<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="review-article" dtd-version="1.1" specific-use="sps-1.9" xml:lang="es" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">av</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>Abanico veterinario</journal-title>
				<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">Abanico vet</abbrev-journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="ppub">2007-428X</issn>
			<issn pub-type="epub">2448-6132</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Sergio Martínez González</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21929/abavet2020.20</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="other">00504</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Notas cortas</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Evaluación del desprendimiento de oocistos de <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> y <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> en pollos de engorde</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Laverty</surname>
						<given-names>Lauren</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Señas-Cuesta</surname>
						<given-names>Roberto</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Martínez-González</surname>
						<given-names>Sergio</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c1"><sup>*</sup></xref>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Selby</surname>
						<given-names>Callie</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Tellez-Jr</surname>
						<given-names>Guillermo</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Hernandez-Velasco</surname>
						<given-names>Xochitl</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Vuong</surname>
						<given-names>Christine</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Hargis</surname>
						<given-names>Billy</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Tellez-Isaias</surname>
						<given-names>Guillermo</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Graham</surname>
						<given-names>Danielle</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff1">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Department of Poultry Science, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, Fayetteville, AR 72701. </institution>
				<institution content-type="orgdiv1">Department of Poultry Science</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture</institution>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff2">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Unidad Académica de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia. Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit. México.</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgdiv1">Unidad Académica de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit</institution>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff3">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Departamento de Medicina y Zootecnia de Aves, Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, UNAM04510, México.</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgdiv2">Departamento de Medicina y Zootecnia de Aves</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgdiv1">Facultad de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">UNAM</institution>
				<country country="MX">Mexico</country>
			</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp id="c1">*Autor para correspondencia: Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit, Unidad Académica de Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia. Km 3.5 Carretera Compostela-Chapalilla. Compostela, Nayarit, México. CP. 63700. <email>lmlavert@uark.edu,</email>
					<email>rsenascu@uark.edu,</email>
					<email>sergio.martinez@uan.edu.mx</email>, <email>mccreer@uark.edu</email>, <email>memotellez98@gmail.com,</email>
					<email>xochitl_h@yahoo.com</email>, <email>vuong@uark.edu,</email>
					<email>bhargis@uark.edu,</email>
					<email>gtellez@uark.edu,</email>
					<email>bmahaffe@uark.edu</email>
				</corresp>
			</author-notes>
			<pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
				<day>28</day>
				<month>02</month>
				<year>2021</year>
			</pub-date>
			<pub-date date-type="collection" publication-format="electronic">
				<season>Jan-Dec</season>
				<year>2020</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>10</volume>			
			<elocation-id>e504</elocation-id>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received">
					<day>02</day>
					<month>05</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
					<day>03</day>
					<month>08</month>
					<year>2020</year>
				</date>
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" xml:lang="es">
					<license-p>Este es un artículo publicado en acceso abierto bajo una licencia Creative Commons</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<abstract>
				<title>RESUMEN:</title>
				<p>El propósito del presente estudio fue evaluar el día y la hora de recolección de la muestra de un desafío experimental con <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (EM) y <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (EA) en pollos de engorde. Los pollos de engorde macho Cobb-Vantress de un día de edad se asignaron aleatoriamente a uno de tres grupos con diez réplicas (n = 8 pollos / réplica). Los pollos se colocaron en jaulas de batería con un entorno controlado apropiado para la edad: Grupo 1) Control negativo (sin desafío o tratamiento); 2) Control de desafío (solo desafío <italic>Eimeria</italic>); 3) Desafío + salinomicina. A los 14 días de edad, los pollos fueron desafiados por vía oral con el cultivo mixto de EM/EA (10,000 EM esporulados que contenían 4% de EA de tipo salvaje). Los parámetros de rendimiento se registraron en los días 7, 14, 20 y 23. Los puntajes de las lesiones se registraron post mortem en los días 20 y 23. El oocisto por gramo (OPG) se realizó en los días seis, siete y ocho después del desafío, y muestras se recolectaron a las 9:00 a.m y a las 6:00 p.m. de cada día, respectivamente. Los recuentos de oocistos fueron significativamente diferentes (P &lt; 0.05) entre la mañana y la tarde en el día seis después del desafío con coccidios. Los resultados de este estudio muestran que el día y la hora en que se recolectan las muestras pueden tener un efecto significativo en la confiabilidad y validez de los datos.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="es">
				<title>Palabras clave:</title>
				<kwd>Eimeria maxima</kwd>
				<kwd>Eimeria acervulina</kwd>
