Loading…
Estimation of the sensitivity of environmental sampling for detection of Salmonella in commercial layer flocks post-introduction of national control programmes
A key element of national control programmes (NCPs) for Salmonella in commercial laying flocks, introduced across the European Union, is the identification of infected flocks and holdings through statutory sampling. It is therefore important to know the sensitivity of the sampling methods, in order...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Epidemiology and infection 2014-05, Vol.142 (5), p.1061-1069 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503 |
| container_end_page | 1069 |
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 1061 |
| container_title | Epidemiology and infection |
| container_volume | 142 |
| creator | ARNOLD, M. E. MARTELLI, F. MCLAREN, I. DAVIES, R. H. |
| description | A key element of national control programmes (NCPs) for Salmonella in commercial laying flocks, introduced across the European Union, is the identification of infected flocks and holdings through statutory sampling. It is therefore important to know the sensitivity of the sampling methods, in order to design effective and efficient surveillance for Salmonella. However, improved Salmonella control in response to the NCP may have influenced key factors that determine the sensitivity of the sampling methods used to detect Salmonella in NCPs. Therefore the aim of this study was to compare estimates of the sensitivity of the sampling methods using data collected before and after the introduction of the NCP, using Bayesian methods. There was a large reduction in the sensitivity of dust in non-cage flocks between the pre-NCP studies (81% of samples positive in positive flocks) and post-NCP studies (10% of samples positive in positive flocks), leading to the conclusion that sampling dust is not recommended for detection of Salmonella in non-cage flocks. However, cage dust (43% of samples positive in positive flocks) was found to be more sensitive than cage faeces (29% of samples positive in positive flocks). To have a high probability of detection, several NCP-style samples need to be used. For confirmation of Salmonella, five NCP faecal samples for cage flocks, and three NCP faecal boot swab samples for non-cage flocks would be required to have the equivalent sensitivity of the EU baseline survey method, which was estimated to have an 87% and 75% sensitivity to detect Salmonella at a 5% within-flock prevalence in cage and non-cage flocks, respectively. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0950268813002173 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9151119</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0950268813002173</cupid><jstor_id>24476781</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24476781</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc-O0zAQxi0EYkvhATiALCEkLoFxYjvJBQmtlj_SShwWztHEcboujl1st1KfhlfFod1SQJwseX7fN9_MEPKUwWsGrH5zA62AUjYNqwBKVlf3yIJx2RacQ3ufLOZyMdcvyKMY1wDQlk39kFyUHEpoWbUgP65iMhMm4x31I023mkbtoklmZ9J-_tJuZ4J3k3YJLY04baxxKzr6QAedtLqT3qCdvNPWIjWOKj9NOiiTJRb3OtDRevUt0o2PqTAuBT9sT1L3q39GlZ8rlm6CXwXMDvExeTCijfrJ8V2Sr--vvlx-LK4_f_h0-e66UEKyVFTlyITiEmvWC9FLqcYeSiXF0PQaG6hUP7Y44MArocdGIPSct9g0HPSAAqoleXvw3Wz7SQ8qTxvQdpuQlxP2nUfT_Vlx5rZb-V3XMsEYa7PBq6NB8N-3OqZuMlHN63Dab2PHRAlVXYtWZvTFX-jab0Oef6YYgBAc6kyxA6WCjzHo8RSGQTefv_vn_Fnz_HyKk-Lu3hl4eQQwKrRjQKdM_M01lYRGzhGfHbh1TD6c-fBa1rnfklTHcDj1wQwrfTbDf-P9BJzV1gc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1510055407</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Estimation of the sensitivity of environmental sampling for detection of Salmonella in commercial layer flocks post-introduction of national control programmes</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Cambridge University Press</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>ARNOLD, M. E. ; MARTELLI, F. ; MCLAREN, I. ; DAVIES, R. H.</creator><creatorcontrib>ARNOLD, M. E. ; MARTELLI, F. ; MCLAREN, I. ; DAVIES, R. H.