Communities in English
Advertise on Engormix

Infectious Coryza

An update on the diagnosis and prevention of Fowl Cholera and Infectious Coryza

Published: September 29, 2011
By: Pat Blackall (Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, EcoSciences Precinct)

The review provides an update on the diagnosis and control of two major bacterial diseases of poultry – fowl cholera and infectious coryza. For both diseases, there are now rapid, molecular based diagnostic tools that are well suited for modern diagnostic laboratories. At the same time, traditional culture based technologies are still relevant. The difficulty with infectious coryza is that the causative agent, Avibacterium paragallinarum, requires media with a range of expensive additives. For fowl cholera, there are both live and killed vaccines available. Only killed vaccines are available for infectious coryza. Investigations of fowl cholera outbreaks can now be supported with a range of typing methodologies that allow an identification of possible sources, with these methods including Multi-Locus Sequence typing, ERIC-PCR, RFLP and ribotyping. Fewer typing options are available for coryza outbreaks. While serotyping is possible for both agents, the capacity for serotyping is limited to a few laboratories around the world.

Key Words: fowl cholera, infectious coryza, diagnosis, vaccines.

This review seeks to provide an up-to-date view on the diagnosis and prevention of two major bacterial diseases of poultry - fowl cholera and infectious coryza.  The review will focus on key issues and recent advances.  More detailed and historical data are already covered in a range of standard texts that are widely available e.g. Diseases of Poultry (Blackall and Soriano 2008; Glisson et al. 2008)) and Poultry Diseases (Blackall and Hinz 2008; Christensen et al. 2008).
Infectious coryza - Laboratory tools to aid diagnosis
As the causative agent of infectious coryza - Avibacterium paragallinarum - is a demanding organism in terms of growth in laboratory media, the usual culture media are not appropriate for this disease.  The main growth requirement is a need for V-factor (NADH).  However, diagnosticians need to be aware that there are some isolates of Av. paragallinarum that do not need NADH (ie they will grow on blood agar) (Garcia et al. 2004).  Further, it has recently been found that some Australian isolates of Av. paragallinarum won´t grow on a complete medium that meets the NADH requirements of other typical Av. paragallinarum isolates (Blackall et al. 2011).  The most universally used isolation medium for Av. paragallinarum remains 5% sheep blood agar with a cross-streak of a nurse culture of Staphylococcus epidermidis to provide the required NADH.  This medium aids in the recognition of Av. paragallinarum as the organism will show satellitism (except if NADH independent!!).  Complete media that do not show satellitism have been used e.g. CLBA medium (Terzolo et al. 1993).  The use of CLBA medium does allow the incorporation of selective antibiotics that reduce the level of contamination due to Gram positive organisms (Terzolo et al. 1993).  Regardless of the medium used, there is a need for a 5% carbon dioxide atmosphere.
Following initial isolation, there is a need for a level of biochemical testing as there are a number of satellitic organisms present in chickens.  At a minimum, the following test results are required:- Gram negative organism, catalase negative, satellitic organism from birds showing clinical signs.  This level can be achieved in most routine diagnostic laboratories.
More extensive phenotypic characterisation (antimicrobial sensitivity testing, detailed biochemical characterisation, serotyping) requires access to suitable media that can support the growth of the organism.  Typically, this level of characterisation is available only in a small number of laboratories.
The well recognised difficulties with conventional diagnosis - specialised, expensive media - have lead to the development of two DNA-based assays.  The conventional PCR for Av. paragallinarum has been validated for use on isolates and directly on birds ((Chen et al. 1996; Chen et al. 1998a; Chen et al. 1998b).  A real-time PCR has also been described and validated for use directly on the bird (Corney et al. 2008).  For those laboratories that lack experience in handling NADH requiring organisms, the use of PCR is an attractive alternative.  Indeed, in regions where NAD-independent Av. paragallinarum is known to occur (South Africa and Mexico), these two PCR assays are the only practical tools for the confident identification of this form of Av. paragallinarum as distinct from Ornithobacterium rhinotrachealae. The main drawback with the use of the PCR tests is that there is no way of obtaining knowledge of serovar or antibiotic resistance.
