The development of the Swine sector causes an increase in the concentration of large-volume pig farms, an increase in the density of the pig population in certain markets and regions and, consequently, the existence of a large traffic of vehicles and people between centres of production. We all know the positive impact, but this situation also has as a direct consequence, an increase in pathological problems. On many occasions you have to deal with new diseases or already known diseases that have reappeared.
Currently, there are several pathological entities in the pig sector, on the one hand, we have PRRS (Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome), causing each time more devastating effects with its new strains, much more virulent than its predecessors, affecting to sows farms, weaning and even fattening. On the other hand, we cannot forget another of the sector’s enemies, ASF (African Swine Fever), which also causes serious socioeconomic consequences in the affected countries.
All of this makes us reflect that the risk of entry and spread of these diseases is very high and we must increase the alert level and, consequently, the control measures (cleaning and disinfection) to avoid the feared entry of diseases.
The remedy has biosecurity as a fundamental pillar, we must continue to improve and follow an exquisite compliance with biosecurity measures to prevent the arrival and / or expansion of diseases that can enter the geographical area, farm or warehouse. Within all biosecurity measures, we highlight cleaning and disinfection as key measures.
Analysis 1 (qualitative): Preparation and control for the disinfection of farms.
Objective:
This first study aims to know the current situation of preparation and control for the disinfection of places such as farms, to determine if the current cleaning and disinfection operations are being effective.
Sampling locations:
Analysed elements:
Results of analysis 1:
Regarding the external vehicles that enter the facilities daily (cars, vans and transport trucks), the data was also worrying, since we were able to verify that:
Analysis 2 (quantitative): Contaminated transport vehicles.
Sampling locations:
Analyzed elements:
Analysis method:
ATP Checking (Adenosine Triphosphate of Adenosine)
Samples taken methodology:
Collection of the sample on a surface of 33 cm² with sponges to carry out cultures of enterorobacteria.
Results classification:
RResults are expressed in CFU (Colony Forming Units) per cm²:
CFU/ cm² 0-100: correct disinfection.
CFU/ cm² 101-200: insufficient disinfection.
CFU/ cm² 201-500: poor disinfection.
CFU/ cm² 501->1000: very bad disinfection.
Results of analysis 2:
Of a total of 63 trucks analysed, only 4.67% of the cases achieved correct disinfection (UFC/ cm² 0-100). The rest of the analyzes showed bad (UFC/ cm² 201-500) or insufficient (UFC/ cm² 101-200) disinfection values.
Objective:
Given the results obtained in the first experimental study, the need arises to develop a complementary action protocol to reinforce biosecurity in pig transport, which ensures adequate disinfection.
This second study aims to reinforce and ensure correct disinfection of the transport trucks under analysis, through the development of an adequate disinfection protocol.
Sampling location:
Pig farm with disinfection centre.
Analyzed elements:
Form of application: Disinfection by soaking carried out by means of a hose with disinfectant under pressure (already carried out in the disinfection centers).
Disinfectant A: Generic disinfectant, used in cleaning and disinfection centers. Composition: Glutaraldehyde 15.00% and Didecyl Dimethyl Ammonium Chloride 10.00%.
Composition: Glutaraldehyde 15.00% and Didecyl Dimethyl Ammonium Chloride 10.00%.
Dose: Diluted at 6%.
Disinfectant contact time: 48 hours.
Form of application: Disinfection by nebulization/spray.
Disinfectant B: Zix Virox.
Composition: 25% hydrogen peroxide, 5% peracetic acid.
Dose: Diluted at 2%.
Disinfectant contact time: 5 minutes.
Collection of the sample on a surface of 33 cm² with sponges to carry out cultures of enterorobacteria.
Samples are taken and analyzes are carried out for each of the three elements (Elevating platform, start of box, end of box), and for each of the disinfection techniques. An initial analysis is also carried out, of the elements without disinfection. Therefore, the analyzes are summarized in 3 different situations, which make it possible to compare the different disinfection techniques used:
Analysis method:
ATP Checking (Adenosine Triphosphate of Adenosine)
Results are expressed in CFU (Colony Forming Units) per cm².
Results with the use of technique 1 and disinfectant A at 6%:
It should be noted that the work of the cleaning and disinfection process was subjectively certified as well done, although disinfecting in the wet and with a hose could dilute the disinfectant.
Results using technique 2 and Zix Virox:
*all the data can be consulted in the study carried out, upon request to the company Biocidas Biodegradables ZIX, S.L.
This experimental study shows that there is still a long way to go in improving biosecurity measures in many pig farms. There are still many farm vulnerable to the devastating effects of viruses such as ASF or PRRS. In places with large concentrations of animals, preventive measures are our greatest ally. Improving biosecurity programs is everyone’s responsibility and we can help by working from our farms to our collaborators and neighbors.
Porcine Ileitis (PI) or Porcine Proliferative Enteropathy is an enteric infectious disease caused by the…
One of the most serious diseases affecting pigs is the dreaded porcine dysentery (PD), this…
For any mammal, weaning is one of the most important stress situations in the life…
Smoke disinfection in farms is one of the best-indicated disinfection method due to its good…
Swine Meningitis has its origin in the Streptococcus suis bacterium and with this content, at…
The ZIX Biocides agenda continues to be full of important events for the second half…
Esta web usa cookies.