Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds

Sanogo Bougma; Harouna Fadam; Ibonyé Diéni; Blaise Waongo; François Tapsoba; Aly Savadogo

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds

Sanogo Bougma^*

, Harouna Fadam, Ibonyé Diéni

, Blaise Waongo

, François Tapsoba

, Aly Savadogo

Published in Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences (Volume 12, Issue 2)

Received: 2 April 2024 Accepted: 17 April 2024 Published: 29 April 2024

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

In Burkina Faso, livestock farming contributes to the supply of animal protein and the improvement of household incomes. However, the poor quality of poultry feed not only leads to economic losses but also risks of microbial transmission to consumers. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess potential health risks to consumers and handlers of poultry products according to the physicochemical and microbiological quality of poultry feed. Physicochemical and microbiological parameters analysis was performed using standard methods. Mean calculations, ANOVA and Tukey tests were performed using Excel 2016 XLSTAT 2016 software. The average water content was 5.42% for broiler feed and 5.03% for layer feed. The average dry matter was 94.58% for broiler feed and 94.77% for layer feed. The average pH was 7.44 for the broiler feed and 7.3 for the layer feed. The average acidity was 0.5% for broiler feed and 0.39% for layer feed. Microbiological analyses showed for broiler and layer feeds, mean loads respectively of 7.64x10⁵ CFU/g and 2.82x10⁵ CFU/g for Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora, 7.76x10⁴ CFU/g and 1.58x10⁴ CFU/g for Sporulating Flora, 1.44x10⁵ CFU/g and 1.22x10⁵ CFU/g for yeast and Molds, 7.89x10⁴ CFU/g and 9.47x10⁴ CFU/g for Total Coliform, 2.27x10⁴ CFU/g and 8.38x10³ CFU/g for Thermotolerant Coliforms, and the presence of Salmonella. Compliance evaluation showed the following results: 100% of feeds analyzed were satisfactory in terms of Total Aerobic Flora, Total Coliforms, Yeasts and Molds. However, 100% of foods assessed were contaminated with Thermotolerant Coliforms and 40% with Salmonella. These high levels pose obvious risks to both poultry and consumers of poultry products. Therefore, compliance with good hygiene practices remains an absolute necessity for the protection of poultry and consumers of poultry products.

Published in	Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences (Volume 12, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14
Page(s)	119-126
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Health Risks, Consumers and Handlers, Poultry Feed, Physicochemical and Microbiological Quality, Poultry Products

1. Introduction

Burkina Faso's economy is heavily dependent on the primary sector. Agriculture and livestock farming employ 86% of the working population and contribute around 40% to the gross domestic product

[1]

. The livestock subsector alone contributes 18.8% to national wealth creation, 14.2% to exports, and 38.8% to the monetary income of rural households

[2]

. Among livestock activities, poultry farming occupies an important place, with an estimated flock of 33,752,000 head of chickens in 2014

[3]

. In urban centers, small-scale poultry farming is an important source of household occupation and provides poultry farmers with substantial income

[1]

. Poultry farming provides a source of protein in the diet through chicken meat and eggs. It also helps to create jobs and reduce youth unemployment. Strong population growth, as well as increased consumption of poultry products by populations, have led to an increase in the demand for poultry meat and eggs

[4]

. Poultry farming is one of the main sources of animal protein in Burkina Faso, where the average per capita meat consumption is estimated at 9 kg/year

[5]

. However, artisanal poultry farming, characterized by its low productivity, remains dominant due to the poor organization of this important sector for the national economy

[6, 7]

. Given the increasing demand for animal protein, there is therefore an urgent need to develop the poultry farming sector to ensure significant meat production to cover animal protein requirements

[8]

. One of the main difficulties encountered in poultry farming undoubtedly remains the feeding of poultry, especially in urban areas. Not only is the supply of poultry feed expensive, but the types of feed generally available on the market do not always meet physicochemical, nutritional and microbiological quality standards

[9]

. Microbial contamination of certain feeds not only leads to high mortality rates among poultry farmers but also constitutes a potential source of danger for handlers and consumers. It leads to reduced growth performance and low egg productivity, as well as poor egg and meat quality

[10]

. Infection of chickens therefore constitutes a direct risk of transmission to humans for certain diseases such as salmonellosis and poisoning

[11]

. Contamination of the food with certain microbes, such as Bacillus cereus, leads to the aggravation of viral diseases in poultry

[12]

. Poultry feed quality is therefore important not only for reducing economic losses for poultry farmers but also for protecting consumers from direct and indirect infections through the handling or consumption of poultry products. It is therefore both necessary and essential to control the quality of feed used to feed poultry. In Burkina Faso, there isn't enough data on the physicochemical and microbiological quality of poultry feed and the risks to consumers. This study aimed to assess the potential health risks to consumers and handlers of poultry products according to the physicochemical and microbiological quality of poultry feed.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Period and Sample Collection

The samples consisted of layer feed and broiler feed collected from producers and retailers in the city of Ouagadougou during the period from January to May 2021. A total of 10 200 g each consisting of 05 samples of layer feed and 05 samples of broiler feed were collected (Table 1). The samples were packaged in plastic bags, coded, and stored at room temperature (25-37°C). Physicochemical and microbiological analyses were carried out at the Laboratory of Biochemistry and Applied Immunology (LaBIA) of Joseph KI-ZERBO University.