Fowl cholera - laboratory tools to aid diagnosis
The robust nature of the causative agent of fowl cholera (Pasteurella multocida) means that a simple isolation medium (5% sheep blood agar) is the medium of choice.  Selective media for use on laryngotracheal and cloacal swabs (Muhairwa et al. 2001) as well as samples from the alimentary tract (Lee et al. 2000) have been described.  Confirmatory biochemical testing can be done with relative ease.  A key point for diagnosticians is that some of the key biological characters associated with the typical P. multocida - indole positive, failure to ferment maltose, presence of ornithine decarboxylase and no requirement for NADH  - can vary (Krause et al. 1987; Christensen et al. 2004).
AA range of species-specific PCR assays for P. multocida have been described - with the two assays being well validated for use on cultures (Townsend et al. 1998; Miflin and Blackall 2001).  Neither of these tests has been validated for direct use on tissues.  However, a recently developed real-time PCR has been shown to be both species-specific and suitable for use directly on swabs (Corney et al. 2007).
Infectious coryza - Prevention by vaccination
In recent years, there has been a significant focus on the cross-protection (within a serovar) provided by inactivated infectious coryza vaccines.  There is now widespread acceptance that the Page serovars (A, B and C) do not cross-protect.  The focus in recent times has been on the issue of cross-protection within the A, B and C serovars.  For some time, it has been known that not all serovar B isolates are cross-protective ((Yamaguchi et al. 1991).  This has reached the stage where some commercial vaccines now include multiple B strains (Jacobs et al. 2003).
The capacity of the Kume serotyping scheme to subtype within the Page A and C has meant that there have been questions on whether these Kume sub-types represent immunotypes i.e. will a Kume C-1 based vaccine provide protection against a Kume C-2 challenge?  A large study from Mexico has provided the answer (at least for single reference strain for each serovar) (Soriano et al. 2004).  Essentially, this study has shown good cross-protection within the four A subtypes but less within the C subtypes (Soriano et al. 2004).  What is not still clear is whether these results (ie a single strain of each sub-type) are typical of all isolates within the sub-type.
While only killed whole cell coryza vaccines remain the only current commercially available vaccines, there has been active research on possible alternative approaches.  Several studies have shown that recombinant haemagglutinin antigens can provide protection (although only tested to date for homologous serovar protection) (Noro et al. 2008; Wu et al. 2011).  Additionally, a peptide has been shown to be capable of providing homologous protection (Wang et al. 2007).  Whether these research results can be converted into commercial products remains an open question.
Fowl cholera - Prevention by vaccination
Unlike infectious coryza, both killed whole cell and live fowl cholera vaccines have been available for some time have been available in the USA.  In Australia, a new vaccine has been just released - the Vaxsafe live fowl cholera vaccine - the first live vaccine in that market.  The generally accepted situation is that the killed vaccines provide protection against the serovars in the vaccine (typically serovars 1, 3 and 4) while the live vaccines (typically a single strain) provide cross-serovar protection.
In many regions, there remains a high use of autogenous vaccines - isolates from a farm are used for a farm-specific vaccine.  While not preferred by some vaccine manufacturers, this approach is based on the belief that the best protection for a killed vaccine is given by the isolate responsible for the challenge.
There are a number of research advances in recent years that may herald the dawn of a new era in fowl cholera vaccines.  As an example, it has recently been shown that a single nucleotide change in a nucleoid-associated protein (the FIS protein) is an explanation for spontaneous capsule loss (Steen et al. 2010).  In addition, this gene (the fis gene) seems to play a central role in the regulation of virulence factors and surface components of the bacterium (Steen et al. 2010).  Clearly, his developing understanding of key virulence regulation mechanisms could lead to next generation fowl cholera vaccines
Laboratory Support Tools
For both infectious coryza and fowl cholera there are now a range of tools to help guide disease investigations and improve prevention and control programs.  For infectious coryza, the tools currently available are limited - restriction endonuclease analysis (Blackall et al. 1990), ribotyping (Miflin et al. 1997) and ERIC-PCR (Morales-Erasto et al. 2011).  While these tools have proven useful they have not yet been widely adopted or used.
