Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

infectious coryza

Toolbox

Datasheet

infectious coryza

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 09 November 2017
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Animal Disease
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • infectious coryza
  • Overview
  • Avibacterium paragallinarum (formerly Haemophilus paragallinarum) is the causative agent of infectious coryza (IC), a disease of the upper respiratory tract in chickens (...

  • There are no pictures available for this datasheet

    If you can supply pictures for this datasheet please contact:

    Compendia
    CAB International
    Wallingford
    Oxfordshire
    OX10 8DE
    UK
    compend@cabi.org
  • Distribution map More information

Don't need the entire report?

Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright
Layer innoculated  with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
TitleSerotype A infection
CaptionLayer innoculated with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
CopyrightSri Poernomo
Layer innoculated  with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
Serotype A infectionLayer innoculated with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.Sri Poernomo
Layer innoculated with serotype C of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
TitleSerotype C infection
CaptionLayer innoculated with serotype C of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
CopyrightSri Poernomo
Layer innoculated with serotype C of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
Serotype C infectionLayer innoculated with serotype C of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.Sri Poernomo
Broiler innoculated with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
TitleSerotype A infection
CaptionBroiler innoculated with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
CopyrightSri Poernomo
Broiler innoculated with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.
Serotype A infectionBroiler innoculated with serotype A of H. paragallinarum Indonesian field strain.Sri Poernomo

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • infectious coryza

International Common Names

  • English: Avibacterium paragallinarum, infectious coryza in chickens; contagious catarrh of fowls; coryza; coryza infectiosa gallinarum; haemophilus paragallinarum, infectious coryza in chickens; infectious coryza of chickens; infectious rhinitis of fowls

Local Common Names

  • Indonesia: snot

English acronym

  • IC

Overview

Top of page

Avibacterium paragallinarum (formerly Haemophilus paragallinarum) is the causative agent of infectious coryza (IC), a disease of the upper respiratory tract in chickens (Yamamoto, 1984). The disease occurs in growing chickens and layers, and is of economic importance due to an increased number of culls and a marked reduction (10-40%) in egg production (Blackall et al., 1997). The disease is characterized by a swelling of the face, inflammation of infra orbital sinuses and conjunctivae with clear or purulent discharge from the nostrils in the acute stage of the disease (Blackall et al., 1997). In many parts of the world, IC has become a major problem that affects all ages of chickens of both indigenous (native chickens) and laying hens in poultry farms.

As early as 1920, Beach believed that IC was a distinct clinical entity. The aetiological agent eluded identification for a number of years, as the disease was often masked in mixed infection, and with fowl pox in particular (Blackall et al., 1997). DeBlieck (1932) isolated the causative agent and named it Bacillus hemoglobinophilus coryzae gallinarum (Blackall et al., 1997). Elliot and Lewis (1934) and Delaplane et al. (1934) independently proposed the binomial Haemophilus gallinarum (Yamamoto, 1991). Based on studies conducted during the 1930s, the causative agent of IC was classified as Haemophilus gallinarum because its requirement for both x-(haemin) and v-(nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, NAD) factors for growth (Beach and Schalm, 1936; Blackall et al., 1997). Page (1962) found that all isolates recovered from cases of IC required only v-factor for growth. This led to the proposal and general acceptance of a new species, Haemophilus paragallinarum (Zinneman and Biberstein, 1974) for an organism requiring only the V-factor. Following a phenotypic and genotypic investigation of the taxonomy of H. paragallinarum, the bacterium was reclassified as Avibacterium paragallinarum (Blackall et al., 2005).

 

Hosts/Species Affected

Top of page

Chickens are primarily affected, although the disease has occasionally been reported in pheasants and guinea fowls (Charlton et al., 2000) and Japanese quails (Reece et al., 1981; Thenmozhi and Malmarugan, 2013). All ages of chickens are susceptible. The disease is seen more frequently on intensive chicken farms, especially on large-scale egg production complexes and breeding farms (Charlton et al., 2000).

On farms where multiple age groups are brooded and raised, spread of the disease to successive age groups usually occurs within 1-6 weeks after birds are moved from the brooder house to growing cages nearby to older groups of infected birds. Chickens are the natural host for A. paragallinarum (Blackall et al., 1997). IC does not occur in turkeys (Blackall et al., 1997). Indigenous domestic native fowls, sometimes referred to as village chickens are also susceptible to A. paragallinarum infection (Zaini and Kanameda, 1991; Lin et al., 1996; Poernomo et al., 2000).

Distribution

Top of page

IC is a disease of economic significance in many parts of the world. Within the USA, the disease is most prevalent in California and the Southeastern States (Blackall et al., 1997). It is likely that IC has a worldwide distribution.

Distribution Table

Top of page

The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.

Continent/Country/RegionDistributionLast ReportedOriginFirst ReportedInvasiveReferenceNotes

Asia

AzerbaijanNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
BahrainDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
BangladeshPresentKhatun et al., 2016
BhutanNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
Brunei DarussalamNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
ChinaPresentChen et al., 1993
-Hong KongReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Georgia (Republic of)Disease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
IndiaPresentAnjaneya, et al., 2014
IndonesiaReported present or known to be presentPoernomo et al., 2000; OIE Handistatus, 2005
IranDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
IraqReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
IsraelNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
JapanNo information availableYamaguchi et al., 1989; OIE Handistatus, 2005
JordanReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
KazakhstanDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Korea, DPRDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Korea, Republic ofReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
KuwaitLast reported2001OIE Handistatus, 2005
LebanonNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
MalaysiaPresentZaini and Kanameda, 1991
-Peninsular MalaysiaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
-SabahLast reported1994OIE Handistatus, 2005
-SarawakReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
MongoliaDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
MyanmarReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
NepalNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
OmanNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
PhilippinesReported present or known to be presentNagaoka et al., 1994; OIE Handistatus, 2005
QatarNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
SingaporeLast reported1992OIE Handistatus, 2005
Sri LankaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
SyriaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
TaiwanReported present or known to be presentLin et al., 1996; OIE Handistatus, 2005
TajikistanNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
ThailandReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
TurkeyNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
TurkmenistanNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
United Arab EmiratesNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
UzbekistanDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
VietnamReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
YemenNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005

