Bacterial Pathogens in Poultry: Salmonella, E. coli, and Food Safety

Introduction

Poultry production is the fastest growing sector in global meat supply [1]. However, intensification of poultry farming has increased the risk of zoonotic transmission of bacterial pathogens [1]. Among these, Salmonella and Escherichia coli are consistently identified as major foodborne and clinical threats. These bacteria cause substantial economic losses and pose significant public health concerns [1, 2]. Salmonella and E. coli can contaminate poultry meat, eggs, and the farm environment [1, 3]. Understanding the biology, epidemiology, and control of these pathogens is essential for veterinary professionals and food safety authorities. This review provides a comprehensive, evidence-based analysis of Salmonella and E. coli in poultry, with emphasis on food safety.

Etiology

Salmonella

Salmonella is a Gram-negative, facultative anaerobic rod belonging to the family Enterobacteriaceae. Over 2,500 serovars exist, but those commonly associated with poultry include Salmonella Enteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium, and the host-adapted serovars Salmonella Gallinarum and Salmonella Pullorum [4, 28]. Salmonella causes fowl typhoid and pullorum disease in chickens [34]. In commercial flocks, Salmonella is also a key zoonotic pathogen. The bacterium is transmitted horizontally through contaminated feed, water, litter, and environmental surfaces, and vertically via infected breeder flocks [1, 31]. Salmonella can colonize the ceca and intestinal tract without causing clinical disease, leading to silent shedding and carcass contamination at slaughter [1, 4, 35].

Escherichia coli

E. coli is a Gram-negative, facultative anaerobic rod, also a member of Enterobacteriaceae. Avian pathogenic E. coli (APEC) strains cause colibacillosis, a systemic infection in poultry [2, 5, 29]. APEC strains possess virulence factors such as fimbriae, toxins, and iron acquisition systems [2, 5]. E. coli is ubiquitous in poultry environments. Commensal strains can become pathogenic under stress or immunosuppression [1, 6]. In commercial broilers and layers, APEC causes respiratory infection, peritonitis, salpingitis, and septicemia [2, 5, 29]. The pathogen is also a frequent contaminant of carcasses during processing, contributing to food safety risks [23, 31].

Epidemiology

Prevalence of Salmonella and E. coli in Poultry

Prevalence studies have consistently shown that both Salmonella and E. coli are widely distributed in poultry flocks worldwide. In a recent surveillance in Jiangxi Province, China, from 2023 to 2024, the isolation rate of bacterial pathogens from clinically diseased poultry was 50.5% (276/547 samples), with APEC dominating at 53.1% and Salmonella spp. at 14.1% [2]. Earlier data from the same region (2020-2022) reported APEC prevalence of 57.53% and Salmonella spp. of 11.87% [5]. In Kenyan poultry, metagenomic analysis revealed that Proteobacteria (which includes E. coli and Salmonella) are among the most dominant phyla in both cloacal and oropharyngeal swabs [6]. In Romania, E. coli was detected in 16.67% of broiler carcasses and Salmonella in 4.17% in 2012, with Campylobacter also common [31]. In Ontario small flocks, Salmonella was detected in 3% of submissions, while Campylobacter and Brachyspira were much more prevalent [7]. The variability in prevalence is influenced by geographical region, farm type, and sampling methods [7, 31]. In Bangladesh, E. coli was the most abundant pathogen in eggshell, feed, and air samples (39.21%) [3]. In India, a systematic review reported E. coli and Salmonella as the most frequently detected pathogens in chicken meat [32]. In Kenya, 96.6% of poultry meat samples were contaminated with high levels of bacteria, with 38.5% of isolates being multidrug resistant (MDR) [33]. Contamination is not limited to meat; Salmonella has been found in poultry litter and on worker hands, indicating farm-level reservoirs [8].

