Salmonella Infection in Chickens: Transmission, Clinical Signs, and Public Health Implications

Introduction

Salmonellosis in poultry, primarily caused by non-typhoidal Salmonella enterica serovars, represents a significant burden to the global poultry industry and a major concern for public health [1]. The genus Salmonella comprises facultative intracellular, Gram-negative bacilli that can establish persistent, often subclinical, infections in avian hosts [2, 3]. While host-specific serovars such as Salmonella Gallinarum and Salmonella Pullorum cause severe systemic disease in chickens, broad-host-range serovars like Salmonella Enteritidis and Salmonella Typhimurium are frequently carried asymptomatically in the intestinal tract and subsequently contaminate poultry products [1, 27]. Understanding the biological mechanisms of transmission, clinical manifestations, and zoonotic implications is essential for effective control strategies. This article examines the transmission pathways, clinical presentations in chickens, and public health implications of Salmonella infection, with emphasis on the molecular and cellular interactions between the pathogen and its avian host.

Transmission Dynamics

Horizontal and Vertical Transmission

Salmonella infection is propagated through two primary routes in poultry flocks: horizontal transmission via the fecal-oral route and vertical transmission through the hen to the egg [1]. Horizontal transmission occurs when susceptible birds ingest Salmonella organisms from contaminated feed, water, litter, or feces [1]. The pathogen can persist in the environment for extended periods, facilitating the continuous circulation of infection within a flock [1]. Co-infection with other pathogens, such as Eimeria tenella or H9N2 avian influenza virus, can significantly enhance Salmonella colonization and shedding, thereby increasing environmental contamination and transmission risk [27, 30]. Infection with E. tenella prior to Salmonella Typhimurium exposure results in a significant increase in cecal Salmonella counts and the number of positive birds [30]. Similarly, co-infection with Salmonella Enteritidis and H9N2 avian influenza virus leads to elevated fecal shedding and organ colonization compared to single infection [27].

Vertical transmission is a critical route for serovars such as Salmonella Enteritidis, which can colonize the reproductive tract of laying hens and contaminate the egg interior before shell formation [1]. This route allows for the introduction of infection into naive flocks through infected chicks hatched from contaminated eggs. The offspring of Salmonella Pullorum-positive parent chickens have been shown to harbor heritable gut microbial alterations, indicating a transgenerational effect of maternal infection [4].

What Bacteria Can You Get from Chicken?

Poultry products represent a primary vehicle for human exposure to zoonotic bacteria. Among the pathogens transmissible from chickens, Salmonella is one of the most important [1]. The question of "what bacteria can you get from chicken" encompasses a range of enteric pathogens, including Salmonella serovars (particularly Enteritidis and Typhimurium), Campylobacter jejuni, and avian pathogenic Escherichia coli [5, 1]. The mechanisms of Salmonella transmission to humans are predominantly foodborne, involving the consumption of undercooked eggs or meat, or cross-contamination of other food items during handling [1]. The pathogen can also be transmitted through direct contact with infected birds or contaminated environments [1]. A comprehensive overview of chicken bacteria infection patterns is provided in the related article on Salmonella in Poultry: Pathogenesis, Epidemiology, and Public Health Implications.

Chicken Bacteria Time: Persistence and Shedding

The temporal dynamics of Salmonella infection in chickens, often described as "chicken bacteria time," are characterized by an initial acute phase followed by a prolonged carrier state. Following oral inoculation, Salmonella can establish persistent colonization of the cecum and cecal tonsils, with fecal shedding lasting for weeks or months [3, 24]. The establishment of a persistent infection is associated with the expansion of regulatory T cell (Treg) populations and the induction of a tolerogenic immune response in the cecal mucosa, characterized by increased expression of interleukin-10 (IL-10) and transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) [3, 24]. This immunological tolerance permits the continuous replication and shedding of Salmonella without eliciting overt clinical disease in the carrier bird [3].

The duration and magnitude of shedding are influenced by multiple factors, including the infecting serovar, the age and genetic background of the host, and the composition of the intestinal microbiota [4, 32]. Antibiotic treatment with drugs like enrofloxacin can paradoxically prolong shedding by disrupting the commensal microbiota and reducing colonization resistance [32]. Natural subclinical infections provide a useful model for studying the factors that modulate shedding duration [2].