Africa

AlgeriaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
AngolaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
BeninNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
BotswanaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Burkina FasoNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
BurundiNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
CameroonReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Cape VerdeReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Central African RepublicNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
ChadNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
Congo Democratic RepublicDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Côte d'IvoireLast reported1996OIE Handistatus, 2005
DjiboutiDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
EgyptLast reported1996Aly and, 2000; OIE Handistatus, 2005
EritreaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
EthiopiaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
GhanaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
GuineaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Guinea-BissauNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
KenyaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
LibyaDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
MadagascarDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
MalawiNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
MaliNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
MauritiusDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
MoroccoReported present or known to be presentMouhid et al., 1989; OIE Handistatus, 2005
MozambiqueNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
NamibiaLast reported2002OIE Handistatus, 2005
NigeriaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
RéunionNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
RwandaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
Sao Tome and PrincipeNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
SenegalNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
SeychellesReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
SomaliaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
South AfricaReported present or known to be presentBragg et al., 1996; OIE Handistatus, 2005
SudanDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
SwazilandNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
TanzaniaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
TogoNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
TunisiaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
UgandaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
ZambiaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
ZimbabweReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005

North America

BermudaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
CanadaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
MexicoReported present or known to be presentFernandes et al., 2000; OIE Handistatus, 2005
USAReported present or known to be presentDronal et al., 1990a; Dronal et al., 1990b; Blackall et al., 1997; OIE Handistatus, 2005
-CaliforniaPresentDronal et al., 1990a; Dronal et al., 1990b; Blackall et al., 1997

Central America and Caribbean

BarbadosDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
BelizeDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
British Virgin IslandsDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Cayman IslandsDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Costa RicaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
CubaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
CuraçaoDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
DominicaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Dominican RepublicNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
El SalvadorNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
GuadeloupeNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
GuatemalaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
HaitiLast reported2003OIE Handistatus, 2005
JamaicaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
MartiniqueNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
NicaraguaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
PanamaPresentCalderón et al., 2010
Saint Kitts and NevisDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Saint Vincent and the GrenadinesReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Trinidad and TobagoDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005

South America

ArgentinaReported present or known to be presentTerzolo et al., 1993; Terzolo et al., 1999; OIE Handistatus, 2005
BoliviaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
BrazilReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
ChileReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
ColombiaReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
EcuadorReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Falkland IslandsDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
French GuianaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
GuyanaSerological evidence and/or isolation of the agentOIE Handistatus, 2005
ParaguayReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
PeruPresentMorales-Erasto et al., 2016
UruguayReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
VenezuelaLast reported1991OIE Handistatus, 2005

Europe

AndorraNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
AustriaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
BelarusDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
BelgiumNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
Bosnia-HercegovinaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
BulgariaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
CroatiaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
CyprusDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Czech RepublicDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
DenmarkNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
EstoniaDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
FinlandDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
FranceDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
GermanyReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
GreeceDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
IcelandLast reported1992OIE Handistatus, 2005
IrelandReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
Isle of Man (UK)Disease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
ItalyNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
JerseyDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
LatviaDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
LiechtensteinDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
LithuaniaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
LuxembourgDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
MacedoniaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
MaltaLast reported2001OIE Handistatus, 2005
MoldovaDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
NorwayDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
PolandNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
PortugalLast reported1996OIE Handistatus, 2005
Russian FederationDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
SlovakiaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
SloveniaDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
SpainDisease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
SwedenNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
SwitzerlandNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
UKReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
-Northern IrelandLast reported1992OIE Handistatus, 2005
UkraineDisease never reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005
Yugoslavia (former)No information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)Disease not reportedOIE Handistatus, 2005

Oceania

AustraliaReported present or known to be presentBlackall and Eaves, 1988; OIE Handistatus, 2005
French PolynesiaCAB Abstracts data miningOIE Handistatus, 2005
New CaledoniaCAB Abstracts data miningOIE Handistatus, 2005
New ZealandReported present or known to be presentOIE Handistatus, 2005
SamoaNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005
VanuatuLast reported1997OIE Handistatus, 2005
Wallis and Futuna IslandsNo information availableOIE Handistatus, 2005

Pathology

Top of page

Postmortem Findings

A. paragallinarum produces an acute catarrhal inflammation of mucous membranes of nasal passages and sinuses. There is frequently a catarrhal conjunctivitis and subcutaneous oedema of face and wattles. Typically, pneumonia and airsacculitis are rarely present; however, some reports of outbreaks in broilers have indicated significant levels of condemnations (up to 69,8%) due to airsaculitis even in the absence of any other recognized viral or bacterial pathogens (Droual et al., 1990; Blackall et al., 1997).

Histopathology

Essential change in the nasal cavity, infra orbital sinuses, and trachea consisted of sloughing, disintegration and hyperplasia of mucosal and glandular epithelia, oedema, and hyperaemia with heterophil infiltration in the tunica propria of the mucous membranes. Pathologic changes first observed at 20 hours reached maximum severity by 7-10 days after infection, with subsequent repair occurring within 14 -21 days. In birds with involvement of the lower respiratory tract, acute catarrhal bronchopneumonia was observed, with heterophils and cell debris filling the lumen of secondary and tertiary bronchi; epithelial cells of air capillaries were swollen and showed hyperplasia, catarrhal inflammation of air sacs was characterized by swelling and hyperplasia of the cells, with abundant heterophil infiltration. In addition, a pronounced infiltration of most cells was observed in the lamina propria of the mucous membrane of the nasal cavity. The products of most cells, heterophil, and macrophages may be responsible for the severe vascular changes and cell damage leading to coryza. A dissecting fibrinopurulent cellulitis similar to that seen in chronic fowl cholera has been reported in broiler and layer chickens. In infectious coryza, lesions were confined to the upper respiratory tract (Reid and Blackall, 1984; Droual et al.,1990; Blackall et al., 1997).