Table 1. Coding of the samples collected.

Feed type	Sample code	Quantity (g)
Broiler feed	CH1	200
	CH2	200
	CH3	200
	CH4	200
	CH5	200
Feed for layers	PO1	200
	PO2	200
	PO3	200
	PO4	200
	PO5	200

CH: Broiler feed; PO: Feed for layers

2.2. Determination of Physicochemical Parameters

Physicochemical analyses focused on moisture content, dry matter, pH, and acidity.

Moisture content (M) and dry matter were determined by differential weighing after steaming 5 g of each sample at 105°C using the AOAC method

[13]

. Moisture content was determined according to formula (1):

M (%) = \frac{TSW - (FW - EW)}{TSW} * 100

(1)

M (%): Moisture content; TSW: Test sample weight; EW: Empty boat weight; FW: Final weight (basket + dehydrated sample).

Dry matter (DM) was determined according to formula (2).

DM (%) = 100 - M (%)

(2)

The hydrogen potential (pH) was determined by the potentiometric method using a pH meter (HANNA HI 2209 pH meter) that was accurate to ± 0.001 according to the AOAC international standard

[14]

Acidity was determined by the international ISO 660 standard

[15]

2.3. Determination of Microbiological Parameters

Microbiological analyses covered Total Mesophilic Aerobic Flora, Spore-forming Flora, Total Coliforms, Thermotolerant Coliforms, Yeasts and Molds, and Salmonella.

Total aerobic mesophilic fauna was enumerated on plate count agar (Liofilchem Diagnostic-ITALY) according to the international ISO 4833 standard

[16]

The seeds were counted on plate count agar using the heat shock method after 24 to 48 hours of incubation at 37°C.

Total collagens were counted on Levine Agar (Liofilchem Srl Zona Ind.le-Rosetod.Abruzzi (TE) -ITALY) according to the international ISO 4832 standard

[17]

Thermotolerant Coliforms were enumerated on Levine Methylene Blue Eosin agar (Liofilchemsrl Zona Ind.le-Rosetod.Abruzzi (TE)-ITALY) according to NF V08-60 standard

[18]

The yeast and molds were counted on Sabouraud Chloramphenicol agar (Liofilchem srl Zona Ind.le-Rosetod. Abruzzi (TE) -ITALY) according to the international ISO 7954 standard

[19]

Salmonella was enumerated on SS agar according to the international ISO 6579 standard

[20]

Determination of Microbial Load Per Gram of Product

The number of germs per gram of product (N) was calculated according to the international ISO 7218 standard

[21]

as a weighted average using equations (3) and (4).

N = \frac{\sum C}{V . d (n 1 + 0, 1 n 2)}

(3)

(More than 15 colonies)

N = \frac{Ʃ C}{V * d}

(4)

(Less than 15 colonies)

ΣC: Sum of colonies on all boxes of two successive dilutions

V: Volume of inoculum

n1 and n2: Number of boxes for the first and 2nd dilutions respectively

d: dilution rate of the first box that produced countable colonies (low dilution)

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Data, means and standard deviations were calculated using Excel 2016 and analyzed using XLSTAT 2016 software. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test were used to compare means, with a significance level of p < 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Physicochemical Characteristics of Poultry Feeds

The results of the physicochemical analyses of poultry feeds are presented in Table 2. Water content ranged from 5.17±0.2 to 5.76±0.19% with an average of 5.42% for broiler feed and from 4.49±0.30 to 5.39±0.19% with an average of 5.03% for layer feed. Generally speaking, all the samples analyzed had water contents below 14 % and were therefore within the recommended limit. In terms of dry matter, the results ranged from 94.23±0.19 to 94.83±0.2%, with an average of 94.58% for broiler feed, and from 94.60±0.2 to 95.5±0.3%, with an average of 94.77% for layer feed. All feeds had dry matter content above the recommended minimum of 86% dry matter. The pH of the poultry feeds analyzed ranged from 7.03±0.02 to 7.74±0.01, with an average of 7.44 for broiler feed, and from 6.69 to 7.73±0.02, with an average of 7.3 for layer feeds. Generally speaking, all pH values were above neutral. As for acidity, results ranged from 0.3±0.02 to 0.62±0.15% with an average of 0.5% for broiler feed, and from 0.25 to 0.54±0.18% with an average of 0.39% for layer feed. Overall, the acidity of the broiler feeds analyzed was higher than that of the layer feeds.

