Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae Infections in Chickens: Laboratory Diagnosis and Control Strategies

1. Introduction

Avian mycoplasmosis, primarily caused by Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae, represents a significant economic burden on the global poultry industry. These pathogens are associated with chronic respiratory disease in chickens and infectious synovitis, respectively, leading to reduced feed conversion, decreased egg production, and increased mortality [1, 2]. Accurate laboratory diagnosis and the implementation of robust control strategies are essential for managing these infections. This article provides a comprehensive review of the etiology, epidemiology, clinical signs, pathology, laboratory diagnostic methods, and control measures for M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae infections in chickens, with a specific emphasis on the chicken mycoplasma test available to diagnosticians.

2. Etiology and Pathogenesis

2.1. Mycoplasma gallisepticum

Mycoplasma gallisepticum is the primary etiological agent of chronic respiratory disease (CRD) in chickens. It is a small, pleomorphic, cell wall-deficient bacterium belonging to the class Mollicutes [3]. The absence of a cell wall renders it inherently resistant to beta-lactam antimicrobials and necessitates specialized culture media for isolation [4]. The organism colonizes the respiratory epithelium, primarily the trachea, air sacs, and lungs, where it adheres via specialized attachment organelles [5]. This adhesion triggers a host inflammatory response characterized by lymphocytic infiltration and exudation, leading to the clinical manifestations of CRD [6].

2.2. Mycoplasma synoviae

Mycoplasma synoviae is the causative agent of infectious synovitis in chickens and turkeys, and it is also associated with respiratory disease and eggshell apex abnormalities [7, 8]. Like M. gallisepticum, it is a cell wall-deficient prokaryote that requires cholesterol for growth [9]. Pathogenesis begins with colonization of the upper respiratory tract, followed by invasion of the bloodstream and localization in synovial tissues, including joints and tendon sheaths [10]. Transcriptome analyses have revealed that M. synoviae undergoes significant metabolic reprogramming when exposed to chicken cells, upregulating genes involved in adhesion and nutrient acquisition [11]. The organism's glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) has been identified as a key factor facilitating colonization in the lower respiratory system [12].

3. Epidemiology

Transmission of both M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae occurs horizontally via direct contact with infected birds and contaminated fomites, as well as vertically through the egg [13, 14]. The vertical transmission route is considered a primary mechanism for the perpetuation of infection in commercial breeding flocks [15]. Once introduced into a flock, the infection can spread rapidly, particularly in multi-age production systems [16].

Molecular typing studies have provided valuable insights into the epidemiology of these pathogens. A 14-year study employing molecular typing techniques on M. synoviae isolated from industrial and backyard poultry in Italy revealed a high degree of genetic diversity and the persistence of specific circulating strains [17]. Similarly, a nationwide multilocus sequence typing (MLST) study conducted in China identified emerging genetic trends and a complex population structure for M. synoviae [7]. Prevalence surveys have demonstrated that M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae are endemic in many regions, with rates varying by production system and geographic area [18]. Co-infections with other respiratory pathogens, such as Avibacterium paragallinarum, Cryptosporidium baileyi, or infectious bronchitis virus, are common and can exacerbate disease severity [19, 2].

4. Clinical Signs and Pathology

4.1. Clinical Signs

The clinical presentation of mycoplasmosis varies depending on the infecting species and the presence of secondary pathogens. In M. gallisepticum infections, clinical signs primarily involve the respiratory tract and include rales, coughing, sneezing, nasal discharge, and conjunctivitis [20]. Decreased feed intake and weight gain are common in growing birds, while laying hens may experience a drop in egg production [21].

M. synoviae infection typically causes lameness, depression, and reluctance to move due to inflammation of the joints and tendon sheaths [22]. Affected birds may have swollen joints, particularly the hock and foot pads, and may develop breast blisters [9]. Respiratory signs, though less prominent, can also occur. In laying flocks, M. synoviae is a known cause of eggshell apex abnormalities, resulting in thinning, roughening, and fractures at the pointed end of the egg [8, 23].

4.2. Gross and Microscopic Pathology

In M. gallisepticum infection, gross lesions are found in the respiratory tract and include catarrhal to caseous tracheitis, airsacculitis, and pneumonia [24]. The air sacs may become thickened, opaque, and covered with a fibrinous exudate. Microscopically, the mucosa is thickened due to lymphoid hyperplasia, and a mixed inflammatory cell exudate is present in the lumen [6].

