Figure 1
Sales report of antimicrobial active substances for food-producing animals of (tonnes).
Source: European Medicines Agency – ESVAC reports 2020, 2021, 2022.
Figure 2
Average consumption (in tonnes) of antimicrobial active substances in poultry production in EU countries in 2023–24 (European Sales and Use of Antimicrobials for Veterinary Medicine ESUAvet, 2023, 2024).
Table 1
Current trends in drug resistance among E. coli strains isolated from poultry in the years 2021–2025
| Type of strain/type of infection | Species of bird | Country | Most frequently detected resistance genes | Antibiotic resistance | Most effective antibiotics | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E. coli APEC/colibacillosis | Broiler chickens | Poland | nd | AMX, AMX + clavulanic acid, colistin, ENR, NEO, norfloxacin, spectinomycin, and STX | Colistin (84.64%), NEO (80.62%), AMX + clavulanic acid (73%) | Majewski et al. (2021) |
| E. coli APEC/colibacillosis | Laying hens, breeding hens, broiler chickens, turkey broilers | Poland | blaTEM, tetB, sul2, tetA, tetB, strA/strB, aphA1, floR, catA1, aadA | AMX, AMX + clavulanic acid, doxycycline, ENR, chloramphenicol | NEO | Stępień-Pyśniak et al. (2025) |
| STX | ||||||
| Pathogenic E. coli strains | Mallard, white-tailed eagle, common buzzard, Eurasian sparrow hawk, Eurasian tawny owl, mute swan, little bittern, little owl, short-eared owl, great spotted woodpecker, lesser spotted woodpecker, European green woodpecker, Bohemian waxwing, western capercaillie, grey heron, Eurasian golden oriole | Poland | sul2, blaTEM; tet(A), aphA1 | TET (50%), ciprofloxacin (46.8%), GEN (34.3%), AMP (28.1%) | Chloramphenicol | Nowaczek et al. (2021) |
| E. coli APEC/colibacillosis | Broilers, layers and breeder chickens | Spain | mcr-1, mcr-2, | colistin (58.3), β-lactams (99.1%), macrolides (99.2%), lincosamides (98.9%), TETs (38%) | nd | Monroy et al. (2025) |
| E. coli APEC/colibacillosis | Necropsied chickens | India | blaTEM | ENR (72.46%), levofloxacin (69.56%), ciprofloxacin (66.66%), AMX + clavulanic acid (63.77%), TET (59.42%) | Ceftriaxone + sulbactam (63.77) | Patel et al. (2024) |
| blaCTX-M-G9 g | AMP + sulbactam (65.22%) | |||||
| E. coli APEC/colibacillosis | Necropsied chickens | Brazil | nd | AMX (66.1%), ceftiofur (56.9%), norfloxacin (47.7%), TET (33.9%), ciprofloxacin (31.2%), FLO (25.7%), doxycycline (23.9%), ENR (22.9%) | GEN (97.1%), NEO (85.3%), ENR (77.1%) | Lúcio et al. (2025) |
| E. coli strains | Broiler meat | Nepal | nd | GEN (90.2%), TET (67.2%), AMP (54.1%) | Ciprofloxacin (93.4%), amikacin (98.4%) | Ranabhat et al. (2024) |
| APEC | Chicken samples | Algeria | AMP (97.96%), AMX + clavulanic acid (96.94%), nalidixic acid (94.90%), TET (90.82%), ciprofloxacin (79.59%), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (67.35%), kanamycin (61.22%) | Chloramphenicol (78.60%), GEN (79.60%), cefotaxime (82.70%) | Boulbair et al. (2025) | |
| APEC | Broilers, layers, broiler breeders | Ukraine | nd | AMX (78.4%), AMX + clavulanic acid (69.3%), doxycycline (58.3%), oxytetracycline (75.6%), flumequine (78.5%) ENR (55.9%) | Colistin (91.6%), GEN (85.6%), ceftiofur (63.9%), FLO (61.0%) | Nechypurenko et al. (2024) |
| E. coli | Broilers | Sweden | bla TEM -1B, bla TEM -1C | AMP 34.0%, sulfamethoxazole 32.1%, | Ciprofloxacin 92.7% | Davam et al. (2026) |
| dfrA1, dfrA5 | ||||||
| Nalidixic acid | ||||||
| tet(A) | ||||||
| sul2 | ||||||
| aadA1 | ||||||
| aph(3′)-Ia, aph(3′‘)-Ib | ||||||
| aph(6)-Id | Trimethoprim 28.4%, | 93.6% | ||||
| qnrS1 | ||||||
| gyrA (p.S83L) | TET 18.3% | |||||
| parC (p.S57T), parE (p.I355T) | ||||||
| APEC | Birds | Italy | nd | AMP (45%), nalidixic acid (45%), TET (43%), sulfonamide (41%), flumequine (33%) | Cefotaxime (100%) | Sgariglia et al. (2019) |
| Cefepime (100%) | ||||||
| Cefoxitin (98%) | ||||||
| Ceftazidime (98%) | ||||||
| APEC | Laying hens | China | tet(A), floR, sul2, aph(3′‘)-Ib, aph(6)-Id, bla TEM -1B, qnrS1 | TET (95.0%), | Colistin (100%) | Tian et al. (2025) |
| AMP (84.6%), FLO (80.0%), sulfisoxazole (80.0%), ceftiofur (73.1%) | ||||||
| AMX + clavulanic acid (95%) | ||||||
| APEC | Broiler breeder hens | USA | B-lactamase inhibitors (blaTEM), cephalosporins (blaCTX-M), aminoglycosides (aac3Vla, aph3IA, and aadA), TETs (tetA), sulfonamides (dfr7, sul1), quinolones (qnr), phenicols (cat1) | TET (28.6%) | STX 96.4% | Joseph et al. (2023) |
| Streptomycin (18%) | ||||||
| Kanamycin (14.3%) | ||||||
| GEN (7.1%) | ||||||
| E. coli | Broiler chickens | Canada | nd | Sulfisoxazole (57.3%) | Azithromycin (99.9%) | Romero-Barrios et al. (2020) |
| Streptomycin (51.6%)AMP (51.2%) | ||||||
| Ciprofloxacin (99.8%) | ||||||
| TET (46.1%) | ||||||
| Ceftriaxone (36.2%), cefoxitin (35.9%), AMX + clavulanic acid (35.8%), GEN (30.2%) | ||||||
| APEC | Birds | Iran | blaCTX-M-15, blaTEM-1A, blaVEB, and blaSHV | AMP (84.2%), STX (65.70%), | Imipenem (100%) | Ghorbani et al. (2022) |
| GEN (97.2%) | ||||||
| tetA, tetB, and tetC, | TET (62.80%), | |||||
| sul1 and sul2, dfrA1, | Cefoxitin (60.00%), | |||||
| Nalidixic acid (60.00%) | ||||||
| ereA, qnrA | ||||||
| E. coli strains | Broilers | Egypt | blaTEM, blaSHV, blaCTXM, mcr1, qnrA, qnrB, papC | AMP 97.8%, doxycycline 85.5%, chloramphenicol 80.9%, | Colistin sulphate 50.7% | Abdel-Rahman et al. (2023) |
| Ciprofloxacin 73.5%, danofloxacin 84.3%, fosfomycin 85.5%, | ||||||
| Levofloxacin 69.7%, | ||||||
| Nalidixic acid 92.2%, norfloxacin 73.2%, PEN 95%, streptomycin 82.5%, | ||||||
| TET 94.8%, | ||||||
| STX 88.5%, ENR 82.4%, | ||||||
| Cefotaxime 86.7%, imipenem 72.8%, AMX + clavulanate 89% | ||||||
| E. coli strains | Broiler poultry | China | nd | AMX (95.47%), AMP (95.08%), FLO (85.43%), | Ofloxacin (24.41%) | Liu et al. (2025a) |
| Chloramphenicol (84.06%), | ||||||
| TET (84.06%), cefotaxime (80.12%), cefazolin (85.43%) | ||||||
| GEN (36.81%) | ||||||
| APEC | Broiler and layer farms | Java | nd | AMX (66.7%), ENR (57.1%), streptomycin (52.4%), STXazole (52.4%), nalidixic acid (47.6%), oxytetracycline (47.6%), TET (42.9%), GEN (42.9%) | NEO (23.8%) | Timur et al. (2025) |
| Yogyakarta | ||||||
| Indonesia |
nd – not detected.