Clinical Signs and Pathogenesis in Chickens

Host-Specific Serovars: Fowl Typhoid and Pullorum Disease

The clinical presentation of Salmonella infection in chickens depends on the infecting serovar, the age of the bird, and the immune status of the flock [1]. The host-specific serovars Salmonella Gallinarum and Salmonella Pullorum cause distinct systemic diseases: fowl typhoid and pullorum disease, respectively [6, 7]. These diseases are characterized by high morbidity and mortality, particularly in young birds [6, 7].

Fowl typhoid, caused by Salmonella Gallinarum, manifests as an acute septicemic illness. Infected birds display depression, anorexia, ruffled feathers, diarrhea (often yellowish), and anemia [6]. Mortality can approach 100% in susceptible flocks [6]. Necropsy findings typically include splenomegaly, hepatomegaly with bronze discoloration, and hemorrhages on the heart and serosal surfaces [6]. The pathogenesis of systemic infection critically depends on the Salmonella pathogenicity island-14 (SPI-14), which is required for resistance to bile acids and full virulence in chickens [6]. A mutant lacking SPI-14 shows significantly attenuated virulence, with all infected chickens surviving and demonstrating reduced bacterial counts in the liver and spleen [6].

Pullorum disease, caused by Salmonella Pullorum, primarily affects chicks under 3 weeks of age, causing high mortality with clinical signs including white pasty diarrhea, labored breathing, and huddling [7]. Adult hens can become asymptomatic carriers, with the bacteria localizing in the ovary and leading to vertical transmission [7]. Genome-wide association studies have identified genetic loci on chicken chromosome 4 associated with resistance to death from Salmonella Pullorum, with candidate genes including FBXW7 and LRBA [7].

Non-Typhoidal Serovars: Subclinical Intestinal Colonization

In contrast to the host-specific serovars, broad-host-range serovars like Salmonella Enteritidis and Salmonella Typhimurium typically cause a subclinical, persistent infection in mature chickens, with the primary pathology confined to the intestine [3, 24]. Infection in young chicks can be more severe, causing diarrhea and growth depression, but in adult birds, infection is often asymptomatic [1, 3]. The hallmark of these infections is persistent colonization of the cecum and cecal tonsils, accompanied by continuous fecal shedding [3, 24].

The pathogenesis of persistent cecal colonization involves a complex interplay between bacterial virulence factors and host immune responses. Salmonella Enteritidis infection triggers an early pro-inflammatory response that is subsequently suppressed through the expansion of Treg cells and the activation of tolerogenic signaling pathways, including non-canonical Wnt-beta-catenin and TGF-beta signaling [3, 24]. At the cellular level, single-cell transcriptomic profiling has revealed that Salmonella Enteritidis infection induces the expansion of innate-like cytotoxic intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs) expressing CD8-alpha-beta and T cell receptor gamma-delta (TCR-gamma-delta) [8]. These innate-like cytotoxic T cells emerge rapidly after infection and are transcriptionally derived from a pool of progenitor T cells, with quiescent stem-like resident memory T cells serving as a reservoir for rapid effector differentiation [8].

Molecular Mechanisms of Virulence

Salmonella pathogenesis in chickens is governed by a suite of virulence factors encoded within Salmonella pathogenicity islands (SPIs). SPI-1 and SPI-2 encode type III secretion systems (T3SSs) that inject effector proteins into host cells, facilitating invasion and intracellular survival [1]. SPI-14, as described, is critical for systemic infection by Salmonella Gallinarum [6]. The siderophore receptor IroN, involved in iron acquisition, is an important protective antigen, suggesting that iron scavenging is a key virulence determinant [9]. The effector protein SifA, encoded within SPI-2, is essential for the formation of Salmonella-induced filaments and for intracellular replication; a recombinant SifA protein has been successfully used as a diagnostic antigen for ELISA-based detection of anti-Salmonella antibodies in poultry [23].

Host genetic factors also play a significant role in determining susceptibility to infection. Allelic variation in toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) has been linked to differences in susceptibility to Salmonella Typhimurium infection in chickens [35]. Transcriptomic and microRNA (miRNA) profiling studies have identified specific miRNAs, such as gga-miR-155 and gga-miR-101-3p, that regulate immune-related genes and pathways, including apoptosis and NOD-like receptor signaling, during Salmonella Enteritidis infection [10]. The Forkhead box O (FoxO) signaling pathway, particularly FoxO3, has been identified as a potential marker for host resistance, with susceptible birds showing strong activation that may drive immune cell apoptosis [11].