For M. synoviae, the characteristic gross lesions are seen in the joints and tendon sheaths, which contain a viscous to caseous exudate [10]. Synovial membranes are thickened and inflamed. Hepatomegaly and splenomegaly may be observed in acute cases. Microscopic examination reveals synovial cell hyperplasia, fibrin deposition, and infiltration of heterophils and macrophages [14]. Co-infection with Cryptosporidium baileyi has been shown to enhance M. synoviae colonization and aggravate tissue damage, resulting in more severe synovitis [2].

5. Laboratory Diagnosis: The Chicken Mycoplasma Test

Accurate laboratory diagnosis is essential for confirming infection, differentiating between M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae, and distinguishing field strains from vaccine strains. The laboratory approach is typically multimodal, combining serology, pathogen isolation, and molecular detection. The term chicken mycoplasma test encompasses a range of these diagnostic techniques.

5.1. Sample Collection and Handling

Proper sample collection is critical for successful diagnosis. For serology, serum samples are collected from a representative number of birds. For pathogen detection, swabs from the trachea, choanal cleft, or air sacs are preferred for live birds [25]. For postmortem examination, samples from affected joints, synovial fluid, or respiratory tissues are collected. Swabs should be placed in a suitable transport medium, such as Frey's medium or a commercial mycoplasma transport medium, and kept cool during transport to the laboratory [3].

5.2. Serological Methods

Serological assays are used for flock-level screening to detect antibodies against M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae. The most commonly used method is the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Commercial ELISA kits are available and offer high throughput and automation [26]. For M. synoviae, several indirect ELISAs have been developed using specific recombinant lipoproteins and immunoproteomics-selected antigens, such as LP53 and P50, which offer improved specificity over whole-cell antigen-based tests [27, 28]. The Serum Plate Agglutination (SPA) test is a rapid, inexpensive method for on-farm use, but it is prone to false-positive reactions, particularly in vaccinated birds [29]. The Hemagglutination Inhibition (HI) test is often used as a confirmatory test due to its high specificity, but it is more labor-intensive [30]. Differential systemic antibody responses to M. synoviae MSPA variants have been characterized, highlighting the importance of antigen selection in serological assays [31].

5.3. Pathogen Isolation and Culture

Culture is considered the gold standard for definitive diagnosis, but it is time-consuming (requiring 2-4 weeks) and technically demanding [5]. M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae are fastidious organisms that require specialized growth media, such as Frey's medium or modified Hayflick's medium, supplemented with serum, yeast extract, and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) for M. synoviae [4]. The choice of medium can significantly affect growth rates and antimicrobial minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs), which has implications for susceptibility testing [10]. Isolation is followed by identification using species-specific antisera or PCR [4].

5.4. Molecular Diagnostics: PCR and Real-Time PCR

Molecular diagnostic methods have become the mainstay for rapid and specific detection of mycoplasma DNA. Conventional PCR assays targeting species-specific genes, such as the 16S rRNA gene or the vlhA gene for M. synoviae, are widely used [15, 32].

Real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) offers the advantage of quantification and reduced turnaround time. A TaqMan-MGB real-time PCR assay has been developed specifically to discriminate between the MS-H live vaccine strain and field strains of M. synoviae, which is critical for post-vaccination surveillance [33]. Another qPCR approach can differentiate M. synoviae MS-H vaccine strains from field strains by targeting specific genetic markers [13]. Multiplex qPCR methods have been designed for the rapid differential diagnosis of M. gallisepticum, M. synoviae, and Avibacterium paragallinarum in a single reaction, enhancing laboratory efficiency [19]. Genotyping of M. synoviae by vlhA gene sequence analysis is a powerful tool for molecular epidemiology and tracking the spread of specific strains [17, 15].