Diagnosis

Top of page

Introduction

Diagnosis is based on recognizing the clinical signs, postmortem findings, and bacteriological examinations of the suspected causal agent leading to isolation, and identification of the causative agent.

Clinical Diagnosis

In susceptible chickens the symptoms first appear about 36-48 hours after exposure to infection. The disease affects the upper respiratory tracts of chickens (Yamamoto, 1984). The disease occurs in growing chickens and layers. The typical symptoms are a swollen face and sinuses with a clear discharge progressively becoming purulent. There is marked conjunctivitis and in some cases the eyes are partially or completely closed, and lacrimation results in an inability of the chicken to eat and drink. Infection may involve one or both sinuses. Mortality is low, but morbidity may reach 100%. Affected chickens have variable size of swelling of the infraorbital sinus and face, nasal discharge, difficulty in breathing and coughing. In layers infection causes a drop in egg production; in broilers there may be an increased need to cull birds (Bains, 1979). A. paragallinarum produces an acute catarrhal inflammation of mucous membranes of nasal passages and sinuses. There is frequently a catarrhal conjunctivitis and subcutaneous oedema of face and wattles.

Lesions

Consistent lesions associated with IC are acute catarrhal inflammation of the nasal passage and sinusitis. There is frequently a catarrhal conjunctivitis and subcutaneous oedema of face and wattles. In chronic cases, an accumulation of 'cheesy' material in the infraorbital sinus may be present (Bain, 1979; Droual et al., 1990).

Laboratory Diagnosis

Ideally, the isolation and identification of the causative bacterium is used to confirm a diagnosis of infectious coryza. The methods used include examination of the satellite phenomenon with a feeder culture of Staphylococcus epidermidis or Staphylococcus hyicus, biochemical tests, fermentation tests of carbohydrates, and serological tests (Page, 1962; Blackall and Reid, 1982; Poernomo et al., 1997a, b).

A polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, which can be applied either to suspect colonies or directly to samples from chickens, is available (Chen et al., 1997, 1998). Although most isolates of A. paragallinarum are dependent upon v-factor for growth in artificial media (meaning they show the traditional satellite growth), some isolates are v-factor-independent (Monahid et al., 1992; Bragg et al., 1993; Horner et al., 1995; Miflin et al., 1995; Jacobs and Van der Werf, 2000). This variation in growth factor requirements, along with the existence of non pathogenic v-factor-dependent organisms, highlights the need for biochemical identification or the use of the new generation PCR test; serotyping of isolates is an important guide in the use of vaccines (Blackall and Yamamoto, 1998).

Serological Tests

A range of serological tests to detect antibodies have been described (Blackall et al., 1997), and haemagglutination inhibition (HI) tests are in widespread use (Blackall and Yamamoto, 1998). A blocking ELISA-kit has also been developed (Zaini et al., 1995; Miao et al., 1999; Zhang et al., 1999; Miao et al., 2000). A. paragallinarum bacteria can be detected on the epithelium of the nasal passage and sinuses by using immunoperoxidase tests (Nakamura et al., 1993).

Isolation and Identification of the Causative Agent

Many different media have been developed to support the growth of A. paragallinarum. Specimens should be taken from two or three chickens in the acute stage of the disease. A sterile cotton swab is inserted deep into the sinus cavity where the organism is most often found in its pure (uncontaminated) form. Tracheal or air sac exudates may also be taken on a sterile swab. The swab is streaked on a blood agar plate, which is then cross-streaked with Staphylococcus epidermidis or Staphylococcus hyicus (Page, 1962; Blackall and Reid, 1982) and incubated at 37°C in a partially evacuated large screw-cap jar. Staphylococcus epidermidis or S. hyicus which are commonly used as 'feeders' should be pre-tested because not all strains actively produce the v-factor (Blackall et al., 1997).

At the simplest level, IC may be diagnosed on the basis of a history of a rapidly spreading disease in which coryza is the main manifestation. A smear of sinus exudates should be made and Gram stained. It should reveal Gram-negative bipolar-staining rods with a tendency toward filament formation and pleomorphism and combined with the isolation of a catalase-negative bacterium showing satellite growth. Another efficient diagnostic procedure is to inoculate the sinus exudates or culture into two or three young normal chickens by the infraorbital sinus (intra sinus). The typical signs and lesion associated with coryza may develop in 24-28 hrs or longer (3-5 days); however, the incubation period may be delayed up to 1 week if only a few organisms are present in the inoculum (Blackall et al., 1997; Charlton et al., 2000). Better equipped laboratories should attempt a more complete biochemical identification; serological tests for serotyping of A. paragallinarum isolates is important for epidemiological investigations and an invaluable prerequisite to management programs based on vaccination (Blackall et al., 1997). Chickens that have recovered from active infection of coryza develop varying degrees of immunity. Pullets that have experienced IC during their growing period are generally protected against a later drop in egg production. Resistance to re-exposure among individual birds may develop as early as 2 weeks after initial exposure by the intrasinus route. Oral administration of doses of 1010 cells of attenuated A. paragallinarum serotype A, effectively induces production of serum haemagglutination-inhibition antibodies in chickens and protects from subsequent infection (Nakamura et al., 1994; Blackall et al., 1997).


Differential Diagnosis

IC must be differentiated from chronic respiratory disease, chronic fowl cholera, fowl pox, and hypovitaminosis A, which produce similar clinical signs. In some areas A. paragallinarum infection must also be differentiated from infection due to Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale. A. paragallinarum often occurs in mixed infections, with chronic IC having a number of contributory agents. One should consider the possibility of other bacteria or viruses as complicating factors, particularly if mortality is high and the disease takes a prolonged course (Blackall and Yamamoto, 1998).