Immune Response and Host Defense

The avian immune response to Salmonella involves both innate and adaptive components. Initial recognition of bacterial components by pattern recognition receptors, including TLR4, triggers the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines [35, 10]. This is followed by the activation of phagocytic cells, such as macrophages and heterophils. Macrophages play a central role in controlling infection, but Salmonella can survive and replicate within these cells by subverting phagolysosomal fusion [6, 10, 11].

Antimicrobial peptides, including defensins, are important effectors of the innate immune response in the intestinal mucosa. Yeast beta-D-glucans have been shown to induce defensin expression and reduce Salmonella colonization in broilers [12]. The adaptive immune response involves both humoral (antibody-mediated) and cell-mediated (T cell) components [1]. The expansion of cytotoxic CD8-alpha-beta+ T cells and the development of innate-like IELs are critical for controlling intestinal infection [8].

Diagnostic Approaches

Accurate and timely diagnosis of Salmonella infection is essential for disease control and for monitoring food safety. Traditional methods include bacterial culture from cecal tonsils, liver, and spleen, often followed by serotyping [13, 23]. Molecular methods, including polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and high-throughput sequencing, offer increased sensitivity and speed.

Serological testing is widely used for flock-level surveillance. Commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) based on whole-cell antigens or specific recombinant proteins are available. An indirect ELISA based on the PagC antibody has been developed for the detection of Salmonella infection in chickens [13]. Similarly, an ELISA employing the recombinant SifA protein demonstrates high specificity for diverse Salmonella serovars and superior sensitivity compared to the conventional plate agglutination test (PAT) for detecting Salmonella Typhimurium infection [23].

Diagnostic Workflow for Suspect Salmonellosis

The following Mermaid diagram illustrates a generalized diagnostic workflow for a chicken suspected of Salmonella infection:

flowchart TD
    A[Chicken with clinical signs<br>depression, diarrhea, mortality], > B{History & Flock Status}
    B, >|High morbidity in young birds| C[Collect samples: liver, spleen, cecal tonsils]
    B, >|Subclinical adult flock| D[Collect samples: cecal droppings, cloacal swabs]
    C, > E[Bacterial Culture on selective media<br>e.g. XLT4, SS agar]
    D, > E
    E, > F[Biochemical & Serological Confirmation]
    F, > G[Serotyping & Molecular Characterization<br>PCR for SPI genes, sequencing]
    E, > H{Parallel Serology}
    H, > I[ELISA: PagC, SifA antigens]
    C, > J[Necropsy: Assess gross lesions<br>hepatomegaly, splenomegaly]
    J, > K[Histopathology & Immunohistochemistry]
    G, > L[Report & Implement Control Measures]
    I, > L
    K, > L

Public Health Implications

Zoonotic Transmission and Food Safety

The public health significance of Salmonella infection in chickens is primarily driven by the contamination of poultry meat and eggs with non-typhoidal serovars, particularly Salmonella Enteritidis and Salmonella Typhimurium [1, 14]. These serovars are among the leading causes of foodborne bacterial gastroenteritis in humans worldwide [8, 14]. The consumption of undercooked eggs and poultry meat, as well as cross-contamination during food preparation, are the major routes of human infection [1]. The pathogen can also be transmitted through direct contact with live poultry, especially in settings such as backyard flocks and farm visits [1].

The "chicken bacteria time" factor is critical for public health: the persistence of Salmonella in the environment and the prolonged shedding by carrier birds mean that a single infected flock can pose a contamination risk for an extended duration [2, 3]. Effective control measures must therefore target both the reduction of within-flock transmission and the prevention of carcass contamination during slaughter and processing.

Antimicrobial Resistance

The emergence and spread of antimicrobial-resistant Salmonella strains is a growing public health concern. The widespread use of antibiotics in poultry production, both for therapy and historically for growth promotion, has selected for resistant strains [32]. Treatment with enrofloxacin, a fluoroquinolone, has been shown to disrupt the intestinal microbiota and paradoxically enhance Salmonella Typhimurium colonization and prolong shedding in neonatal chickens [32]. This highlights the need for judicious antibiotic use and the development of alternative control strategies.

Control Strategies: Vaccination and Probiotics

Vaccination is a cornerstone of Salmonella control in poultry. Live attenuated vaccines, such as the Salmonella Enteritidis Sm24/Rif12/Ssq strain, have been shown to provide cross-protection against Salmonella Pullorum and other serovars, reducing organ colonization and lesion severity [31, 26]. Outer membrane vesicle (OMV)-based vaccines derived from major outer membrane protein-deficient Salmonella Typhimurium mutants have demonstrated broad cross-protection against Salmonella Enteritidis and avian pathogenic E. coli in chickens [5].