				<kwd>desprendimiento de oocistos</kwd>
				<kwd>parámetros de rendimiento</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<counts>
				<fig-count count="0"/>
				<table-count count="10"/>
				<equation-count count="0"/>
				<ref-count count="24"/>
				<page-count count="0"/>
			</counts>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec sec-type="intro">
			<title>INTRODUCCIÓN</title>
			<p>La coccidiosis actualmente demuestra ser una enfermedad protozoaria importante y urgente en la industria avícola en todo el mundo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Dalloul y Lillehoj, 2006</xref>). La coccidiosis es causada por un parásito protozoario del género <italic>Eimeria</italic>. El ciclo de vida de los parásitos coccidiales incluye etapas de replicación asexual y sexual y comienza cuando un ave ingiere oocistos esporulados del medio ambiente, como describen <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Conway y McKenzie (2007)</xref> Después de la ingestión, cuatro esporoquistes contenidos en un solo oocisto esporulado liberan dos esporozoitos. La liberación de los esporozoitos es causada por la actividad digestiva dentro del pollo. Los esporozoitos liberados &quot;invadirán las células epiteliales en una zona específica del intestino o ceca&quot;; que depende de la especie <italic>Eimeria</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Chapman, 2003</xref>). Dentro de la célula, los esporozoítos se convierten en trofozoítos y se alimentan durante 12 a 48 para crecer y finalmente dividirse asexualmente a través de esquizogonia o merogonía; esta etapa se conoce como esquizonte o meront. Dentro del parásito, las etapas de merozoito se forman y se liberan después de que el esquizonte madura y se rompe, lo que toma tres días. Esta primera generación de merozoitos invadirá más células epiteliales y repetirá el proceso de multiplicación. La segunda generación de merozoitos puede inducir un tercer ciclo esquizogónico; esto también depende de la especie <italic>Eimeria</italic>. Se formarán gametocitos masculinos (microgametocitos) y femeninos (macrogametocitos). Los macrogametocitos se convertirán en macrogametos. Los microgametocitos madurarán, se romperán y liberarán microgametos biflagelados que fertilizan a los macrogametos femeninos. Después de la fertilización, “se forma una pared engrosada alrededor del macrogameto, formando un cigoto” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Conway y McKenzie, 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">McDougald and Fitz-Coy, 2013</xref>). Al final de este ciclo, se forma un nuevo ooquiste que pasará a través de los excrementos del ave después de romper su célula huésped (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Tewari y Maharana, 2011</xref>).</p>
			<p>Los oocistos de <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp, de una o varias infecciones simultáneas, se excretan en las heces durante un período de varios días. La excreción de oocistos comienza en un nivel bajo, alcanza una meseta y luego disminuye hasta que la enfermedad sigue su curso (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Clarke, 1979</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Williams, 1973</xref>). Curiosamente, varios investigadores han informado que los recuentos de oocistos difieren entre las recolecciones de muestreo matutino y vespertino (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Hudman <italic>et al</italic>., 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brown <italic>et al</italic>., 2001</xref>). Esta variabilidad se ha reconocido durante varios años, pero en gran medida se ha pasado por alto (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Misof, 2004</xref>). Sin embargo, recientemente se ha demostrado que el día posterior a la inoculación y la hora del día en que se recolectan las muestras pueden tener un efecto significativo en la confiabilidad y validez de los datos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Brawner y Hill, 1999</xref>). Por lo tanto, el propósito del presente estudio fue evaluar la influencia de la variación en la excreción de oocistos y el día de muestreo sobre el desafío experimental con <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> y <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> en pollos de engorde.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
			<title>MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS</title>
			<sec>
				<title>Cepas de desafío</title>
				<p>El Dr. John R. Barta proporcionó oocistos de <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> M6 (EM) y <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (EA) de tipo salvaje, Universidad de Guelph, Canadá. Los métodos para detectar y recuperar oocistos de pollos infectados, esporulación de oocistos y preparación de dosis infecciosas, se llevaron a cabo como se describió anteriormente (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Haug <italic>et al</italic>., 2006</xref>). Se llevó a cabo un estudio de titulación de la dosis para determinar la dosis de co-desafío de coccidia EM/EA antes de comenzar el ensayo experimental. A los 13 días de edad, los pollos de engorde se pesaron, se dividieron en tres grupos (n=15/grupo) y se desafiaron con tres dosis diferentes (10,000, 20,000 o 40,000) de oocistos esporulados en 1 mL de volumen por sonda oral. El cuarto grupo de pollitos se mantuvo como control negativo. Cinco días después de la exposición, se registraron el peso corporal (PC) y la ganancia de peso corporal (GPC). En el presente estudio, los pollos expuestos fueron alimentados por sonda oral a las 9:00 am con el cultivo mixto de EM/EA (10,000 EM esporulados que contienen 4% de EA de tipo salvaje) a los 14 días de edad ya que esta dosis redujo el BWG en un 35.82%. Esto se basa en el criterio de que la dosis de provocación debe causar coccidiosis subclínica, que consiste en una reducción entre el 25-35% del GPC sin la presencia de signos clínicos.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>Fuente animal y diseño experimental</title>
