Bacterial Infections in Poultry: Clinical Manifestations, Diagnosis, and Antimicrobial Therapy

Introduction

Bacterial infections represent a significant cause of morbidity, mortality, and economic loss in commercial poultry operations worldwide. The intensive housing conditions typical of modern poultry production facilitate the rapid transmission of bacterial pathogens among flocks, leading to clinical disease outbreaks that require prompt diagnosis and intervention [1, 2]. The clinical manifestations of these infections vary widely depending on the etiologic agent, the host species and age, and the presence of concurrent viral or parasitic infections [3, 4]. Accurate diagnosis relies on a combination of clinical observation, gross pathology, histopathology, and laboratory-based detection methods including culture, serology, and molecular assays [5, 6]. Antimicrobial therapy remains a cornerstone of disease management, although the emergence of multidrug-resistant strains has complicated treatment protocols and necessitated a more judicious approach to antibiotic use [1, 7]. This article provides a comprehensive review of the major bacterial pathogens affecting poultry, their clinical presentations, diagnostic approaches, and current antimicrobial therapeutic strategies.

Major Bacterial Pathogens of Poultry

Avian Pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC)

Avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC) is the causative agent of colibacillosis, a complex disease syndrome that includes airsacculitis, pericarditis, perihepatitis, salpingitis, and septicemia [8, 9]. APEC strains belong to a diverse group of extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli that possess specific virulence factors including adhesins, iron acquisition systems, and toxins [10, 11]. The TolA protein has been shown to play a multifaceted role in promoting survival, biofilm formation, and virulence of APEC [9]. The high pathogenicity islands (HPIs) carrying the irp2 and fyuA genes are involved in the pathogenesis of APEC infections, particularly through iron acquisition mechanisms [12]. Experimental models have demonstrated that both strain and host factors significantly impact the clinical and pathological outcome of avian E. coli salpingitis [13]. The definition of the APEC pathotype has been refined through inclusion of high-risk clonal groups, which aids in identifying strains with enhanced pathogenic potential [11].

Clinical manifestations of colibacillosis include respiratory distress, reduced feed intake, depression, and increased mortality [8, 14]. Gross lesions typically include fibrinous exudates on serosal surfaces, airsacculitis, and pericarditis [15]. The disease often occurs secondary to viral infections such as infectious bronchitis virus or Mycoplasma gallisepticum, which compromise respiratory defenses and allow APEC to invade the lower respiratory tract [16].

Salmonella enterica Serovars

Salmonella enterica serovars Gallinarum and Pullorum cause fowl typhoid and pullorum disease, respectively, in poultry [33]. These host-adapted serovars produce systemic infections characterized by septicemia, diarrhea, and high mortality, particularly in young birds [17, 33]. The landscape of antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella Gallinarum-Pullorum has been characterized in various geographic regions, with multidrug resistance patterns emerging as a significant concern [1]. Salmonella Typhimurium is another important serovar that can cause clinical disease in chickens, particularly in young birds, and also represents a zoonotic risk [39]. Vaccination strategies against protozoal and viral infections have been associated with alterations in Salmonella prevalence in broiler flocks, suggesting complex interactions between vaccine-induced immunity and Salmonella colonization [28].

Clinical signs of salmonellosis include lethargy, anorexia, white diarrhea, and pasted vents in chicks [33]. In older birds, infection may be subclinical, with birds serving as carriers that shed the organism intermittently [36]. Postmortem lesions include hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, and necrotic foci in the liver and spleen [17, 33].

Clostridium perfringens and Necrotic Enteritis

Clostridium perfringens type A and type C are the primary etiologic agents of necrotic enteritis in poultry, a disease characterized by severe intestinal necrosis and high mortality [18, 19]. The pathogenesis of necrotic enteritis involves the production of alpha-toxin and NetB toxin, which cause enterocyte necrosis and villus atrophy [18]. Experimental models have been developed to reproduce necrotic enteritis in turkeys using different C. perfringens strains, facilitating the study of host-pathogen interactions [2]. Recent developments in understanding host-pathogen interactions during necrotic enteritis have highlighted the role of the gut microbiome and immune responses in disease susceptibility [18]. Dietary interventions, including the use of cannabis-derived cannabidiol and nanoselenium, have been shown to improve gut barrier function and affect bacterial enzyme activity in chickens subjected to C. perfringens challenge [19].

Clinical signs of necrotic enteritis include depression, decreased feed intake, diarrhea, and sudden death [18]. Gross lesions are characterized by a thickened, friable intestinal mucosa covered by a pseudomembrane, often described as a "Turkish towel" appearance [19]. The disease is frequently precipitated by predisposing factors such as coccidiosis, dietary changes, or immunosuppression [18].