Table 2
Current trends in drug resistance among Campylobacter spp. strains isolated from poultry
| Type of strains | Type of sample | Number of samples | Country | Most frequently detected resistance genes | Resistance to antibiotics | Most effective antibiotics | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Campylobacter jejuni | Caecal samples from chickens | n = 108 | Australia | TetO, bla OXA, gyrA | Ciprofloxacin (14.8%), nalidixic acid (14.8%), TET (22.2%) | FLO (100%), ERY (99.1%), GEN (100%), azithromycin (99.1%), clindamycin (99.1%), telithromycin (99.1%) | Abraham et al. (2020) |
| Campylobacter coli | Caecal samples from chickens | n = 96 | Australia | TetO, bla OXA, gyrA | TET (22.22%) | FLO (100%), ERY (94.8%), ciprofloxacin (94.8%), nalidixic acid (94.8%), GEN (100%), TET (96.9%), azithromycin (94.8%), clindamycin (94.8%), telithromycin (95.8%), | Abraham et al. (2020) |
| C. jejuni | Chickens | n = 45 | China | GyrA, TetO, TetA, ermB | Ciprofloxacin (66.7%), nalidixic acid (80%), ERY (62.2%), azithromycin (60%), TET (71.1%), clindamycin (62.2%), GEN (68,9%) | FLO (93.3%) | Tang et al. (2020) |
| C. coli | Chicken | n = 25 | China | GyrA, TetO, tetA, ermB | Ciprofloxacin (100%), nalidixic acid (92%), ERY (76%), azithromycin (64%), TET (88%), clindamycin (64%), GEN (60%) | FLO (92%) | Tang et al. (2020) |
| C. jejuni | Carcass, chicken cuts, cloacal swabs, pre-chiller water | n = 54 | Brazil | GyrA, tetO | Ciprofloxacin (94.4%), nalidixic acid (94.4%), ERY (51.9-53.7%)a, TET (51.9-57.4%)a | GEN (100%), chloramphenicol (100%) | Paravisi et al. (2020) |
| Campylobacter jejuni | Chicken meat samples | n = 75 | Chile | bla OXA-61, lnuC, gyrA, tet(O) | Ciprofloxacin (37.3%), TET (20%) | ERY (100%), GEN (100%) | Concha-Toloza et al. (2023) |
| Campylobacter coli | Chicken meat samples | n = 43 | Chile | aph(3’)-III, aadE-Cc, cfrC, bla OXA-61, gyrA,tetO | Ciprofloxacin (55.8%), ERY (16.3%), TET (4.7%) | GEN (100%) | Concha-Toloza et al. (2023) |
| C. jejuni | retail raw chicken samples, Farm samples: litter, faeces, cloacal swabs | n = 59 | United States | GyrA, tetOaph(3′)-IIIa, bla OXA-184, bla OXA-61 | nalidixic acid (49.2%) | ERY (83.1%) Ciprofloxacin (84.7%), GEN (93.2%), TET (76.3%), clindamycin (83.1%) | Poudel et al. (2022) |
| C. lari | Retail raw chicken samples, farm samples: litter, faeces, cloacal swabs | n = 7 | United States | bla OXA-61 | Nalidixic acid (71.4%), ciprofloxacin (57.1%), TET (57.1%) | ERY (85.3%), GEN (85.3%), azithromycin (85.3%) | Poudel et al. (2022) |
| Campylobacter spp. | Chicken faeces | n = 26 | Ukraine | nd | Ciprofloxacin (57.7%), ERY (73%), TET (88.5%) | Shchur et al. (2023) | |
| Campylobacter spp. | Poultry caecal swabs | n = 36 | Iraq | nd | Nalidixic acid (100%), ciprofloxacin (100%) , TET (88.8%), AMP (83.3%), sulfa/trimethoprim (80.5%), ERY (50%), ceftriaxone (50%) | GEN (69.5%), chloramphenicol (77.8%), AMX/clavulanic acid (72.3%) | Shakir et al. (2021) |
| C. jejuni | Swab samples from broiler carcasses | n = 525 | Poland | nd | Ciprofloxacin (92.0%), nalidixic acid (90.3%), TET (64.8%) | ERY (98.9%), GEN (98.7%), streptomycin (79.8%) | Wieczorek et al. (2020) |
| C. coli | Swab samples from broiler carcasses | n = 738 | Poland | nd | Ciprofloxacin (93.9%), nalidixic acid (93.8%), TET (75.3%) | ERY (93.6%), GEN (99.6%), streptomycin (72.9%) | Wieczorek et al. (2020) |
| C. jejuni | Cloacal swabs from laying hens | n = 76 | Germany | nd | Ciprofloxacin (81.6%), nalidixic acid ( 86.9%), enrofloksacin (88.2%), sulfa/trimethoprim (86.9%) | ERY (98.7%), gentamycin (100%), TET (94.7%), azithromycin (100%), chloramphenicol (98.7%) | Casalino et al. (2022) |
| C. coli | Cloacal swabs from laying hens | n = 63 | Germany | nd | Ciprofloxacin (79.4%), nalidixic acid (82.5%), ENR (84.1%), TET (60.3%) | ERY (100%), GEN (100%), azithromycin (98.5%), chloramphenicol (100%), sulfa/trimethoprim (90.5%), | Casalino et al. (2022) |
aDepending on the criteria (CLSI or EUCAST).
