time in the environment, particularly in organic material, but does not persist for extended periods outside the host [1]. Carrier birds, which may harbor the organism without showing clinical signs, are a significant source of infection for naive flocks [1].

Risk Factors and Geographic Distribution

A case-control survey identified several farm-level risk factors for infectious coryza, including multi-age flock management, poor biosecurity practices, and the introduction of new birds without quarantine [8]. A retrospective analysis of outbreaks in California from 2016 to 2022 revealed distinct epidemiologic patterns, with outbreaks often occurring in clusters and linked to specific management practices [9]. A meta-analysis of studies from China covering 1993 to 2024 reported a pooled prevalence of infectious coryza and identified regional variations in risk [3]. Outbreaks have also been documented in Canada [2], Ethiopia [5], Iran [4], Poland [20], and across Europe [21]. The disease is considered endemic in many parts of the world, particularly in regions with intensive poultry production [3, 1].

Coinfections

Avibacterium paragallinarum is frequently involved in polymicrobial respiratory infections. Coinfection with Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale has been reported in broiler chickens, and A. paragallinarum has been associated with endocarditis in broiler breeding hens, often in conjunction with other bacterial pathogens [20]. Concurrent infections with Mycoplasma gallisepticum or infectious bronchitis virus can exacerbate the severity of clinical disease [1].

Clinical Signs

The incubation period for avian coryza is typically 1 to 3 days following exposure [1]. The hallmark clinical signs are serous to mucoid nasal discharge, facial edema (swelling of the periorbital sinuses and wattles), and conjunctivitis [2, 1]. Affected birds may exhibit sneezing, rales, and dyspnea [1]. In laying hens, a marked drop in egg production (10% to 40%) is common, and egg quality may be compromised [2, 1]. Morbidity is typically high (up to 100%), while mortality is usually low unless secondary infections occur [1]. In severe cases, particularly with virulent strains, the infection can spread to the lower respiratory tract, leading to pneumonia and airsacculitis [22]. A questionnaire study in small chicken flocks highlighted the grave consequences of infectious coryza, including prolonged morbidity and economic hardship for flock owners [21].

Pathology

Gross lesions are primarily confined to the upper respiratory tract. The nasal passages and infraorbital sinuses contain copious amounts of catarrhal to purulent exudate [1]. The mucosa of the nasal turbinates and sinuses is hyperemic and edematous [1]. In chronic or severe cases, caseous exudate may be present in the sinuses [1]. Histologically, there is acute catarrhal inflammation with desquamation of the respiratory epithelium, infiltration of heterophils and mononuclear cells, and hyperplasia of mucous glands [1]. In cases of systemic infection, fibrinous pericarditis and perihepatitis may be observed [20].

Pathogenesis

The pathogenesis of A. paragallinarum infection involves adherence to and colonization of the upper respiratory tract epithelium [1]. The bacterium produces a capsular polysaccharide and a lipooligosaccharide, both of which are important virulence factors [23]. The biosynthetic loci for these structures have been identified and characterized [23]. The HMTp210 hemagglutinin protein mediates attachment to host cells and is a key target of the host immune response [11]. Biofilm formation is another important virulence mechanism, and the genes involved in this process have been identified using random transposon mutagenesis [24]. The bacterium is also capable of natural transformation, a process that facilitates horizontal gene transfer and the acquisition of new traits, including antimicrobial resistance genes [25]. Outer membrane vesicles produced by A. paragallinarum have been shown to mediate the horizontal transfer of antibiotic resistance genes [26].

Diagnosis

Clinical and Postmortem Examination

A presumptive diagnosis of avian coryza can be made based on the characteristic clinical signs of facial edema, nasal discharge, and conjunctivitis, particularly in layer flocks [2, 1]. However, these signs are not pathognomonic, and differential diagnoses must be considered. These include avian influenza A virus in wild birds and poultry: etiology, epidemiology, clinical signs, pathology, diagnostics, treatment, and control, avian cholera (fowl cholera) in poultry and wild birds: etiology, epidemiology, clinical signs, pathology, diagnosis, treatment and control, avian mycoplasmosis: mycoplasma gallisepticum and other species, vaccination and control in poultry, and other respiratory viral infections [1]. Postmortem examination reveals the presence of catarrhal exudate in the nasal passages and sinuses [1].

