Phytogenic interventions at the heat stress-bacterial infection interface in chickens: a critical One Health review and research agenda for antimicrobials
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66585/ohmi.2026.2.0031الكلمات المفتاحية:
Antimicrobial resistance، Bacterial infection، Heat stress، Phytogenic feed additives، Poultry، One Healthالملخص
Heat stress affects chickens by reducing feed intake, disrupting redox balance, weakening immune function, and damaging intestinal barriers. These effects increase the risk of enteric infections, complicate treatment decisions, and encourage empirical antimicrobial use. This review examines phytogenic solutions at the intersection of heat stress and infection, assessing whether their advantages support antimicrobial stewardship and One Health goals. Evidence is categorized as direct, proximal, or supportive, with quantitative comparisons extracted when study designs permit. Currently, the strongest evidence supports antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, barrier-protective, and pathogen-reducing effects. Evidence is considerably weaker for reduced antimicrobial use, lower abundance of resistance genes, reduced food-chain contamination, or limited environmental dissemination. Fermented Allium preparations are presented as an illustrative case from hot-climate production systems, not as proof of One Health benefit. We propose a staged evaluation framework: phytogenics should (i) demonstrate animal health and performance benefits; (ii) demonstrate reduced antimicrobial use under defined treatment protocols; (iii) quantify effects on resistance, food safety, and environmental burden; (iv) confirm these effects at commercial scale using standardized outcome reporting. Phytogenics are best positioned as preventive, adjunctive tools alongside climate management, diagnostics, vaccination, biosecurity, veterinary care, and necessary antimicrobial treatment. The objective is not to eliminate antibiotics but to remove unnecessary treatment without compromising bird welfare or clinical outcomes.
المراجع
1. World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, United Nations Environment Programme, World Organisation for Animal Health. One Health Joint Plan of Action (2022–2026). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022.
2. Mulchandani R, Wang Y, Gilbert M, Van Boeckel TP. Global trends in antimicrobial use in food-producing animals: 2020 to 2030. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023;3:e0001305. doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0001305.
3. Roth N, Käsbohrer A, Mayrhofer S, Zitz U, Hofacre C, Domig KJ. The application of antibiotics in broiler production and the resulting antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli: a global overview. Poult Sci. 2019;98:1791–1804. doi:10.3382/ps/pey539.
4. Lara LJ, Rostagno MH. Impact of heat stress on poultry production. Animals (Basel). 2013;3:356–369. doi:10.3390/ani3020356.
5. Wasti S, Sah N, Mishra B. Impact of heat stress on poultry health and performances, and potential mitigation strategies. Animals (Basel). 2020;10:1266. doi:10.3390/ani10081266.
6. Mangan M, Siwek M. Strategies to combat heat stress in poultry production—a review. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl). 2024;108:576–595. doi:10.1111/jpn.13916.
7. Rostagno MH. Effects of heat stress on the gut health of poultry. J Anim Sci. 2020;98:skaa090. doi:10.1093/jas/skaa090.
8. Burkholder KM, Thompson KL, Einstein ME, Applegate TJ, Patterson JA. Influence of stressors on normal intestinal microbiota, intestinal morphology, and susceptibility to Salmonella Enteritidis colonization in broilers. Poult Sci. 2008;87:1734–1741. doi:10.3382/ps.2008-00107.
9. Quinteiro-Filho WM, Gomes AVS, Pinheiro ML, Ribeiro A, Ferraz-de-Paula V, Astolfi-Ferreira CS, et al. Heat stress impairs performance and induces intestinal inflammation in broiler chickens infected with Salmonella Enteritidis. Avian Pathol. 2012;41:421–427. doi:10.1080/03079457.2012.709315.
10. Alhenaky A, Abdelqader A, Abuajamieh M, Al-Fataftah AR. The effect of heat stress on intestinal integrity and Salmonella invasion in broiler birds. J Therm Biol. 2017;70:9–14. doi:10.1016/j.jtherbio.2017.10.015.
11. Broom LJ, Kogut MH. The role of the gut microbiome in shaping the immune system of chickens. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2018;204:44–51. doi:10.1016/j.vetimm.2018.10.002.
12. Clavijo V, Vives Flórez MJ. The gastrointestinal microbiome and its association with the control of pathogens in broiler chicken production: a review. Poult Sci. 2018;97:1006–1021. doi:10.3382/ps/pex359.
