Fowl Cholera in Poultry: Etiology, Pathogenesis, Diagnostic Methods, and Control Strategies

Introduction

Fowl cholera is a highly contagious bacterial disease of domestic and wild birds caused by Pasteurella multocida [1, 2]. The disease is recognized as a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in poultry production systems worldwide, with outbreak mortality rates often exceeding 50% in susceptible flocks [3, 1]. The term "fowl cholera" is used in veterinary medicine, while in Hindi it is referred to as "fowl cholera" (मुर्गी हैजा), but it bears no relation to human cholera or to chicken pox, which is a viral disease caused by the varicella-zoster virus in humans (the search term "chicken pox bacteria name" reflects a common misconception). Understanding the question "does chicken get bacteria" is fundamental: chickens can acquire P. multocida through ingestion or inhalation of contaminated material [3, 4]. The pathogen can be present in chicken feces, enabling environmental persistence and transmission [3], and the question "what kills chicken bacteria" refers to host immune mechanisms and antimicrobial agents [5, 6]. The emergence of multidrug-resistant strains has transformed fowl cholera into a potential "poultry pandemic" threat, with frequent "chicken bacteria outbreak" reports from multiple continents [7, 8, 9]. Transmission can occur through "ground chicken bacteria" in contaminated feed or litter [3], and concerns about "does cooking chicken kill bacteria" are relevant to food safety but do not affect live bird management. This article provides an exhaustive review of the etiology, pathogenesis, diagnostic methods, and control strategies for fowl cholera in poultry, incorporating recent genomic, immunological, and epidemiological findings.

Etiology and Taxonomy

Pasteurella multocida is a Gram-negative, facultatively anaerobic, non-motile coccobacillus belonging to the family Pasteurellaceae [2]. The species is classified into five serogroups (A, B, D, E, F) based on capsular antigens and 16 somatic serotypes based on lipopolysaccharide (LPS) antigens [10, 11]. Avian isolates predominantly belong to serogroups A, D, and F, with capsular type A being most common in fowl cholera outbreaks [10, 12, 13]. The bacterium possesses a complex LPS outer core structure; strains expressing the full LPS outer core (type 1) are generally more virulent than those with truncated LPS [12]. Genomic analyses have revealed extensive diversity among avian strains. Whole-genome sequencing of isolates from Bangladesh [14], Ethiopia [15], Australia [4], and China [7, 13] has identified multiple sequence types (STs), with ST20 being widespread in Australian poultry farms [4]. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) has been used to genotype isolates from different hosts [16]. The kmt1 gene, encoding a species-specific outer membrane protein, is a conserved target for molecular detection [8, 17]. Recent work has identified phase variation in glycosyltransferase genes, which can alter LPS structure and contribute to immune evasion during outbreaks on free-range layer farms [18].

Epidemiology and Transmission

Fowl cholera occurs worldwide and affects all poultry species, including chickens, turkeys, ducks, and geese [19, 10, 13]. Turkeys are particularly susceptible and often experience higher mortality than chickens [19, 1]. The disease is considered a "poultry pandemic" in regions with intensive production. Outbreaks are frequently reported in commercial broiler and layer flocks, often following stress factors such as overcrowding, poor ventilation, or concurrent infections [19, 20]. The question "does chicken get bacteria" is answered by the known transmission routes: birds acquire P. multocida via inhalation of dust contaminated with nasal or oral secretions or via ingestion of feed or water contaminated with feces [3]. Infected birds shed the bacteria in droppings, so chicken feces bacteria serve as a major source of environmental contamination [3, 4]. Outbreaks often start with introduction of carrier birds or contaminated fomites, and the bacteria can survive for weeks in organic material [3]. Land cover and environmental factors, such as the presence of water bodies or forests, have been associated with increased occurrence of fowl cholera in some regions [20]. The search term "ground chicken bacteria" may refer to contamination of poultry litter or soil, which can facilitate transmission [3]. Wild waterbirds can act as reservoirs and disseminate strains over long distances [4]. A compartmental model of cholera transmission in poultry farms has been developed to predict outbreak dynamics and evaluate control measures [3].