Table 3
Current trends in drug resistance among Listeria spp. strains isolated from poultry
| Type of strain/type of infection | Species of bird | Country | Most frequently detected resistance genes | Antibiotic resistance | Most effective antibiotics | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L. monocytogenes | Chicken and turkey | Spain | nd | Oxacillin (98.5%), cefotaxime (97.5%), cefoxitin (93%), cefepime (97.3%) | Chloramphenicol (97.5%), AMP (97.5%), TET (∼94%), gentamycin (∼89%) | Panera-Martínez et al. (2022) |
| L. mobocytogenes, L. innocua, L. welshimeri | Chicken, duck, quail, turkey | Spain | nd | Cefotaxime (100%), oxacillin (100%) | Vancomycin (100%), SXT (98.31%), AMP (96.62) | Martinez-Laorden et al. (2024) |
| L. monocytogenes | Poultry meats: goose, chicken, pigeon, duck | China | nd | Cefoxitin (100%), oxacillin (17.7%), clindamycin (17.7%) | STX(SXT 100%), GEN (100%), AMP (100%), chloramphenicol (100%), ciprofloxacin (100%) | Chen et al. (2024) |
| L. monocytogenes L. welshimeri L. innocu | Broiler chickens | Zambia | nd | Clindamycin (61%), TET (30%), ERY (13%) | GEN (100%), chloramphenicol (100%), levofloxacin (100%) | Mpundu et al. (2022 |
| L. monocytogenes | Chicken meat | Indonesia | nd | AMX + sulbactam (100%), STX (100%), AMP (100%), | Sefotaxime (100%), meropenem (66.67%) | Aksono et al. (2020) |
| L. monocytogenes | Broiler meat | Egypt | nd | PEN (100%), AMP (100%), TET (88.8%), AMX/clavulanic acid (55.5%), ERY (66.6%) | STX (88.8%), streptomycin (77.7%), chloramphenicol (66.6%) | Aziz & Mohamed (2020) |
nd – not detected.
Table 4
Antimicrobial resistance in Staphylococcus and Mammaliicoccus bacteria isolated from poultry
| Country | Years | Type of material | Number of flocks/samples | Isolated strains | Phenotypic resistance | Resistance genes | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CoPS | CoNS | |||||||
| Poland | 2016–2017 | Broiler chickens, turkeys –internal organs | 173 flocks | S. cohnii, S. saprophyticus, S. epidermidis, S. xylosus, M. lentus, M. sciuri, S. chromogenes, S. simulans, S. haemolyticus, S. hominis | TET 59%, PEN G 54%, AMP 49.6%, AMX 21.3%, GEN 25.2%, cefoxitin 16.5%, ERY 14.1%, AMX/clavulanic acid 7.9%, STX 7.1%, clindamycin 5.5%, chloramphenicol 3.1% | tetK, tetL, tetM, tetO, ermA, ermB, aac (6′)-Ie, aph (2″)-Ia, msr, A/B, Cfr, BlaZ, mecA 27.5% | Pyzik et al. (2019) | |
| Hungary | 2022–2023 | Layers, breeding flocks, broilers | 8 flocks, 7 flocks, 8 flocks | S. aureus, n = 227 | TIA 82.8%, doxycycline 74.4%, ENR 68.7%, STX 60.2%, AMX 58.6%, ENR 55.1%, AMX/clavulanic acid 35.7% | No data | Szabó et al. (2025) | |
| 2022–2023 | Turkeys | 7 breeding farms, 14 broiler farms | S. aureus n = 166 | TIA 90.4%, doxycycline 79.5%, AMX 63,3%, AMX/clavulanic acid 60.8%, tylosin 41%, vancomycin 18.1% | No data | Kovács et al. (2025) | ||
| Czechia | 2017–2018 | Turkey and chicken meat | 33 flocks | S. aureus | MRSA 36.4% | No data | Tegegne et al. (2021) | |
| Belgium | 2023 | Chicken broilers | 96 flocks | MRSA n = 1 | MRSA 1% | No data | EFSA (2022, 2023) | |
| Commercial layers | 33 flocks | nd | nd | nd | nd | |||
| Meat turkeys | 27 flocks | MRSA n = 5 | MRSA 18.5% | |||||
| Germany | 2022 | Chicken broilers – carcasses | — | MRSA n = 60 | TET 96.7%, clindamycin 95%, trimethoprim 88.3%, ERY 85%, TIA 76.7%, quinupristin/dalfopristin 75%, GEN 11.7%, ciprofloxacin 10%, streptomycin 8.3%, rifampicin 1.7%, sulfamethoxazole 1.7%, chloramphenicol 0% | No data | ||
| Meat turkeys – carcasses | MRSA n = 219 | TET 92.2%, clindamycin 80.8%, trimethoprim 77.6%, ERY 79.5%, TIA 79%, quinupristin/dalfopristin 69.4%, GEN 6.4%, ciprofloxacin 38.4%, streptomycin 9.1%, rifampicin 0.5%, sulfamethoxazole 1.8%, kanamycin 5.9%, chloramphenicol 0% | No data | |||||
| Autonomous Province of Vojvodina in Serbia | 2021 | Chicken broilers – meat | S. aureus n = 34 | Cloxacillin 100%, AMX 100%, AMX/clavulanic acid 100%, ERY 82.35%, chloramphenicol 61.77%, STX 38.24%, TET 34%, GEN 23.53% | No data | Lika et al. (2021) | ||
| Portugal | 2020 | Swabs from slaughterhouses | 100 quails; 50 commercial chickens; 70 homebred chickens | Methicillin-resistant, M. lentus, S. urealyticus, M. sciuri, S. haemolyticus | 73 (97.3%) isolates MDR (resistant to at least 3 or more classes of antibiotics): 11 strains of S. lentus, 21 S. urealyticus, 14 S. sciuri, and 3 S. haemolyticus with phenotypic resistance to PEN; 40% of isolates were resistant to aminoglycosides. All strains of S. lentus and S. urealyticus, 14 M. sciuri and 2 S. haemolyticus resistant to macrolides and lincosamides.All strains of S. urealyticus, S. sciuri ,and S. haemolyticus and 25 (69.4%) of S. lentus resistant to TET.No resistance to vancomycin | - mecA, - aph(3)-IIIa, ant(4)-Ia, -ermA, -ermB, -ermC, -mphC, -tetK, -tetL, -tetM, -tetO, - cat p194 in one S. lentus isolate, -dfrK, -dfrD, -cfr one M. sciuri strain | Silva et al. (2022) | |