13. Windisch W, Schedle K, Plitzner C, Kroismayr A. Use of phytogenic products as feed additives for swine and poultry. J Anim Sci. 2008;86:E140–E148. doi:10.2527/jas.2007-0459.
14. Gadde U, Kim WH, Oh ST, Lillehoj HS. Alternatives to antibiotics for maximizing growth performance and feed efficiency in poultry: a review. Anim Health Res Rev. 2017;18:26–45. doi:10.1017/S1466252316000207.
15. Lillehoj H, Liu Y, Calsamiglia S, Fernandez-Miyakawa ME, Chi F, Cravens RL, et al. Phytochemicals as antibiotic alternatives to promote growth and enhance host health. Vet Res. 2018;49:76. doi:10.1186/s13567-018-0562-6.
16. Abdelli N, Solà-Oriol D, Pérez JF. Phytogenic feed additives in poultry: achievements, prospective and challenges. Animals (Basel). 2021;11:3471. doi:10.3390/ani11123471.
17. Biswas S, Ahn JM, Kim IH. Assessing the potential of phytogenic feed additives: a comprehensive review on their effectiveness as a potent dietary enhancement for nonruminants in swine and poultry. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl). 2024;108:711–723. doi:10.1111/jpn.13922.
18. Aminullah N, Mostamand A, Zahir A, Mahaq O, Azizi MN. Phytogenic feed additives as alternatives to antibiotics in poultry production: a review. Vet World. 2025;18:141–154. doi:10.14202/vetworld.2025.141-154.
19. Saracila M, Panaite TD, Papuc CP, Criste RD. Heat stress in broiler chickens and the effect of dietary polyphenols, with special reference to willow (Salix spp.) bark supplements—a review. Antioxidants (Basel). 2021;10:686. doi:10.3390/antiox10050686.
20. Kikusato M, Xue G, Pastor A, Niewold TA, Toyomizu M. Effects of plant-derived isoquinoline alkaloids on growth performance and intestinal function of broiler chickens under heat stress. Poult Sci. 2021;100:957–963. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2020.11.050.
21. Shaukat A, Hanif S, Shukat R, Aleem MT, Shaukat I, Almutairi MH, et al. Immunological role of chlorogenic acid in broiler intestinal health under chronic heat stress. Poult Sci. 2025;104:105300. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2025.105300.
22. Yang B, Gao Y, Xi K, Wang H, Yan M, Sun H, et al. Effects of Ban Lian Zi Jin San on intestinal inflammation and barrier function of heat-stressed broilers. Poult Sci. 2024;103:103425. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2024.103425.
23. Abudabos AM, Alyemni AH, Dafalla YM, Khan RU. The effect of phytogenic feed additives to substitute in-feed antibiotics on growth traits and blood biochemical parameters in broiler chicks challenged with Salmonella Typhimurium. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016;23:24151–24157. doi:10.1007/s11356-016-7665-2.
24. Singh AK, Wang J, Patil PS, Subedi D, Mallavarapu B, Bhumanapalli S, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters as strategies to reduce Salmonella in meat-type poultry. Poult Sci. 2025;104:105640. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2025.105640.
25. Logue CM, De Cesare A, Tast-Lahti E, Chemaly M, Payen C, LeJeune J, et al. Salmonella spp. in poultry production: a review of the role of interventions along the production continuum. Adv Food Nutr Res. 2024;108:289–341. doi:10.1016/bs.afnr.2023.11.001.
26. Bakin BC, Stolte-Carroll K, Sigman J, Ritchie SM, Tillman GE, Bilanovic I, et al. A systematic review on preharvest interventions used to control Salmonella in poultry rearing in the United States. J Food Prot. 2025;88:100474. doi:10.1016/j.jfp.2025.100474.
27. Khairunnesa M, Kumar A, Wu SB, Akter S, Barekatain R, Palanisamy K, et al. Phytogenic feed additive mitigates necrotic enteritis-associated gut damage and performance loss in broilers. Poult Sci. 2026;105:106592. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2026.106592.