</creatorcontrib><description>A key element of national control programmes (NCPs) for Salmonella in commercial laying flocks, introduced across the European Union, is the identification of infected flocks and holdings through statutory sampling. It is therefore important to know the sensitivity of the sampling methods, in order to design effective and efficient surveillance for Salmonella. However, improved Salmonella control in response to the NCP may have influenced key factors that determine the sensitivity of the sampling methods used to detect Salmonella in NCPs. Therefore the aim of this study was to compare estimates of the sensitivity of the sampling methods using data collected before and after the introduction of the NCP, using Bayesian methods. There was a large reduction in the sensitivity of dust in non-cage flocks between the pre-NCP studies (81% of samples positive in positive flocks) and post-NCP studies (10% of samples positive in positive flocks), leading to the conclusion that sampling dust is not recommended for detection of Salmonella in non-cage flocks. However, cage dust (43% of samples positive in positive flocks) was found to be more sensitive than cage faeces (29% of samples positive in positive flocks). To have a high probability of detection, several NCP-style samples need to be used. For confirmation of Salmonella, five NCP faecal samples for cage flocks, and three NCP faecal boot swab samples for non-cage flocks would be required to have the equivalent sensitivity of the EU baseline survey method, which was estimated to have an 87% and 75% sensitivity to detect Salmonella at a 5% within-flock prevalence in cage and non-cage flocks, respectively.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-2688</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-4409</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0950268813002173</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24020913</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EPINEU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Animals ; Bacteriology ; Bayes Theorem ; Biological and medical sciences ; Competent authority ; Data sampling ; Dust ; Eggs - microbiology ; Environmental Microbiology ; Environmental Monitoring ; Estimation methods ; European Union ; Farms ; Feces - microbiology ; Flocks ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Gastrointestinal Pathogens ; Infections ; Methods ; Microbiology ; Miscellaneous ; Models, Biological ; Original Papers ; Ovaries ; Poultry ; Poultry - microbiology ; Poultry Diseases - diagnosis ; Poultry Diseases - microbiology ; Proportions ; Salmonella ; Salmonella - isolation & purification ; Salmonella Infections, Animal - diagnosis ; Salmonella Infections, Animal - microbiology ; Sampling methods ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Survey methods</subject><ispartof>Epidemiology and infection, 2014-05, Vol.142 (5), p.1061-1069</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013</rights><rights>Cambridge University Press 2014</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Cambridge University Press 2013 2013 Cambridge University Press</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24476781$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0950268813002173/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,730,783,787,888,27936,27937,53804,53806,58570,58803,73294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28360866$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24020913$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>ARNOLD, M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MARTELLI, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCLAREN, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAVIES, R. H.</creatorcontrib><title>Estimation of the sensitivity of environmental sampling for detection of Salmonella in commercial layer flocks post-introduction of national control programmes</title><title>Epidemiology and infection</title><addtitle>Epidemiol. Infect</addtitle><description>A key element of national control programmes (NCPs) for Salmonella in commercial laying flocks, introduced across the European Union, is the identification of infected flocks and holdings through statutory sampling. It is therefore important to know the sensitivity of the sampling methods, in order to design effective and efficient surveillance for Salmonella. However, improved Salmonella control in response to the NCP may have influenced key factors that determine the sensitivity of the sampling methods used to detect Salmonella in NCPs. Therefore the aim of this study was to compare estimates of the sensitivity of the sampling methods using data collected before and after the introduction of the NCP, using Bayesian methods. There was a large reduction in the sensitivity of dust in non-cage flocks between the pre-NCP studies (81% of samples positive in positive flocks) and post-NCP studies (10% of samples positive in positive flocks), leading to the conclusion that sampling dust is not recommended for detection of Salmonella in non-cage flocks. However, cage dust (43% of samples positive in positive flocks) was found to be more sensitive than cage faeces (29% of samples positive in positive flocks). To have a high probability of detection, several NCP-style samples need to be used. For confirmation of Salmonella, five NCP faecal samples for cage flocks, and three NCP faecal boot swab samples for non-cage flocks would be required to have the equivalent sensitivity of the EU baseline survey method, which was estimated to have an 87% and 75% sensitivity to detect Salmonella at a 5% within-flock prevalence in cage and non-cage flocks, respectively.