Probiotics represent a promising alternative or adjunct to antibiotics for reducing Salmonella colonization. Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) has been shown to significantly reduce the load of Salmonella Typhimurium in experimentally infected chickens, an effect attributed to the production of antimicrobial peptides, modulation of the gut microbiota, and enhancement of intestinal barrier integrity [14]. Other probiotic strains, including Lactobacillus casei, Bifidobacterium breve, and Bifidobacterium infantis, have also demonstrated efficacy through competitive exclusion or immunomodulation [25].

Nutritional and Feed-Based Interventions

Dietary interventions can modulate the host's resistance to Salmonella infection. The novel acidifier sodium diformate (NaDF) has been shown to improve growth performance and reduce Salmonella Pullorum colonization in the cecum, liver, and spleen of chickens, while also lowering gut pH and promoting beneficial gut microbiota [15]. Similarly, potassium diformate reduces Salmonella Pullorum loads and promotes the colonization of probiotic genera such as Bacteroides and Faecalibacterium [22]. The natural polyphenol resveratrol ameliorates Salmonella Typhimurium-induced intestinal inflammation and barrier dysfunction in chickens by inhibiting cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) activity and reducing pro-inflammatory cytokines [29]. Copper/zinc-modified palygorskite, a clay nanoparticle, has also been shown to reduce Salmonella Typhimurium colonization and intestinal damage [28].

The Role of the Gut Microbiome and Metabolome

The composition of the chicken gut microbiota is a critical determinant of Salmonella colonization resistance. Salmonella Typhimurium infection causes a significant reduction in beneficial genera such as Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus, and activates the arachidonic acid (ARA) cyclooxygenase metabolic pathway, which mediates intestinal inflammation [16]. Heritable gut microbes, including the pathogens Pelomonas and Brevundimonas, are associated with genetic variants in immunity-related genes in Salmonella Pullorum-infected chickens, suggesting that host genetics can influence the microbiome's role in disease susceptibility [4]. A genome-centric investigation of bile acid-metabolizing microbiota has revealed that Salmonella Typhimurium infection alters the abundance of bile salt hydrolase (BSH) genes and the overall microbial community structure, further linking gut metabolism to pathogen resistance [33].

The Intersection of Chicken and Bacteria: Broader Pathogen Considerations

While Salmonella is a primary focus, the "chicken bacteria infection" landscape includes other significant pathogens. Escherichia coli, particularly avian pathogenic E. coli (APEC), is a major cause of colibacillosis, and its co-occurrence with Salmonella can complicate disease management [5]. Campylobacter jejuni is another major foodborne pathogen associated with poultry. The related article on Escherichia coli in Chickens and Poultry Products provides a detailed discussion of this pathogen. Understanding the "chicken and bacteria" dynamic requires a multi-pathogen perspective, as co-infections are common in commercial poultry operations.

The concept of "chicken bacteria time" also applies to the development of effective vaccination and probiotic strategies, which aim to reduce the window of Salmonella shedding and limit the duration of contamination risk. The use of live vaccines, for example, induces a rapid immune response that can shorten the period of susceptibility [26, 31]. Probiotics, by improving colonization resistance early in life, can also reduce the "time to clearance" of an invading pathogen [14, 25].

References

[1] Shaji, S., Selvaraj, R., Shanmugasundaram, R. Salmonella Infection in Poultry: A Review on the Pathogen and Control Strategies. Microorganisms. 2023. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/09626066cb93dcefde5fff585f2a643ae8662dc4

[2] Linton, A., Al-Chalaby, Z. A., Hinton, M. Natural subclinical salmonella infection in chickens: a potential model for testing the effects of various procedures on salmonella shedding. The Veterinary Record. 1985. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1bce61cb3d5b31fb84edce336c99f12734baf620

[3] Kogut, M., Arsenault, R. A Role for the Non-C

[4] Ding, J., Zhou, H., Luo, L., et al. Heritable Gut Microbiome Associated with Salmonella enterica Serovar Pullorum Infection in Chickens. mSystems. 2021. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a6b9299e860a0167b778f4899a388c4c28c7486f

[5] Chen, Y., Jie, K., Li, B., et al. Immunization With Outer Membrane Vesicles Derived From Major Outer Membrane Protein-Deficient Salmonella Typhimurium Mutants for Cross Protection Against Salmonella Enteritidis and Avian Pathogenic Escherichia coli O78 Infection in Chickens. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2020. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1e6c06c05162eb2568b3e348c579d565ccf1a5f4