Pathogenesis

Pathogenesis of P. multocida infection involves multiple virulence factors. The capsule, composed of hyaluronic acid in serogroup A strains, is a key anti-phagocytic factor [6]. The stringent response, mediated by (p)ppGpp, negatively regulates capsule production, indicating that bacterial metabolic state influences virulence [6]. The LPS outer core is critical for resistance to complement-mediated killing and for adherence to host cells [12]. The hyaD gene, encoding a hyaluronidase, contributes to virulence by degrading the capsule and facilitating tissue invasion [5]. The filamentous hemagglutinin B1 (FhaB1) was previously considered a adhesin, but studies in turkey poults showed it is not essential for avian fowl cholera pathogenesis [21]. The Pasteurella multocida toxin (PMT) is a potent mitogen that activates intracellular signaling through G proteins, leading to cellular proliferation and osteolysis, but its role in avian disease remains less defined than in porcine atrophic rhinitis [22]. Host defenses include phagocytosis by macrophages and heterophils, and the production of reactive oxygen species and antimicrobial peptides [6]. The question "what kills chicken bacteria" encompasses these innate immune mechanisms, which can be overwhelmed by high bacterial loads or capsule expression [5, 6]. Some chicken breeds, such as the Indian native Nicobari breed, exhibit disease tolerance or resistance through enhanced humoral and cell-mediated immune responses [23].

Clinical Signs and Pathology

Fowl cholera manifests in peracute, acute, and chronic forms. Peracute disease causes sudden death without premonitory signs, often in well-conditioned birds [1, 2]. Acute cases present with fever, depression, anorexia, ruffled feathers, oral discharge, diarrhea, and cyanosis of the comb and wattles [1, 24, 23]. Mortality can reach 100% in untreated flocks [1]. Chronic infection may involve localized lesions such as swollen wattles, joint infections, and sinusitis [2]. At necropsy, common findings include petechial hemorrhages on the heart (epicardium), liver, and serosal surfaces [1, 24]. The liver often shows multiple pale necrotic foci (1-2 mm) that are pathognomonic for acute fowl cholera [1, 25]. The spleen may be enlarged and mottled, and pneumonia or airsacculitis can be present [19]. In turkeys, coinfection with Mycoplasma gallisepticum (the agent of chronic respiratory disease) exacerbates pathology, leading to fibrinous polyserositis [19]. It is important to differentiate fowl cholera from other causes of septicemia such as avian influenza, Newcastle disease, and salmonellosis [2].

Diagnostic Methods

Accurate diagnosis relies on a combination of clinical signs, necropsy findings, and laboratory confirmation. Bacterial culture from heart blood, liver, bone marrow, or swabs of exudates remains the standard method. P. multocida grows on blood agar as small, gray, mucoid colonies with a characteristic "mousy" odor [24]. Biochemical identification can be performed using commercial kits [25]. Molecular diagnostics offer higher sensitivity and specificity. PCR targeting the kmt1 gene is widely used for species identification [15, 17]. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays have been developed as field-deployable alternatives; one comparative study showed LAMP had sensitivity comparable to PCR with shorter turnaround times [17]. Serotyping is performed using PCR-based capsular typing and LPS typing methods [11, 13]. Indirect ELISA kits have been developed for detecting anti-P. multocida antibodies in chicken sera, facilitating serosurveillance [26]. Whole-genome sequencing and PFGE provide high-resolution genotyping for epidemiological tracking [14, 4, 16]. Antibiogram profiling using disk diffusion or broth microdilution is essential for guiding therapy and monitoring resistance [7, 15, 8, 24].

The following table summarizes key diagnostic methods.