5.5. Point-of-Care and Emerging Assays

There is a growing need for rapid, field-deployable diagnostic tests. Isothermal amplification methods, such as Recombinase-Aided Amplification (RAA), have been combined with lateral-flow dipstick assays for the rapid visual detection of M. gallisepticum without the need for thermal cyclers [3]. Similarly, a dual-mode RAA-CRISPR/Cas12a system has been developed for the rapid nucleic acid detection of M. synoviae, offering high specificity and sensitivity [12]. These assays represent promising tools for the future of the chicken mycoplasma test at the point of care.

flowchart TD
    A[Flock with Suspected Mycoplasmosis], > B[Clinical Examination & History]
    B, > C[Sample Collection]
    
    subgraph C [Sample Types]
        C1[Serum - Serology]
        C2[Tracheal/Joint Swabs - Molecular]
        C3[Tissue/Swab - Culture]
    end

    C1, > D[Serology]
    C2, > E[Molecular Detection]
    C3, > F[Isolation & Culture]

    subgraph D [Serological Assays]
        D1[ELISA (Screening)]
        D2[SPA (Rapid)]
        D3[HI (Confirmatory)]
    end

    subgraph E [Molecular Assays]
        E1[Conventional PCR]
        E2[Real-Time PCR (qPCR)]
        E3[RAA or RAA-CRISPR]
        E4[Genotyping (vlhA)]
    end

    subgraph F [Culture & ID]
        F1[Specialized Media]
        F2[Species-Specific Antisera]
        F3[Antimicrobial Susceptibility]
    end

    D1 & D2 & D3, > G[Antibody Status]
    E1 & E2 & E3, > H[Pathogen DNA Detection & Quantification]
    E4, > I[Strain Typing / Vaccine & Field Strain Differentiation]
    F1 & F2 & F3, > J[Pathogen Isolation & Susceptibility]

    G & H & I & J, > K[Integrated Diagnosis & Control Decision]
    K, > L[Vaccination Strategy / Treatment / Biosecurity]

6. Treatment and Antimicrobial Resistance

Antimicrobial therapy is one component of controlling mycoplasma infections, though it is generally considered a short-term measure. The most commonly used classes of antimicrobials include macrolides (e.g., tilmicosin), fluoroquinolones (e.g., enrofloxacin), and tetracyclines [34]. However, the emergence of antimicrobial resistance is a growing concern. Studies from Malaysia have documented the prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae isolates, noting increasing resistance to certain antibiotics [18]. Genomic characterization of M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae in Colombia has specifically identified fluoroquinolone resistance genotypes, correlating with phenotypic resistance [9]. The choice of growth media for in vitro susceptibility testing must be carefully standardized, as it can influence the MIC results [10].

Novel therapeutic strategies are being investigated to mitigate the impact of M. synoviae infection. For instance, the synergistic effects of tilmicosin combined with sinomenine have shown efficacy in treating M. synoviae infection by modulating the inflammatory response [1]. Plant-derived compounds, such as berberine, have been shown to inhibit M. synoviae infection by suppressing PIK3CA-dependent inflammatory and apoptotic responses in avian macrophages [14]. Complex herbal formulations, like the Tengchuan compound mixture, have demonstrated an ability to ameliorate M. synoviae-induced synovitis, as evidenced by network pharmacology and metabolomics analyses [16].

7. Control Strategies

Control of M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae in commercial poultry relies on a combination of biosecurity, monitoring, vaccination, and in some cases, eradication.

7.1. Biosecurity and Management

Strict biosecurity measures are the first line of defense against mycoplasma introduction and spread. These include maintaining closed flocks, controlling the movement of people and equipment, and implementing all-in/all-out production systems [24]. Eliminating vertical transmission by establishing and maintaining breeder flocks free from infection is a primary goal of many control programs [15].

7.2. Vaccination

Vaccination is widely used to reduce the clinical and economic impact of mycoplasmosis. Both live attenuated and inactivated vaccines are available for M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae.

Live Vaccines: Temperature-sensitive (ts) live vaccines, such as the MS-H strain for M. synoviae and the ts-11 strain for M. gallisepticum, are commonly administered via eye drop or aerosol [8, 33]. A newly developed temperature-sensitive live attenuated M. synoviae strain has been shown to prevent pathological lesions in both the respiratory and reproductive tracts of chickens [29]. The mechanisms of vaccine protection have been investigated, revealing key roles for both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses [23]. A recombinant live vector vaccine delivered via attenuated Salmonella has been designed to co-express antigens of both M. synoviae and M. gallisepticum, offering the potential for bivalent protection [8].