| Iran | 2023 | 523 samples of meat and edible viscera from broiler chickens | Thigh and breast meat, liver, stomach, heart, shank | S. aureus n = 267 | TET (94.37%), AMP (88.73%), PEN (71.83%). | -mecA 53.2% | Seyedeh Mozhgan et al. (2025) | |
| Pakistan – Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province | 2017 | 100 small-intestinal samples from broiler chickens | 50 samples from farm chickens, 50 samples from household chickens | S. carnosus, S. xylosus, S. cohnii S. lentus, S. saprophyticus, S. simulans, S. gallinarum, S. chromogenes, S. warneri. | Over 50% isolates resistant to four antimicrobials, including, ERY 66.7% and 69.8%, clindamycin 68.6% and 72.1%, TET 66.7% and 65.1% and tygecycline 74.5% and 58.1%, for breeding and homebred chickens, respectively. | -mecA 15.8%, -ermC, -ermA, -tet K, -tetM, -aacA-aphD. | Syed et al. (2020) | |
| Egypt | 2020 | 396 samples from broiler chickens | Samples from broiler farms, runs, hatcheries, slaughterhouses | S. aureus (n = 40) | nd | Clindamycin (97.5%), ERY (95%), TET (90%), PEN and oxacillin (82.5%), 95% strains MRSA, | No data | Ahmed et al. (2021) |
| Algeria | 2011–2018 | 4,248 nasal swabs from birds | 840 poultry farms, breeding hens (n = 654 samples), layer hens (n = 838 samples), chicken broilers (n = 1,614), turkeys (n = 1,142) | S. aureus, n = 1,276 | nd | MRSA: 100% MRSA isolates (n = 252) resistant to PEN G, AMX/clavulanic acid, oxacillin, and cefoxitin. TET (82.5%). ERY (70.6%). Clindamycin (68.6%), ciprofloxacin (50%). All MRSA isolates susceptible to vancomycin, mupirocin and rifampicin, except 2 isolates from turkeys, which were resistant to rifampicin. About 82.3% of strains were susceptible to chloramphenicol, 76.1% to GEN, 75.8% to streptomycin, 72.6% to STX and 58.73% to kanamycin. 50% susceptible to ciprofloxacin. All isolates were MDR. | No data | Benrabia et al. (2020) |
| Nigeria | June 2018 to April 2019 | Frozen turkey samples Broiler chickens, n = 368 | MRSA n = 110 | PEN G 110 (100%), clarithromycin 53 (48.2%), doxycycline 58 (52.7%), minocycline 53 (48.2%), TET 64 (58.2%), ciprofloxacin 71 (64.6%), levofloxacin 84 (76.4%), moxifloxacin 88 (80%), clindamycin 62 (56.4%), sulfonamides 53 (48.2%), trimethoprim 71 (64.6%) and rifampicin 103 (93.6%), ceftaroline 54 (49.1%), GEN 51 (46.4%), amikacin 64 (58.2%), kanamycin 56 (50.9%), nitrofurantoin 100 (90.9%), STX 58 (52.7%), chloramphenicol 78 (70.9%), linezolid 83 (75.5%). All isolates were susceptible to vancomycin, oritavancin, teicoplanin, daptomycin, and tedizolid. 89 (80.9%) MDR isolates in total | No data | Igbinosa et al. (2023) | ||
| 2017 | Faecal samples from healthy broiler chickens | Four broiler chicken farms | 14 strains of S. epidermidis, S. saprophyticus, M. sciuri | M. sciuri PEN 87.5%. M sciuri cefoxitin 37.5% | -mecA, -blaZ | Jesumirhewe et al. (2024) | ||
| South Africa | 2019 | 384 samples from poultry farms, transport, abattoir, and retail outlets | S. aureus n = 120: farm (40 strains), transport (15 strains), abattoir (30 strains), retail outlet (35 strains) | TET (61.67%), PEN G (55.83%), ERY (54.17%), clindamycin (43.33%), doxycycline (36.67%), AMP (34.17%), moxifloxacin (30.83%), amikacin (30.83%), STX(30.00%), levofloxacin (23.33%). All isolates were 100% susceptible to tigecycline, teicoplanin, vancomycin, nitrofurantoin, chloramphenicol, and linezolid. Mdr 39.17% | Amoako et al. (2020) | |||
| Ethiopia | 2021 | 222 samples: 101 cloacal swabs, 90 tracheal swabs, 17 pooled litter swabs | Broiler chickens | 40 S. aureus strains | 11 strains of S. hyicus 13 strains of other CoNS species | PEN G (96.9%), TET (78.1%), AMX 65.6%, ERY 65.6%. Most isolates were highly susceptible to ciprofloxacin (95.3%). SFX (85.9%) 95.3% resistant to three or more drugs | No data | Abunna et al. (2022) |
| USA | 2010 | Retail chicken and turkey broiler carcasses | 114 samples from chicken broilers and 53 from turkeys | 168 Staphylococcus aureus isolates (101 from chickens and 67 from turkeys) | 12 MRSA isolates (7.1%), AMP (94.6%), TET (72%). PEN (70.8%). doxycycline (62.5%). oxacillin with 2% NaCl (47.6%). azithromycin (44.6%). ERY (44.6%). vancomycin (36.8%). cyprofloxacin (32.1%). cefoxitin with 2% NaCl (31%). GEN (25.6%). kanamycin (26.8%). clindamycin (20.8%). rifampicin (14.9%). STX. chloramphenicol (5.4%). | mecA 1.8% | Abdalrahman et al. (2015) | |
| Canada | 2022–2024 | Air samples from chicken barns, chickens aged 7–15 weeks, and layers from 44 to 64 weeks | 15 chicken barns | S. equorum n = 7, S. shinii n = 5, S. cohnii n = 1, S. pseudoxylosus n = 1, S. gallinarum n = 1 | LIN 73.3%,, TET 66.7%,, streptomycin 33.3%,, ERY 20%,, GEN 6.25%. All isolates susceptible to ciprofloxacin, chloramphenicol, daptomycin, nitrofurantoin, linezolid, PEN, synercid, vancomycin, and tigecycline., 40% of isolates were MDR | tetk 66.7%, LnuA 66.7%, mphC 66.7%, str 33.3%, msrA 20%, fosD 13.1%, aac (6′)-aph (2′‘) 6.67%, fusF 6.7% | Ghaffar et al. (2025) | |