List of Symptoms/Signs

Top of page
SignLife StagesType
Digestive Signs / Anorexia, loss or decreased appetite, not nursing, off feed Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Digestive Signs / Diarrhoea Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Digestive Signs / Excessive salivation, frothing at the mouth, ptyalism Sign
General Signs / Head, face, ears, jaw, nose, nasal, swelling, mass Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
General Signs / Inability to stand, downer, prostration Sign
General Signs / Increased mortality in flocks of birds Sign
General Signs / Lack of growth or weight gain, retarded, stunted growth Sign
General Signs / Underweight, poor condition, thin, emaciated, unthriftiness, ill thrift Sign
General Signs / Weight loss Sign
Nervous Signs / Dullness, depression, lethargy, depressed, lethargic, listless Sign
Ophthalmology Signs / Chemosis, conjunctival, scleral edema, swelling Sign
Ophthalmology Signs / Conjunctival, scleral, injection, abnormal vasculature Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Ophthalmology Signs / Conjunctival, scleral, redness Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Ophthalmology Signs / Lacrimation, tearing, serous ocular discharge, watery eyes Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Ophthalmology Signs / Purulent discharge from eye Sign
Reproductive Signs / Decreased, dropping, egg production Sign
Respiratory Signs / Abnormal breathing sounds of the upper airway, airflow obstruction, stertor, snoring Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Respiratory Signs / Abnormal lung or pleural sounds, rales, crackles, wheezes, friction rubs Sign
Respiratory Signs / Change in voice, vocal strength Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Respiratory Signs / Coughing, coughs Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Respiratory Signs / Dyspnea, difficult, open mouth breathing, grunt, gasping Sign
Respiratory Signs / Increased respiratory rate, polypnea, tachypnea, hyperpnea Sign
Respiratory Signs / Mucoid nasal discharge, serous, watery Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Respiratory Signs / Purulent nasal discharge Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Respiratory Signs / Sneezing, sneeze Poultry:Young poultry,Poultry:Mature female,Poultry:Cockerel,Poultry:Mature male Sign
Skin / Integumentary Signs / Ruffled, ruffling of the feathers Sign
Skin / Integumentary Signs / Skin edema Sign

Disease Course

Top of page

The principle lesion manifested by A. paragallinarum infection is an acute catarrhal inflammation of the upper respiratory tract, mainly of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Infiltration of a large number of most cells into the lamina propria of the mucous membrane of the nasal cavity is also characteristic. Numerous organisms are found on the cilia or on the surface of the epithelial cells of the nasal mucosa. Chickens with the lesions often have severe coryza. Adherence to and colonization of the encapsulated variant on the nasal mucosa seems to be a first step of infection (Sawata et al., 1985a). Colonization of the nasal mucosa by encapsulated A. paragallinarum is probably essential to induce morphological changes in the nasal mucosa (Sawata et al., 1985b).

Acute uncomplicated coryza is characterized by a short duration, with signs usually clinically visible for 7-11 days, and subsequently results in birds being refractory to reinfection. Chronic disease is usually found in complicated coryza and in this case clinical signs can persist for a month and longer. Chronic coryza can be produced experimentally, by creating a combined infection of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and A. paragallinarum (Rimler et al., 1977).

IC may occur in growing chickens and layers. There is usually a rapid onset and morbidity is high in the flock, decreased feed and water consumption, retarded growth in young stock and reduced egg production in laying flocks. The most common clinical signs are nasal discharge, facial swelling, lacrimation, anorexia, conjunctivitis with some adherence of eyelids, respiratory noise, swollen infraorbital sinuses and exudates in the conjunctival sac, occasionally diarrhoea (Blackall et al., 1997; Charlton, 2000). There has been a recent emergence of disease in meat chickens in the USA and a swollen head-like syndrome associated with A. paragallinarum infection has been reported (Droual et al., 1990); similar symptoms have been reported in South America (Sandoval et al., 1994). Additionally, arthritis and septicaemia, possibly complicated by the presence of other pathogens, have been reported in broiler and layer flocks in South America (Sandoval et al., 1994). A foul odour may be detected in flocks in which the disease has become chronic and complicated with other bacteria (Blackall et al., 1997). A. paragallinarum/A. gallinarum infection also may involve the trachea and bronchi, causing rales and difficult breathing (Beach and Schalm, 1936).

Epidemiology

Top of page

The disease is observed primarily during the autumn and winter months in subtropical climates, or during the rainy season in a tropical climate. All age groups of chickens are susceptible, but the disease appears to be more severe in birds of 4 weeks old and upwards. Morbidity is high (80-100%) and mortality is low (0-1%), unless there is complication with other infections, such as infectious bronchitis virus, Mycoplasma gallisepticum and Pasteurella spp. The presence of disease in growing birds may result in poor growth, and reduced egg production. Chronic or apparently healthy carrier birds have been recognized as the main reservoirs of infection. Spread within a flock is rapid via contact with infected birds, through ingestion of contaminated feed or water, and by the airborne route. Recovered birds are frequently carriers. No mechanical or biological carriers (vectors) have been demonstrated. The organism does not survive longer than 4-5 hours in the environment outside its hosts (Anon., 1971; Charlton et al., 2000). Susceptible birds exposed to infected birds may show signs of the disease within 24-72 hours (Rimler et al., 1977; Blackall et al., 1997). Chickens inoculated with cultures of A. paragallinarum or exudate, will show the characteristic features of coryza after 24-48 hours (Blackall et al., 1997).

Impact: Economic

Top of page

IC occurs in all ages of growing chickens and is of economic importance due to an increased number of culls and a marked reduction (10-40%) in egg production (Blackall et al., 1997).

IC is often regarded as a disease that has its greatest impact in intensively raised chickens. In Indonesia, the disease was formerly not considered to be widespread in village chickens. However the isolation of A. paragallinarum in village chickens has indicated that the disease can be present in less intensive production systems (Poernomo et al., 2000). In China, it has been estimated that over a three year period, 1986-1988, the disease caused cases of about 1000 million Yen (approximately US $18 million) at the 1992 exchange rate (Chen et al., 1993).