Pasteurella multocida and Fowl Cholera

Pasteurella multocida is the causative agent of fowl cholera, a highly contagious disease affecting chickens, turkeys, and waterfowl [10, 31]. The organism is a Gram-negative coccobacillus that produces a polysaccharide capsule, which is a major virulence factor [10]. Pathognomonic features of P. multocida isolates from various avian species have been characterized, revealing serotype diversity and variations in virulence [10]. Concurrent infections with P. multocida and Ascaridia galli have been shown to affect disease outcome in free-range chickens, demonstrating the importance of parasite co-infections in bacterial disease pathogenesis [31].

Clinical manifestations of fowl cholera include acute septicemia with sudden death, fever, mucoid discharge from the mouth and nares, and cyanosis of the comb and wattles [10]. Chronic infections may present as localized swellings of the wattles, joints, and sinuses [31]. Postmortem lesions include petechial hemorrhages on the heart and serosal surfaces, hepatomegaly, and multifocal hepatic necrosis [10].

Avibacterium paragallinarum and Infectious Coryza

Avibacterium paragallinarum (formerly Haemophilus paragallinarum) is the etiologic agent of infectious coryza, an acute respiratory disease of chickens [34, 37]. The bacterium is a Gram-negative, pleomorphic rod that requires nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) for growth [34]. Encapsulated variants of A. paragallinarum produce more severe respiratory lesions compared to nonencapsulated variants [37]. A transient increase in MHC-II(low) monocytes has been observed after experimental infection with A. paragallinarum serovar B-1 in specific-pathogen-free chickens, indicating a specific immune response to infection [20].

Clinical signs of infectious coryza include facial edema, nasal discharge, conjunctivitis, and sneezing [34]. The disease is typically characterized by a rapid onset and high morbidity but low mortality in uncomplicated cases [37]. Differential diagnosis from other respiratory pathogens such as avian influenza and Mycoplasma gallisepticum is essential for appropriate management [34].

Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Mycoplasma synoviae

Mycoplasma gallisepticum is the primary cause of chronic respiratory disease in chickens and infectious sinusitis in turkeys [32]. The organism is a cell wall-deficient bacterium that colonizes the respiratory epithelium and induces a chronic inflammatory response [32]. Mycoplasma synoviae causes infectious synovitis and respiratory disease in chickens and turkeys, and has been associated with eggshell apex abnormalities in laying hens [3, 4]. A rapid nucleic acid detection method for M. synoviae using a dual-mode recombinase-aided amplification (RAA)-CRISPR/Cas12a system has been developed, offering improved sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis [3]. Metabolomic and 16S rRNA sequencing approaches have been used to study the pathogenesis of M. synoviae-induced synovitis and the effects of therapeutic interventions [4].

Clinical signs of M. gallisepticum infection include rales, coughing, nasal discharge, and reduced egg production [32]. M. synoviae infection typically presents with lameness, swollen joints, and breast blisters [3]. Both organisms can be transmitted vertically through the egg, making hatchery surveillance critical for control [32].

Other Important Bacterial Pathogens

Gallibacterium anatis biovar haemolytica is an emerging pathogen associated with reproductive tract infections in laying hens, particularly salpingitis and peritonitis [7]. Multidrug resistance has been documented in G. anatis isolates from the reproductive tracts of laying hens, complicating treatment [7]. A quantitative PCR assay for detecting gtxA-containing Gallibacterium species has been developed for improved diagnosis [27].

Riemerella anatipestifer is a Gram-negative bacterium that causes septicemia and polyserositis in ducks and, less commonly, in chickens [5]. Biological and genomic characterization of chicken-derived R. anatipestifer isolates has revealed genetic diversity and the presence of multiple virulence genes [5].

Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale is a respiratory pathogen of turkeys and chickens that causes pneumonia, airsacculitis, and mortality [29, 30]. Diagnosis of O. rhinotracheale infection can be achieved using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for antibody detection [29]. Clinical signs in turkeys include respiratory distress, decreased feed intake, and increased mortality [30].

Staphylococcus aureus causes a range of infections in poultry, including bumblefoot (pododermatitis), arthritis, and osteomyelitis [38]. The manifestations of S. aureus infection in chickens have been described in industrialized poultry units, with lameness and joint swelling being common presentations [38]. Staphylococcus agnetis has been identified as a pathogen in both cattle and chickens, with whole-genome comparisons revealing genetic similarities and differences between host-specific isolates [21].