Table 2. Results of physicochemical analyses of poultry feeds.

Samples	Moisture (%)	Dry Matter (%)	pH	Acidity (%)
CH1	5.76±0.19	94.23±0.19	7.66±0.00	0.58±0.03
CH2	5.28±0.09	94.72±0.09	7.74±0.01	0.40±0.11
CH3	5.67±0.27	94.32±0.27	7.73±0.01	0.30±0.02
CH4	5.20±0.00	94.80±0.00	7.05±0.00	0.56±0.19
CH5	5.17±0.20	94.83±0.20	7.03±0.02	0.62±0.15
Mean	5.42	94.58	7.44	0.50
PO1	5.39±0.20	94.60±0.20	7.62±0.01	0.38±0.01
PO2	5.39±0.19	94.61±0.19	7.71±0.00	0.25±0.00
PO3	5.28±0.09	94.72±0.09	7.73±0.02	0.54±0.18
PO4	4.59±0.01	95.41±0.01	6.69±0.00	0.36±0.03
PO5	4.49±0.30	95.50±0.30	6.71±0.00	0.40±0.04
Mean	5.03	94.77	7.30	0.39
Limits*	≤ 14	≥ 86	-	-

pH: Hydrogen potential; *: (Malumba, 2001; Algerian Law n°88-09, 1988)

[22, 23]

3.2. Microbiological Characteristics of Poultry Feed

Table 3 shows the results of microbiological analyses of poultry feed. Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora ranged from 5.53±5.4x10⁵ to 1.02±0.59x10⁶ CFU/g with an average of 7.64x10⁵ CFU/g for broiler feeds, while loads on layer feeds varied significantly from 1.04±0.49x10⁵ to 5.21±5.03x10⁵ CFU/g with an average of 2.82x10⁵ CFU/g. Sporulating Flora varied significantly from less than 10 to 1.49±1.39x10⁵ CFU/g, with an average of 7.76x10⁴ CFU/g for broiler feed, while loads of layer feed varied from 10 to 3.06±0.06x10⁴ CFU/g, with an average of 1.58x10⁴ CFU/g. About Yeasts and Molds, loads varied significantly from 6.81±2.76x10⁴ to 3.33±0.58x10⁵ CFU/g with an average of 1.44x10⁵ CFU/g for broiler feed, while loads for layer feed varied from 2.26±0.64x10⁴ to 1.36±0.55x10⁵ CFU/g with an average of 1.22x10⁵ CFU/g. Total Coliform loads ranged from 5.33±4.04x10⁴ to 1.36±1.16x10⁵ CFU/g with an average of 7.89x10⁴ CFU/g for broiler feed, while layer feed loads ranged from 4.73±1.10x10⁴ to 1.89±0.19x10⁵ CFU/g with an average of 9.47x10⁴ CFU/g. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between broiler feed samples and layer feed samples. Regarding thermotolerant colonies, loads varied significantly from 1.02±0.94x10⁴ to 3.22±0.59x10⁴ CFU/g with an average of 2.27x10⁴ CFU/g for broiler feeds, while layer feed loads varied from 4.80±0.69x10³ to 1.43±0.1x10⁴ CFU/g with an average of 8.38x10³ CFU/g. In terms of Salmonella, the results showed the presence of germs in some samples.

Table 3. Results of poultry feed microbiological analyses.

Samples	TAMF (CFU/g)	SF (CFU/g)	YM (CFU/g)	TC (CFU/g)	TC (CFU/g)	SS
CH1	5.98±3.26x10^5ab	< 10	3.33±0.58x10^5bc	6.20±5.36x10^4ab	3.15±1.08x10^4bcd	Present
CH2	1.02±0.59x10^6ab	1.08±0.16x10^5ab	1.11±0.78x10^5ab	1.36±1.16x10^5ab	3.22±0.59x10^4bd	Absent
CH3	7.49±6.52x10^5ab	1.49±1.39x10^5a	1.24±0.6710^5ab	6.80±1.55x10^4ab	2.89±1.30x10^4bcd	Absent
CH4	5.53±5.40x10^5ab	6.40±5.71x10^4a	6.81±2.76x10^4a	7.53±3.00x10^4ab	1.02±0.94x10^4abcd	Present
CH5	9.01±4.81x10^5ab	6.73±4.56x10^4a	8.36±2.09x10^4a	5.33±4.04x10^4a	1.06±0.78x10^4abcd	Present
Mean	7.64x10⁵	7.76x10⁴	1.44x10⁵	7.89X10⁴	2.27x10⁴	-
PO1	1.46±0.40x10^5a	< 10	2.26±0.64x10^4abc	1.89±0.19x10^5ab	7.73±2.83x10^3ab	Absent
PO2	5.21±5.03x10^5ab	2.73±2.367x10^4a	1.32±0.28x10^5ab	8.71±8.07x10^4ab	6.45±2.21x10^3ab	Absent
PO3	1.04±0.49x10^5ab	8.00±6.92x10^3a	2.28±1.49x10^4abc	8.94±2.65x10^4ab	1.43±0.10x10^4abc	Absent
PO4	2.92±0.94x10^5ab	3.06±0.06x10^4a	9.36±0.55x10^4a	6.09±1.66x10^4ab	8.62±6.42x10^3abc	Present
PO5	3.46±0.31x10^5ab	1.30±0.61x10^4a	1.36±0.55x10^5ab	4.73±1.10x10^4a	4.80±0.69x10^3a	Absent
Mean	2.82x10⁵	1.58x10⁴	1.22x10⁵	9.47x10⁴	8.38x10³	-
Limits*	3x10⁶	-	10⁶	-	< 3.10³	Absent