				<p>Se pesaron 240 pollos de engorde Cobb-Vantress machos de un día de edad (Fayetteville, AR, EE. UU.) Y se asignaron al azar a uno de tres grupos con diez repeticiones (n = 8 pollos/repetición). Los pollos se colocaron en jaulas en batería, con un ambiente controlado apropiado para la edad: Grupo 1) Control negativo (sin desafío ni tratamiento); 2) Control de desafío (solo desafío de <italic>Eimeria</italic>); 3) Desafío + Salinomicina a 60 g/tonelada (Bio-Cox 60, Huvepharma, Peachtree City, GA 30269). Los pollitos recibieron acceso <italic>ad libitum</italic> al agua y al alimento durante 23 días. Se formuló una dieta de iniciación experimental (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">Tabla 1</xref>) para aproximar los requisitos nutricionales de los pollos de engorde según lo recomendado por el Consejo Nacional de Investigación (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">NRC, 1994</xref>) y se ajustó a las recomendaciones de los criadores <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cobb, 2015</xref>). Los pollos recibieron 23 horas de luz del día primero al cuarto, 20 horas de luz del día 5 al 14 y 18 horas de luz del día 15 al 23. La intensidad de la luz se fijó en una vela de 30 pies la primera semana, una vela de 1 pie de los días ocho a catorce, y una vela de 0.5 pies de los días 15 a 23. La temperatura y la luz se establecieron para imitar las condiciones comerciales del día 1-21 en todas las habitaciones con una reducción gradual de la temperatura de 32 a 24 °C y la humedad relativa a 55 ± 5 %. Los parámetros de rendimiento: peso corporal (PC), ganancia de peso corporal (GPC), consumo de alimento (CA) e índice de conversión alimenticia (ICA) se registraron los días 7, 14, 20 y 23. El día 20, la mitad de los pollos de cada réplica se pesaron y sacrificaron mientras que los pollos restantes se pesaron y sacrificaron el día 23 para evaluar las lesiones macroscópicas de acuerdo con el sistema de puntuación de Johnson y Reid (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Johnson y Reid, 1970</xref>). Se evaluó el oocisto por gramo (OPG) los días seis, siete y ocho después de la exposición, y las muestras se recolectaron a las 9:00 AM y 6:00 PM todos los días, respectivamente. Todos los procedimientos de manipulación de animales cumplieron con el Comité Institucional de Uso y Cuidado de Animales (IACUC) de la Universidad de Arkansas, Fayetteville. De manera explícita, el IACUC aprobó este estudio bajo el protocolo # 21020.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t1">
						<label>Tabla 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Composición de ingredientes y contenido de nutrientes de una dieta de iniciación de maíz y soja utilizada en todos los grupos experimentales tal cual.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">Ítem</th>
									<th align="center">Dieta de inicio</th>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">Ingredientes (%)</th>
									<th align="left"> </th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Maíz</td>
									<td align="center">57.34</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Harina de soja</td>
									<td align="center">34.66</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Grasa de ave</td>
									<td align="center">3.45</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Fosfato dicálcico</td>
									<td align="center">1.86</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Carbonato de calcio</td>
									<td align="center">0.99</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">sal</td>
									<td align="center">0.38</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">DL-metionina</td>
									<td align="center">0.33</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">L-lisina HCl</td>
									<td align="center">0.31</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Treonina</td>
									<td align="center">0.16</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Premezcla de vitaminas<sup>1</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0.20</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Premezcla mineral<sup>2</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0.10</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Cloruro de colina 60%</td>
									<td align="center">0.20</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Antioxidante<sup>3</sup></td>
									<td align="center">0.02</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Análisis calculado</td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Energía metabolizable (kcal / kg)</td>
									<td align="center">3,035</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Proteína cruda (%)</td>
									<td align="center">22.16</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Extracto de éter (%)</td>
									<td align="center">5.68</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Lisina (%)</td>
									<td align="center">1.35</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Metionina (%)</td>
									<td align="center">0.64</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Metionina + cistina (%)</td>
									<td align="center">0.99</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Treonina (%)</td>
									<td align="center">0.92</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Triptófano (%)</td>
									<td align="center">0.28</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Calcio total</td>
									<td align="center">0.90</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Fósforo disponible</td>
									<td align="center">0.45</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left"><bold>Análisis determinado</bold></td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Proteína cruda (%)</td>
									<td align="center">21.15</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Extracto de éter (%)</td>
									<td align="center">6.05</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Calcio (%)</td>
									<td align="center">0.94</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Fósforo (%)</td>
									<td align="center">0.73</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN1">
								<label><sup>1</sup></label>
								<p> La premezcla de vitaminas se suministró por kg: vitamina A, 20.000 UI; vitamina D3, 6.000 UI; vitamina E, 75 UI; vitamina K3, 6,0 mg; tiamina, 3,0 mg; riboflavina, 8,0 mg; ácido pantoténico, 18 mg; niacina, 60 mg; piridoxina, 5 mg; ácido fólico, 2 mg; biotina, 0,2 mg; cianocobalamina, 16 µg; y ácido ascórbico, 200 mg (Nutra Blend LLC, Neosho, MO 64850). <sup>2</sup>Se suministró una premezcla de mineral por kg: manganeso, 120 mg; zinc, 100 mg; hierro, 120 mg; cobre, 10 a 15 mg; yodo, 0,7 mg; selenio, 0,4 mg; y cobalto, 0,2 mg (Nutra Blend LLC, Neosho, MO 64850). <sup>3</sup>Etoxiquina.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>Análisis estadístico y de datos</title>