Antimicrobial Resistance

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major concern in poultry pathogens. APEC isolates show high resistance rates to multiple drug classes. In Jiangxi, APEC resistance to amoxicillin, ampicillin, and florfenicol exceeded 80%, and nearly all isolates were multidrug resistant [2, 5]. Salmonella isolates from the same region also exhibited 100% multidrug resistance [2]. In turkey farms, E. coli and Salmonella carried extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) and carbapenemase genes (e.g., blaTEM, blaSHV, blaCTX-M, blaKPC, blaNDM) [8]. In chicken farms, E. coli also harbored ESBL genes, with blaTEM present in 100% of isolates [8]. Resistances to critically important antimicrobials such as tetracycline, sulfonamides, and fluoroquinolones are widespread [31, 33]. Machine learning approaches have identified farm management practices and environmental factors driving MDR in pastured poultry, even in antibiotic-free systems [9]. The emergence of MDR bacteria in poultry represents a significant threat to both animal and human health [28].

Transmission Routes

Transmission occurs through multiple pathways. Horizontal transmission via contaminated feed, water, and litter is predominant [1, 8]. Vertical transmission from breeders to chicks is important for Salmonella [1, 4]. The lesser mealworm beetle (Alphitobius diaperinus) acts as a reservoir and vector for bacterial pathogens, including Salmonella and E. coli, and contributes to AMR dissemination [10]. Within flocks, cloacal shedding contaminates the environment [6]. At processing, carcass contamination occurs from cecal contents and skin, leading to food safety risks [35].

Clinical Signs and Pathology

Salmonellosis

In chickens, Salmonella infections may be subclinical or cause acute disease depending on serovar and host susceptibility. Salmonella Gallinarum causes fowl typhoid, characterized by depression, anorexia, diarrhea, and high mortality in young birds [34]. Salmonella Pullorum causes pullorum disease with white diarrhea and high mortality in chicks [34]. In older birds, Salmonella Enteritidis and Typhimurium often produce no clinical signs but result in cecal colonization and intermittent shedding [1, 4]. Pathology includes hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, necrotic foci in liver and spleen, and cecal cores [34].

Colibacillosis

APEC infection leads to colibacillosis, which manifests as airsacculitis, pericarditis, perihepatitis, peritonitis, and septicemia [2, 5, 29]. In broilers, leg disorders can occur due to bacterial arthritis and osteomyelitis [29]. Layers may develop salpingitis and peritonitis. Gross lesions include fibrinopurulent serositis and yolk peritonitis. APEC is frequently isolated from respiratory tissues and visceral organs [2, 5]. The pathotype is associated with extraintestinal infection rather than enteric disease [1].

Diagnostics

Conventional culture methods remain the gold standard for isolation of Salmonella and E. coli from poultry samples. For Salmonella, pre-enrichment in buffered peptone water followed by selective enrichment and plating on selective agars (e.g., XLD, Brilliant Green) is typical [23, 31]. For E. coli, MacConkey agar and eosin methylene blue (EMB) agar are used [3, 23]. Biochemical tests (e.g., IMViC, TSI) confirm identification. Serotyping is performed for epidemiological purposes [28, 31].

Molecular diagnostics are increasingly used for rapid detection and quantification. Real-time PCR (qPCR) enables direct detection and quantification of Salmonella, Campylobacter, and C. perfringens from broiler cecal samples collected at slaughter, with detection limits as low as 10^4 cells/g [35]. Multiplex PCR can detect ESBL and carbapenemase genes in E. coli and Salmonella isolates [8]. High-throughput sequencing and metagenomics provide comprehensive characterization of the poultry gut microbiota and AMR genes [11, 6].

Biosensor technology offers rapid, on-site detection along the poultry value chain. Impedance biosensors can detect single Salmonella cells in ready-to-eat turkey samples within 45 minutes [27]. CRISPR-based biosensors are emerging as innovative tools for specific pathogen detection [12]. However, these methods are not yet routine in most diagnostic laboratories.