Brachyspira pilosicoli (formerly Serpulina pilosicoli) causes cecal spirochetosis in poultry, characterized by diarrhea and reduced growth performance [22, 35]. The organism colonizes the cecal mucosa and induces a mild to moderate colitis [35]. Tiamulin administered through drinking water has been evaluated for control of B. pilosicoli infection in laying poultry [22].

Neisseria species have been isolated from captive wild geese, although their pathogenic significance in poultry remains to be fully elucidated [23]. Borrelia anserina, transmitted by the tick Argas persicus, causes avian spirochetosis, a septicemic disease of poultry characterized by fever, depression, and green diarrhea.

Diagnostic Approaches

Clinical and Pathological Examination

The initial diagnosis of bacterial infections in poultry begins with careful observation of clinical signs and postmortem examination [8, 14]. Clinical manifestations such as respiratory distress, diarrhea, lameness, and mortality patterns provide important clues to the etiologic agent [10, 18]. Gross lesions observed at necropsy, including fibrinous exudates, hepatic necrosis, and intestinal thickening, guide the selection of appropriate laboratory tests [8, 15]. Histopathological examination of affected tissues can reveal characteristic inflammatory responses and the presence of bacterial colonies [18, 19].

Bacteriological Culture and Isolation

Isolation of the causative bacterium remains the gold standard for diagnosis of most poultry bacterial infections [5, 10]. Samples from affected tissues, swabs from lesions, or fecal samples are plated onto selective and nonselective media and incubated under appropriate atmospheric conditions [10, 34]. For fastidious organisms such as A. paragallinarum, supplementation with NAD is required [34]. Mycoplasma species require specialized media and prolonged incubation for isolation [32]. Identification of isolates is based on colony morphology, Gram stain characteristics, biochemical tests, and serotyping [10, 34].

Serological Methods

Serological assays are widely used for detection of antibodies against bacterial pathogens in poultry flocks [29, 32]. ELISA is commonly employed for detection of antibodies against M. gallisepticum, M. synoviae, O. rhinotracheale, and other pathogens [29, 32]. The ELISA format allows for high-throughput screening of flock samples and can distinguish between vaccinated and infected birds in some cases [29]. Agglutination tests are also used for detection of antibodies against Salmonella Pullorum and Gallinarum in pullorum disease and fowl typhoid surveillance programs [33].

Molecular Diagnostic Methods

Molecular diagnostic techniques have revolutionized the detection and characterization of bacterial pathogens in poultry [3, 5, 27]. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays targeting species-specific genes provide rapid and sensitive detection directly from clinical samples [5, 27]. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) allows for quantification of bacterial load and can be used to monitor treatment efficacy [27]. The development of isothermal amplification methods such as recombinase-aided amplification (RAA) combined with CRISPR/Cas12a systems has enabled rapid, field-deployable detection of pathogens such as M. synoviae [3]. Whole-genome sequencing provides comprehensive genetic characterization of isolates, including identification of virulence genes and antimicrobial resistance determinants [5, 11].

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing is essential for guiding therapy and monitoring resistance trends in poultry bacterial pathogens [1, 7]. Disk diffusion and broth microdilution methods are commonly used to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of antimicrobial agents against bacterial isolates [1]. The emergence of multidrug resistance in pathogens such as Salmonella Gallinarum-Pullorum, G. anatis, and APEC underscores the importance of routine susceptibility testing [1, 7, 11].

The following table summarizes the major bacterial pathogens of poultry, their clinical manifestations, and recommended diagnostic methods.

Antimicrobial Therapy

Principles of Antimicrobial Use

Antimicrobial therapy for bacterial infections in poultry should be based on accurate diagnosis, identification of the causative agent, and determination of antimicrobial susceptibility patterns [1, 7]. The selection of an antimicrobial agent should consider the pharmacokinetic properties of the drug, the site of infection, and the withdrawal period required for meat and egg safety [8]. Empirical therapy may be initiated based on known susceptibility patterns of common pathogens while awaiting laboratory results [1, 8].

Commonly Used Antimicrobial Agents

Several classes of antimicrobial agents are used in poultry medicine for treatment of bacterial infections. Beta-lactam antibiotics such as amoxicillin and ceftiofur are effective against many Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens [8]. Florfenicol, a fluorinated derivative of thiamphenicol, has been evaluated for treatment of colibacillosis in broiler chickens and has shown efficacy in reducing mortality and lesions [8]. Tetracyclines including oxytetracycline and doxycycline are commonly used for treatment of mycoplasmosis and other respiratory infections [32]. Macrolides such as tylosin and tilmicosin are effective against Mycoplasma species and some Gram-positive pathogens [32]. Tiamulin, a pleuromutilin antibiotic, has been used for control of B. pilosicoli infection in laying poultry [22]. Fluoroquinolones including enrofloxacin have broad-spectrum activity but their use is increasingly restricted due to concerns about antimicrobial resistance [1].