Bacteriological Culture

Definitive diagnosis requires the isolation and identification of A. paragallinarum from clinical specimens [10, 1]. Swabs of the nasal cavity, infraorbital sinuses, or trachea are the preferred samples [1]. The bacterium is fastidious and requires enriched media, such as chocolate agar or blood agar supplemented with a nurse colony (e.g., Staphylococcus epidermidis) to provide the necessary V factor (NAD) [10, 1]. Selective culture media have been developed to improve the isolation rate of A. paragallinarum from samples contaminated with other bacteria [10]. Colonies are small, dewdrop-like, and may produce a characteristic odor [1]. Identification is confirmed by Gram staining, colony morphology, and biochemical tests, including catalase (negative), oxidase (positive), and the requirement for NAD [1].

Molecular Diagnostics

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays have become the standard for the rapid and specific detection of A. paragallinarum [19, 5]. PCR assays targeting the HMTp210 gene are widely used and can differentiate between the major serovars [19, 12]. A critical development is the validation of PCR assays that can differentiate pathogenic from nonpathogenic strains, which is essential for accurate diagnosis and management decisions [19]. Molecular detection is particularly useful for confirming infection in carrier birds or in cases where culture is unsuccessful due to prior antimicrobial therapy [19, 5]. Sequence analysis of PCR amplicons can provide genotyping data for epidemiological investigations [13, 4, 14, 12].

Serology

Serological tests, such as the hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test and commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), can be used to detect antibodies against A. paragallinarum [1]. The HI test is serovar-specific and is used for serotyping and for monitoring vaccine responses [1]. ELISAs are more suitable for flock-level screening but may have variable sensitivity and specificity depending on the antigen used [1].

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Given the increasing reports of antimicrobial resistance, susceptibility testing is recommended to guide treatment [7, 27]. A standardized broth microdilution method has been recommended for A. paragallinarum to ensure consistent and comparable results across laboratories [27]. Genomic analysis of isolates has revealed the presence of various resistance genes, including those conferring resistance to tetracyclines, sulfonamides, and beta-lactams [7, 26].

flowchart TD
    A[Clinical Signs: Facial edema, nasal discharge, conjunctivitis], > B{Presumptive Diagnosis}
    B, > C[Sample Collection: Nasal/sinus swabs]
    C, > D{Diagnostic Pathway}
    D, > E[Bacteriological Culture on Selective Media]
    D, > F[Molecular Detection: HMTp210 PCR]
    D, > G[Serology: HI test or ELISA]
    E, > H[Biochemical Identification & MALDI-TOF]
    F, > I[Genotyping & Pathogenicity Differentiation]
    G, > J[Antibody Detection]
    H, > K[Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing]
    I, > L[Definitive Diagnosis & Epidemiological Typing]
    J, > L
    K, > L
    L, > M[Treatment & Control Decisions]

Treatment

Antimicrobial Therapy

Treatment of avian coryza is primarily based on the administration of antimicrobial agents [1]. Commonly used drugs include tetracyclines (e.g., oxytetracycline, doxycycline), sulfonamides, and macrolides (e.g., tylosin, tilmicosin) [1]. However, the emergence of antimicrobial resistance is a growing concern, and treatment should be guided by susceptibility testing whenever possible [7, 27]. The use of probiotics in combination with berry phenolic extracts has shown promise as an alternative or adjunctive therapy [28]. Chinese herbal medicine extracts have also demonstrated bacteriostatic activity against A. paragallinarum in vitro [29].

Supportive Care

Supportive care, including ensuring adequate ventilation, reducing stocking density, and providing clean water and feed, can help reduce the severity of clinical signs and improve recovery rates [1].

Control and Prevention

Biosecurity

Strict biosecurity is the cornerstone of preventing avian coryza [8, 1]. Key measures include maintaining closed flocks, implementing all-in/all-out management, quarantining new birds, and controlling the movement of people and equipment [8, 1]. Cleaning and disinfection of poultry houses and equipment between flocks is essential, as the bacterium can survive in organic material [1].