A diagnostic workflow is summarized in the following Mermaid diagram:

flowchart TD
    A[Sample Collection: cloacal swab, cecal content, tissue, meat], > B{Culture-based Isolation}
    B, > C[Selective plating for Salmonella & E. coli]
    C, > D[Biochemical identification & serotyping]
    D, > E[Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (disk diffusion, MIC)]
    E, > F{Interpretation}
    F, > G[Clinical management & treatment decisions]
    
    B, > H[Molecular detection: qPCR, multiplex PCR]
    H, > I[Quantification & virulence/resistance gene detection]
    I, > J[Epidemiological Surveillance & AMR monitoring]
    
    H, > K[Metagenomics / Biosensors (advanced)]
    K, > L[Comprehensive pathogen typing]

Treatment and Control

Antimicrobial Therapy

Treatment of colibacillosis and salmonellosis in poultry relies on antimicrobials. However, high levels of resistance limit efficacy. For example, APEC isolates from Jiangxi showed resistance to amoxicillin (89.68%) and florfenicol (83.33%) [5]. In Egypt, florfenicol combined with marjoram essential oil was effective against MDR Salmonella Typhimurium [29]. In contrast, Pasteurella multocida isolates showed lower resistance levels [28]. Prudent use of antimicrobials guided by susceptibility testing is essential [28].

Vaccination

Vaccines are available for Salmonella and E. coli in poultry. Attenuated live vaccines and killed vaccines are used to reduce colonization and disease. For Salmonella, live attenuated vaccines (e.g., aroA mutants) provide protection against fowl typhoid and pullorum disease [34]. For APEC, autogenous vaccines are sometimes employed, but efficacy varies [34]. Metabolic product vaccines and subunit vaccines are also under investigation [34].

Probiotics and Competitive Exclusion

Probiotics represent a promising preharvest intervention. Lactobacillus johnsonii FI9785 has been characterized as a defined competitive exclusion agent against bacterial pathogens [13]. Lactobacillus casei overexpressing myosin-cross-reactive antigen (LC+mcra) reduced Salmonella and Campylobacter colonization in chicken gut [14]. Probiotic strategies help reduce pathogen load without antibiotics [1].

Phytochemicals and Essential Oils

Phytochemicals also offer antimicrobial alternatives. Polyphenolic compounds such as carvacrol, thymol, and oregano oil control antibiotic-resistant E. coli and Salmonella in the gut [21]. Thymus vulgaris essential oil (TEO) reduced Salmonella Derby and E. coli counts in poultry litter by over 73% [22]. Momordica charantia fruit extracts displayed antibacterial activity against Bacillus spp. from poultry [19]. Marjoram essential oil synergized with florfenicol against MDR S. Typhimurium [29]. Zinc oxide nanoparticles synthesized from Achyranthes aspera leaf extract showed strong activity against Salmonella gallinarum and Salmonella enteritidis [20]. These natural compounds may be incorporated as feed additives.

Marination and Hurdle Technologies

Marination can act as a hurdle to microbial pathogens in poultry meat. Formulations containing organic acids, ethanol, and essential oils reduce Salmonella and spoilage organisms [30]. The antimicrobial potential of wine-based marinades has been noted due to their phenolic content [30]. However, commercial marinades are typically optimized for sensory attributes rather than safety, and further development is needed [30].

Biosecurity and Management

Preharvest interventions include strict biosecurity, cleaning, and disinfection. Litter management is critical; the lesser mealworm beetle should be controlled to break transmission cycles [10]. All-in/all-out production reduces pathogen carryover [9]. On-farm surveillance for Salmonella and E. coli is recommended, especially for breeding flocks.

Food Safety Implications

Contamination of Poultry Meat and Eggs

Poultry meat is a common source of Salmonella and E. coli for consumers. Contamination can occur at the farm and during slaughter. Salmonella is often found on raw poultry carcasses; studies report prevalence rates from 3% to over 20% [7, 31, 35]. E. coli is present on nearly all raw chicken, with APEC strains potentially pathogenic to humans [23]. The question "does all chicken have salmonella" has a nuanced answer: not all chicken, but a significant proportion may carry Salmonella, especially if sourced from infected flocks [1, 4]. Similarly, "salmonella chicken only" is incorrect, as Salmonella can contaminate other meats and produce, but poultry remains a primary vehicle. "Chicken e coli or salmonella" highlights the dual hazard; both can be present simultaneously.