Disease Treatment

Top of page

Various sulfonamides and antibiotics have been used to treat IC, usually in feed or drinking water. Birds usually respond to treatment but relapses may occur when treatment is discontinued. Many drugs and antibiotics have been used, including streptomycin, erythromycin, sulfodimethoxine, tylosin tartrate and spectinomycin (Charlton et al., 2000). Drug combinations found effective for the treatment of IC include sulfachloropyridazine/trimethoprim (Poernomo and Ronohardjo, 1987), and sulfamethoxazol/trimethoprim (Takahashi et al., 1990; Poernomo et al., 1997). It should be noted that sulfa drugs may cause a temporary drop in egg production and overdoses may be toxic. Similarly, streptomycin causes severe stress in chickens, which can last for 24 hours (Bains, 1979). Erythromycin and oxytetracycline are two commonly used antibiotics (Blackall et al., 1997). Other antibiotics found effective in the treatment of IC include norfloxacin (Lublin et al., 1993), enrofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, ampicillin (Prabhakar et al., 1998), and gentamycin (Muhammad et al., 1998). Some strains of A. paragallinarum are resistant to various antibiotics, including cloxacillin, erythromycin, ampicillin, lincomycin (Prasad et al., 1999), neomycin, cotrimoxazol, amikacin, and cephalexin (Prabhakar et al., 1998). Strains of A. paragallinarum resistant to various antibiotics have not been found to carry plasmids (Blackall, 1988).

Prevention and Control

Top of page

Farm-level Control


Recovered carrier birds are the main source of infection, so practices such as buying breeding males or started chicks from unknown sources should be discouraged. Only day-old chicks should be secured for replacement purposes unless the source is known to be free of IC. Isolation rearing and the housing away from old stock are desirable practices. To eliminate the agents from a farm, it is necessary to depopulate the infected or recovered flock(s), because birds in such flocks remain reservoirs of infection. After the cleaning and disinfecting of equipment and houses, the premises should be allowed to remain vacant for 2-3 weeks before restocking with clean birds (Blackall et al., 1997), raised, in so far as is possible, in quarantine (Charlton et al., 2000).

It is important to avoid the introduction of infected chickens to the farm and if this occurs then the early recognition of disease and institution of appropriate treatment is vital. Good husbandry and management procedures prevent spread of disease; isolation of age groups of chickens on an all-in, all-out basis (Bain, 1979).

It is necessary to depopulate flocks that have experienced the disease, because recovered birds remain reservoirs of infection. The method of eradication depends upon circumstances on the farm, the size of the flock, facilities, and purpose of the flock. The infected birds may be marketed at once and the premises cleaned before new chicks are brought onto the farm. Another more popular method is to treat the affected flock and keep it isolated until new stock has been raised in isolation as replacements. After the infected or recovered birds are marketed, the house should be cleaned and disinfected before housing clean stock. As the organism may survive in exudates for several days at low temperatures, it would be advisable to allow the cleaned house to remain vacant for about 1 week, particularly during the cooler periods of the year (Yamamoto, 1984).

Immunization and Vaccines


Vaccination is normally effective for the control of disease, but some outbreaks have been caused by vaccine failure. The mis-matching of challenge serovar with vaccine is the most likely explanation for these cases of vaccine failure. Other explanations such as improper vaccination technique may also have played a role. Where they occur there is a need for the active investigation of suspect infectious coryza vaccine failures, including the isolation and serotyping of suspect A. paragallinarum isolates.

Commercial bacterins prepared from chicken embryos or broth may be autogenous or may combine strains of 2-3 serotypes. The product is inactivated with formalin or merthiolate, and must contain at least 108 CFU/ml to be effective. They may contain adjuvants (Al(OH)3 gel or mineral oil), stabilizers, or saline diluent (Yamamoto, 1984). Bacterin/vaccine produced in broth protected more effectively than vaccine produced in chicken embryo (Terzalo et al., 1999). Bacterins are generally injected in birds between 10 and 20 week of age and yield optimal result when given 3-4 weeks prior to an expected natural outbreak. Two injections given approximately 4 weeks apart before 20 weeks of age results in better performance of layers than a single injection (Feng et al., 1988; Mouhid et al., 1991). Both subcutaneous and intramuscular injections have been found to be effective (Blackall and Reid, 1987). Injection of the bacterin into the leg muscle has been found to give better protection than when it is injected into breast muscle.

Inactivated IC bacterins provide protection only against the particular Page serovars included in the vaccine, so it is vital that vaccines contain all the serovars that may be present in infections in the target population (Blackall et al., 1997); Page serovar B has now been confirmed to be a true serovar with full pathogenicity. Serovar B is widespread and must be included in inactivated bacterins in areas where it is present (Tezalo et al., 1999; Poernomo et al., 2000). However, as different strains of serovar B provide only partial cross-protection among themselves it may be necessary to prepare an autogenous bacterin for use in areas where serovar B is endemic (Mouchid et al., 1991; Yamaguchi et al., 1990, 1991; Aly and Mousa, 2000; Poernomo et al., 2000).

References

Top of page

Aly MM; Mousa S, 2000. Cross-protection between Haemophilus paragallinarum strains and evaluation of infectious coryza vaccines. Assiut Veterinary Medical Journal, 43(85):339-353; 21 ref.

Anjaneya; Singh SD; Dhama K; Wani MY; Gowthaman V; Chawak MM, 2014. Molecular characterization of Avibacterium paragallinarum isolated from poultry flocks of India. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 9(7):440-451. http://scialert.net/fulltext/?doi=ajava.2014.440.451&org=10

Anon., 1971. Methods for Examining Poultry Biologics and for Identifying and Quantifying Avian Pathogen. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy of Science.

Bains BS, 1979. A Manual of Poultry. Basle, Switzerland: Edition Roche. F. Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. Ltd.

Beach JR; Schalm OW, 1936. Studies of the clinical manifestations and transmissibility of infectious coryza of chickens. Poultry Science, 15:466-472.

Blackall PJ, 1988. Antimicrobial drug resistance and the occurrence of plasmids in Haemophilus paragallinarum.. Avian Diseases, 32(4):742-747; 26 ref.