				<p>Las puntuaciones de las lesiones, los oocistos por gramo y los datos de rendimiento se sometieron a ANOVA como un diseño completamente al azar utilizando el procedimiento GLM de SAS (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">SAS, 2002</xref>). Para los parámetros de rendimiento del crecimiento (PC, GPC, CA y ICA), cada jaula replicada se consideró como una unidad experimental. Las medias del tratamiento se dividieron usando la prueba de rango múltiple de Duncan a P &lt;0,05, lo que indica significación estadística.</p>
			</sec>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="results|discussion">
			<title>RESULTADOS Y DISCUSIÓN</title>
			<p>Los resultados de la evaluación del peso corporal, la ganancia de peso corporal, el consumo de alimento y la índice de conversión alimenticia en pollos de engorde desafiados con coccidios se resumen en la <xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Tabla 2</xref>. Los tres grupos comenzaron con un peso corporal similar; sin embargo, en el día 7, hubo un aumento en el peso corporal de los pollos tratados con salinomicina. Para el día 20 (6 días después de la exposición), el grupo de control negativo (no desafiado o tratado) y el grupo tratado con salinomicina de desafío mostraron un aumento significativo en el peso corporal en comparación con el grupo de control desafiado (P &lt;0.05). Curiosamente, el día 23 (9 días después de la exposición), solo hubo diferencias significativas en el peso corporal entre el grupo de control negativo y el control de exposición. Se observó una tendencia similar en GPC e ICA. No se observaron diferencias significativas en CA entre los tres grupos (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">Tabla 2</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t2">
					<label>Tabla 2</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Evaluación del peso corporal, la ganancia de peso corporal, la ingesta de alimento y el índice de conversión alimenticia en pollos de engorde desafiados con coccidios.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							
						
						<tr>
								<th align="left">Ítem</th>
								<th align="center">Control negativo (sin desafío ni tratamiento)</th>
								<th align="center">Control de desafío (solo desafío de <italic>Eimeria</italic>) </th>
								<th align="center">Salinomicina sódica tratada con desafío + (60 g/ton) </th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Peso corporal (g)</td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0</td>
								<td align="center">46.60 ± 0.19</td>
								<td align="center">46.16 ± 0.36</td>
								<td align="center">46.70 ± 0.42</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 7</td>
								<td align="center">145.05 ± 2.16 <sup>ba</sup></td>
								<td align="center">144.48 ± 2.51 <sup>ba</sup></td>
								<td align="center">148.95 ± 2.33 <sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 14</td>
								<td align="center">401.30 ± 7.28 <sup>bc</sup></td>
								<td align="center">402.63 ± 9.21 <sup>bac</sup></td>
								<td align="center">429.16 ± 5.11 <sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 20</td>
								<td align="center">736.14 ± 11.23 <sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">671.97 ± 16.35 <sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">751.09 ± 8.00 <sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 23</td>
								<td align="center">927.51 ± 20.06 <sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">781.25 ± 42.28 <sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">881.38 ± 23.87 <sup>ba</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Ganancia de peso corporal (g)</td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
								<td align="center"> </td>
							</tr>
							
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 7</td>
								<td align="center">98.45 ± 2.13 <sup>ba</sup></td>
								<td align="center">98.31 ± 2.54 <sup>ba</sup></td>
								<td align="center">102.25 ± 2.36 <sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 7 to 14</td>
								<td align="center">256.26 ± 6.15</td>
								<td align="center">258.16 ± 7.55</td>
								<td align="center">280.21 ± 3.82 <sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 14 to 20</td>
								<td align="center">334.84 ± 5.67 <sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">269.34 ± 11.69 <sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">321.93 ± 5.47 <sup>a</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 23</td>
								<td align="center">890.31 ± 29.18 <sup>a</sup></td>
								<td align="center">735.65 ± 42.60 <sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">834.03 ± 23.61</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Ingesta de alimento (g)</td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
							</tr>
							
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 14</td>
								<td align="center">609.89 ± 12.51</td>
								<td align="center">621.93 ± 16.27</td>
								<td align="center">641.06 ± 15.45</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 20</td>
								<td align="center">930.19 ± 37.87</td>
								<td align="center">909.81 ± 36.98</td>
								<td align="center">770.41 ± 30.53</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 23</td>
								<td align="center">1323.79 ± 31.08</td>
								<td align="center">1198.68 ± 57.19</td>
								<td align="center">1325.55 ± 29.11</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Índice de conversión alimenticia (ajustada)</td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
							</tr>
							
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 14</td>
								<td align="center">1.50 ± 0.03</td>
								<td align="center">1.53 ± 0.03</td>
								<td align="center">1.50 ± 0.04</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 20</td>
								<td align="center">1.44 ± 0.01 <sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.49 ± 0.02</td>
								<td align="center">1.45 ± 0.02</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">d 0 to 23</td>
								<td align="center">1.41 ± 0.06 <sup>b</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.54 ± 0.03</td>
								<td align="center">1.51 ± 0.03</td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN2">