Cooking and Thermal Inactivation

Proper cooking kills bacteria in poultry. The question "cooking chicken kill bacteria" is addressed by guidelines: internal temperature must reach at least 74°C (165°F) to achieve a 7-log reduction of Salmonella [1]. However, "does cooked chicken grow bacteria" is a critical food safety point: if cooked chicken is not promptly refrigerated, residual or recontaminating bacteria can multiply. "Reheat chicken kill bacteria" is also true, but only if reheated to 74°C throughout. Surviving spores or toxins are not inactivated by reheating in some cases.

Consumer Handling and Washing

"Salmonella chicken washing" is a dangerous practice; washing raw chicken splashes bacteria onto kitchen surfaces. The FSIS advises against washing raw poultry. The term "fsis poultry salmonella" refers to the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service's regulatory framework for Salmonella reduction in poultry products [cross-link to relevant article: /knowledge/bacteria/avian-bacteria/poultry-salmonella-food-safety-fsis].

Specific Products and Populations

"Chicken neck bacteria" and "chicken breast bacteria" indicate that bacterial loads can vary by cut; skin-on parts often have higher contamination. "Salmonella chicken baby" is a serious concern because infants are at higher risk for invasive salmonellosis. "Chicken salmonella uk" points to UK surveillance programs that monitor Salmonella in broilers [cross-link: /knowledge/bacteria/avian-bacteria/salmonella-poultry-uk-epidemiology].

Toxin Production

Some E. coli strains produce toxins (e.g., enterotoxins) [23]. Salmonella does not typically produce preformed toxins but causes infection via invasion. "Chicken bacteria toxins" refers to toxins from Clostridium perfringens and Staphylococcus aureus, but also to Shiga toxins in STEC strains that can contaminate poultry [25]. However, Salmonella and E. coli are the most common pathogens in raw poultry meat [1, 25].

Conclusion

Salmonella and E. coli remain the most important bacterial pathogens in poultry from both animal health and food safety perspectives. Their ubiquity, ability to acquire antimicrobial resistance, and potential for zoonotic transmission make them a constant challenge. Effective control requires a multi-hurdle approach encompassing farm biosecurity, vaccination, probiotics, phytochemicals, and consumer education. Continuous surveillance using molecular tools and the development of new antimicrobial alternatives are essential to mitigate the risks. Veterinary professionals must stay informed about the evolving epidemiology and resistance trends to guide management decisions and protect public health.

References

[1] Sharma, S., Kaur, S., Naguib, M. et al. Major Foodborne Bacterial Pathogens in Poultry: Implications for Human Health and the Poultry Industry and Probiotic Mitigation Strategies. Microorganisms, 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0ab06f9a65757d8ad959ebd75a03a3f1f10815d2

[2] Tan, M.-F., Tan, J., Huang, J. et al. Bacterial pathogens in Jiangxi poultry (2023–2024): Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance profiles. Poultry Science, 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/48267f13d1ba6d2295aa38ab39ae3f6ff685b787

[3] Parveen, A., Rahman, M., Fakhruzzaman et al. Characterization of bacterial pathogens from egg shell, egg yolk, feed and air samples of poultry houses. Journal, 2017. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9569ae97cea82f9a06eb5f6305cbe791e95761a8

[4] Swaggerty, C., Callaway, T., Kogut, M. et al. Modulation of the Immune Response to Improve Health and Reduce Foodborne Pathogens in Poultry. Microorganisms, 2019. https

[5] Tan, M.-F., Li, H., Yang, Q. et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial resistance profile of bacterial pathogens isolated from poultry in Jiangxi Province, China from 2020 to 2022. Poultry Science, 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4c41d2f9a6e2037f6ffa8a58341eff34b9bb0c62

