Paper Details

PJB-2025-247

Prevalence of Antibiotic-Resistant Salmonella in Poultry Meat and the Potential of Essential Oils as Natural Antimicrobial Agents

 

Ambreen Rafique
Abstract

---

Poultry meat, widely consumed across the globe, is frequently associated with bacterial contamination and spoilage, serving as a common vehicle for foodborne illnesses and outbreaks. Environmentally sustainable alternatives, such as essential oils (EOs), have gained attention for their potential antimicrobial properties. The present study aimed to assess the antimicrobial activity of four commercially available essential oils against Salmonella isolates isolated from poultry meat and to evaluate possible synergistic effects when combined with conventional antibiotic discs. A total of 150 chicken meat samples were collected from various local markets in Karachi, Pakistan. Salmonella isolates were identified using selective culturing and standard microbiological techniques. Antibiotic susceptibility was determined via the disc diffusion method, while the antibacterial efficacy of essential oils was evaluated using the agar well diffusion assay. Out of 150 samples, 15 (10%) tested positive for Salmonella. Antibiogram results revealed notable resistance to ampicillin (11%) and moderate resistance to erythromycin (6%), whereas fluoroquinolones such as levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin remained largely effective. Among the tested essential oils, Syzygium aromaticum and Cinnamomum verum exhibited significant antibacterial activity, with inhibition zones ranging from 25.3 mm to 37.6 mm. In contrast, Salvia Rosmarinus oil demonstrated limited effectiveness, and M. piperita oil showed variable inhibitory effects. These findings underscore the need for continuous monitoring of antimicrobial resistance patterns and highlight the potential of essential oils as natural adjuncts or alternatives in the management of drug-resistant Salmonella infections in poultry products.

 

To Cite this article:

Out of Scope

Dear Author Unfortunately, though your work appears to be scientifically sound, we are not able to consider your paper for publication at present and will not be sending it for review. This is not a reflection on the quality of the work, but because we are greatly over-subscribed and can only consider papers in certain subject areas. Consequently, this is not a rejection and you should not consider it as such. Policy on such matters is directed by the editorial board and the publisher, and is formulated to maximise the impact of the journal as well as control the number of papers sent out for review. Although we are responding rapidly, we have read your paper. We deliberately try and reply within a matter of days, so that authors can resubmit the paper elsewhere, quickly, and most authors appreciate this. Thank you for your interest in PJB and I am sorry the outcome was not positive on this occasion. Please note that we cannot enter into further correspondence regarding individual manuscripts. Yours sincere