							<p>Los pollos se expusieron a <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (M6) y <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (tipo salvaje) mediante sonda oral a los 14 días. a-c Los valores medios en la misma fila que no comparten una letra común difieren significativamente (P &lt;0.05). Cada valor representa la media ±error estándar. Diez repeticiones, n = 8.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>La <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref> muestra los resultados de la evaluación del recuento de oocistos de <italic>E. maxima</italic> por gramo en las heces de pollos de engorde desde el día 6 hasta el día 8 después de la exposición a diferentes momentos del día, el promedio por día. Aunque hubo cierta recuperación de oocistos de pollos de control no tratados y no desafiados, hubo significativamente menos OPG en este grupo en comparación con ambos grupos de desafío. No se observaron diferencias significativas en OPG entre ambos grupos de desafío durante los tres días de evaluación (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref>). En el presente estudio, fue notable encontrar que los oocistos EM se excretaron en cantidades muy altas el día 6 después de la exposición por la noche para los tres grupos experimentales. Al combinar y obtener la OPG promedio, el día 6 mostró un mayor número de oocistos EM, y se observaron las diferencias significativas esperadas entre las OPG entre los tres grupos experimentales (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref>). De manera similar, se encontraron diferencias significativas en las puntuaciones de lesiones para EM para ambos días de evaluación (20 y 23 días) entre los tres grupos experimentales. No obstante, se recuperó un mayor número de oocistos el día 20 en ambos grupos desafiados en comparación con el día 23 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Tabla 3</xref>). En el presente estudio, los pollos de control negativo fueron asignados aleatoriamente a los grupos experimentales que fueron desafiados con coccidios. Quizás, esa es la razón por la que estos pollos mostraron alguna infección, debido a la contaminación cruzada de heces entre las jaulas. Claramente, en estudios futuros, los pollos de control negativo deben colocarse en una habitación separada y si esto no es posible, en jaulas separadas y aisladas.</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t3">
					<label>Tabla 3</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Evaluación de oocistos de <italic>E. maxima</italic> por recuento de gramo<sup>1</sup> en las heces de pollos de engorde del día 6 al día 8 después de la exposición en diferentes momentos del día y promedio por día.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th align="center">Tratamiento</th>
								<th align="center">Día 6 / 9:00 AM (día 20)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 6 / 6:00 PM (día 20)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 6 Promedio AM/PM</th>
								<th align="center">Día 7 / 9:00 AM (día 21)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 7 / 6:00 PM (día 21)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 7 Promedio AM/PM</th>
								<th align="center">Día 8 / 9:00 AM (día 22)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 8 / 6:00 PM (día 22)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 8 Promedio AM/PM</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Control</td>
								<td align="left">239 ±</td>
								<td align="left">1,880 ±</td>
								<td align="left">1,059 ±</td>
								<td align="left">2,214 ±</td>
								<td align="left">465 ±</td>
								<td align="left">1,340 ±</td>
								<td align="left">312 ±</td>
								<td align="left">504 ±</td>
								<td align="left">408 ±</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">negativo</td>
								<td align="left">123.12<sup>b z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">350.09<sup>b y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">192.37 <sup>b z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">2,055.28<sup>b y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">164.91<sup>b z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">1,080.81 <sup>b z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">247.92<sup>b z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">399.77<sup>b z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">319.28 <sup>b y</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Control de</td>
								<td align="left">39,756 ±</td>
								<td align="left">392,859 ±</td>
								<td align="left">216,308 ±</td>
								<td align="left">258,783 ±</td>
								<td align="left">73,803 ±</td>
								<td align="left">166,293 ±</td>
								<td align="left">39,751 ±</td>
								<td align="left">12,844 ±</td>
								<td align="left">26,298 ±</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">desafío</td>
								<td align="left">8,540.64<sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">53742.38<sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">26,680.84 <sup>a x</sup></td>
								<td align="left">34093.03 <sup>a w</sup></td>
								<td align="left">20,753.83 <sup>a x</sup></td>
								<td align="left">24,541.92 <sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">10,808.39 <sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">2,256.07 <sup>a z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">5888.63 <sup>a z</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Desafío +</td>
								<td align="left">28,060 ±</td>
								<td align="left">304,517 ±</td>
								<td align="left">166,288 ±</td>
								<td align="left">180,752 ±</td>
								<td align="left">86,940 ±</td>
								<td align="left">133,846 ±</td>
								<td align="left">23,440 ±</td>
								<td align="left">11,966 ±</td>
								<td align="left">17,703 ±</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Salinomicina sódica tratada</td>
								<td align="left">11,708.46<sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">31,024.37<sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">11,708.46 <sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">39,771.21<sup>a w</sup></td>
								<td align="left">22,231.97<sup>a x</sup></td>
								<td align="left">39,771.21 <sup>a y</sup></td>
								<td align="left">5,199.72<sup>a yz</sup></td>
								<td align="left">1,207.11<sup>a z</sup></td>