For fowl cholera, there is now an extensive range of typing tools - with a critical review identifying restriction endonuclease analysis and REP-PCR as most suitable at that time (Blackall and Miflin 2000).  The major addition to the array of typing tools is multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) (Subaaharan et al. 2010).  MLST is now widely accepted as the definitive typing tool.  A Website that allows access to the typing results of over 450 strains is now fully functioning and being extended on a regular basis (http://pubmlst.org/pmultocida_rirdc/).  The data-base is currently being used to address questions of host specificity - are certain clones of P. multocida found only in cattle and not in poultry?  As well, the original study defining the MLST scheme showed the methodology had a good capacity to investigate the epidemiology of fowl cholera outbreaks (Subaaharan et al. 2010).
There have been significant new technologies developed for laboratory based tests to help in the diagnosis and prevention of both fowl cholera and infectious coryza.  While these new technologies have relevant roles, the traditional approach of culture and phenotypic characterization remains a valid and important option for diagnostic investigations.  As with all diseases, a diagnosis and a prevention and control program requires input from the full range of expertise and skills - field veterinarians, laboratory diagnosticians and pathologists.
Blackall, P.J., Christensen, H. and Bisgaard, M. (2011) Unusual growth variants of Avibacterium paragallinarum. Aust Vet J 89:273-275.
Blackall, P.J. and Hinz, K.-H. (2008) Infectious coryza and related diseases. In Poultry Diseases eds. Pattison, M., McMullin, P.J., Bradbury, J.M. and Alexander, D.J. pp.155-159. Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier.
Blackall, P.J. and Miflin, J.K. (2000) Identification and typing of Pasteurella multocida. Avian Pathol 29:271-287.
Blackall, P.J., Morrow, C.J., McInnes, A., Eaves, L.E. and Rogers, D.G. (1990) Epidemiologic studies on infectious coryza outbreaks in northern New South Wales, Australia, using serotyping, biotyping, and chromosomal DNA restriction endonuclease analysis. Avian Dis 34:267-276.
Blackall, P.J. and Soriano, E.V. (2008) Infectious coryza and related infections. In Diseases of Poultry eds. Saif, Y.M., Fadly, A.M., Glisson, J.R., McDougald, L.R., Nolan, L.K. and Swayne, D.E. pp.789-803. Ames: Blackwell Publishing Professional.
Chen, X., Chen, Q., Zhang, P., Feng, W. and Blackall, P.J. (1998a) Evaluation of a PCR test for the detection of Haemophilus paragallinarum in China. Avian Pathol 27:296-300.
Chen, X., Miflin, J.K., Zhang, P. and Blackall, P.J. (1996) Development and application of DNA probes and PCR tests for Haemophilus paragallinarum. Avian Dis 40:398-407.
Chen, X., Song, C., Gong, Y. and Blackall, P.J. (1998b) Further studies on the use of a polymerase chain reaction test for the diagnosis of infectious coryza. Avian Pathol 27:618-624.
Christensen, H., Angen, O., Olsen, J.E. and Bisgaard, M. (2004) Revised description and classification of atypical isolates of Pasteurella multocida from bovine lungs based on genotypic characterization to include variants previously classified as biovar 2 of Pasteurella canis and Pasteurella avium. Microbiol 150:1757-1767.
Christensen, J.P., Bojesen, A.M. and Bisgaard, M. (2008) Fowl Cholera. In Poultry Diseases eds. Pattison, M., McMullin, P.J., Bradbury, J.M. and Alexander, D.J. London: Saunders Elsevier.
