The poultry industry is an infant but fast growing sector in Ethiopia. However, it is largely dependent on local chicken managed under backyard production system. The sector is facing different challenges, mainly emanated from prevalence of infectious diseases such as helminth parasite species. Hence, this study came up with an aim to determine the infection rate and identify helminth parasite species in chickens managed under different production systems, in Mekelle, Ethiopia. A cross-sectional study design was employed, from November 2015 to March 2016. Postmortem (N=138) and fecal (N=410) samples of chicken were considered for necropsy and coproscopic examination to see both adult and eggs of helminth parasites, respectively. Similar gastrointestinal helminth parasites infection rate of chicken was obtained from both examination approaches (necropsy, 90.60%; and coproscopy, 90.97%). The study attested high prevalence (87.7%) of mixed infection with helminth parasites of chicken.
Chickens are widely spread at almost every family, in Ethiopia, providing valuable source of protein and cash income. About 99 % of Ethiopian poultry resources managed under backyard production system undergo poor handling scheme. Backyard production system involves low productivity with less input and periodic flock devastation due to different reasons. Women, in the rural are mainly involved in the system to benefit an immediate cash income [
Poultry industry in Ethiopia is infant but fast growing sector. The industry faces various challenges such as shortage of feed in terms of quality and quality, poor husbandry practices, prevalence, and wide distribution of infectious and noninfectious diseases. Poor veterinary services and lack of appropriate breeding practices are assumed to be additional challenges. Moreover, the government has given less attention [
Parasites are among the infectious agents that cause an alarming problem to the industry, posing adverse economic effects. Gastrointestinal parasitism leads to significant economic losses in poultry [
Recently, poultry farms in Ethiopia are dramatically increasing in number. However, research findings conducted in different parts of the country, incriminated helminthes as major causes of ill health and loss of productivity in local chickens [
The study was carried out in Mekelle, the capital city of Tigray National Region State, geographically situated between 13°09′′ and 14°34′′ North latitude and 39°12′′ and 40°28′′ East longitude. The area is located some 784 Km away from Addis Ababa in north direction. Agroclimatic condition of the area is midland locally called Weynadega with an elevation of 2254 meters above sea level. The average annual temperature ranges between 11.11°C and 24.1°C. The average annual rainfall is measured to be 570 mm [
Chickens under intensive, semi-intensive, and backyard production systems, in Mekelle town, were considered during the study. The studied animals were systematically categorized as per the Ethiopian poultry production systems context [
Cross-sectional type of study design was employed from November 2015 to March 2016, with aims to estimate the prevalence of gastrointestinal helminth parasites of chicken and to identify associated risk factors. Postmortem and fecal samples were collected from chickens of all (intensive, semi-intensive, and backyard) production systems. Based on the poultry population potential, Semen and Hawelti (two subcities with 11 kebeles) and other three kebeles from each subcity were purposely selected. Two poultry farms with chickens (n=125) from intensive, three farms with chickens (n=130) from semi-intensive, and other chickens (n=155) from different randomly selected households at selected kebeles with backyard production systems were involved. Fecal samples were collected from (N = 410) chickens out of randomly selected poultry farms. Following this, samples have proportionally allocated to each of the management systems, examined in every after one month of the study period. Furthermore, necropsy examination was conducted on chickens (N = 138) of three restaurants originated from intensive farms (n=42) and from chickens slaughtered (n=96) in randomly selected households during the Ethiopian (christmas and epiphany) holidays. Sex, breed, and type of production systems of each sampled chicken were recorded on a format prepared for this purpose.