								<td align="left">5199.72 <sup>a z</sup></td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>Los resultados de la evaluación de oocistos <italic>de E. acervulina</italic> por recuento de gramos en las heces de pollos de engorde del día 6 al día 8 después de la exposición en diferentes momentos del día, el promedio por día y las puntuaciones de lesiones en los días 20 y 23 se resumen en <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">Tabla 4</xref>. Se observó una tendencia similar en la OPG para EA, aunque hubo más oocistos en el día 23 en los grupos desafiados que en el día 20 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">Tabla 4</xref>). Las puntuaciones de las lesiones intestinales macroscópicas en los días 20 y 23 de edad se muestran en la <xref ref-type="table" rid="t5">tabla 5</xref>. En resumen, los recuentos de oocistos fueron significativamente diferentes entre la mañana y la noche del día 6 después de la exposición. El aumento de la eliminación de oocistos en las recolecciones de muestras vespertinas está de acuerdo con estudios anteriores sobre la excreción diurna de oocistos de <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp. (Hudman <italic>et al</italic>., 2000; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brown <italic>et al</italic>., 2001</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Misof, 2004</xref>).</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t4">
					<label>Tabla 4</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Evaluación de oocistos de <italic>E. acervulina</italic> por recuento de gramo<sup>1</sup> en las heces de pollos de engorde del día 6 al día 8 después de la exposición en diferentes momentos del día y promedio por día.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							
						
						<tr>
								<th align="center">Tratamiento</th>
								<th align="center">Día 6 /9:00 AM(día 20)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 6 /6:00 PM(día 20)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 6 PromedioAM/PM</th>
								<th align="center">Día 7/9:00 AM(día 21)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 7 /6:00 PM(día 21)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 7 Promedio AM/PM</th>
								<th align="center">Día 8 /9:00 AM(día 22)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 8 /6:00 PM(z 22)</th>
								<th align="center">Día 8 PromedioAM/PM</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Control</td>
								<td align="center">83 ±</td>
								<td align="center">52 ±</td>
								<td align="center">55 ± 29.65cy</td>
								<td align="center">0 ± 0c z</td>
								<td align="center">0 ± 0b z</td>
								<td align="center">0 ± 0 c z</td>
								<td align="center">52 ±</td>
								<td align="center">26 ±</td>
								<td align="center">52 ±</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">negativo</td>
								<td align="center">28.07 a y</td>
								<td align="center">30.20 c y</td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="center">52.08 c y</td>
								<td align="center">26.25c y</td>
								<td align="center">52.21c y</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Control de</td>
								<td align="center">1,000 ±</td>
								<td align="center">5,993 ±</td>
								<td align="center">3,497 ±</td>
								<td align="center">6,656 ±</td>
								<td align="center">3,007 ±</td>
								<td align="center">4,831 ±</td>
								<td align="center">1,800 ±</td>
								<td align="center">779 ±</td>
								<td align="center">1,289 ±</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">desafío</td>
								<td align="center">319.03 a yz</td>
								<td align="center">995.74 a w</td>
								<td align="center">352.58a y</td>
								<td align="center">1924.02 a w</td>
								<td align="center">1266.66 a x</td>
								<td align="center">1580.37a y</td>
								<td align="center">212.01 ab y</td>
								<td align="center">228.56 ab z</td>
								<td align="center">182.52ba z</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">Desafío +</td>
								<td align="center">194 ±</td>
								<td align="center">1,849 ±</td>
								<td align="center">1,022 ±</td>
								<td align="center">2,287 ±</td>
								<td align="center">1,912 ±</td>
								<td align="center">2,099 ±</td>
								<td align="center">1,339 ±</td>
								<td align="center">552 ±</td>
								<td align="center">945 ±</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="right">Salinomicina</td>
								<td align="center">54.9 a z</td>
								<td align="center">498.62 b w</td>
								<td align="center">241.84b y</td>
								<td align="center">335.90 b w</td>
								<td align="center">514.33 a w</td>
								<td align="center">270.65b y</td>
								<td align="center">88.24 b x</td>
								<td align="center">99.01 b y</td>
								<td align="center">69.81b z</td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">sódica</td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="left">tratada</td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
								<td align="left"> </td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN3">
							<p>Los pollos fueron desafiados con <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (M6) y <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (tipo salvaje) por sonda oral a los 14 días de edad. <sup>1</sup>Cada valor representa la media ± error estándar. Cinco repeticiones / n=5. <sup>a-c</sup> Los valores medios en la misma columna que no comparten una letra común difieren significativamente. <sup>w-z</sup> Los valores medios en la misma fila que no comparten una letra común difieren significativamente (P &lt;0.05). <sup>2</sup>Cada valor representa la media ± error estándar. Diez repeticiones / n = 8. <sup>a-c</sup> Los valores medios en la misma columna que no comparten una letra común difieren significativa.</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>
				<table-wrap id="t5">
					<label>Tabla 5</label>
					<caption>
						<title>Puntuaciones de lesiones intestinales macroscópicas<sup>1</sup> en los días 20 y 23 de edad para pollos de engorde desafiados con <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> y <italic>E</italic>. <italic>maxima</italic>.</title>
					</caption>
					<table>
						<colgroup>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
							<col/>
						</colgroup>
						<thead>
							<tr>
								<th align="center">Tratamiento</th>
								<th align="center" colspan="2">Eimeria acervulina</th>
								
								<th align="center" colspan="2">Eimera maxima</th>
								
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<th align="left"> </th>
								<th align="center">día 20</th>
								<th align="center">día 23</th>
								<th align="center">día 20</th>
								<th align="center">día 23</th>
							</tr>
						</thead>
						<tbody>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Control negativo</td>