Corney, B.G., Diallo, I., Wright, L., Hewitson, G., De Jong, A., Burrell, P., Duffy, P., Stephens, C.P., Rodwell, B., Boyle, D.B. and Blackall, P.J. (2007) Pasteurella multocida detection by 5´ Taq nuclease assay: a new tool for use in diagnosing fowl cholera. J Microbiol Methods 69:376-380.
Corney, B.G., Diallo, I.S., Wright, L., Hewitson, G., De Jong, A., Tolosa, X., Burrell, P., Duffy, P., Rodwell, B., Boyle, D.B. and Blackall, P.J. (2008) Rapid and sensitive detection of Avibacterium paragallinarum in the presence of other bacteria using a 5´ Taq nuclease assay: a new tool for diagnosing infectious coryza. Avian Pathol 37:599 - 604.
Garcia, A., Angulo, E. and Blackall, P.J. (2002) The presence of NAD independent Haemophilus paragallinarum in Mexico. Avian Dis 48:425-429.
Glisson, J.R., Hofacre, C.L. and Christensen, J.P. (2008) Fowl cholera. In Diseases of Poultry eds. Saif, Y.M., Fadly, A.M., Glisson, J.R., McDougald, L.R., Nolan, L.K. and Swayne, D.A. Ames: Blackwell Publishing.
Jacobs, A.A., van den Berg, K. and Malo, A. (2003) Efficacy of a new tetravalent coryza vaccine against emerging variant type B strains. Avian Pathol 32:265-269.
Krause, T., Bertschinger, H.U., Corboz, L. and Mutters, R. (1987) V-factor dependent strains of Pasteurella multocida subsp. multocida. Zentral Bakteriol Hyg A 266:255-260.
Lee, C.W., Wilkie, I.W., Townsend, K.M. and Frost, A.J. (2000) The demonstration of Pasteurella multocida in the alimentary tract of chickens after experimental oral infection. Vet Microbiol 72:47-55.
Miflin, J.K. and Blackall, P.J. (2001) Development of a 23S rRNA-based PCR assay for the identification of Pasteurella multocida. Lett Appl Microbiol 33:216-221.
Miflin, J.K., Chen, X. and Blackall, P.J. (1997) Molecular characterisation of isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum from China by ribotyping. Avian Pathol 27:119-127.
Morales-Erasto, V., García-Sánchez, A., Salgado-Miranda, C., Talavera-Rojas, M., Robles, F., Blackall, P.J. and Soriano-Vargas, E. (2011) ERIC-PCR genotyping of emergent serovar C-1 isolates of Avibacterium paragallinarum from Mexico. Avian Dis Accepted.
Muhairwa, A.P., Mtambo, M.M.A., Christensen, J.P. and Bisgaard, M. (2001) Occurrence of Pasteurella multocida and related species in village free ranging chickens and their animal contacts in Tanzania. Vet Microbiol 78:139-153.
Noro, T., Oishi, E., Kaneshige, T., Yaguchi, K., Amimoto, K. and Shimizu, M. (2008) Identification and Characterization of Haemagglutinin Epitopes of Avibacterium paragallinarum Serovar C. Vet Microbiol 131:406-413.
Soriano, V.E., Longinos, G.M., Téllez, G., Fernández, R.P., Suárez-Güemes, F. and Blackall, P.J. (2004) Cross-protection study of the nine serovars of Haemophilus paragallinarum in the Kume haemagglutinin scheme. Avian Pathol 33:506-511.
Steen, J.A., Steen, J.A., Harrison, P., Seemann, T., Wilkie, I., Harper, M., Adler, B.A. and Boyse, J.D. (2010) Fis Is Essential for Capsule Production in Pasteurella multocida and Regulates Expression of Other Important Virulence Factors. PLOS Pathogens 6. doi: 1000710.1001371/journal.ppat.1000750.
Subaaharan, S., Blackall, L.L. and Blackall, P.J. (2010) Development of a multi-locus sequence typing scheme for avian isolates of Pasteurella multocida. Vet Microbiol 141:354-361.