Blackall PJ, 1989. The avian haemopili. Clinical Microbiology, Rev., 2:210-277.

Blackall PJ; Christensen H; Beckenham T; Blackall LL; Bisgaard M, 2005. Reclassification of Pasteurella gallinarum, [Haemophilus] paragallinarum, Pasteurella avium and Pasteurella volantium as Avibacterium gallinarum gen. nov., comb. nov., Avibacterium paragallinarum comb. nov., Avibacterium avium comb. nov. and Avibacterium volantium comb. nov. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 55(1):353-362.

Blackall PJ; Eaves LE, 1988. Serological classification of Australian and South African isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum.. Australian Veterinary Journal, 65(11):362-363; 14 ref.

Blackall PJ; Eaves LE; Morrow CJ, 1991. Comparison of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolates by restriction endonuclease analysis of chromosomal DNA. Veterinary Microbiology, 27(1):39-47; 15 ref.

Blackall PJ; Eaves LE; Rogers DG, 1989. Biotyping of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolates using hemagglutinin serotyping, carbohydrate fermentation patterns, and antimicrobial drug resistance patterns. Avian Diseases, 33(3):491-496; 23 ref.

Blackall PJ; Matsumoto M; Yamamoto R, 1997. Infectious coryza In: Calnek BW, Barnes HJ, Beard CW, McDougald LR, Saif YM, eds. Diseases of Poultry, 10th Edn, Iowa, Iowa State Univeristy Press 179-190.

Blackall PJ; Reid GG, 1982. Further characterization of Haemophilus paragallinarum and Haemophilus avium. Veterinary Microbiology, 7:359-367.

Blackall PJ; Reid GG, 1987. Further efficacy studies on inactivated, aluminum-hydroxide-adsorbed vaccines against infectious coryza. Avian Diseases, 31(3):527-532; 13 ref.

Blackall PJ; Rogers DG; Yamamoto R, 1990. Outer-membrane proteins of Haemophilus paragallinarum.. Avian Diseases, 34(4):871-877; 24 ref.

Blackall PJ; Yamamoto R, 1998. Infections Coryza. In: Swayne DE et al., eds. A Laboratory Manual for the Isolation and Identification of Avian Pathogens, edition 4. Tallahassee, Florida, USA: Rose Printing, 29-34.

Bragg RR, 2002. Isolation of serovar C-3 Haemphilus paragallinarum from Zimbabwe: A further indication of the need for the production of vaccines against infectious coryza containing local isolates of H. paragallinarum. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, 69: 129- 132.

Bragg RR; Coetzee L; Verschoor JA, 1993. Monoclonal antibody characterization of South African field isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, 60(3):181-187; 25 ref.

Bragg RR; Coetzee L; Verschoor JA, 1996. Changes in the incidences of the different serovars of Haemophilus paragallinarum in South Africa: a possible explanation for vaccination failures. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, 63(3):217-226; 23 ref.

Calderón EN; Thomas K; Morales-Erasto V; Salgado-Miranda C; Soriano-Vargas E, 2010. Identification of Avibacterium paragallinarum serovar B-1 from severe infectious coryza outbreaks in Panama. Avian Diseases, 54(3):1095-1097. http://www.aaapjournals.info/doi/abs/10.1637/9123-110409-Case.1

Charlton BL et al., eds, 2000. Infections Coryza. Avian Disease Manual. Kennets Square, Pennsylvania, USA: 19348:94-96.

Chen X; Song C; Gong Y; Blackall PJ, 1998. Further studies on the use of a polymerase chain reaction test for the diagnosis of infectious coryza. Avian Pathology, 27(6):618-624; 10 ref.

Chen X; Zhang P; Blackall PJ; Feng W, 1993. Characterization of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolates from China. Avian Diseases, 37(2):574-576; 17 ref.

Chen XL; Feng WD; Chen K; Zhang PL; Gang YM, 1997. Diagnosis of Infections Coryza using a polymerase chain assay. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 23(12):10-11.

DeBlieck L, 1932. A haemophilic bacterium as the cause of contagious catarrh of the fowl (coryza infectiousa gallinarum). Veterinary Journal, 88:9-13.

Delaplane JP; Erwin LE; Stuart HO, 1934. A haemophilic bacillus as the cause of an infectious rhinitis (coryza) of fowls. Rhode Island Agriculture Expt. Sta. Bulletin, 244.

Dronal R; Bickford AA; Charlton BR; Cooper GL; Channing SE, 1990b. Infections Coryza in meat chickens in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Avian Diseases, 34:473-478.

Droual R; Bickford AA; Charlton BR; Cooper GL; Channing SE, 1990. Infectious coryza in meat chickens in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Avian Diseases, 34(4):1009-1016; 10 ref.

Eaves LE; Rogers DG; Blackall PJ, 1989. Comparison of hemagglutinin and agglutinin schemes for the serological classification of Haemophilus paragallinarum and proposal of a new haemagglutinin serovar. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 27(7):1510-1513; 17 ref.

Eliot CP; Lewis MR, 1934. A haemophilic bacterium as a cause of infectious coryza in the fowl. Journal American Veterinary Medical Association, 64:878-888.

Feng WD; Chen XL; Zhang PJ, 1988. Studies on an inactivated vaccine of infectious coryza in chickens. II. Experiments on the dosage, potency and duration of immunity. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 14(10):39-41; [5 tab.].

Fernandes RP; Delgado GA; Ochoa P; Sarino VE, 2000. Characterization of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolates from Mexico. Avian Pathology, 29(5):473-476.

Horner RF; Bishop GC; Jarvis CJ; Coetzer THT, 1995. NAD (V-factor)-independent and typical Haemophilus paragallinarum infection in commercial chickens: a five year field study. Avian Pathology, 24(3):453-463; 11 ref.

Jacobs ACC; van der Werf J, 2000. Efficacy of commercially available Coryza vaccine against challenge with recent South-Africa NAD-independent isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum in chickens. Journal of the South Africa. Veterinary Association, 71(2):109-111.