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Bacteriology</subject><subject>Bayes Theorem</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Competent authority</subject><subject>Data sampling</subject><subject>Dust</subject><subject>Eggs - microbiology</subject><subject>Environmental Microbiology</subject><subject>Environmental Monitoring</subject><subject>Estimation methods</subject><subject>European Union</subject><subject>Farms</subject><subject>Feces - microbiology</subject><subject>Flocks</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Gastrointestinal Pathogens</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Microbiology</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Models, Biological</subject><subject>Original Papers</subject><subject>Ovaries</subject><subject>Poultry</subject><subject>Poultry - microbiology</subject><subject>Poultry Diseases - diagnosis</subject><subject>Poultry Diseases - microbiology</subject><subject>Proportions</subject><subject>Salmonella</subject><subject>Salmonella - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Salmonella Infections, Animal - diagnosis</subject><subject>Salmonella Infections, Animal - microbiology</subject><subject>Sampling methods</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Survey methods</subject><issn>0950-2688</issn><issn>1469-4409</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kc-O0zAQxi0EYkvhATiALCEkLoFxYjvJBQmtlj_SShwWztHEcboujl1st1KfhlfFod1SQJwseX7fN9_MEPKUwWsGrH5zA62AUjYNqwBKVlf3yIJx2RacQ3ufLOZyMdcvyKMY1wDQlk39kFyUHEpoWbUgP65iMhMm4x31I023mkbtoklmZ9J-_tJuZ4J3k3YJLY04baxxKzr6QAedtLqT3qCdvNPWIjWOKj9NOiiTJRb3OtDRevUt0o2PqTAuBT9sT1L3q39GlZ8rlm6CXwXMDvExeTCijfrJ8V2Sr--vvlx-LK4_f_h0-e66UEKyVFTlyITiEmvWC9FLqcYeSiXF0PQaG6hUP7Y44MArocdGIPSct9g0HPSAAqoleXvw3Wz7SQ8qTxvQdpuQlxP2nUfT_Vlx5rZb-V3XMsEYa7PBq6NB8N-3OqZuMlHN63Dab2PHRAlVXYtWZvTFX-jab0Oef6YYgBAc6kyxA6WCjzHo8RSGQTefv_vn_Fnz_HyKk-Lu3hl4eQQwKrRjQKdM_M01lYRGzhGfHbh1TD6c-fBa1rnfklTHcDj1wQwrfTbDf-P9BJzV1gc</recordid><startdate>20140501</startdate><enddate>20140501</enddate><creator>ARNOLD, M. E.</creator><creator>MARTELLI, F.</creator><creator>MCLAREN, I.</creator><creator>DAVIES, R. H.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140501</creationdate><title>Estimation of the sensitivity of environmental sampling for detection of Salmonella in commercial layer flocks post-introduction of national control programmes</title><author>ARNOLD, M. E. ; MARTELLI, F. ; MCLAREN, I. ; DAVIES, R. H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Bacteriology</topic><topic>Bayes Theorem</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Competent authority</topic><topic>Data sampling</topic><topic>Dust</topic><topic>Eggs - microbiology</topic><topic>Environmental Microbiology</topic><topic>Environmental Monitoring</topic><topic>Estimation methods</topic><topic>European Union</topic><topic>Farms</topic><topic>Feces - microbiology</topic><topic>Flocks</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Gastrointestinal Pathogens</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Microbiology</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Models, Biological</topic><topic>Original Papers</topic><topic>Ovaries</topic><topic>Poultry</topic><topic>Poultry - microbiology</topic><topic>Poultry Diseases - diagnosis</topic><topic>Poultry Diseases - microbiology</topic><topic>Proportions</topic><topic>Salmonella</topic><topic>Salmonella - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Salmonella Infections, Animal - diagnosis</topic><topic>Salmonella Infections, Animal - microbiology</topic><topic>Sampling methods</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Survey methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>ARNOLD, M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MARTELLI, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCLAREN, I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAVIES, R. H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Epidemiology and infection</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>ARNOLD, M. E.</au><au>MARTELLI, F.</au><au>MCLAREN, I.