Vaccination

Vaccination is a widely used control strategy, particularly in layer flocks where the disease is endemic [30, 31, 32, 1]. Both inactivated (bacterin) and live attenuated vaccines are available [32, 1]. Inactivated vaccines are typically administered via injection and provide serovar-specific protection [30, 1]. Live attenuated vaccines, including a recently developed strain, can be administered via drinking water or spray and may provide broader protection [32]. The efficacy of different vaccination plans has been evaluated against variant strains, such as a serovar B variant from Argentina [30]. The use of Enterococcus faecium as a probiotic has been shown to improve the immune response to vaccination [31]. Polymeric nanocarrier-based adjuvants have been developed to enhance the mucosal immune response to locally produced vaccines [33].

Eradication

Eradication of A. paragallinarum from a flock is difficult due to the existence of carrier birds [1]. Depopulation of infected flocks followed by thorough cleaning and disinfection is the most effective method for elimination [1]. In some regions, test-and-removal programs based on serological or molecular testing have been implemented [1].

Future Directions

Research continues to focus on understanding the molecular basis of pathogenicity, developing improved diagnostic tools, and creating more effective vaccines [16, 34, 15, 19, 24]. The development of a counterselection system for marker-free genetic manipulation of A. paragallinarum will facilitate functional genomic studies [34]. The identification of nonpathogenic strains and their potential as live vaccine candidates represents a promising avenue for future control strategies [16]. Continued surveillance of antimicrobial resistance patterns is essential for guiding treatment recommendations [7, 27].

References

[1] El-Gazzar M, Gallardo R, Bragg R, et al. Avibacterium paragallinarum, the Causative Agent of Infectious Coryza: A Comprehensive Review. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40249575/

[2] Gupta A, Girard T, Bowling H, et al. Infectious coryza outbreak in a table egg layer flock in Alberta. Can Vet J. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41716501/

[3] Wang Y, Si M, Qiu J, et al. Prevalence, risk factors, and regional insights of infectious coryza among poultry populations in China during 1993-2024: a meta-analysis. J Vet Med Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41320253/

[4] Bashashati M, Moradi Haghgou L, Nouri A, et al. Genetic diversity of Avibacterium paragallinarum: uncovering novel genotypes in Iranian poultry farms. Avian Pathol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41178666/

[5] Deresse G, Assefa E, Tesfaw L, et al. Isolation, molecular detection, and sequence analysis of Avibacterium paragallinarum from suspected cases of infectious coryza infected chickens from different areas of Ethiopia, 2022-2024. BMC Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40087555/

[6] Davison S, Tracy L, Kelly DJ, et al. Infectious Coryza in Pennsylvania. Avian Dis. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39400211/

[7] Cao X, Huang X, Lin Y, et al. Prevalence and genomic-based antimicrobial resistance analysis of Avibacterium paragallinarum isolates in Guangdong Province, China. Poult Sci. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38652951/

[8] Pierdon M, Prown R, Davison S, et al. A Case Control Survey of Farm Characteristics, Biosecurity Measures, and Risk Events in Flocks With and Without Infectious Coryza. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40249578/

[9] Nguyen V, Stoute S, Ramsubeik S, et al. A Retrospective Analysis to Identify Epidemiologic Patterns of the Infectious Coryza Outbreak in California 2016-22. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40249577/

[10] Srednik ME, Shelkamy MMS, Hashish A, et al. Development of selective culture media for efficient isolation of Avibacterium paragallinarum from chickens. J Clin Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40679850/

[11] Li KP, Tan DH, Ou SJ, et al. Regions Important for Hemagglutination Activity and Serotypes of Avibacterium paragallinarum HMTp210 Protein. Avian Dis. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37556294/

[12] Buter R, Feberwee A, de Wit S, et al. Molecular characterization of the HMTp210 gene of Avibacterium paragallinarum and the proposition of a new genotyping method as alternative for classical serotyping. Avian Pathol. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37470411/

[13] Wen J, Liao Z, Yin L, et al. Molecular serotyping and virulence assessment of Avibacterium paragallinarum strains circulating in Chinese poultry flocks. Front Vet Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41815498/

[14] Chen L, Hu J, Dai N, et al. Genotypic and Biochemical Divergence of Avibacterium paragallinarum Isolates in China. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40643936/

[15] Ghanem M, Harris A, Timilsina M, et al. A standardized, genome-guided MLST scheme for Avibacterium paragallinarum: enhanced epidemiological typing and validation against existing methods. J Clin Microbiol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41665375/