Treatment and Antimicrobial Resistance

Therapeutic intervention relies on prompt administration of antibiotics. Historically, tetracyclines, sulfonamides, and penicillins have been used [24, 2]. However, antimicrobial resistance has become a global concern. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains have been reported from poultry in Ethiopia [15, 24], Bangladesh [9], China [7, 13], and Egypt [8]. Resistance genes such as tet(A), blaROB-1, strA, sul2, and floR have been identified in MDR isolates [7, 8]. The high prevalence of resistance to tetracyclines and sulfonamides limits therapeutic options. Fluoroquinolones and florfenicol are sometimes used but resistance is emerging [7]. The search term "does cooking chicken kill bacteria" pertains to food safety: adequate cooking (internal temperature >74°C) kills P. multocida, but does not address live bird outbreaks. Treatment should be guided by antibiogram results to avoid further resistance selection [15].

Control Strategies

Control of fowl cholera requires integrated biosecurity, vaccination, and management practices.

Biosecurity and Management

Strict biosecurity measures are essential to prevent introduction of the bacterium. These include all-in-all-out production, cleaning and disinfection of facilities, control of fomites, and exclusion of wild birds and rodents [3, 2]. The presence of carrier birds is a major risk; detection and culling of carriers using serological or molecular tests is recommended [26, 2]. The compartmental model of Malek (2026) demonstrated that culling infected birds and reducing contact rates significantly reduce the basic reproduction number (R0) [3]. Proper disposal of chicken feces and litter reduces environmental contamination [3].

Vaccination

Vaccination is widely used to prevent fowl cholera. Both inactivated bacterins and live attenuated vaccines are available. Inactivated vaccines are generally safe but require adjuvants to induce robust immunity. Oil-adjuvanted bacterins are common [10, 27]. Gamma-irradiated vaccines combined with various adjuvants (e.g., aluminum hydroxide, chitosan) have shown enhanced antibody responses and cytokine expression in chickens [28, 29]. Hydrogel-based inactivated vaccines have demonstrated immunoprotective effects in chickens [30]. Live attenuated vaccines, often derived from serial passage in laboratory media, can induce stronger cellular immunity. The strain PMZ8, passaged in duck embryos, showed attenuation and protective efficacy in ducks [31]. Subunit vaccines targeting lipoprotein E (PlpE) have been developed, with flagellin as an adjuvant enhancing immunogenicity [32]. The signal sequence of PlpE contributes to its immunogenicity [33]. Truncated LPS mutants have been tested as live vaccines in ducks [12]. Bacterins can also be prepared from local outbreak strains to ensure antigenic match [10].

The flowchart below outlines a decision tree for outbreak control.

flowchart TD
    A[Outbreak suspected], > B[Clinical signs and mortality]
    B, > C[Collect samples for lab diagnosis]
    C, > D[Confirm P. multocida by culture/PCR]
    D, > E[Perform antibiogram]
    E, > F{Antimicrobial resistance?}
    F, >|Low| G[Administer susceptible antibiotic]
    F, >|High| H[Use alternative or combination therapy]
    G, > I[Implement biosecurity: isolate birds, clean premises]
    H, > I
    I, > J[Mortality controlled?]
    J, >|Yes| K[Vaccinate remainder of flock]
    J, >|No| L[Cull affected birds]
    K, > M[Monitor and retest after 2 weeks]
    L, > M
    M, > N[Outbreak resolved]

Integration of Control Measures

Effective control combines vaccination with biosecurity. Gamma-irradiated mucosal vaccines have been proposed as safe candidates for mass immunization [29]. Adjuvant selection influences vaccine efficacy; saponin and montanide adjuvants have been evaluated in chickens [27]. For smallholder farms, educational programs on biosecurity and hygiene are critical [2]. The question "what kills chicken bacteria" in the context of environmental decontamination is answered by effective disinfectants such as chlorine compounds, formaldehyde, and peracetic acid, which inactivate P. multocida on surfaces [2].