TAMF: Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora; SF: Sporulating Flora; YM: yeast and Molds; TC: Total Coliforms; TC: Thermotolerant Coliforms. SS: Salmonella;

* (RE 142, 2011; AL n°88-09, 1988)

[23, 24]

The microbial germs obtained in samples corresponding respectively to Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora (a), Yeasts (b), Molds (c), and Salmonella (d) are illustrated in Figure 1.

a: TAMF; b: Yeasts; c: Mold; d: SS

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 1. Aspects of some colonies observed in Petri dishes.

3.3. Poultry Feed Conformity Assessment

The two-class evaluation of the results showed that all feeds were satisfactory in the total aerobic mesophilic flora, yeasts and molds (Figure 2). However, there was significant overall contamination with Thermotolerant Coliforms. Regarding Salmonella, the evaluation of the results showed that 40% of the poultry feeds analyzed were all contaminated by the presence of germs.

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 2. Compliance assessment of foods tested.

4. Discussion

The moisture content obtained in the poultry feeds analyzed showed a low water activity overall. The results obtained were lower than those obtained by Malumba (2001)

[22]

in Congo, who had reported an average moisture of 9.13% in his study on complete feeds formulated for poultry. The results were therefore satisfactory overall, as the water content obtained was also well below the recommended 14% moisture content for poultry feed

[23]

. These results reflect a residual moisture content favorable to good preservation against microorganisms. Relative humidity below the recommended limit would also influence yield

[25, 26]

. The dry matter content also complied with the recommendations for flours intended for consumption by broilers and laying hens

[23]

. The dry matter values obtained in this study were higher than those obtained by Bastianelli et al., (2005)

[27]

, who reported an average of 89.8% dry matter for broiler feed and 89.7% dry matter for layer feed in their study on poultry feed. Regarding the pH and acidity values of poultry feeds, the results obtained generally showed that poultry feeds were close to neutral. All the average values obtained in this study were higher than those obtained by Malumba (2001)

[22]

in the Congo, who reported an average pH of 5.6 in his study. These pH and acidity values in poultry feed could be explained by the use of certain raw materials such as food processing by-products, microbial supplements, and fermentation extracts (dried soluble fermentation extracts)

[11]

. The presence of certain fermentative microorganisms in by-products used in processing plants would therefore influence the acidity of poultry feed. Regarding the evaluation of microbiological quality, the total aerobic mesophilic flora obtained in this study was higher than that reported by Malumba (2001)

[22]

in Congo in his study of complete poultry feeds, with total aerobic mesophilic flora ranging from 2.84x10³ to 3.36x10³ CFU/g. However, the overall results for total aerobic mesophilic flora remained below the recommended limits

[24]

. These results can be explained by the low water content of the feed analyzed, which hinders the development of microorganisms in general. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences for broiler feed. However, the comparison between the values obtained for the layers showed a significant difference, which could be explained by the use of highly charged raw materials in the feed production process, leading to higher values. The results obtained for Total Coliforms and Thermotolerant Coliforms showed that all the feeds analyzed were contaminated with these germs. However, the results obtained in this study were lower than those obtained by Ibrahim et al. (2009)

[28]

in their study on the bacteriological quality of poultry feed in Senegal. Statistical analyses revealed no significant differences between broiler feed samples. However, feeds for laying hens were significantly different for Total Coliforms and Thermotolerant Coliforms. These differences could be explained by the non-standardization of production, with different practices from one producer to another. The presence of fecal germs, saprophytes of the human digestive tract, in poultry feed is generally indicative of poor application of good hygiene practices during feed formulation, which would have led to contamination by germs potentially dangerous to humans

[29]

. A minimum of hygiene during the production process could reduce the transient flora by over 40%

