Skip to main content
Log in

Effect of dietary selenium on the response of stressed and unstressed chickens toEscherichia coli challenge and antigen

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Biological Trace Element Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Selenium was added to the feed of White Leghorn type chickens 1 day prior to challenge with eitherEscherichia coli or sheep erythrocyte antigen. the incidence of death or lesions was reduced from 86% to 21% at the optimal dose of selenium (0.4 mg/kg resulting in feed concentration of 0.45 mg/kg). After the chickens were stressed by chilling, selenium was ineffective againstE. coli. Dietary additions of selenium between 0.1 and 0.8 mg/kg resulted in an antibody titer increase from 2.2 to 3.9 to the log2 against sheep erythrocytes (SRBC). Followng chilling, antibody titer response was reduced from 4.9 to 2.4 to the log2. This titer reduction could be prevented with dietary additions of selenium between 0.1 and 1.2 mg/kg. The effects of a nitrofuran and selenium were additive againstE. coli challenge infection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. R. R. Dietert, J. A. Marsh, and G. F. Combs,Poul. Sci. 62, 1412 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. S. Hogan, K. L. Smith, W. P. Weiss, D. A. Todhunter, and W. L. Schockey,J. Dairy Sci. 73, 2372 (1990).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. L. Kiremidjian-Schumacher and G. Stotzky,Envir. Res. 42, 277 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. M. A. Peplowski, D. C. Mann, F. A. Murray, and A. H. Moxin,J. Anim. Sci. 51, 344 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  5. E. S. Aziz and P. N. Klesius,Am. J. Vet. Res. 47, 148 (1986).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. E. O. Gyang, J. B. Stevens, W. G. Olson, S. D. Tsitsmis, and E. A. Usenik,Am. J. Vet. Res. 45, 175 (1984).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. L. K. Smith J. H. Harrison D. D. Hancock, D. A. Todhunter, and H. C. Conrad,J. Dairy. Sci. 67, 1203 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. G. Greeder and J. A. Milner,Science 209, 825 (1980).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. J. A. Milner,Fed. Proc. 44, 2568 (1985).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. P. B. Siegel and W. B. Gross,Poult. Sci. 59, 1 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  11. K. G. Brodie,Am. Lab. 11, 8 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  12. W. B. Gross and H. S. Siegel,Avian. Dis. 27, 972 (1983).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. W. B. Gross, P. B. Siegel, and R. T. DuBose,Poul. Sci. 59, 516 (1980).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. W. B. Gross and P. B. Siegel,Poul. Sci. 60, 2232 (1981).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. W. B. Gross, D. Jones, and J. Cherry,Avian Dis. 32, 407 (1988).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. W. B. Gross,Am. J. Vet. Res. 45, 963 (1984).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. W. B. Gross,Am. J. Vet. Res. 52, 1288 (1991).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. W. B. Gross,Avian Dis. 32, 483 (1988).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Larsen, C.T., Pierson, F.W. & Gross, W.B. Effect of dietary selenium on the response of stressed and unstressed chickens toEscherichia coli challenge and antigen. Biol Trace Elem Res 58, 169–176 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02917469

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02917469

Index Entries

Navigation