Conclusion

Fowl cholera remains a major threat to poultry health and production globally. Advances in genomic typing, molecular diagnostics, and understanding of pathogenesis have improved our ability to detect and control outbreaks. The emergence of multidrug-resistant P. multocida strains underscores the need for rational antibiotic use and alternative control strategies such as vaccination and biosecurity. Future research should focus on developing cross-protective vaccines and rapid point-of-care diagnostics to mitigate the impact of this "poultry pandemic".

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.

References

[1] Miller I, Jerry C, Nguyen V, et al. 100% Mortality in Commercial Slow-Growing Broiler Chickens with Acute Fowl Cholera. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40643942/

[2] Fasina YO, Suarez DL, Ritter GD, et al. Unraveling frontiers in poultry health (part 1) - Mitigating economically important viral and bacterial diseases in commercial Chicken and Turkey production. Poult Sci. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38417326/

[3] Malek A. Dynamics of cholera transmission in poultry farm: insights from a compartmental model and control strategies. Br Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40960429/

[4] Allen JL, Bushell RN, Noormohammadi AH, et al. Pasteurella multocida ST20 is widespread in Australian poultry farms and may infect wild waterbirds. Vet Microbiol. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38228079/

[5] Gao P, Wang L, Wang S, et al. The activity of hyaD contributed to the virulence of avian Pasteurella multocida. Microb Pathog. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38960217/

[6] Smallman TR, Williams GC, Harper M, et al. Genome-Wide Investigation of Pasteurella multocida Identifies the Stringent Response as a Negative Regulator of Hyaluronic Acid Capsule Production. Microbiol Spectr. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35404102/

[7] Miao F, Dai B, Li Z, et al. Antimicrobial resistance and genomic characteristics of avian Pasteurella multocida. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41637789/

[8] El-Tarabili RM, Enany ME, Alenzi AM, et al. Unveiling resistance patterns, kmt1 sequence analyses, virulence traits, and antibiotic resistance genes of multidrug-resistant Pasteurella multocida retrieved from poultry and rabbits. Sci Rep. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39948418/

[9] Saha O, Islam MR, Rahman MS, et al. First report from Bangladesh on genetic diversity of multidrug-resistant Pasteurella multocida type B:2 in fowl cholera. Vet World. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34840474/

[10] Semmate N, Bamouh Z, Elkarhat Z, et al. Isolation and Characterization of Pasteurella multocida A from an Outbreak in Turkeys in Morocco and Vaccine Preparation and Evaluation. Avian Dis. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40643939/

[11] Hashish A, Johnson TJ, Ghanem M, et al. Complete genome sequences of eight Pasteurella multocida isolates representing all lipopolysaccharide outer core loci. Microbiol Resour Announc. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39365089/

[12] Zhao X, Yang F, Shen H, et al. Immunogenicity and protection of a Pasteurella multocida strain with a truncated lipopolysaccharide outer core in ducks. Vet Res. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35236414/

[13] Xiao J, Li Y, Hu Z, et al. Characterization of Pasteurella multocida isolated from ducks in China from 2017 to 2019. Microb Pathog. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34534643/

[14] Islam MA, Haque ME, Iftehimul M, et al. Genomic profiling of Pasteurella multocida strains isolated from ISA Brown (Gallus gallus domesticus) in Bangladesh. Microbiol Resour Announc. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41920836/

[15] Geda AM, Wendimu A, Lulie S, et al. Molecular Detection and Antibiogram Profiling of Pasteurella multocida Isolated From Breeder Chickens Suspected of Fowl Cholera in Gondar City, Ethiopia. Int J Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40297765/

[16] Tabatabaei M, Janparvar A, Motamedifar M. Genotypic evaluation of Pasteurella multocida isolated from cattle and sheep by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Vet Res Forum. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37181852/

[17] Poussard M, Pant SD, Huang J, et al. Comparative evaluation of PCR and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assays for detecting Pasteurella multocida in poultry. N Z Vet J. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39448061/