</au><au>DAVIES, R. H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Estimation of the sensitivity of environmental sampling for detection of Salmonella in commercial layer flocks post-introduction of national control programmes</atitle><jtitle>Epidemiology and infection</jtitle><addtitle>Epidemiol. Infect</addtitle><date>2014-05-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>142</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1061</spage><epage>1069</epage><pages>1061-1069</pages><issn>0950-2688</issn><eissn>1469-4409</eissn><coden>EPINEU</coden><abstract>A key element of national control programmes (NCPs) for Salmonella in commercial laying flocks, introduced across the European Union, is the identification of infected flocks and holdings through statutory sampling. It is therefore important to know the sensitivity of the sampling methods, in order to design effective and efficient surveillance for Salmonella. However, improved Salmonella control in response to the NCP may have influenced key factors that determine the sensitivity of the sampling methods used to detect Salmonella in NCPs. Therefore the aim of this study was to compare estimates of the sensitivity of the sampling methods using data collected before and after the introduction of the NCP, using Bayesian methods. There was a large reduction in the sensitivity of dust in non-cage flocks between the pre-NCP studies (81% of samples positive in positive flocks) and post-NCP studies (10% of samples positive in positive flocks), leading to the conclusion that sampling dust is not recommended for detection of Salmonella in non-cage flocks. However, cage dust (43% of samples positive in positive flocks) was found to be more sensitive than cage faeces (29% of samples positive in positive flocks). To have a high probability of detection, several NCP-style samples need to be used. For confirmation of Salmonella, five NCP faecal samples for cage flocks, and three NCP faecal boot swab samples for non-cage flocks would be required to have the equivalent sensitivity of the EU baseline survey method, which was estimated to have an 87% and 75% sensitivity to detect Salmonella at a 5% within-flock prevalence in cage and non-cage flocks, respectively.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>24020913</pmid><doi>10.1017/S0950268813002173</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0950-2688 |
| ispartof | Epidemiology and infection, 2014-05, Vol.142 (5), p.1061-1069 |
| issn | 0950-2688 1469-4409 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9151119 |
| source | JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Cambridge University Press; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Animals Bacteriology Bayes Theorem Biological and medical sciences Competent authority Data sampling Dust Eggs - microbiology Environmental Microbiology Environmental Monitoring Estimation methods European Union Farms Feces - microbiology Flocks Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Gastrointestinal Pathogens Infections Methods Microbiology Miscellaneous Models, Biological Original Papers Ovaries Poultry Poultry - microbiology Poultry Diseases - diagnosis Poultry Diseases - microbiology Proportions Salmonella Salmonella - isolation & purification Salmonella Infections, Animal - diagnosis Salmonella Infections, Animal - microbiology Sampling methods Sensitivity and Specificity Survey methods |
| title | Estimation of the sensitivity of environmental sampling for detection of Salmonella in commercial layer flocks post-introduction of national control programmes |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-11-13T13%3A05%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Estimation%20of%20the%20sensitivity%20of%20environmental%20sampling%20for%20detection%20of%20Salmonella%20in%20commercial%20layer%20flocks%20post-introduction%20of%20national%20control%20programmes&rft.jtitle=Epidemiology%20and%20infection&rft.au=ARNOLD,%20M.%20E.&rft.date=2014-05-01&rft.volume=142&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1061&rft.epage=1069&rft.pages=1061-1069&rft.issn=0950-2688&rft.eissn=1469-4409&rft.coden=EPINEU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0950268813002173&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E24476781%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-32f15c46a71b55b66cfb02c65d8bea803cbf9adad435ef85a0b449a8840eda503%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1510055407&rft_id=info:pmid/24020913&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0950268813002173&rft_jstor_id=24476781&rfr_iscdi=true |