Antimicrobial Resistance

Antimicrobial resistance is a growing concern in poultry bacterial pathogens, with multidrug-resistant strains being reported with increasing frequency [1, 7]. Resistance to multiple antimicrobial classes has been documented in Salmonella Gallinarum-Pullorum isolates from poultry in Bangladesh, with high rates of resistance to tetracyclines, sulfonamides, and fluoroquinolones [1]. Gallibacterium anatis isolates from laying hens have shown high levels of multidrug resistance, limiting therapeutic options [7]. APEC strains have also demonstrated increasing resistance to commonly used antimicrobials, necessitating the development of alternative control strategies [11, 24].

Alternative Therapeutic Strategies

The emergence of antimicrobial resistance has stimulated research into alternative therapeutic approaches for bacterial infections in poultry. Bacteriophage therapy has been evaluated for reducing the impact of E. coli infections in chickens, with T4-like phages showing potential as antimicrobial agents for controlling drug-resistant E. coli [24]. Bacteriophages have also been evaluated for their efficacy in reducing the impact of single and mixed infections with E. coli and infectious bronchitis virus in chickens [16]. Autogenous vaccines prepared from specific farm isolates have been used for control of E. coli infections in broiler breeders, demonstrating the potential of vaccination as an alternative to antimicrobial therapy [25]. Probiotics, prebiotics, and dietary supplements such as cannabidiol and nanoselenium have been investigated for their ability to improve gut health and reduce the severity of necrotic enteritis [19].

The following Mermaid diagram illustrates a diagnostic and therapeutic decision workflow for bacterial infections in poultry.

flowchart TD
    A[Clinical Signs Observed] --> B[Clinical Examination & History]
    B --> C[Postmortem Examination]
    C --> D[Sample Collection]
    D --> E[Laboratory Diagnostics]
    E --> F[Gram Stain & Culture]
    E --> G[Serology ELISA]
    E --> H[Molecular PCR/qPCR/RAA-CRISPR]
    F --> I[Identification & Serotyping]
    G --> I
    H --> I
    I --> J[Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing]
    J --> K[Selection of Antimicrobial Therapy]
    K --> L[Treatment Administration]
    L --> M[Monitor Clinical Response]
    M --> N{Response Adequate?}
    N -->|Yes| O[Complete Treatment Course]
    N -->|No| P[Re-culture & Susceptibility Testing]
    P --> K
    O --> Q[Implement Biosecurity & Prevention]
    Q --> R[Vaccination if Available]
    Q --> S[Management Improvements]

Prevention and Control

Prevention of bacterial infections in poultry relies on a comprehensive approach that includes biosecurity, management practices, and vaccination [18, 25]. Biosecurity measures such as all-in-all-out production, disinfection of facilities, and control of rodent and insect vectors reduce the introduction and spread of pathogens [18]. Management practices including proper ventilation, litter management, and nutrition support bird health and reduce susceptibility to infection [18, 19]. Vaccination against specific pathogens such as E. coli, Salmonella, and P. multocida can reduce disease incidence and antimicrobial use [25, 31]. The use of autogenous vaccines tailored to farm-specific strains has shown promise for control of colibacillosis in broiler breeders [25].

Conclusion

Bacterial infections remain a significant challenge in poultry production, causing substantial economic losses and compromising animal welfare. Accurate diagnosis through a combination of clinical, pathological, and laboratory methods is essential for effective disease management. Antimicrobial therapy, guided by susceptibility testing, remains a key component of treatment, although the emergence of multidrug resistance necessitates judicious use of antibiotics and the development of alternative control strategies. Continued research into host-pathogen interactions, vaccine development, and novel therapeutics will be critical for sustainable control of bacterial infections in poultry.