Khatun MM; Lijon MB; Islam MA; Nasrin Sultana, 2016. Detection of antibiotic resistant Avibacterium paragallinarum from broiler chickens in Bangladesh. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research, 3(2):173-177. http://bdvets.org/JAVAR/V3I2/c149_pp173-177.pdf

Kume K; Sawata A, 1984. Immunologic properties of variants dissociated from serotype 1 Haemophilus paragallinarum strains. Japanese Journal of Veterinary Science, 46(1):49-56; 20 ref.

Kume K; Sawata A; Nahase Y, 1980. Immunologic relationship between Page's and Sawata's serotype strains of Haemophilus paragallinarum. American Journal Veterinary Research, 41:757-769.

Kume K; Sawata A; Naka T; Matsumoto M, 1983. Serologic classification of Haemophilus paragallinarum with a Haemaglutinin system. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 17:958-964.

Lin A; Shyu CL; Yamaguchi T; Tagaki M, 1996. Characterization and pathogenicity of Haemophilus paragallinarum serotype C in local chickens in Taiwan. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, 58(10):1007-1009.

Lublin A; Mechani S; Malkinson M; Weisman Y, 1993. Efficacy of norfloxacin nicotinate treatment of broiler breeders against Haemophilus paragallinarum. Avian Diseases, 37(3):673-679; 16 ref.

Miao DY; Zhang BJ; Gong YM, 2000. Test of efficacy of bivalent inactivated oil adjuvant vaccine to avian infections Coryza. Acta Agricultural Boreali Sinica, 15(2):138-142.

Miao DY; Zhang BJ; Gong YM; Chen XL, 1999. Study on blocking Elisa with monoclonal antibody for the detection of serovar-specific antibody to Haemophilus paragallinarum. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 25(6):8-11.

Miflin JK; Horner RF; Blackall PJ; Chen X; Bishop GC; Morrow CJ; Yamaguchi T; Iritani Y, 1995. Phenotypic and molecular characterization of V-factor (NAD)-independent Haemophilus paragallinarum. Avian Diseases, 39(2):304-308; 21 ref.

Morales-Erasto V; Falconi-Agapito F; Luna-Galaz GA; Saravia LE; Montalvan-Avalos A; Soriano-Vargas E E; Fernández-Díaz M, 2016. Coinfection of Avibacterium paragallinarum and Ornithobacterium rhinotracheale in chickens from Peru. Avian Diseases, 60(1):75-78. http://www.bioone.org/loi/avdi

Mouhid M; Baozoubad K; Zonageri Z, 1989. Chicken IC in mArroko: epidemiological study and pathogenicity trials. Actes-de-l. Institute Agronomique et-Veteriner-Hasan II, 9(2):11-16.

Mouhid M; Bauzouhaa K; Zouagesi Z, 1991. Preparation and use of an autogenous bacterin against Infectious Coryza in chickens. Veterinary Research Communication, 15(6):413-419.

Mouhid M; Bisgaard M; Morley AJ; Mutter R; Mannheim W, 1992. Occurrence of V-factor (NAD) independent straints of Haemophilus paragallinarum. Veterinary Microbiology, 31:363-368.

Muhamad K; Akhbar S; Muneer MA, 1998. Coryza like syndrome in poultry. Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 18(3):166-167.

Nagaoka K; Mayo Ade; Takagi M; Ohta S, 1994. Characterization of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolated in the Philippines. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, 56(5):1017-1019; 12 ref.

Nakamura K; Hasae T; Shizai T; Sawata A; Tanimura N; Maeda M, 1993. Lesion and immunoperaxidase localisation of Haemophilus paragallinarum in chickens with IC. Veterinary Record, 132(22):557-558.

Nakamura S; Hoshi S; Nagasawa Y; Meda S, 1994. Protective effect of oral administration of killed Haemophilus paragallinarum serotype on chickens. Avian Diseases, 38(2):289-292.

OIE Handistatus, 2002. World Animal Health Publication and Handistatus II (dataset for 2001). Paris, France: Office International des Epizooties.

OIE Handistatus, 2003. World Animal Health Publication and Handistatus II (dataset for 2002). Paris, France: Office International des Epizooties.

OIE Handistatus, 2004. World Animal Health Publication and Handistatus II (data set for 2003). Paris, France: Office International des Epizooties.

OIE Handistatus, 2005. World Animal Health Publication and Handistatus II (data set for 2004). Paris, France: Office International des Epizooties.

Page LA, 1962. Haemophilus Infectious in Chickens. I. Characteristics of Haemophilus Isolates recovered from diseased chickens. American Journal Veterinary Research, 23:85-95.

Poernomo S; Ronohardjo P, 1987. Efficacy of cosmix plus in Broilers with Coryza. (Haemophylus paragallinarum) infections. Penyakit Hewan, 19:6-10.

Poernomo S; Sutarma; Nazarudin Y, 1997. Haemophilus paragallinarum in chickens in Indonesia: II. physiological and biochemical properties of Haemophilus spp. from diseased chickens. Jurnal Ilmu Ternak dan Veteriner, 2(4):263-266; 13 ref.

Poernomo S; Sutarma; Rafiee M; Blackall PJ, 2000. Characterisation of isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum from Indonesia. Australian Veterinary Journal, 78(11):759-762; 33 ref.

Poernomo S; Sutarma; Silawatri SAKD, 1997. Haemophilus paragallinarum in chickens in Indonesia: III. antimicrobial drug sensitivity test of H. paragallinarum from chickens suffering from coryza. Jurnal Ilmu Ternak dan Veteriner, 2(4):267-269; 8 ref.

Prabhahar TG; Doraizajan N; Swamanathan K; Suvakumar S, 1998. Antibiotic sensitivity pattern of Haemophilus species from Infectious Coryza in Namakhal. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences, 68(9):888-889.