[6] Panyako, P., Ommeh, S., Kuria, S. et al. Metagenomic Characterization of Poultry Cloacal and Oropharyngeal Swabs in Kenya Reveals Bacterial Pathogens and Their Antimicrobial Resistance Genes. International Journal of Microbiology, 2024. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/394c59ee98ed33c764ddc9ae95160d1a89502542

[7] Brochu, N. M., Guerin, M., Varga, C. et al. A two-year prospective study of small poultry flocks in Ontario, Canada, part 1: prevalence of viral and bacterial pathogens. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation, 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0dc61f8a86fe0624eff9d6feaa0ca05c8142d8ca

[8] Khalefa, H. S., Ahmed, Z. S., El-saadany, A. et al. The effect of papain on some bacterial pathogens in poultry meat. Poultry Science, 2026. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5a8b4918f9b2113b186a409fee5a681933b96750

[9] Ayoola, M., Pillai, N., Nanduri, B. et al. Preharvest Environmental and Management Drivers of Multidrug Resistance in Major Bacterial Zoonotic Pathogens in Pastured Poultry Flocks. Microorganisms, 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/39ab599815b5cf7bec6ee20c7fb90f5ec0144d18

[10] Smith, R., Hauck, R., Macklin, K. et al. A review of the lesser mealworm beetle (Alphitobius diaperinus) as a reservoir for poultry bacterial pathogens and antimicrobial resistance. Worlds Poultry Science Journal, 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e9fa58bae3b1a85f7a636935b6dfb59267cc9540

[11] Deblais, L., Kathayat, D., Helmy, Y. A. et al. Translating ‘big data’: better understanding of host-pathogen interactions to control bacterial foodborne pathogens in poultry. Animal Health Research Reviews, 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a2c749c4e4294fb1d9dbe81322c5da884a3278bc

[12] Boodhoo, N., Shoja Doost, J., Sharif, S. Biosensors for Monitoring, Detecting, and Tracking Dissemination of Poultry-Borne Bacterial Pathogens Along the Poultry Value Chain: A Review. Animals, 2024. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f584892dbc9eefd60d8c5c7e8a29df90cb78ada4

[13] La Ragione, R. L., Narbad, A., Gasson, M. et al. In vivo characterization of Lactobacillus johnsonii FI9785 for use as a defined competitive exclusion agent against bacterial pathogens in poultry. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 2004. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/acd7dfd8a012d260763ed50a5e4b13168adbabf4

[14] Tabashsum, Z., Peng, M., Alvarado-Martínez, Z. et al. Competitive reduction of poultry-borne enteric bacterial pathogens in chicken gut with bioactive Lactobacillus casei. Scientific Reports, 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f4003a43f848a87ab38b8f6da1fb09c02b4a39b8

[15] Iheukwumere, I., Iheukwumere, C., Iloegbunam, S. O. et al. Extraction and Elucidation of Antibiotics from the Mycelia of Aspergillus niger Isolated from Poultry Farm against Enteric Bacterial Pathogens. IPS Journal of Advanced and Applied Biochemistry, 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/92cbc9f9b55bc75856b567423eb673f385351528

[16] Ammar, A., Abd El-Aziz, N. A., Abd El Wanis, S. et al. Molecular versus conventional culture for detection of respiratory bacterial pathogens in poultry. Cellular and Molecular Biology, 2016. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/435c4c2d1b712543a4bf1d219108d64d821a85b3

[17] Bobbarala, V., Duggirala, V., Rani, G. E. Anti-bacterial properties of herbal extracts towards bacterial pathogens in poultry. Journal, 2009. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/977751d4e1e9ffa6b305f4b239663c56cdcff650

[18] Realpe Aranda, M. I., Gómez, G. A., de Barros, M. et al. Antimicrobial and Synergistic Activity of 2,2′,4-Trihydroxybenzophenone Against Bacterial Pathogens of Poultry. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/706c7ac27fe617660f0280222e47dff0677eb5ec