28. Hai PV, Van HTH, Chao NV, Khuong NDT, Le TTT, Anh LX, et al. Antimicrobial activity of chives and ginger extract on Escherichia coli and Salmonella spp. isolated from broiler chickens. Hue Univ J Sci Agric Rural Dev. 2019;128(3B). doi:10.26459/hueuni-jard.v128i3B.5310.
29. Hai PV, Hung PHS, Dung HT, Liem TN, Khuong NDT, Hoa NX. The dietary supplement efficiency of essential oil of chive (Allium macrostemon) on the productivity and health performance of broilers. CTU J Innov Sustain Dev. 2020;12:1–6. doi:10.22144/ctu.jen.2020.018.
30. Hai PV, Hung PHS, Dung HT, Duc LM, Khuong NDT, Liem TN. Effect of dietary supplementation of ethanol extract of chives and ginger on the productivity and health performance of broilers. Hue Univ J Sci Agric Rural Dev. 2020;129(3C). doi:10.26459/hueunijard.v129i3C.5881.
31. Hai PV, Phuong HTA, Hung PHS, Na TT, Lai NH, Khuong NDT, et al. Selection of Lactobacillus strains from native chicken feces for the fermentation of purple onion (Allium cepa L.) as an antibiotic alternative against Salmonella spp. in chickens. Open Vet J. 2024;14:3525–3538. doi:10.5455/OVJ.2024.v14.i12.35.
32. Hai PV, Anh LX, Hoa NX. Fermented chive (Allium schoenoprasum) with Lactobacillus plantarum: a potential antibiotic alternative feed additive for broilers challenged with Escherichia coli. Fermentation. 2025;11:277. doi:10.3390/fermentation11050277.
33. Hai PV, Hoa NX, Phuong HTA. Fermented purple onion (Allium cepa L.) and chive (Allium schoenoprasum) bulb extracts as antibiotic alternatives against toxin-carrying bacteria: in vitro and pathogenicity assessment in chickens. Open Vet J. 2025;15:2355–2364. doi:10.5455/OVJ.2025.v15.i6.8.
34. Nguyen KDT, Nguyen HX, Phan HV, Hoang CV. Reducing heat stress in yellow-feather Rilai chickens by a purple onion–Lactiplantibacillus plantarum synbiotic delivered via drinking water. J Res Vet Sci. 2026;6:137–145. doi:10.5455/JRVS.20260125083919.
35. Hoang TAP, Nguyen XH, Phan VH. Lactiplantibacillus plantarum-fermented shallot (Allium cepa L.) bulb in drinking water as a potential antibiotic alternative against Salmonella Pullorum infection in broilers. Vet Immunol Immunopathol. 2026;296:111112. doi:10.1016/j.vetimm.2026.111112.
36. Islam MA, Bose P, Rahman MZ, Muktaruzzaman M, Sultana P, Ahamed T, et al. A review of antimicrobial usage practice in livestock and poultry production and its consequences on human and animal health. J Adv Vet Anim Res. 2024;11:675–685. doi:10.5455/javar.2024.k817.
37. Abou-Jaoudeh C, Andary J, Abou-Khalil R. Antibiotic residues in poultry products and bacterial resistance: a review in developing countries. J Infect Public Health. 2024;17:102592. doi:10.1016/j.jiph.2024.102592.
38. Borda-Molina D, Seifert J, Camarinha-Silva A. Current perspectives of the chicken gastrointestinal tract and its microbiome. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2018;16:131–139. doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2018.03.002.
39. Kers JG, Velkers FC, Fischer EAJ, Hermes GDA, Stegeman JA, Smidt H. Host and environmental factors affecting the intestinal microbiota in chickens. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:235. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.00235.
40. Tiseo K, Huber L, Gilbert M, Robinson TP, Van Boeckel TP. Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals from 2017 to 2030. Antibiotics (Basel). 2020;9:918. doi:10.3390/antibiotics9120918.
41. Van Boeckel TP, Brower C, Gilbert M, Grenfell BT, Levin SA, Robinson TP, et al. Global trends in antimicrobial use in food animals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112:5649–5654. doi:10.1073/pnas.1503141112.
42. Marshall BM, Levy SB. Food animals and antimicrobials: impacts on human health. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2011;24:718–733. doi:10.1128/CMR.00002-11.
منشور
إصدار
القسم
الرخصة
الحقوق الفكرية (c) 2026 Phan Vu Hai (Author)
هذا العمل مرخص بموجب Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