Prasad V; Murthy KK; Murthy PR, 1999. Antibiotic sensitivity studies on Haemophillus paragallinarum isolated from chickens. Indian Veterinary Journal, 76(3):253-254; 6 ref.

Reece RL; Barr DA; Owen AC, 1981. The isolation of Haemophilus paragallinarum from Japanese quail. Australian Veterinary Journal 57(7):350-351; 7 ref.

Reid GG; Blackall PJ, 1984. Pathogenicity of Australian isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum [gallinarum] and Haemophilus avium in chickens. Veterinary Microbiology, 9(1):77-82; 19 ref.

Reid GG; Blackall PJ, 1987. Comparison of adjuvants for an inactivated infectious coryza vaccine. Avian Diseases, 31(1):59-63; 28 ref.

Rimler RB; Davis RB; Page PK, 1977. Infection Coryza: Cross protection studies, using seven strains of Haemophilus paragallinarum. American Journal Veterinary Research, 38:1587-1589.

Sandoval VE; Terzolo HR; Blackall PJ, 1994. Complicated infectious coryza outbreaks in Argentina. Avian Diseases, 38(3):672-678; 21 ref.

Sawata A; Kume K; Nahase Y, 1978. Haemophilus Infections in Chickens 2. Types of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolates from chickens with infections Coryza, in relation to Haemopilus paragallinarum strain no 221. Japanese Journal Veterinary Science, 40:645-652.

Sawata A; Kume K; Nahase Y, 1980. Biologic and serologic relationships between Page's Sawaba's Journal Veterinary Research, 41:1901-1904.

Sawata A; Nakai T; Kume K; Yoshikawa H; Yoshikawa T, 1985. Intranasal inoculation of chickens with encapsulated or nonencapsulated variants of Haemophilus paragallinarum: electron microscopic evaluation of the nasal mucosa. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 46(11):2346-2353; 22 ref.

Sawata A; Nakai T; Kume K; Yoshikawa H; Yoshikawa T, 1985. Lesions induced in the respiratory tract of chickens by encapsulated or nonencapsulated variants of Haemophilus paragallinarum. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 46(5):1185-1191; 21 ref.

Schalm OW; Beach JR, 1936. Studies of infections Coryza of chickens with special reference to its ecology. Poultry Science, 15:473-482.

Tagaki M; Hirayama M; Sumazaki T; Taguchi K, Yamaoka R. Ohta S, 1993. Purification of Hemaglutinin from Haemophilus paragallinarum using monoclonal antibody. Veterinary Microbiology, 34:191-197.

Takahashi I; Yoshida T; Honma Y; Saito E, 1990. Comparison of the susceptibility of Haemophilus paragallinarum to ofloxacin and other existing antimicrobial agents. Journal of the Japan Veterinary Medical Association, 43(3):187-191.

Terzolo HR; Paolicchi FA; Sandoval VE; Blackall PJ; Yamaguchi T; Iritani Y, 1993. Characterization of isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum from Argentina. Avian Diseases, 37(2):310-314; 27 ref.

Terzolo HR; Sandoval VS; Pondal FG, 1999. Evaluation of inactivated infectious coryza vaccines in chickens challenged by serovar B strains of Haemophilus paragallinarum. Advances in Agricultural Sciences, 6(1):101-114; 29 ref.

Thenmozhi V; Malmarugan S, 2013. Isolation, identification and antibiogram pattern of Avibacterium paragallinarum from Japanese quails. Tamilnadu Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 9(4):253-258. http://www.tanuvas.ac.in/tnjvas/tnjvas/vol9(4)/253-258.pdf

Verschoor JA; Coetzee L; Visser L, 1989. Monoclonal antibody characterization of two field strains of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolated from vaccinated layer hens. Avian Diseases, 33(2):219-225; 19 ref.

Xu FuZhou; Miao DeYuan; Du Yu; Chen XiaoLing; Zhang PeiJun; Sun HuiLing, 2013. Draft genome sequence of Avibacterium paragallinarum strain 221. Genome Announcements, 1(3):e00290-13. http://genomea.asm.org/content/1/3/e00290-13.full

Yamaguchi T; Blackall PJ; Takigami S; Iritani Y; Hayashi Y, 1990. Pathogenicity and serovar-specific hemagglutinating antigens of Haemophilus paragallinarum serovar B strains. Avian Diseases, 34(4):964-968; 13 ref.

Yamaguchi T; Blackall PJ; Takigami S; Iritani Y; Hayashi Y, 1991. Immunogenicity of Haemophilus paragallinarum serovar B strains. Avian Diseases, 35(4):965-968; 13 ref.

Yamaguchi T; Iritani Y; Hayagashi Y, 1989. Hemagglutinating activity and immunological properties of Haemophilus paragallinarum field isolates in Japan. Avian Diseases, 33(3):511-515; 13 ref.

Yamamoto R, 1984. Infectious coryza. Diseases of poultry, Edition 8:178-186; 81 ref.

Zain MZ; Eguchi M; Tan LJ, 1995. Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for detection of antibody to Haemophilus paragallinarum. Journal Veteriner Malaysia, 7(2):53-60.

Zaini MZ; Kanameda M, 1991. Susceptibility of the indigenous domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) to experimental infection with Haemophilus paragallinarum.. Jurnal Veterinar Malaysia, 3(1/2):21-24; 6 ref.

Zaini MZ; Siti-Zaleha AT; Tan LJ, 1991. Characterisation of Haemophilus paragallinarum isolated in Malaysia. Jurnal Veterinar Malaysia, 3(1/2):25-30; 15 ref.

Zhang P; Blackall PJ; Yamaguchi T; Iritani Y, 1999. A monoclonal antibody-blocking enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of serovar-specific antibodies to Haemophilus paragallinarum. Avian Diseases, 43(1):75-82; 22 ref.

Zinneman K; Biberstein EL, 1974. Haemophilus. In: Buchanan RE, Gibbons, eds. Bergey's Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, edition 8. Baltimore, USA: Williams & Wilkins, 364-370.

Distribution Maps

Top of page
You can pan and zoom the map
Save map