References

[1] Kingshuk MMR, Alam SB, Rahman MS, et al. The Landscape of Salmonella enterica Serovar Gallinarum-Pullorum Antimicrobial Resistance in Bangladesh's Poultry Industry: A Combined Phenotypic and Molecular Study. Microbiologyopen. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42271175/

[2] Cordioli B, Vereecken M, Drigo I, et al. Experimental model for the reproduction of necrotic enteritis in turkeys using different Clostridium perfringens strains. Avian Pathol. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41379603/

[3] 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. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41270550/

[4] 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. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41072088/

[5] Zhang Y, Wang X, Wang Y, et al. Biological and genomic characteristics of chicken-derived Riemerella anatipestifer in China. Front Microbiol. 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40950598/

[6] Li B, Mao M, Li H, et al. Synergistic pathogenicity of novel duck Orthoreovirus and salmonella typhimurium in ducks. Poult Sci. 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40014975/

[7] Kursa O. Multidrug Resistance of Gallibacterium anatis Biovar Haemolytica Isolated from the Reproductive Tracts of Laying Hens. Pathogens. 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39599542/

[8] Ghahramani Z, Mosleh N, Shomali T, et al. A study on selected responses and immune structures of broiler chickens with experimental colibacillosis with or without florfenicol administration. BMC Vet Res. 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39155372/

[9] Su S, Li Z, Sun Y, et al. The multifaceted role of TolA protein in promoting survival, biofilm formation and virulence of avian pathogenic Escherichia coli. Poult Sci. 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39106694/

[10] El-Demerdash AS, Mowafy RE, Fahmy HA, et al. Pathognomonic features of Pasteurella multocida isolates among various avian species in Sharkia Governorate, Egypt. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37807011/

[11] Johnson TJ, Miller EA, Flores-Figueroa C, et al. Refining the definition of the avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC) pathotype through inclusion of high-risk clonal groups. Poult Sci. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35952599/

[12] Tu J, Xue T, Qi K, et al. The irp2 and fyuA genes in High Pathogenicity Islands are involved in the pathogenesis of infections caused by avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC). Pol J Vet Sci. 2016. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27096784/

[13] Olsen RH, Thøfner IC, Pors SE, et al. Experimental induced avian E. coli salpingitis: Significant impact of strain and host factors on the clinical and pathological outcome. Vet Microbiol. 2016. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27139030/

[14] Badr H, AbdelMenamm Shosha E, Roshdy H, et al. Investigation of many bacterial and viral infections circulating in pigeons showing nervous symptoms. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35531168/

[15] Bagheri S, Paudel S, Wijewardana V, et al. Production of interferon gamma and interleukin 17A in chicken T-cell subpopulations hallmarks the stimulation with live, irradiated and killed avian pathogenic Escherichia coli. Dev Comp Immunol. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35390358/

[16] Tawakol MM, Nabil NM, Samy A. Evaluation of bacteriophage efficacy in reducing the impact of single and mixed infections with Escherichia coli and infectious bronchitis in chickens. Infect Ecol Epidemiol. 2019. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31839902/

[17] Celis-Estupiñan ALDP, Batista DFA, Cardozo MV, et al. Further investigations on the epidemiology of fowl typhoid in Brazil. Avian Pathol. 2017. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28277779/

[18] Emami NK, Dalloul RA. Centennial Review: Recent developments in host-pathogen interactions during necrotic enteritis in poultry. Poult Sci. 2021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34280643/

[19] Konieczka P, Szkopek D, Kinsner M, et al. Cannabis-derived cannabidiol and nanoselenium improve gut barrier function and affect bacterial enzyme activity in chickens subjected to C. perfringens challenge. Vet Res. 2020. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33225993/

[20] Alvarez KLF, Poma-Acevedo A, Fernández-Díaz M. A transient increase in MHC-II(low) monocytes after experimental infection with Avibacterium paragallinarum (serovar B-1) in SPF chickens. Vet Res. 2020. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32977847/

[21] Shwani A, Adkins PRF, Ekesi NS, et al. Whole-Genome Comparisons of Staphylococcus agnetis Isolates from Cattle and Chickens. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2020. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32245765/

[22] Woodward MJ, Mappley L, Le Roy C, et al. Drinking water application of Denagard Tiamulin for control of Brachyspira pilosicoli infection of laying poultry. Res Vet Sci. 2015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26679801/

[23] Wang C, Luo J, Wang H, et al. Isolation and characterization of a Neisseria sp. from the captive wild goose (Anser anser). Integr Zool. 2016. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26767581/

[24] Zhang C, Li W, Liu W

[25] Li L, Thøfner I, Christensen JP, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of an autogenous Escherichia coli vaccine in broiler breeders. Avian Pathol. 2017. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27982712/

[26] Pors SE, Olsen RH, Christensen JP. Variations in virulence of avian pathogenic Escherichia coli demonstrated by the use of a new in vivo infection model. Vet Microbiol. 2014. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24703749/

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.