Terzolo, H.R., Paolicchi, F.A., Sandoval, V.E., Blackall, P.J., Yamaguchi, T. and Iritani, Y. (1993) Characterization of isolates of Haemophilus paragallinarum from Argentina. Avian Dis 37:310-314.
Townsend, K.M., Frost, A.J., Lee, C.W., Papadimitriou, J.M. and Dawkins, J.S. (1998) Development of PCR assays for species- and type-specific identification of Pasteurella multocida isolates. J Clin Microbiol 36:1096-1100.
Wang, H., Gao, Y., Gong, Y., Chen, X., Liu, C., Zhou, X., Blackall, P.J., Zhang, P. and Yang, H. (2007) Identification and immunogenicity of an immunodominant mimotope of Avibacterium paragallinarum from a phage display peptide library. Vet Microbiol 119:231-239.
Wu, J.-R., Wu, Y.-R., Shien, J.-H., Hsu, Y.-M., Chen, C.-F., Shieh, H.K. and Chang, P.-C. (2011) Recombinant proteins containing the hypervariable region of the haemagglutinin protect chickens against challenge with Avibacterium paragallinarum. Vaccine 29:660-667.
Yamaguchi, T., Blackall, P.J., Takigami, S., Iritani, Y. and Hayashi, Y. (1991) Immunogenicity of Haemophilus paragallinarum serovar B strains. Avian Dis 35:965-968.
Watch Dr. Pat Blackall lecture at the XXII Latin American Poultry Congres
Content from the event:
Related topics:
Pat Blackall
University of Queensland
Pat Blackall
University of Queensland
30 de mayo de 2012
Nadim, Good to hear from you. I am always happy to do my best to help in these situations. Australia has strict quarantine rules BUT I do have a permit that allows importation. Please contact me direct for more details. Pat Blackall
Pat Blackall
University of Queensland
30 de mayo de 2012
Dr Ramzee - Agree that even with good vaccination programs, there will sometimes be problems - overwhelming challenge, high stress levels, immuno-supression are additional factors that can imacpt on even the best vaccination program. Pat Blackall
Nadim Amarin
United Animal Health
30 de mayo de 2012
Thanks Dr. Pat for the valuable information you are sharing with us as we are really looking for a tool to identify the Infectious Coryza and also to do serotyping to know which vaccine we shall use A or B or C? We had some isolates from the filed on Blood agar without Satph (Aouth African like strain??) but these were so fragile and need refereshment from time to time in the refrigerator!! I hope in the near future we will be able to send sampes to your lab for further identification?
Pat Blackall
University of Queensland
29 de mayo de 2012
I would agree that isolation of Av. paragallinarum is a challenge. I would recommed that you look for birds in the early stage of the disease process (NOT Golfball eyes). From these early stage birds, the best option is to sample the infra-orbital sinus. We heat sear the surface and then slice the sinus open with a sterile scalpel. The sinus is swabbed and then plated onto blood agar and chocolate agar. We use a nurse colony (Staph hyicus) and a candle jar. I found little success with sampling deeper into the respiratory tract BUT this is in setting where we had pure coryza and little in the way of complications. My colleague in Argentina (Horacio Terzolo) was able to isolate the agent from systemtic sites (liver, hock and so on) BUT this is a rare observation. Best to concentrate on the infra-orbital sinus. Pat Blackall
Arshaq Ramzee
30 de mayo de 2012
A very informative article with some new inputs, both of the diseases are very dangerous and usually cause heavy losses in flocks. A good immunization program with some good vaccines may be an answer but sometimes even vaccinated flocks get the infection.
Iman M Hamza
29 de mayo de 2012

Thank you for the useful topic, regarding infectious coryza. According to my experience isolation of the bacteria is very difficult because beside the fastidious nature of the organism the stage of the disease and the site of sampling is crucial for isolation of the bacteria . swabbing from infra orbital Sinus ,Trachea and cleft palate and liver what is the preferable site for isolation of the organism

Profile picture
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
Join Engormix and be part of the largest agribusiness social network in the world.