[30]

. The toxins produced by certain germs can affect consumers, as certain toxins have often been found in contaminated poultry meat and eggs

[31]

. The results for yeasts and molds also showed that all foods were satisfactory. Statistical analysis showed that the samples were significantly different, which could be explained by the difference in raw materials used by the producers, in particular processing by-products containing yeasts and molds. The abundant presence of yeasts in particular is significant, as several studies have shown that the incorporation of yeasts into poultry feed improves feed intake and increases the live weight of reared chickens

[32-35]

. On the other hand, some molds secrete toxins that have harmful effects on poultry after ingestion of contaminated feed

[10]

. These same risks exist for consumers, who could therefore absorb them

[31]

. Concerning Salmonella, 40% of corrupted samples could also be explained by the lack of hygiene during production, which is responsible for contamination by germs of fecal origin. Poor hygiene on the part of certain employees, and easy access to production areas for all kinds of rodents and insects, have been responsible for the high presence of salmonella in poultry products

[30]

. Poultry feed, when contaminated, is therefore an important route of consumer exposure to salmonellosis

[11]

. It is therefore clear that infection in poultry has a direct impact on the transmission of disease to humans through the meat, pâtés, and eggs they produce.

5. Conclusion

The results of the physicochemical analyses showed that all the feeds analyzed complied with the recommendations for water content, dry matter, pH and acidity. Microbiological analyses also showed that poultry feed was satisfactory in terms of total flora, spore-forming flora, total coliforms, yeasts and molds. However, high levels of fecal contamination and Salmonella were obtained. Thus, the risk of transmission of these germs to consumers is obvious and must be monitored. To improve the quality of poultry feed, it would therefore be important to assess the nutritional quality of poultry feed for potential fungal toxins.

Abbreviations

AL: Algerian Law

AOAC: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists

CEDEAO: Communauté Economique des Etats de l’Afrique de l’Ouest [Economic Community of West African States]

CILSS: Comité inter-Etat de lutte contre la sécheresse au sahel [Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel]

FAO: Food and Agriculture Organization

FEWS NET: Famine Early Warning Systems Network

ISO: International Organization for Standardization

MAHRH: Ministère de l’Agriculture, de l’Hydraulique et des Ressources Halieutiques [ministry of agriculture, hydraulics and halieutic resources]

MRA: Ministère des Ressources Animales [ministry of animal resources]

NF: Normes Françaises [French standards]

OMS: Organisation Mondiale de la Santé [World Health Organization]

PNSAN: Politique Nationale de Sécurité Alimentaire et Nutritionnelle [National Food and Nutritional Security Policy]

PNUD: United Nations Development Program

RE: European Regulation

USAID: United States Agency for International Development

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the participants who contributed to this study.

Author Contributions

Sanogo Bougma: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Validation, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Methodology, Visualization, Writing - review & editing

Harouna Fadam: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Validation, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Methodology, Visualization, Writing - review & editing

Ibonyé Diéni: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Validation, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Methodology, Visualization, Writing - review & editing

Blaise Waongo: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Validation, Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft

François Tapsoba: Data curation, Formal Analysis, Supervision, Visualization, Project administration, Writing - review & editing

Aly Savadogo: Resources, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Supervision, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Project administration, Writing - review & editing