| Brazil | Chicken meat samples | S. aureus | ERY 100%, GEN 100%, clindamycin 100%, doxycycline 100%, TET 100% | norC, tet, nora, blaZ. | da Silva et al. (2025) | |||
Table 5
Percentage of MDR Salmonella, the most common antimicrobial resistance, and the most prevalent Salmonella serovars in different poultry sectors from selected countries
| Poultry sector | Country | MDR Salmonella prevalence (%) | Common resistance | Reference | Dominant Salmonella serovar (%) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Broiler chickens | EU | 35.1–43% | Ciprofloxacin, sulfonamides, TET | European Food Safety Authority, & European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (2025a, 2025b) | Infantis (57.9%) | EFSA & ECDC (2024) |
| China | 61.6–70.6% | Sulfisoxazole, nalidixic acid, TET | Wang et al. (2024); Liu et al. (2025b) | Enteritidis (34.3%–37.5%) | Wang et al. (2024); Liu et al. (2025b) | |
| USA | 47.4% | TET, sulfamethoxazole-sulfisoxazole, ciprofloxacin | Food and Drug Administration (2026) | Kentucky (nd) | Obe et al. (2023) | |
| Egypt | 100% | Ceftazidime, cefepime, and ERY | Salem et al. (2025) | Kentucky (52.6%) | Salem et al. (2025) | |
| Brazil | 50.7–77.3% | Ciprofloxacin | Rau et al. (2021) | Heidelberg (37.7%–54.6%) | Rau et al. (2021) | |
| Thailand | 29.1% | Doxycycline, colistin | Noenchat et al. (2023) | Enteritidis (73.36%) | Noenchat et al. (2023) | |
| Japan | 0% | Not detected | Noenchat et al. (2023) | Schwarzengrund (100%) | Noenchat et al. (2023) | |
| Laying hens | Europe | 6.0–7.5% | Ciprofloxacin, sulfonamides, TET | European Food Safety Authority, & European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (2025a, 2025b) | Enteritidis (38.5%) | EFSA & ECDC, 2024 |
| China | 5.1% | Sulfisoxazole, nalidixic acid, TET | Wang et al. (2024) | Newport (51.2%) | Wang et al. (2024) | |
| Egypt | 100% | NEO, nalidixic acid, cefoxitin | Elsayed et al. (2024) | Enteritidis (nd) | Elsayed et al. (2024) | |
| Brazil | 51.1% | Sulfamethoxazole, sulfonamides, ceftiofur | Moraes et al. (2024) | Agona (31.1%) | Moraes et al. (2024) | |
| Turkey | Europe | 22.9–38,9% | Ciprofloxacin, AMP, TET | European Food Safety Authority, & European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (2025a) | Agona (46.1%) | EFSA & ECDC, 2024 |
| USA | 16.2% | TET, sulfamethoxazole-sulfisoxazole, AMP | FDA, 2026 | Reading (11.3%) | Cason et al. (2024) | |
| Ducks | China | 97.3% | AMP, TET, ciprofloxacin | Chu et al. (2024) | Indiana (29.0%), Typhimurium (30.15%) | Chu et al. (2024); Song et al. (2024) |
Table 6
Percentage of Salmonella isolates resistant to selected antimicrobials isolated from poultry and tested in the harmonized AMR monitoring in Europe (https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/microstrategy/dashboard-antimicrobial-resistance)
| Antimicrobial | AMP | Ciprofloxacin | Colistin | TET | Cefotaxime | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 2022 | 2024 | 2022 | 2024 | 2022 | 2024 | 2022 | 2024 | 2022 | 2024 |
| Broilers | 19% | 17% | 55% | 50% | 4% | 4% | 40% | 32% | 1% | 1% |
| Laying hens | 5% | 5% | 25% | 22% | 5% | 7% | 9% | 7% | 0% | 0% |
| Turkeys | 50% | 28% | 58% | 33% | 0% | 1% | 41% | 26% | 2% | 0% |
Table 7
Summary of antimicrobial resistance characteristics of poultry-derived E. rhusiopathiae isolates
| Country | Number of isolates | Source of isolation; year of isolate collection | Serotypes – % distribution | Antimicrobial resistance (%) | MDR frequency | Detected resistance genes and MGEs containing resistance genes | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poland | 60 | Domestic geese (n = 55) and ducks (n = 5); 2019–2021 | 5–38.3%; 1b – 28.3%; 8–15.0% 2–10% others – 8.3% | TET 85.0%; ENR 80.0%; ERY 3.3%; LIN 16.7%; TIA 15%; PEN, AMP and AMX 0%; FLO 0%; intrinsic resistance to aminoglycosides (GEN, NEO) and STX | 16.7% (mainly serotype 8) | tetM, lnuB, lsaE, ant(6)-Ia, spw, erm47; mutated genes gyrA and parB; Tn916 (18 kb); ICEEr1023 (130 kb); ICEEr1012 (74 kb); GI_Er147 (98 kb), prophage φEr670 (53 kb) | Dec et al. (2024a); Dec et al. (2024b); Dec et al. (2026) |
| Poland | 47 | Domestic geese (n = 47); 2008–2018 | 1b – 55.3%; 2–27.7%; 5–17% | ENR 76.6%; TET – 63.8%; ERY 0%; AMX 0%; | 0% | tetM, mutated gene gyrA; | Bobrek & Gaweł (2023) |
| Hungary | 38 | Domestic geese (n = 32), ducks (n = 2) and turkeys (n = 4); 2024 | ND | TET 10.5%; ENR 2.6%; LIN 2.6%; TYL 7.9%; TIA 7.9%; FLO 5.3%; PEN and AMX 0% | ND | tetM, tetT, erm47; Tn6009, ISErh6 | Kerek et al., 2025 |
TET – tetracycline; ENR – enrofloxacin; ERY – erythromycin; LIN – lincomycin; TIA – tiamulin; PEN – penicillin; AMP – ampicillin; AMX – amoxicillin; GEN – gentamicin; NEO – neomycin; FLO – florfenicol; STX – trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole; ND – not determined.