Fecal samples were collected directly from the cloaca and the ground immediately after defecation and then placed in a clean universal bottle. Collected samples were preserved with 10% formalin and transported to Mekelle University, College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Parasitology, for laboratory examination. Flotation technique was involved with NaCl solution that uses the fluid for flotation. Simultaneously, sedimentation technique was employed using a centrifugation (1500 rpm for 3 minutes) [
The whole gastrointestines of chicken were collected from volunteer restaurants and households (during holydays) within the selected kebeles of Mekelle town. The gut samples were collected soon after evisceration and immersed into sample box filled with 10% buffered formalin and transported to the Mekelle University, College of Veterinary Medicine, Parasitology Laboratory Department, for necropsy examination with required information regarding their source. The intestine was opened longitudinally with a scissor and the content for each intestine were carefully scraped into a petri-dish and a small amount of tap water was added to soften whatever debris to facilitate recovery of worms from the lumen. All worms visible to naked eye were removed using a thumb forceps. The recovered worms were put in another petri-dish labeled according to predilection site and 10% ethanol added to help straightening before identification under stereomicroscope using morphological keys described according to [
The data obtained from postmortem and fecal examinations has entered into Microsoft Excel spreadsheet; raw data were coded and then analyzed using STATA [
Ethical clearance was obtained from Institutional Review Board of Mekelle University, College of Veterinary Medicine. Furthermore, verbal informed consent was obtained from all poultry farm owners or managers participated in the study, after explaining the purpose of the study in their local language (Tigrigna).
Among the 410 chickens examined, 373 (90.98%) were positive for eggs of one or more helminth parasites. Management system and breed factors were significantly associated with an overall infection rate of helminth parasites. However, no significant difference was observed for sex factor (Table
Univariate and multivariate regression analysis of helminth parasitism among considered risk factors (coproscopy).
Possible risk factors | Number examined | Number Positive ('%) | Crude OR | P-value | Adjusted OR | P-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(CI95%) | (CI95%) | ||||||
| Intensive | 125 | 105 (84.0) | 1 | 1 | ||
Semi Intensive | 130 | 120 (92.3) | 2.28 (1.02, 5.10) | 0.04 | 2.14 (0.85, 5.37) | 0.11 | |
Backyard | 155 | 148 (95.5) | 4.02 (1.64,9.87) | 0.00 | 3.40 (0.71,16.31) | 0.13 | |
| Exotic | 213 | 186 (87.3) | 1 | 1 | ||
Local | 197 | 187 (94.9) | 2.71 (1.28,5.77) | 0.01 | 1.17 (0.31,4.36) | 0.82 | |
| Female | 201 | 180 (89.6) | 1 | 1 | ||
Male | 209 | 193 (92.3) | 1.41 (0.71,2.78) | 0.33 | 1.06 (0.56,2 17) | 0.87 | |
| |||||||
| | |
During coproscopy examination, eight (8) helminth parasite species (three nematodes and five cestodes) were identified (Table
Describing prevalence of helminth parasite Species identified among the considered risk factors (coproscopy).
Possible risk factors | No. examined | A. | H. | Cap. | R. | R. | R. | D. | H. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intensive | 125 | 62 (49.6) | 64 (51.2) | 43 (34.4) | 69 (55.2) | 54 (43.2) | 54 (43.2) | 57 (45.6) | 45 (36.0) |
Semi-intensive | 130 | 93 (71.5) | 94 (72.3) | 94 (65.4) | 50 (38.5) | 62 (47.7) | 81 (62.3) | 85 (63.4) | 41 (31.5) | |
Backyard | 155 | 118 (76.1) | 111 (71.6) | 115 (74.2) | 112 (72.3) | 108 (69.7) | 111 (71.6) | 124 (80.0) | 29 (18.7) | |
| Exotic | 213 | 124 (58.2) | 129 (60.6) | 102 (47.9) | 108 (50.7) | 94 (44.1) | 107 (50.2) | 113 (53.1) | 65 (30.5) |
Local | 194 | 149 (75.6) | 140 (71.1) | 141 (71.6) | 123 (62.4) | 130 (67.0) | 139 (70.6) | 153 (77.7) | 50 (25.4) | |
| Male | 209 | 150 (71.8) | 153 (73.2) | 132 (63.2) | 118 (56.5) | 119 (57.5) | 131 (62.7) | 137 (65.6) | 55 (26.3) |
Female | 201 | 123 (61.2) | 116 (57.7) | 111 (55.2) | 113 (56.2) | 105 (52.2) | 115 (57.2) | 129 (64.2) | 60 (29.9) | |
| ||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | |
a,
Among the 410 chickens examined, infection rate of 89% (365/410) for cestode and 84.4% (346/410) for nematode parasite species were recorded. Management and breed factors were found significantly associated with both cestode and nematode parasitism, though the variation among breeds was not significant when adjusted with the other variables together. Chickens from backyard management system (AOR=4.9, 95%CI=1.1-20.9) and local breed (AOR=1.2, 95%CI= 0.4-3.9) had more chance to get cestode infection and, similarly, these chickens had also (AOR=3.8, 95%CI=1.1-12.9 and AOR=1.1, 95%CI=0.4-3.1) more likelihood of getting nematode infections compared with their counterparts, respectively (Table
Univariate and multivariate regression analysis of cestode and nematodes among the considered risk factors (coproscopy).
| | | | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number | Crud OR | Adjusted OR | Number | Crud OR | Adjusted OR | |||
Positive (%) | (95% CI) | (95% CI) | Positive (%) | (95% CI ) | (95% CI) | |||
| Intensive | 125 | 100(80.0) | 1 | 1 | 89(71.20) | 1 | 1 |
Semi intensive | 130 | 117(90.0) | 2.3(1.1-4.6) | 2.3(0.98-5.2) | 114(87.7) | 2.9(1.5-5.5) | 2.6(1.2-5.5) | |
Backyard | 155 | 148(95.5) | 5.3(2.2-12.7) | 4.9(1.1-20.9) | 142(91.6) | 4.8(2.4-9.8) | 4.1(1.2-14.3) | |
| Exotic | 213 | 179(84.0) | 1 | 1 | 166(77.9) | 1 | 1 |
Local | 197 | 186(94.4) | 3.2(1.6-6.5) | 1.2(0.4-3.9) | 179(90.9) | 2.9(1.6-5.4) | 1.1(0.4-3.1) | |
| Female | 201 | 178(88.6) | 1 | 1 | 161(80.1) | 1 | 1 |
Male | 209 | 187(89.5) | 1.1(0.5-1.6) | 1.3(0.7-0.5) | 184(88.0) | 1.8(0.3-0.9) | 1.4(0.4-1.3 ) | |
| ||||||||
| | | |
Out of 138 chickens’ gut dissected for adult helminth parasites examination, 125(90.6%) were found harboring one or more species of GIT parasites (Table
The helminth parasites infection rate in chickens under different factors (necropsy).
Possible Risk Factors | Number Examined. | Number positive | Percentage (%) | P-value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intensive | 42 | 36 | 85.7 | 0.20 |
Backyard | 96 | 89 | 92.7 | ||
| Exotic | 42 | 36 | 85.7 | 0.20 |
Local | 96 | 89 | 92.7 | ||
| Male | 96 | 88 | 91.7 | 0.79 |
Female | 42 | 37 | 88.1 | ||
| |||||
| | | |
Results in (Table
Describing prevalence of helminth parasite species identified among the different factors considered (necropsy).
Possible Risk factors | Number examined | A. | H. | Cap. | R. | R. | R. | H. | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intensive | 42 | 19 (45.2) | 20 (47.6) | 16 (38.1) | 20 (47.6) | 8 (19.1) | 14 (33.3) | 03 (07.1) |
Backyard | 96 | 76 (79.2) | 80 (83.3 ) | 55 (57.3) | 71 (73.9) | 47 (48.9) | 62 (64.5) | 69 (71.9) | |
| Exotic | 42 | 19 (45.2) | 20 (47.6) | 16 (38.1) | 20 (47.6) | 08 (19.1) | 14 (33.3) | 03 (07.1) |
Local | 96 | 76 (79.2) | 80 (83.3 ) | 55 (57.3) | 71 (73.9) | 47 (48.9) | 62 (64.5) | 69 (71.9) | |
| Male | 96 | 70 (72.9) | 74 (77.1 ) | 51 (53.1) | 63 (65.6) | 38 (39.6) | 57 (59.4) | 56 (58.3) |
Female | 42 | 25 (59.5) | 26 (61.9) | 20 (47.6) | 28 (66.7) | 17 (40.5) | 19 (45.2) | 16 (38.1) | |
| |||||||||
| | | | | | | | |
a,
Among the postmortem examined chickens (N = 138), a prevalence rate of 87.68% (n=121) and 86.96% (n = 120) was recorded for cestodes and nematodes, respectively. Table
Prevalence of cestode and nematode parasites of chicken among different factors considered (necropsy).
| | | | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number Positive | Percentage (%) | P-value | Number Positive | Percentage (%) | P- value | |||
| Intensive | 42 | 31 | 73.8 | 0.002 | 34 | 80.9 | 0.112 |
Backyard | 96 | 89 | 92.7 | 87 | 90.6 | |||
| Exotic | 42 | 31 | 73.8 | 0.002 | 34 | 80.9 | 0.112 |
Local | 96 | 89 | 92.7 | 87 | 90.6 | |||
| Male | 96 | 83 | 86.4 | 0.793 | 85 | 88.5 | 0.642 |
Female | 42 | 37 | 88.0 | 36 | 85.7 | |||
| ||||||||
| | | | | |
Most of the postmortem examined chicken (87.7%) was harboring adults of two or more species of helminth parasites (mixed infection); the highest burden has been recorded with 5 parasites (21%) in chickens followed by 3 parasites (17%) per a single sample (Table
Describing the burden of helminth parasitic infections recorded per chicken (necropsy).
| | | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
| No infection (0) | 13/138 | 09.42 |
| Single infection (1) | 04/138 | 02.90 |
| Two parasites (2) | 12/138 | 08.70 |
| Three parasites (3) | 23/138 | 16.67 |
| Four parasites (4) | 21/138 | 15.22 |
| Five parasites (5) | 29/138 | 21.01 |
| Six parasites (6) | 19/138 | 13.77 |
| Seven parasites (7) | 17/138 | 12.32 |
| |||
| | |
As shown in Table
Describing prevalence of the identified parasite species using both techniques employed.
| | | | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Necropsy (n=138) | Coproscopy (n=410) | |||
1 | | 68.8 | 0.63 | 66.6 |
2 | | 72.5 | 65.6 | 0.13 |
3 | | 51.5 | 59.3 | 0.11 |
4 | | 65.9 | 56.3 | 0.04 |
5 | | 39.9 | 54.6 | 0.00 |
6 | | 55.1 | 60.0 | 0.31 |
7 | | 52.2 | 28.1 | 0.00 |
| ||||
| | |
The present study revealed that 90.60% (125/138) of chickens were positive for one or more helminth parasites during necropsy examination. It is comparable with the findings reported from Barisal district, Bangladesh (91.88%), Nairobi County, Kenya (90%), and Hawassa, Ethiopia (88.5%) [
The current study with necropsy examination showed a comparable prevalence of cestode (86.96%) and nematode (87.68%) parasites. However, it is different from findings reported from central Ethiopia (86.32%, 75.79%) and Nairobi County, Kenya (68.1%, 74.4%) for cestode and nematode infections, respectively [
This study showed that vast majority (87.7%) of the chickens in the study area harbored multiple (more than one) species of helminth parasites, in which their combined devastating effects on the host metabolism play a major role in early chick mortality and other production losses among adults [
The prevalence of
Among the cestode parasite species of chicken revealed from the current study,
A statistically significant difference was observed in the overall prevalence of gastrointestinal helminths among chickens kept under the backyard, semi-intensive, and intensive management systems. This showed that the prevalence of helminth parasites was decreased with increasing quality and modernization of the production system, which is in agreement with the study conducted in Akure, Nigeria [
This study had come up with extremely high prevalence of cestode and nematode helminth infections. The majority of chickens were also found harboring more than one helminth parasite species. Management system and breed were identified as major risk factors affecting the occurrence of helminth parasites. These findings will become more detrimental because poultry sector is an infant, but fast growing industry in Ethiopia at large and in Mekelle town in particular, which are highly dominated with local chickens kept under backyard production system. Therefore, urgent intervention with regular deworming scheme and continuous surveillance is critical. Moreover, strict attention should be given towards maintaining hygienic condition and modernizing the management system together with breed improvement measures of chicken.
The raw data used to support the findings of this study have been deposited in the Mendeley data repository (doi:
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.
All authors read and approved final version of the manuscript and conceived the study. M. Berhe generated the idea, proposal, and paper write-up and performed field and laboratory experiments and data analysis. B. Mekibib enriched the idea, completed the paper, and analyzed data. Both A. Bsrat and G. Atsbaha have taken part in paper write-up, data analysis, and edition of the manuscript.
The authors are thankful to Mekelle University College of Veterinary Medicine for allowing the parasitology laboratory work for free. Dr. Abrha Tesfay is also acknowledged for his supervision and technical support during the study period.