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	CILSS, CEDEAO, MRA, MAHRH, and FEWS NET/USAID. Impacts socio-économiques de la grippe aviaire en Afrique de l’Ouest: «Étude de cas au Burkina Faso» Draft [Socio-economic impacts of avian influenza in West Africa: "Burkina Faso case study" Draft]. Burkina Faso. 2006, p. 69.
[2]	MRA and PNUD. Contribution de l’élevage à l’économie et à la lutte contre la pauvreté, les déterminants de son développement [Contribution of livestock farming to the economy and the fight against poverty, the determinants of its development]. Ministère des Ressources Animales, Burkina Faso. 2011, p. 80.
[3]	MRA. Annuaire des statistiques de l'élevage 2013-2014 [Yearbook of livestock statistics 2013-2014]. Ministère des Ressources Animales, Burkina Faso. 2015, p. 177.
[4]	FAO. Impacts des systèmes de production bovine et avicole sur la santé, l’environnement et les moyens de subsistance [Impacts of cattle and poultry production systems on health, environment and livelihoods]. Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’Alimentation et l’Agriculture. 2018, p. 81.
[5]	PNSAN. Politique Nationale de Sécurité Alimentaire et Nutritionnelle [National Food and Nutritional Security Policy]. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. 2013.
[6]	Ouattara S, Bougouma-Yameogo VMC, Nianogo AJ, and Al Bachir A. Effets des graines torréfiées de Vigna unguiculata (niébé) comme source de protéines, dans l’alimentation des poules locales en ponte au Burkina Faso, sur leurs performances zootechniques et la rentabilité économique des régimes [Effects of roasted Vigna unguiculata (cowpea) seeds as a protein source, in the diet of local laying hens in Burkina Faso, on their zootechnical performance and the economic profitability of the diets]. International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences. 2015, 8(5), 1990-1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ijbcs.v8i5.4
[7]	Pindé S, Tapsoba ASR, Traoré F, Ouédraogo R, Ba S, Sanou M, Traoré A, Tamboura HH, and Simporé J. Caractérisation et typologie des systèmes d’élevage de la poule locale du Burkina Faso [Characterization and typology of local chicken breeding systems in Burkina Faso]. J. Anim. Plant Sci. 2020, 46(2), 8212-8225. http://dx.doi.org/10.35759/JAnmPlSci.v46-2.6
[8]	Coulibaly Y. Effet de la variété de maïs ESPOIR sur la productivité des poules pondeuses [Effect of the ESPOIR maize variety on the productivity of laying hens]. Master, Université Polytechnique de Bobo Dioulasso (UPB), Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso. 2014, p. 70.
[9]	Ouédraogo L, Yaméogo-Bougouma V, Kondombo S, and Nianogo A. Méthodologie de la recherche sur la production animale en zone urbaine et périurbaine [Methodology of animal production research in urban and peri-urban areas]. Burkina Faso. 2002, p. 15.
[10]	Ezekiel CN, Bandyopadhyay R, Sulyok M, Warth B, and Krska R. Fungal and bacterial metabolites in commercial poultry feed from Nigeria. Food Additives and Contaminants. 2012, Part A, 29(8), 1288-1299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2012.688878
[11]	FAO/OMS. Impact des aliments pour animaux sur la sécurité sanitaire des aliments [Impact of animal feed on food safety]. Rapport de la réunion d’experts FAO/OMS. 2007, p. 80.
[12]	Zhang Q, Zuo Z, Guo Y, Zhang T, Han Z, Huang S, Karama M, Saleemi MK, Khan A, and He C. Contaminated feed-borne Bacillus cereus aggravates respiratory distress post avian influenza virus H9N2 infection by inducing pneumonia. Scientific Reports. 2019, 9(1), 7231. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-43660-2
[13]	AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis. Washington DC, USA. 1990.
[14]	AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis. Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA: AOAC. 2005.
[15]	ISO 660. Fats of animal and vegetable origin: Determination of acid value and acidity. 1999 (F).
[16]	ISO 4833. Microbiology of foods: Horizontal method for the enumeration of microorganisms - Colony counting techniques at 30°C. 2003, p. 9.
[17]	ISO 4832. Microbiology of foods. Horizontal method for coliform enumeration by colony counting. 2006, p. 6.
[18]	NF V08-060. Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs - Enumeration of thermotolerant coliforms by counting colonies obtained at 44°C. 2009.
[19]	ISO 7954. General guidelines for the enumeration of yeasts and molds - Colony counting techniques at 25°C. 1987, p. 4.
[20]	ISO 6579-1. Microbiology of the food chain: Horizontal method for the detection, enumeration and serotyping of salmonella-Part 1: Detection of Salmonella spp. 2017.
[21]	ISO 7218. Food microbiology-general requirements and recommendations. 2007, p. 79.
[22]	Malumba KP. Une approche programmatique dans la formulation conceptuelle des aliments complets pour volailles [A programmatic approach in the conceptual formulation of complete feeds for poultry]. Mémoire d'Ingénieur, Université de Kinshasa, RD Congo, 2001, p. 72.
[23]	AL n° 88-08. Loi n° 88-08 du 26 Janvier 1988 relative aux activités de médecine vétérinaire et à la protection de la santé animale [Law no. 88-08 of January 26, 1988 on veterinary medicine and the protection of animal health]. République d’Algérie. 1988, p. 90.
[24]	RE-142. Règlement (UE) 142/2011 portant application du règlement (CE) 1069/2009 établissant des règles sanitaires applicables aux sous-produits animaux et produits dérivés non destinés à la consommation humaine et portant application de la directive 97/78/CE concernant certains échantillons et articles exemptés des contrôles vétérinaires effectués aux frontières [Regulation (EU) 142/2011 implementing Regulation (EC) 1069/2009 laying down health rules concerning animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and implementing Directive 97/78/EC concerning certain samples and articles exempt from veterinary checks at the border]. 2011.
[25]	Omar CA. État des lieux de la pratique d’élevage de poulet de chair dans une exploitation située dans la région de Mellakou (élevage privé intensif) [Inventory of broiler rearing practices on a farm located in the Mellakou region (intensive private rearing)]. Doctorat, Université ibn khaldoun TIARET, 2019.
[26]	Sankara F, Sankara F, Pousga S, Coulibaly K, Nacoulma JP, Somda I, and Kenis M. Amélioration de techniques de production, d’extraction et de séchage des larves de mouches domestiques (Musca domestica Linnaeus, 1758) utilisées dans l'alimentation des volailles au Burkina Faso [Improved production, extraction and drying techniques for housefly larvae (Musca domestica Linnaeus, 1758) used in poultry feed in Burkina Faso]. Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences. 2021, 50(1), 8998-9013. http://dx.doi.org/10.35759/JABs.150.4
[27]	Bastianelli D, Fermet-Quinet E, Hervouet C, Domenech S, Bonnal L, and Friot D. Qualité des aliments pour volailles en Afrique de l’Est. Intérêt de la spectroscopie dans le proche infrarouge (SPIR) pour l’estimation de leur composition [Poultry feed quality in East Africa. Interest in near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) for the estimation of their composition]. 2005. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:164962883
[28]	Ibrahim AI, Ayessou NCM, Sylla KSB, Diop CM, Alambedji RB, and Seydi MG. Qualité bactériologique de la farine de poissons en alimentation des volailles au Sénégal [Bacteriological quality of fish meal in poultry feed in Senegal]. Revue Africaine de Santé et de Productions Animales. 2009, 7(S), 123-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4660.8003
[29]	Oualid L and Tigzirt S. Evaluation de la qualité bactériologique et de l’antibiorésistance du pâté de volaille au niveau de l’unité ORAC – Taboukert [Evaluation of the bacteriological quality and antibiotic resistance of poultry pâté at the ORAC unit - Taboukert]. Doctorat, Université Mouloud Mammeri, 2016.
[30]	Bonnefoy C, Guillet F, Leyral G, and Verne-Bourdais E. Microbiologie et qualité dans les industries agroalimentaires [Microbiology and quality in the food industry]. Paris: Éditions Biosciences et techniques. 2002, p. 248.
[31]	Cegielska-Radziejewska R, Stuper K, and Szablewski T. Microflora and mycotoxin contamination in poultry feed mixtures from western Poland. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine. 2013, 20(1), 30-35.
[32]	Haldar S, Ghosh TK, Toshiwati, and Bedford MR. Effects of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and yeast protein concentrate on production performance of broiler chickens exposed to heat stress and challenged with Salmonella enteridis. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 2011, 168, 60-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.03.007
[33]	Yalcin S, Eser H, and Yalcin S. Effects of dietary yeast autolysate (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on performance, carcass and gut characteristics, blood profile and antibody production to sheep red blood cells in broilers. J Anim Poult Res. 2013, 22, 55-61. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2012-00577.
[34]	Ouedraogo B, Zoundi JS, and Sawadogo L. Effets de l’incorporation de la « levure de dolo » biere locale de sorgho sur la croissance pondérale et les caractéristiques de la carcasse des poulets de chair au Burkina Faso [Effects of incorporating local sorghum beer "dolo yeast" on weight growth and carcass characteristics of broilers in Burkina Faso]. Agronomie Africaine Sp. 2021, 33(2), 161-172.
[35]	Kassem GI and Rabie HF. Effect of Yeast as Feed Supplement on Behavioral and Productive Performance of Broiler Chickens. Life Science Journal. 2012, 9(4), 4026-4031. www.researchgate.net/publication/233997642