Table 8
Antimicrobial resistance in Riemerella spp. bacteria isolated from poultry
| Type of strains | Type of sample | Number of samples | Country | Most frequently detected resistance genes | Resistance to antibiotics | Most effective antibiotics | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R. anatipestifera | Duck brain and liver | n = 74 | China | tetX, ermF, floR, bla TEM | GEN (77%), ENR (73%), kanamycin (62.2%), streptomycin (58.1%) | Ceftriaxone (100%) ceftiofur (98.6%) FLO (64.9%) | Lyu et al. (2023) |
| R. anatipestifera | Duck brain, chicken embryos | n = 88 | China | tetX, floR, ermF, qnrS rmtB | Polymyxin B (97%), amikacin (91%), kanamycin (90%), ciprofloxacin (90%), ENR (89%), TET (80%), doxycycline (75%), GEN (74%), cefotaxime (60%), ceftazidime (55%), ceftiofur (53%), chloramphenicol (47%), FLO (55%) | Rifampicin (78%) | Yan et al. (2026) |
| R. anatipestifera | Duck brain | n = 51 | China | ranA, ranB, aadS, ermF, floR, tetX, tetX6, tetX, tetQ, mef, ereD, bla OXA-209 | GEN (100%), kanamycin (100%), streptomycin (100%), NEO (100%), LIN (94%), tobramycin (94%), polymyxin B (98%), azithromycin (78%), norfloxacin (55%), ENR (45%), methicillin (88%) | Levofloxacin (90.2%), ciprofloxacin (90.2%), cefotaxime (90%), cefepime (90%) | Xihui et al. (2023) |
| R. anatipestifera | Geese ducks | n = 157 | China | tetX, tetX2, tetB(P), tetO, tetS, tetT, tetM, tetW, tet30, tet35, tet41, tetB(46), tetA(60), tetB(60), tetA(58), tetX3, tetX4, tetX5, tetX6, vanH_in_vanA_cl, vanH_in_vanF_cl, vanZ_in_vanA_cl, vanE, vanR_in_vanE_cl, vanR_in_vanF_cl, vanG, vanT_in_vanG_cl, vanS_in_vanC_cl, vanS_in_vanL_cl, vanS_in_vanN_cl, ermE, ermF, ermR, ermX, erm(35), erm(47), ereD, bla GOB-5 , bla GOB-12 , bla OXA-209 , bla OXA-464 , vatB, vatE, vatF vatH, aac(3)-Ig, aac(3)-Ic, aadS, mcr-8.1, bcrA, bacA, pgpB, arr-1, dfrA36, dfrA38, blaTLA-1, blaVEB-10, floR, sul4, lsaE, lsaC, lnuG, optrA, cfrA, cfrB, poxtA, sat-4, fosB2, salA, catB8 | AMP (47.77%), kanamycin (98.73%), amikacin (98.09%), GEN (98.09%), streptomycin (94.91%), TET (62.42%), norfloxacin (78.34%), ciprofloxacin (68.15%), lomefloxacin (81.53%), STX (57.33%), trimethoprim (59.87%), polymyxin b (61.78%), clindamycin (82.8%) | Cephalothin (93.63%), ceftriaxone (98.73%), ceftazidime (92.99%), cefepime (95.54%), spectinomycin (95.54%), chloramphenicol (92%), FLO (98.73%), ERY (73.25%), azithromycin (86.62%), sulfafurazole (94.9%), rifampicin (75.16%) | Dong et al. (2024) |
| R. anatipestifera | Brain, heart, lungs, liver, blood from ducks | n = 69 | Vietnam | nd | Nalidixic acid (97.1%), norfloxacin (94.2%), ERY (89.9%), kanamycin (81.1%), streptomycin (78.3%), ciprofloxacin (72.5%), TET (68.1%), NEO (56.5%), STX (53.6%), PEN (50.7%), GEN (49.3%), oxacilin (49.3%), amikacin (30.4%) | AMX/clavulanic acid (100%), imipenem (100%) FLO (91.3%), cefoperazone (89.9%), piperacillin (89.9%), ceftazidime (89.9%), cefepime (87%), cephalecin (87%), doxycycline (87%), cephalothin (78.3%), ceftriaxone (72.5%), ofloxacin (72.5%) | Vo et al. (2022) |
| R. anatipestifera | Trachea, lungs, brain, infraorbital sinus, hock joint from turkeys, chickens, geese, and ducks | n = 24 | Poland | nd | Amikacin (100%), streptomycin (100%), spectinomycin (62.5%), clindamycin (91.6%), ERY (95.8%), doxycycline (91.6%), ENR (100%), chloramphenicol (95.7%) | AMP (75%)b, PEN (66%)b, cephalexin (95.8%)b, ceftazidime (95.8%)b, cefuroxime (95.8%)b, STX (83.3%)b | Tyc et al. (2026) |
nd – not detected.
Table 9
Experimental phage therapies in poultry
| Poultry species | Country | Type of phage | Host pathogens | Form of application | Scope of use (therapy, prophylaxis, other) | Effect on bacteria | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Broiler chickens | Thailand | vB_SenS_KP001 vB_SenS_KP005, vB_SenS_WP110 | S. Anatum, S. Kentucky | Phage cocktail, final concentration 7 log PFU/ml, 1 l of 1010 PFU/ml added to 1,000 l of drinking water 3 times (4, 13, 16 days of grow-out) | Prophylaxis and other, i.e. elimination of bacteria from digestive tract | From 0 to 17 days of experiment total elimination of Salmonella in cloacal samples (0% prevalence) | Pelyuntha et al. (2024) |
| Broiler chickens | China | vB_SalP_LDW16 | S. Enteritidis, S. Pullorum, S. Typhimurium | Application of 100 µl of phage at 106 PFU/ml with feed | Prophylaxis and other, i.e. elimination of bacteria from digestive tract | Prevention of Salmonella proliferation in vivo; survival rate after S. Enteritidis challenge was 100% after 1 week; all tissues and organs in the phage treatment group and phage control group could develop normally | Cao et al. (2022) |
| 7-days-old broiler chickens | Poland | vB_SenM-2 vB_Sen-TO17 | S. Typhimurium | Phage cocktail for 14 days, 1 ml of phage suspension of 2 × 109 PFU/ml 1 × 109 PFU/ml of each phage per os | Therapy against experimental challenge with S. Typhimurium | Enrichment of natural intestinal microbiome in birds; early administration of phages (1 day after infection) completely eliminated bacteria, application of phages 2 days after infection only partially eliminated bacteria | Kosznik-Kwaśnicka et al. (2022) |
| 7-dayS-old, Salmonella-free ROSS 308 broiler chickens | Poland | UPWr_S1, S2, S4 | S. Enteritidis A28 | Phage cocktail UPWr_S1, UPWr_S3, UPWr_S4, inoculated with a pool of 1 × 107 PFU/ml of each phage at 1, 4, 7, 10 and 13 days post-infection | Therapy against experimental challenge with S. Enteritidis | Effectively reduced the number of organs infected with Salmonella and the pathogen load in internal organs, e.g. spleen, liver, bursa of Fabricius, and caecal tonsils. | Kuźmińska- Bajor et al., 2023 |
| 1-day-old female SPF White Leghorn chicks | China | Salmonella virulent phage PLL1; nonproductive phage F118P13 | S. Typhimurium ST149, S. Enteritidis SE3377 | Phage cocktail 0.5 × 108 PFU/ml applied orally at 8 h, 32 h, 54 h after challenge | Therapeutic effect against S. Typhimurium ST149 post-infection | 100% survival of chicks after infection; significant decrease in concentration of S. Typhimurium strains in spleen and bursa | Hao et al. (2023) |
| 1-day-old chickens | India | vB_EcoS_PJ16 | E. coli APEC-P02 | Application of phage orally at 2, 7, 14 or 2, 3, 4, 5 days of age 1.12 × 1010 PFU/ml | Therapeutic and prophylactic effect against experimental challenge with E. coli APEC P02 strain | 20% reduction in mortality compared to infected untreated control group; significantly higher weight gain in birds treated with phages | Jhandai et al. (2024 |
| )14-days-old male and female Ross 308 broiler chickens | Poland | UPWr_E1 UPWr_E2 UPWr_E3 UPWr_E4 | E. coli | Application of 4-phage cocktail 108–109 PFU/ml to litter for 4 weeks | Preventive effect (E. coli elimination); improved production parameters and performance | Significant reduction in total E. coli by 3.2 log10 CFU/g in litter, liver, caecal contents, faeces | Kuźmińska-Bajor et al. (2025) |