[6] Hu, Z., Ojima, S., Zhu, Z., et al. Salmonella pathogenicity island-14 is a critical virulence factor responsible for systemic infection in chickens caused by Salmonella gallinarum. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2024. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ef5de72b7b56b0dd3d51d76126125cb442957a09

[7] Li, X., Nie, C., Liu, Y., et al. A genome-wide association study explores the genetic determinism of host resistance to Salmonella pullorum infection in chickens. Genetics Selection Evolution. 2019. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ad8aa8ccfdda2b66fee1ab8c07b0679fd2ce5195

[8] Majeed, S., Shah, B., Aryal, B., et al. Single-cell transcriptomic profiling reveals innate-like cytotoxic intraepithelial lymphocyte expansion during Salmonella Enteritidis infection in chickens. Frontiers in Immunology. 2026. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f553b0bd236801adc3d74034619ac36939cd5006

[9] Kaneshige, T., Yaguchi, K., Ohgitani, T. Siderophore Receptor IroN Is an Important Protective Antigen Against Salmonella Infection in Chickens. Avian diseases. 2009. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8e80b3d42a5597240f728f8bc4ace3a43ae70574

[10] Li, P., Fan, W., Li, Q., et al. Splenic microRNA Expression Profiles and Integration Analyses Involved in Host Responses to Salmonella enteritidis Infection in Chickens. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2017. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7effdfb0d54a76d5466c45685aab0e66a582986d

[11] Li, P., Fan, W., Everaert, N., et al. Messenger RNA Sequencing and Pathway Analysis Provide Novel Insights Into the Susceptibility to Salmonella enteritidis Infection in Chickens. Frontiers in Genetics. 2018. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9d25e44e3b3701999f73c6a115f92fc813beba9f

[12] Shao, Y., Wang, Z., Tian, X., et al. Yeast β-d-glucans induced antimicrobial peptide expressions against Salmonella infection in broiler chickens. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2016. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/df150b3058669cf452d948de05f8be3c9f58074b

[13] Ma, Z., Yang, X., Fang, Y., et al. Detection of Salmonella Infection in Chickens by an Indirect Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Based on Presence of PagC Antibodies in Sera. Foodborne pathogens and disease. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/28ce15449e785638381199bd0bb467bffe0744d6

[14] Closs, G., Bhandari, M., Helmy, Y. A., et al. The probiotic Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG supplementation reduces Salmonella load and modulates growth, intestinal morphology, gut microbiota, and immune responses in chickens. Infection and Immunity. 2025. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/efdda1b70f76b91c1b99ba21eac53b19625af26d

[15] Sun, Y., Zhang, X., Han, W., et al. Dietary supplementation with a novel acidifier sodium diformate improves growth performance by increasing growth-related hormones levels and prevents Salmonella enterica serovar Pullorum infection in chickens. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2024. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/967e5f797c015cdfbb488cf79b4dc5bb48964f8d

[16] Chen, S., Xie, Y., Guo, D., et al. Effects of Salmonella Typhimurium infection on intestinal flora and intestinal tissue arachidonic acid metabolism in Wenchang chickens. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2025. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2e414870d7962fe4c8e38ec059a0ab7b5df0bd93

[17] Barrow, P., Huggins, M. B., Lovell, M. Host specificity of Salmonella infection in chickens and mice is expressed in vivo primarily at the level of the reticuloendothelial system. Infection and Immunity. 1994. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/394a12d7e15b253654e2a39fde859c4bda2ec90e

[18] Seuna, E., Schneitz, C., Nurmi, E. Combined therapy of Salmonella infection in chickens by antimicrobial agents followed by cultured cecal bacteria. Poultry Science. 1980. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c8b7fa0ac1d0948deb6d0268da171a298e853335

[19] Soulier, A. The role of defensins in controlling Salmonella infection in chickens. 2007. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aac840ec617d6a708fdcb86cdc7c635f8b100d17

[20] Mahato, S., Thakuri, K. C., Thapa, P., et al. Prevalence of Salmonella infection in chickens in Nepal. 1990. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9132f3436587c0f6cc6494517069ea9e9c79ed30

[21] Hsu, Y., Yu, B., Tseng, C.-S., et al. Preventive activities of Scutellariae Radix, Gardeniae Fructus, and probiotics in Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium infection in chickens. 2016. URL: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2849d4ce4b50ec18ac1661437a2ce914f93ba29d