								<td align="center">0.00 ± 0.00<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">0.00 ± 0.00<sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">0.05 ± 0.03 <sup>c</sup></td>
								<td align="center">0.00 ± 0.00 <sup>c</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Control de desafío</td>
								<td align="center">0.80 ± 0.12a <sup>z</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.45 ± 0.11a <sup>y</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.93 ± 0.10 <sup>a</sup> <sup>y</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.25 ± 0.08 <sup>a</sup> <sup>z</sup></td>
							</tr>
							<tr>
								<td align="center">Desafío + Salinomicina sódica tratada</td>
								<td align="center">0.48 ± 0.11b <sup>z</sup></td>
								<td align="center">0.90 ± 0.09b <sup>y</sup></td>
								<td align="center">1.28 ± 0.14 <sup>b</sup> <sup>y</sup></td>
								<td align="center">0.77 ± 0.09 <sup>b</sup> <sup>z</sup></td>
							</tr>
						</tbody>
					</table>
					<table-wrap-foot>
						<fn id="TFN4">
							<p>Los pollos fueron desafiados con <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (M6) y <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (tipo salvaje) por sonda oral a los 14 días de edad. <sup>1</sup>Cada valor representa la media ± error estándar. Cinco repeticiones, n = 5. <sup>a-c</sup> Los valores medios en la misma columna que no comparten una letra común difieren significativamente. <sup>w-z</sup> Los valores medios en la misma fila que no comparten una letra común difieren significativamente (P &lt;0.05). <sup>2</sup>Cada valor representa la media ± error estándar. Diez repeticiones, n = 8. <sup>a-c</sup> Los valores medios en la misma columna que no comparten una letra común difieren significativamente (P &lt;0.05).</p>
						</fn>
					</table-wrap-foot>
				</table-wrap>
			</p>
			<p>La coccidiosis sigue siendo una de las enfermedades más críticas en las aves de corral y resulta en la pérdida anual de millones de dólares estadounidenses por parte de la industria avícola (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Williams, 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Chapman, 1999</xref>). Una práctica común en el manejo de la coccidiosis es el uso de fármacos profilácticos y antimicrobianos que inhiben el desarrollo de esporozoitos/merozoitos. Sin embargo, la industria avícola ahora está experimentando una creciente resistencia a los medicamentos en las cepas de <italic>Eimeria</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Abbas <italic>et al</italic>., 2012</xref>). Por lo tanto, la presión de la disminución de la eficacia química ha aumentado la demanda de nuevos métodos de tratamiento, como los productos vegetales. Dado que existen claras ventajas de un agente de control eficaz sin complicaciones con la resistencia a los fármacos de Eimeria, es conveniente buscar métodos eficaces con mecanismos alternativos a la quimioterapia anticoccidial tradicional (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Naidoo <italic>et al</italic>., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Masood <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>). La vacunación contra la coccidiosis es una alternativa al uso de productos químicos. Al vacunar contra la coccidiosis, el sistema inmunológico natural del animal se emplea para combatir posibles infecciones en el futuro (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Shivaramaiah <italic>et al</italic>., 2014</xref>). De manera convencional, se utilizan parásitos vivos o atenuados y las vacunas específicas de Eimeria pueden incorporar múltiples especies o cepas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Shivaramaiah <italic>et al</italic>., 2014</xref>). Los parásitos atenuados de <italic>Eimeria</italic> se pueden seleccionar a través de la &quot;precocidad&quot;, en la que &quot;cepas virulentas de <italic>Eimeria</italic> sensibles a los fármacos&quot; se les permite pasar a través de una especie hospedadora, reproducirse y convertirse en vacunas atenuadas (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Peek y Landman, 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Shirley <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>).</p>
			<p>Investigaciones anteriores han descrito la variación circadiana en la diseminación de oocistos en múltiples especies de aves hospedadoras (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Hudman <italic>et al</italic>., 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brown <italic>et al</italic>., 2001</xref>). En consecuencia, si no se tiene en cuenta la variación circadiana en la eliminación de oocistos, los resultados de tales pruebas no son confiables y pueden inducir a error (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Misof, 2004</xref>). Un método adecuado para obtener datos precisos parece ser restringir el período de muestreo.</p>
			<p>Los resultados de este estudio muestran que el día y la hora en que se recolectan las muestras pueden tener un impacto significativo en los datos y refuerzan la importancia de recolectar las muestras fecales a la misma hora del día después del desafío. Los recuentos de oocistos fueron significativamente diferentes entre la mañana y la tarde del día seis después de la exposición a coccidios. El muestreo de carga de coccidios debe restringirse a la segunda mitad del tiempo total de luz diurna. Por tanto, este período más restrictivo debe considerarse el período preferido para obtener información fiable.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="conclusions">
			<title>CONCLUSIONES</title>
			<p>Los resultados de este estudio muestran que el día y la hora en que se recolectan las muestras pueden tener un impacto significativo en los datos y refuerzan la importancia de recolectar las muestras fecales a la misma hora del día después del desafío. El muestreo de carga de coccidios debe restringirse a la segunda mitad del tiempo total de luz diurna. Por tanto, este período más restrictivo debe considerarse el período preferido para obtener información fiable.</p>
			<p>Financiamiento: La investigación fue apoyada en parte por fondos proporcionados por USDA-NIFA Sustainable Agriculture Systems, Grant No. 2019-69012-29905. Título del proyecto: Empoderamiento de la producción de pollos de engorde de EE. UU. Para la transformación y la sostenibilidad USDA-NIFA (Sistemas de agricultura sostenible): No. 2019-69012-29905</p>
			<p>Conflictos de interés: Los autores declaran no tener ningún conflicto de intereses.</p>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ref-list>