| Chicken meat | Germany | vB_Eco_LmqsKl31-21, vB_Eco_LmqsKl33-12, vB_Sty-LmqsSP6 | E. coli 3981/1/22, E. coli 3617/1/22, Salmonella LT2 | Application of phage cocktail directly to raw chicken fillets | E. coli and Salmonella food contamination control | Maximum reduction of 1.56 log10 CFU/ml of Salmonella BfR 20-SA00418 and 1.48 log10 CFU/ml of E. coli 19/302/1/A after 72 h | Berhilevych et al. (2026) |
| 1-day-old chickens (Leghorn) | Kazakhstan | 10 lytic E. coli bacteriophages belonging to different phylogroups (B1, B2, and D) | E. coli APEC | Intraperitoneal injection of cocktail of 10 E. coli phages titre 108 pfu/ml | Therapeutic effect | 100% survival of chickens infected with APEC strains | Alexyuk et al. (2024) |
| 1-day-old Ross 308 broilers | Iraq | E. coli strains | Application of E. coli bacteriophage titres 3.2 × 108 PFU/g through feeding | Prophylactic effect; improved production parameters | Higher gut Lactobacillus and reduced coliform counts; significant (P < 0.05) increase in body weight, weight gain, feed consumption, and feed conversion | Aljuhaishi & Albawi (2024) | |
| Broiler chickens 1 week old | Australia | PH5, PH8, PH11, PH13, PH18, and PH19 (Farm B) | C. jejuni NCTC 12662, C. jejuni NC 3142, C. coli NC 2934 | 3 ml of phage cocktail, final concentration 107 PFU/ml by oral gavage in water | Prophylaxis and elimination of bacteria from digestive tract | Decrease in intestinal Campylobacter in caecum by 1–3 log10 CFU/g in market-ready chickens | Chinivasagam et al. (2020) |
| 25-dayS-old Ross 308 chickens | Germany | Phage NCTC 12673 phage vB_CcM-LmqsCPL1/1 | C. jejuni NCTC 12662, C. coli NCTC 12667 | Phage cocktails via drinking water | Prophylaxis and elimination of bacteria from digestive tract | Significant reductions of Campylobacter strains up to 1.1 log10 CFU/ml in faecal samples 1 day after dosing | Bogun et al. (2024) |
| 38-dayS-old broiler chickens | Italy | Phages: Φ7-izsam, Φ16-izsam | C. jejuni 252 gM/12 A | Application of phages via oral gavage φ16-izsam (107–108 PFU/ml) | Preventive effect on Campylobacter | Reduction in total bacterial contamination by up to 2 log10 | D’Angelantonio et al. (2021) |
| Meat samples from broiler chickens | China | phage CP6 | C. jejuni, C. coli | phage suspension (107–109 PFU/g) dropped onto chicken meat | Prevented Campylobacter contamination of chicken breast meat | Reduction in number of live Campylobacter bacteria by 1.02–1.23 log after 6 h; inhibition of growth of C. coli Cc512 at 4 °C after 24 h | Zhang et al. (2024) |
| Adult boiler chickens | Netherlands | Phage #7 | C. perfringens LMG 11264 | Phage #7 introduced at 104 PFU/mL | Preventive effect – Clostridium spp. control | Significant inhibition of growth of C. perfringens LMG 11264 in vitro | Wiese et al. (2025) |
| 1-day-old Ross 308 broilers | Australia | Clostridium spp. phages | C. perfringens NE14 NE18 NE21 NE36 | Orally gavaged with 1 × 106 units of cocktail of three C. perfringens phages | Protective effect against experimental challenge | significantly reduced lesion scores of birds challenged with NE (P < 0.01) | Keerqin et al. (2022) |
| 1-day-old male broiler chicks (Ross 308) | South Korea | C. perfringens φCJ22 phage | C. perfringens wildtype strains | Application of phage titre 107 BP PFU/kg to feed for 5 weeks | Protective effect against experimental challenge | Reduction in number of lesions and mortality rates with no changes in performance at the end of experimental period | Bae et al. (2021) |
Table 10
Examples of commercial phage preparations approved for use in live and post-slaughter poultry to prevent food contamination
| Name of phage preparation | Foodborne pathogens | Target food product/poultry species | Company | Certificates/Country of approval for use | Efficacy | Producer website/References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EcoShield PX™ Phage cocktail | E. coli O157:H7 STEC | Poultry and beef products, fish, cheese, vegetables | Intralytix, Inc. | FDA, FCN No. 1018 certified kosher product Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS Notice No. 528) | Reduction in bacteria (by 3.0 log CFU/g in beef, chicken breast, boiled chicken, salmon, cheese, cantaloupe, and romaine lettuce | Vikram et al. (2022) |
| Secure Shield E1 | Pathogenic E. coli strains | Beef meat, turkey products, and other foods | FINK TEC; GmbH (GER) | FDA/GRN 724, USDA, FSIS Directive 7120.1 | Significant reduction in bacteria (by 3.2 log CFU/g) in beef. Total elimination of bacteria from products. | Oluwarinde et al. (2023) |
| FORMIDA® | Pathogenic E. coli | Feed additive for poultry | PhageLab Chile, Brazil, Peru, Mexico, Europe, United Kingdom, Argentina, USA | Notified Veterinary Bio-control | Significant reduction in mortality. Supports prevention of colibacillosis. Improves weight gain and rearing performance. | Fokas et al. (2026) |
| BAFACOL™ | APEC | Feed additive for all poultry species, including chickens, turkeys, ducks, and pigeons. | Proteon Pharmaceuticals SA, Poland | EFSA acceptance, registered in Brazil and Poland | Reduces morbidity. Supports prevention of colibacillosis. Significant reduction in mortality. Improves weight gain and rearing performance. Natural alternative to antibiotics without disturbing the microbiome. | Proteonpharma website |
| BacWashTM | Salmonella spp. | Applied in the form of washing liquid, mist, or spray directly onto animals before slaughter. | OmniLytics Inc., USA | Effective antimicrobial for surface disinfection and reducing pathogens in animal production – in living animals and post-mortem. Reduces the risk of Salmonella in poultry. | Żbikowska et al. (2020); OmniLytics website | |
| Salmonelex™ | Salmonella spp. | Application to food and water as antimicrobial agent to fight Salmonella in doses up to 108 PFU/g of food Can also be sprayed onto the environment | Micreos Food Safety BV (the Netherlands) | FDA-approved, GRAS status | Improves growth rates. Reduces Salmonella up to total elimination. | Micreos Food Safety BV website; Żbikowska et al. (2020) |
| PHAGEX-ES | Salmonella and E. coli | Oral application in water and feed, therapeutic and prophylactic agent against indigenous Salmonella and E. coli | Vaster Life Sciences, India | India | Effective control of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria strains. Help to control transmission of Salmonella and E. coli on farm/in hatchery/indoor spaces. Reduces contamination in hatching rooms and other indoor spaces. Improves feeding efficiency and liver weight, reduces pathogens in broilers. Improves egg production and egg quality in layer hens. Natural, nontoxic, feasible, and inexpensive alternative to antibiotics. Use of bacteriophages as alternative to antibiotics and disinfectants. | Vaster Life Sciences website |