Inactivated Vaccines: Bacterin-based inactivated vaccines are also used, particularly in laying flocks, where they can reduce egg production losses [24]. The MS-HLJ strain has been evaluated as a novel inactivated vaccine candidate, demonstrating long-term immune protection [35]. Combinatorial approaches using inactivated and subunit vaccines have been shown to enhance protective efficacy against M. synoviae challenge [30]. Subunit and recombinant vector vaccines, including those based on recombinant adenovirus (e.g., fowl adenovirus 4 expressing the P50 protein) and recombinant Salmonella, are under active development to improve the breadth and duration of immune protection [20, 32, 5].

7.3. Eradication

Eradication of M. gallisepticum and M. synoviae from primary breeding stock has been achieved in many developed countries. This involves routine serological and molecular monitoring to identify infected flocks, followed by depopulation or, in some cases, long-term antimicrobial therapy combined with strict biosecurity to clear the infection [24]. Molecular diagnostic tools that can discriminate between vaccine and field strains are critical for the success of eradication programs that use live vaccines [13, 33]. Metabolomics studies are also providing new potential biomarkers for the early detection of infection, which could aid in surveillance efforts [11, 35].

8. Conclusion

Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae remain important pathogens of chickens worldwide. A thorough understanding of their biology, transmission dynamics, and the host immune response is essential for effective disease management. The modern diagnostic laboratory offers a powerful suite of tools, ranging from high-throughput ELISA for serological screening to rapid isothermal amplification assays and highly specific real-time PCR methods that can differentiate field strains from vaccine strains. Control strategies must be integrated, incorporating rigorous biosecurity, immunization with appropriate vaccines, and prudent use of antimicrobials. Continued research into novel vaccines, therapeutic compounds, and rapid point-of-care diagnostics will further enhance the ability of the poultry industry to control these economically significant infections.

References

[1] Deng B, Wang X, Li M, et al. A novel therapeutic strategy for Mycoplasma synoviae infection: Elucidating the synergistic effects and underlying mechanisms of Tilmicosin and Sinomenine. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42308745/

[2] Zhang Y, Li Y, Wang Z, et al. Cryptosporidium baileyi and Mycoplasma synoviae co-infection enhances M. synoviae colonization and aggravates tissue damage in chickens. Front Microbiol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42158394/

[3] Xuan H, Wang S, Ren X, et al. Rapid visual detection of Mycoplasma gallisepticum by combining recombinase-aided amplification with lateral-flow dipstick assay. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42127851/

[4] Si D, Bao S, Guo L, et al. Transcriptome landscape of Mycoplasma synoviae when exposed to chicken cells. BMC Genomics. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41904433/

[5] Liu Y, Li W, Li G, et al. Protection of chickens against M. synoviae infection by vaccination with a recombinant fowl adenovirus 4-P50. Microb Pathog. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41887300/

[6] Stefani E, Morales-Arce AY, Nai G, et al. Molecular typing of Mycoplasma synoviae in industrial and backyard poultry: a 14-year study in Italy. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41817199/

[7] Tu L, Li X, Liu Y, et al. Genetic Diversity and Emerging Trends of Mycoplasma synoviae in China: Insights from a 2024 Nationwide MLST Study. Microorganisms. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41597774/

[8] Sabir R, Liu M, Saeed HA, et al. Next-generation live vector vaccine targeting Mycoplasma synoviae and Mycoplasma gallisepticum via recombinant Salmonella. Vaccine. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41518971/

[9] Forero-Marin S, Gomez AP, Beltran-Leon M, et al. A first look into the genomic characterization and fluoroquinolone resistance genotypes of Mycoplasma spp. in Colombian poultry. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41401692/

[10] Taiyari H, Abu J, Zakaria Z, et al. Different media affect the growth and antimicrobial minimum inhibitory concentrations of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae. J Microbiol Methods. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41319922/

[11] Wei X, Sun M, Zhang K, et al. Potential Biomarkers and Underlying Pathogenesis of Mycoplasma synoviae Infection: Insights from Metabolomics Analysis. Microorganisms. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41304112/

[12] Hu Q, Liu J, Zhang W, et al. Rapid nucleic acid detection of Mycoplasma synoviae using dual-mode RAA-CRISPR/Cas12a system. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41270550/

[13] Chen M, Guo M, Zhang C, et al. Enhancing Mycoplasma synoviae control: A novel quantitative real-time PCR approach to differentiate MS-H vaccine strain and field strains. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41202594/

[14] Sun Y, Hu W, Li S, et al. Berberine inhibits Mycoplasma synoviae infection by suppressing PIK3CA-dependent inflammatory and apoptotic responses in avian macrophages. Microb Pathog. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41115537/