[16] Shelkamy MMS, Fay C, Hashish A, et al. Investigating the pathogenicity of novel non-pathogenic Avibacterium paragallinarum isolates and their protective potential against infectious coryza. Avian Pathol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42210853/

[17] Shelkamy MMS, Hashish A, Srednik ME, et al. Eight complete and four draft genome sequences of nonpathogenic Avibacterium paragallinarum isolates from naive, healthy layer chickens in the USA. Microbiol Resour Announc. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40815000/

[18] Shelkamy MMS, Hashish A, Srednik ME, et al. Prevalence of Nonpathogenic Avibacterium paragallinarum in Naïve-Healthy Layer Flocks Across Multiple States in the United States. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40420864/

[19] Shelkamy MMS, Hashish A, Chaves M, et al. Development and Validation of PCR Assays for Improved Diagnosis of Infectious Coryza by Differentiating Pathogenic and Nonpathogenic Avibacterium paragallinarum. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40249576/

[20] Stępień-Pyśniak D, Dec M, Hauschild T, et al. Case reports involving coinfection with Avibacterium paragallinarum and Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale in broiler chickens and Avibacterium endocarditis in broiler breeding hens in Poland. Avian Pathol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38385975/

[21] Etterlin PE, Comin A, Eriksson H, et al. Questionnaire study suggests grave consequences of infectious laryngotracheitis, infectious coryza and mycoplasmosis in small chicken flocks. Acta Vet Scand. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37710285/

[22] Mei C, Zhi Y, Xu J, et al. Characterization of a highly virulent Avibacterium paragallinarum isolate. J Anim Sci. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37882211/

[23] Chen L, Sun J, Hu J, et al. Identification and characterization of biosynthetic loci of lipooligosaccharide and capsular polysaccharide in Avibacterium paragallinarum. Vet Microbiol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39612782/

[24] Guo M, Wang H, Zhang H, et al. Identifcation of the genes involved in biofilm formation of Avibacterium paragallinarum using random transposon mutagenesis. Vet Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39892023/

[25] Liu D, Zhang H, Tan H, et al. Basic Characterization of Natural Transformation in Avibacterium paragallinarum. Microbiol Spectr. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37212663/

[26] Xu J, Mei C, Zhi Y, et al. Comparative Genomics Analysis and Outer Membrane Vesicle-Mediated Horizontal Antibiotic-Resistance Gene Transfer in Avibacterium paragallinarum. Microbiol Spectr. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36000914/ *** Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to substitute for professional veterinary advice, diagnosis, treatment, or regulatory guidance. Always consult a licensed veterinarian or qualified specialist regarding animal health, disease diagnosis, and therapeutic decisions.

[27] Gütgemann F, Heuvelink A, Müller A, et al. Recommendation of a standardized broth microdilution method for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Avibacterium paragallinarum and resistance monitoring. J Clin Microbiol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38363142/

[28] Thapa K, Phan A, Lin S, et al. Implication of probiotics with berry phenolic extracts against Avibacterium paragallinarum. Microb Pathog. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42097187/

[29] Yue Z, Li Y, Chen L, et al. Study on bacteriostasis of Chinese herbal medicine extracts to avibacterium paragallinarum. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41579597/

[30] Huberman YD, Méndez LL, Méndez AM, et al. Efficacy of Different Vaccination Plans Against Experimental Infection with a Serovar B Variant of Avibacterium paragallinarum from Argentina in Laying Hens. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41003436/

[31] Cui W, Wang C, Wu Y, et al. Epidemiological Investigation of Infectious Coryza in Central China and the Effect of Enterococcus faecium on Improving Vaccine Immunity. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40769017/

[32] Guo M, Wang H, Liu D, et al. Development and evaluation of an attenuated Avibacterium paragallinarum strain as a live vaccine candidate for infectious coryza. Vet Res. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40490807/

[33] Ibrahim HM, Mohammed GM, Sayed RH, et al. Polymeric nanocarrier-based adjuvants to enhance a locally produced mucosal coryza vaccine in chicken. Sci Rep. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38961116/

[34] Sun J, Chen L, He G, et al. Development of a counterselection system for efficient marker-free genetic manipulation in Avibacterium paragallinarum. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41910236/

[35] Guo Y, Yin M, Zhang T, et al. Research Note: Isolation and genomic characterization of Avibacterium paragallinarum from the Hubei Province, China. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40644909/