| BAFASAL + G | Salmonella Enteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium and Salmonella Gallinarum | All poultry species, including chickens, turkeys, ducks, and pigeons Feed additive to treat the digestive tract of poultry | Proteon Pharmaceuticals SA, Poland | EFSA acceptance, registered in Brazil, Ukraine | Effectively prevents Salmonella infections while preserving the natural gut microbiota of birds. Regular use improves production parameters and increases rearing performance | Proteonpharma website |
| BAFASAL® | Salmonella Enteritidis and Salmonella Typhimurium | All poultry species, including chickens, turkeys, ducks, and pigeons | Proteon Pharmaceuticals SA, Poland | EFSA acceptance, Registered in Brazil, Ukraine | Supports prevention of Salmonella and loss of productivity with no negative effect on the microbiome, thus improving growth, productivity, and performance. | Proteonpharma website |
| PhageGuard S™ (previously Salmonelex™) | Salmonella sp. | Eggs, chicken, and turkey meat surface of poultry meat products | Phageguard Micreos Food Safety (Wageningen, Netherlands) | Australia/New Zealand. FSANZ processing aid – 2012 USA, FDA GRAS (GRN 468) – 2013 USA, USDA approved processing aid (Directive 7120.1) – 2016 Canada, Health Canada: Processing aid – 2016 India, FSSI: food contact surfaces and processing aid – 2021 Chile, Undersecretary of Public Health (MINSAL) (ORD. B34/N794) – 2022 Egypt, National Authority of Food Safety Egypt: Approved use in poultry production – 2023 Notified Processing Aid Vietnam, HCMC Food Safety Department – 2025 Dubai, DM Food Safety Department – 2025 Costa Rica, Ministry of Health of the Government of Costa Rica – 2026 | Protects against product contamination Reduces or eliminates risk of foodborne salmonellosis. Direct application to poultry | Phageguard website; Vikram et al. (2022); Fokas et al. (2026) |
| SalmoGuard | Salmonella spp. including S. Enteritidis, S. Typhimurium, S. Gallinarum, S. Pullorum, S. Hadar, S. Infantis S. Virchow | Poultry feed additives – oral administration | UniFAHS | FDA, Southeast Asian countries | Reduces Salmonella spp. colonization in broilers and their environment. | Huang et al. (2022) |
| SalmoFREE® | Salmonella Enteritidis, S. Typhimurium, S. Paratyphi B, S. Gallinarum | Via drinking water for broilers and laying hens | Latin America | Prevents avian salmonellosis in laying hens wide spectrum of activity against S. Gallinarum, S. Pullorum, S. Enteritidis, S. Typhimurium, S. Infantis, and other Salmonella enterica serotypes. | Hernández-Villamizar et al. (2025) | |
| SalmoFresh™ | Salmonella enterica (serotypes Typhimurium, Enteritidis, Heidelberg, Newport, Hadar, Kentucky, Thompson, Georgia, Agona, Grampian, Senftenberg, Alachua, Infantis, Reading, Schwarzengrund) | Poultry, red meat, fish, and shellfish, fresh and processed fruits and vegetables | Intralytix (Columbia, MD, USA) | OMRI GRAS, FDA recognition in 2013 (GRAS Notice No. GRN 000435), Islamic Food and Nutrition Council of America: Halal Certified; Star-K Kosher Certification: Kosher Certified; Health Canada: iLONO; FSIS: Directive 7120.1- USA | Protection against product contamination, Reduces or eliminates risk of foodborne salmonellosis, direct application to poultry | Efenberger-Szmechtyk & Nowak (2025) |
| Phagelab (CHI) | Salmonella spp. | Liquid feed additive | Chile | No available data | Total elimination of Salmonella strains from digestive tract of broiler chickens. | Huang et al. (2022) |
| PhageGuard Listex™ (P100) | L. monocytogenes L. innocua | Meat products, including poultry | Micreos Food Safety, Wageningen, Netherlands | GRAS; FDA USA Canada and Switzerland | Degrades bacterial biofilm, eliminates Listeria without compromising food quality | Zawiasa et al. (2025) |
| PhageGuard L. | L. monocytogenes | Eggs, chicken, and turkey meat products | OMR from 25.01.2018 USA, FDA GRAS (GRN 218) – 2006 USA, USDA approved processing aid (Directive 7120.1) – 2007 Canada, Health Canada: Processing aid – 2011 Australia/New Zealand. FSANZ processing aid – 2012 Israel, Food Control Services Ministry of Health: approved processing aid – 2014 Switzerland, Ordinance of the FDHA (SR817.022.42): Approved processing aid for cheese production – 2016 EU, Phageguard L (Listex™) is safe for use (EFSA opinion) – 2016 Chile, Undersecretary of Public Health (MINSAL) (ORD. B34/N794) – 2022 Dubai, DM Food Safety Department – 2025 Costa Rica, Ministry of Health of the Government of Costa Rica – 2026 | Total elimination of bacterial biofilm from surface of eggs and poultry carcasses. | Phageguard website | |
| istex™ | Listeria monocytogenes | Meat products | GRAS (GRN No. 198 & No. 218), FDA – USA, Canada, OMRI Listed, FSANZ: Approved as a processing aid by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. Informal clearance in the EU – EFSA evaluation; due to processing-aid interpretation. Kosher & Halal | Significant protection against contamination of meat products obtained from livestock species | Phageguard website; Fokas et al. (2026) | |
| ListShield™ | L. monocytogenes | Ready-to-eat meat and poultry, products, smoked salmon, fresh and processed fruits and vegetables, dairy products (including cheese) | Intralytix (Columbia, MD, USA) | Halal; OMRI FDA-cleared phage preparation for food safety Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS Notice No. 528) USA (FDA 21 CFR § 172.785, FSIS Directive 7120.1, GRAS GRN No. 528), Health Canada (iLONO), National Food Service of Israel (Ref: 70275202) | Eliminates Listeria monocytogenes from surfaces of food of animal and plant origin; prevents contamination of equipment that does not have contact with food in processing plants and other food plants. | Vikram et al. (2021); Intralytic website |
| ShigaShieldTM | S. flexneri, S. sonnei, S. dysenteriae | contamination in foods and food processing facilities; specifically designed for treating ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and poultry, fish (including smoked fish), shellfish, fresh and processed fruits and vegetables, and dairy products, including cheese | Intralytix Inc., USA | GRAS GRN No. 000672, USA Kosher, Halal, and Organic | Reduction and total elimination of contamination in foods and food processing facilities | Połaska & Sokołowska (2019); Fokas et al. (2026) |
| sPHAGOVET | E. coli, Salmonella enterica, P. aeruginosa, S. aureus S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, Streptococcus pyogenes Enterococcus faecalis, E. faecium, E. hirae, E. durans, Proteus vulgaris | Application to water for drinking | Microminr Company | GMP certification in 2025, Russian Federation | Prevention and treatment of bacterial infections in poultry, i.e. salmonellosis, colibacillosis, streptococcosis, staphylococcosis, enterococcosis, pseudomonosis, proteus and mixed bacterial infections. Application during viral infections in poultry to prevent secondary bacterial infections | MicroMir company website |