[18] Omaleki L, Blackall PJ, Cuddihy T, et al. Phase variation in the glycosyltransferase genes of Pasteurella multocida associated with outbreaks of fowl cholera on free-range layer farms. Microb Genom. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35266868/

[19] Gornatti-Churria CD, Jerry C, Ramsubeik S, et al. High mortality in a commercial turkey flock associated with coinfection by Pasteurella multocida and Mycoplasmoides (Mycoplasma) gallisepticum. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40996859/

[20] Ouyang L, Campler MR, Wong S, et al. Exploring the Impact of Land Cover on the Occurrence of Ornithobacteriosis and Fowl Cholera: A Case-Case Study. Animals (Basel). 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39943166/

[21] Dassanayake RP, Briggs RE, Kaplan BS, et al. Pasteurella multocida filamentous hemagglutinin B1 (fhaB1) gene is not involved with avian fowl cholera pathogenesis in turkey poults. BMC Vet Res. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40140814/

[22] Kubatzky KF. Pasteurella multocida toxin - lessons learned from a mitogenic toxin. Front Immunol. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36591313/

[23] Kannaki TR, Priyanka E, Haunshi S. Research Note: Disease tolerance/resistance and host immune response to experimental infection with Pasteurella multocida A:1 isolate in Indian native Nicobari chicken breed. Poult Sci. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34217907/

[24] Geda AM. Fowl Cholera in Chickens: Current Trends in Diagnosis and Phenotypic Drug Resistance in Gondar City, Ethiopia. Vet Med Int. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39669206/

[25] Shalaby AG, Bakry NR, El-Demerdash AS. Virulence attitude estimation of Pasteurella multocida isolates in embryonated chicken eggs. Arch Microbiol. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34554268/

[26] Beyene D, Shite A, Getachew B. Development and optimization of in-house made indirect ELISA kit for the detection of antibodies against Pasteurella multocida in chicken. BMC Immunol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41724974/

[27] Ghadimipour R, Ghorbanpoor M, Gharibi D, et al. Effects of Selected Adjuvants on Immunogenicity and Protectivity of Pasteurella multocida Bacterin Vaccine in Chickens. Arch Razi Inst. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35096310/

[28] Belay E, Bitew M, Ibrahim SM, et al. Gamma-irradiated fowl cholera vaccines formulated with different adjuvants induced antibody response and cytokine expression in chickens. Front Immunol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40103817/

[29] Dessalegn B, Bitew M, Asfaw D, et al. Gamma-Irradiated Fowl Cholera Mucosal Vaccine: Potential Vaccine Candidate for Safe and Effective Immunization of Chicken Against Fowl Cholera. Front Immunol. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34917086/

[30] Chen J, Sun Y, Hu Y, et al. Evaluation of the immunoprotective effect of gel 01 hydrogel inactivated vaccine against Pasteurella multocida infection in chickens. Microb Pathog. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40934985/

[31] Ji X, Meng Y, Yang H, et al. Attenuation mechanisms and vaccine potential of the serial passage-derived Pasteurella multocida strain PMZ8 in ducks. Poult Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41747463/

[32] Chung YC, Cheng LT, Chu CY, et al. Flagellin Enhances the Immunogenicity of Pasteurella multocida Lipoprotein E Subunit Vaccine. Avian Dis. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39400212/

[33] Cheng LT, Chu CY, Vu-Khac H, et al. Signal sequence contributes to the immunogenicity of Pasteurella multocida lipoprotein E. Poult Sci. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36423524/

[34] Wahdan A, Elsebai MF, Elhaig MM, et al. Innovative use of wild Egyptian artichoke extract to control fowl cholera in vitro. Vet World. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40182829/

[35] Bathobakae L, Cho H, Philip S, et al. Friend Turned Foe: Pasteurella multocida Bacteremia Following a Scratch by an Adopted Pekin Duck. J Investig Med High Impact Case Rep. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40110910/