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Bougma, S., Fadam, H., Diéni, I., Waongo, B., Tapsoba, F., et al. (2024). Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds. Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences, 12(2), 119-126. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Bougma, S.; Fadam, H.; Diéni, I.; Waongo, B.; Tapsoba, F., et al. Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2024, 12(2), 119-126. doi: 10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Bougma S, Fadam H, Diéni I, Waongo B, Tapsoba F, et al. Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds. J Food Nutr Sci. 2024;12(2):119-126. doi: 10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14,
author = {Sanogo Bougma and Harouna Fadam and Ibonyé Diéni and Blaise Waongo and François Tapsoba and Aly Savadogo},
title = {Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds
},
journal = {Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences},
volume = {12},
number = {2},
pages = {119-126},
doi = {10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jfns.20241202.14},
abstract = {In Burkina Faso, livestock farming contributes to the supply of animal protein and the improvement of household incomes. However, the poor quality of poultry feed not only leads to economic losses but also risks of microbial transmission to consumers. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess potential health risks to consumers and handlers of poultry products according to the physicochemical and microbiological quality of poultry feed. Physicochemical and microbiological parameters analysis was performed using standard methods. Mean calculations, ANOVA and Tukey tests were performed using Excel 2016 XLSTAT 2016 software. The average water content was 5.42% for broiler feed and 5.03% for layer feed. The average dry matter was 94.58% for broiler feed and 94.77% for layer feed. The average pH was 7.44 for the broiler feed and 7.3 for the layer feed. The average acidity was 0.5% for broiler feed and 0.39% for layer feed. Microbiological analyses showed for broiler and layer feeds, mean loads respectively of 7.64x105 CFU/g and 2.82x105 CFU/g for Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora, 7.76x104 CFU/g and 1.58x104 CFU/g for Sporulating Flora, 1.44x105 CFU/g and 1.22x105 CFU/g for yeast and Molds, 7.89x104 CFU/g and 9.47x104 CFU/g for Total Coliform, 2.27x104 CFU/g and 8.38x103 CFU/g for Thermotolerant Coliforms, and the presence of Salmonella. Compliance evaluation showed the following results: 100% of feeds analyzed were satisfactory in terms of Total Aerobic Flora, Total Coliforms, Yeasts and Molds. However, 100% of foods assessed were contaminated with Thermotolerant Coliforms and 40% with Salmonella. These high levels pose obvious risks to both poultry and consumers of poultry products. Therefore, compliance with good hygiene practices remains an absolute necessity for the protection of poultry and consumers of poultry products.
},
year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY - JOUR
T1 - Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds

AU - Sanogo Bougma
AU - Harouna Fadam
AU - Ibonyé Diéni
AU - Blaise Waongo
AU - François Tapsoba
AU - Aly Savadogo
Y1 - 2024/04/29
PY - 2024
N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14
DO - 10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14
T2 - Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences
JF - Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences
JO - Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences
SP - 119
EP - 126
PB - Science Publishing Group
SN - 2330-7293
UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14
AB - In Burkina Faso, livestock farming contributes to the supply of animal protein and the improvement of household incomes. However, the poor quality of poultry feed not only leads to economic losses but also risks of microbial transmission to consumers. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess potential health risks to consumers and handlers of poultry products according to the physicochemical and microbiological quality of poultry feed. Physicochemical and microbiological parameters analysis was performed using standard methods. Mean calculations, ANOVA and Tukey tests were performed using Excel 2016 XLSTAT 2016 software. The average water content was 5.42% for broiler feed and 5.03% for layer feed. The average dry matter was 94.58% for broiler feed and 94.77% for layer feed. The average pH was 7.44 for the broiler feed and 7.3 for the layer feed. The average acidity was 0.5% for broiler feed and 0.39% for layer feed. Microbiological analyses showed for broiler and layer feeds, mean loads respectively of 7.64x105 CFU/g and 2.82x105 CFU/g for Total Aerobic Mesophilic Flora, 7.76x104 CFU/g and 1.58x104 CFU/g for Sporulating Flora, 1.44x105 CFU/g and 1.22x105 CFU/g for yeast and Molds, 7.89x104 CFU/g and 9.47x104 CFU/g for Total Coliform, 2.27x104 CFU/g and 8.38x103 CFU/g for Thermotolerant Coliforms, and the presence of Salmonella. Compliance evaluation showed the following results: 100% of feeds analyzed were satisfactory in terms of Total Aerobic Flora, Total Coliforms, Yeasts and Molds. However, 100% of foods assessed were contaminated with Thermotolerant Coliforms and 40% with Salmonella. These high levels pose obvious risks to both poultry and consumers of poultry products. Therefore, compliance with good hygiene practices remains an absolute necessity for the protection of poultry and consumers of poultry products.

VL - 12
IS - 2
ER -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Sanogo Bougma

Department of Biochemistry-Microbiology, Joseph KI-ZERBO University, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6198-7262
Harouna Fadam

Department of Biochemistry-Microbiology, Joseph KI-ZERBO University, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Contact Email
Ibonyé Diéni

Department of Biochemistry-Microbiology, Joseph KI-ZERBO University, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9392-6747
Blaise Waongo

Department of Biochemistry-Microbiology, Joseph KI-ZERBO University, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0711-6498
François Tapsoba

Department of Biochemistry-Microbiology, Joseph KI-ZERBO University, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6964-0442
Aly Savadogo

Department of Biochemistry-Microbiology, Joseph KI-ZERBO University, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9090-290X

Download PDF

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Bougma, S., Fadam, H., Diéni, I., Waongo, B., Tapsoba, F., et al. (2024). Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds. Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences, 12(2), 119-126. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Bougma, S.; Fadam, H.; Diéni, I.; Waongo, B.; Tapsoba, F., et al. Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2024, 12(2), 119-126. doi: 10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Bougma S, Fadam H, Diéni I, Waongo B, Tapsoba F, et al. Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds. J Food Nutr Sci. 2024;12(2):119-126. doi: 10.11648/j.jfns.20241202.14

Copy | Download

Copy | Download

TY - JOUR
T1 - Potential Health Risks for Consumers and Handlers of Poultry Products Fed with Poor Quality Feeds

VL - 12
IS - 2
ER -

Copy | Download