[15] Zhang W, Deng L, Liu T, et al. Research note: Prevalence and vlhA gene genotyping analysis of Mycoplasma synoviae in poultry from 2021 to 2023 in central China. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41075596/

[16] Kan Q, Luo J, Zhao L, et al. Tengchuan compound mixture ameliorates Mycoplasma Synoviae-induced synovitis: An integrated network pharmacology, metabolomics, and 16S rRNA sequencing study. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41072088/

[17] Zhao H, Liu Y, Wei J, et al. Identification and pathogenic analysis of Mycoplasma synoviae isolated from a broiler farm in China. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41005010/

[18] Rufai AA, Zakaria Z, Yu CY, et al. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae isolated from the central peninsular Malaysia. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40749628/

[19] Xu B, Wang S, Yao W, et al. New molecular diagnostic targets for Avibacterium paragallinarum and a set of single-plex and multiplex qPCR methods for the rapid differential diagnosis of Mycoplasma gallisepticum, Mycoplasma synoviae, and Avibacterium paragallinarum. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40795612/

[20] Zhang G, Han L, Zhao Y, et al. Construction and protective evaluation of a recombinant attenuated Salmonella vaccine delivering Mycoplasma synoviae antigens. Virulence. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40778425/

[21] Yin L, Luo Y, Li C, et al. Transmission investigation of Mycoplasma synoviae in Chinese indigenous chickens. Front Vet Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40433458/

[22] Zare S, Marenda MS, Arachchige SNK, et al. Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase facilitates Mycoplasma synoviae colonisation in the lower respiratory system. Vet Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40803170/

[23] Kamathewatta KI, Kanci Condello A, Shil PK, et al. Mechanisms of vaccine protection in chickens against challenge with virulent Mycoplasma synoviae. Vet Res. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40635092/

[24] Wang Z, Chen L, Song L, et al. Isolation and identification of Mycoplasma synoviae in Hebei, China, and evaluation of the immune protection efficacy of inactivated vaccines. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40592287/

[25] Zhong L, Wu C, Liao L, et al. Comparative omics analysis of the impact of Mycoplasma synoviae infection on the immune mechanisms of poultry spleen. Virulence. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40485328/

[26] Li H, Hu Z, Wang G, et al. Development of an indirect ELISA based on a new specific lipoprotein LP53 for the detection of antibodies against Mycoplasma synoviae. BMC Vet Res. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40450297/

[27] Liu Y, You G, Shi J, et al. Indirect ELISA developed to detect antibodies against Mycoplasma synoviae P50 protein via immunoproteomic screening. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40327128/

[28] Omotainse OS, Noormohammadi AH, Jeffery N, et al. Differential systemic antibody responses to Mycoplasma synoviae MSPA variants after vaccination and/ or field challenge. Vet Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40414108/

[29] Liu CC, Suzuki C, Sato K, et al. A newly developed temperature-sensitive Mycoplasma synoviae live attenuated strain prevents pathological lesions of the respiratory and reproductive tracts in chickens caused by a wild-type M. synoviae strain. J Vet Med Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40399073/

[30] Yi C, Xu Q, Han Y, et al. The combination of inactivated and subunit vaccines enhances protective efficacy against Mycoplasma synoviae. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40393263/

[31] Yang P, Li Y, Zhou N, et al. Evaluating the MS-HLJ strain as a novel inactivated vaccine candidate: Long-term immune protection against Mycoplasma synoviae in poultry. Microb Pathog. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40306592/

[32] Ying-Fen L, Chun S, Jun Y, et al. Recombinant adenovirus expressing pdhβ-pdhD fusion protein produces robust immune responses and partial protection against Mycoplasma Synoviae challenge in chickens. Poult Sci. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40315580/

[33] Liu Z, Zhou S, Meng C, et al. A TaqMan-MGB real-time PCR for discriminating between MS-H-live vaccine and field Mycoplasma synoviae strains. Microbiol Spectr. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40172194/

[34] Wang C, Wang Q, Li Y, et al. Plasma metabolomics of Mycoplasma synoviae infection in SPF White Leghorn hens by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Vet Res. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40121482/

[35] Zare S, Marenda MS, Klose SM, et al. Enzymatic divergence of GAPDH in Mycoplasma synoviae: Comparative insights from MS-H and TS4 strains. Vet Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40743594/