			<title>LITERATURA CITADA</title>
			<ref id="B1">
				<mixed-citation>Abbas R, Colwell D, Gilleard J. 2012. Botanicals: an alternative approach for the control of avian coccidiosis. <italic>World's Poultry Science Journal</italic>. 68(2):203-215. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933912000268</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Abbas</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Colwell</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Gilleard</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2012</year>
					<article-title>Botanicals: an alternative approach for the control of avian coccidiosis</article-title>
					<source>World's Poultry Science Journal</source>
					<volume>68</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>203</fpage>
					<lpage>215</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S0043933912000268</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<mixed-citation>Brawner III WR, Hill GE. 1999. Temporal variation in shedding of coccidial oocysts: implications for sexual-selection studies. <italic>Can. J. Zool</italic>. 77:347-350. https://doi.org/10.1139/z98-207</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Brawner III</surname>
							<given-names>WR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Hill</surname>
							<given-names>GE.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1999</year>
					<article-title>Temporal variation in shedding of coccidial oocysts: implications for sexual-selection studies</article-title>
					<source>Can. J. Zool</source>
					<volume>77</volume>
					<fpage>347</fpage>
					<lpage>350</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1139/z98-207</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<mixed-citation>Brown MA, Ball S, Holman D. 2001. The periodicity of isosporan oocyst discharge in the greenfinch (<italic>Carduelis chloris</italic>). <italic>J. Nat. Hist</italic>. 35:945-948. https://doi.org/10.1080/002229301300323875</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Brown</surname>
							<given-names>MA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ball</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Holman</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2001</year>
					<article-title>The periodicity of isosporan oocyst discharge in the greenfinch (Carduelis chloris)</article-title>
					<source>J. Nat. Hist</source>
					<volume>35</volume>
					<fpage>945</fpage>
					<lpage>948</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/002229301300323875</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<mixed-citation>Chapman HD. 2003. Origins of coccidiosis research in the fowl-The first fifty years. <italic>Avian Dis</italic>. 47:1-20. https://doi.org/10.1637/0005-2086(2003)047[0001:OOCRIT]2.0.CO;2</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Chapman</surname>
							<given-names>HD.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2003</year>
					<article-title>Origins of coccidiosis research in the fowl-The first fifty years</article-title>
					<source>Avian Dis</source>
					<volume>47</volume>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>20</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/0005-2086(2003)047[0001:OOCRIT]2.0.CO;2</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<mixed-citation>Chapman H. 1999. Anticoccidial drugs and their effects upon the development of immunity to <italic>Eimeria</italic> infections in poultry. <italic>Avian Pathol</italic>. 28:521-535. http://doi.org/10.1080/03079459994317</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Chapman</surname>
							<given-names>H.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1999</year>
					<article-title>Anticoccidial drugs and their effects upon the development of immunity to Eimeria infections in poultry</article-title>
					<source>Avian Pathol</source>
					<volume>28</volume>
					<fpage>521</fpage>
					<lpage>535</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079459994317</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<mixed-citation>Clarke PL. 1979. Coccidial infection with <italic>Eimeria tenella</italic> and caecal defaecation in chicks. <italic>Br. Poult. Sci</italic>. 20:317-322. http://doi.org/10.1080/00071667908416586</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Clarke</surname>
							<given-names>PL.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1979</year>
					<article-title>Coccidial infection with Eimeria tenella and caecal defaecation in chicks</article-title>
					<source>Br. Poult. Sci</source>
					<volume>20</volume>
					<fpage>317</fpage>
					<lpage>322</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/00071667908416586</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<mixed-citation>Cobb-Vantress Inc. 2015. Cobb 500 broiler performance and nutrition supplement. Pp. 14. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.cobb-vantress.com/docs/default-source/cobb-500guides/Cobb500_Broiler_Performance_And_Nutrition_Supplement.pdf">http://www.cobb-vantress.com/docs/default-source/cobb-500guides/Cobb500_Broiler_Performance_And_Nutrition_Supplement.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>Cobb-Vantress Inc</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2015</year>
					<source>Cobb 500 broiler performance and nutrition supplement</source>
					<fpage>14</fpage>
					<lpage>14</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.cobb-vantress.com/docs/default-source/cobb-500guides/Cobb500_Broiler_Performance_And_Nutrition_Supplement.pdf">http://www.cobb-vantress.com/docs/default-source/cobb-500guides/Cobb500_Broiler_Performance_And_Nutrition_Supplement.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<mixed-citation>Conway DP, McKenzie ME. 2007. Poultry Coccidiosis Diagnostic and Testing Procedures. Third Edition. Blackwell Publishing. ISBN-13:978-0-8138-2202-0. ISBN-10: 0-8138-2202-5. <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.academia.edu/35924772/Poultry_Coccidiosis_Diagnostic_and_Testing_Procedures_THIRD_EDITION">https://www.academia.edu/35924772/Poultry_Coccidiosis_Diagnostic_and_Testing_Procedures_THIRD_EDITION</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Conway</surname>
							<given-names>DP</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>McKenzie</surname>
							<given-names>ME.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2007</year>
					<source>Poultry Coccidiosis Diagnostic and Testing Procedures</source>
					<edition>Third </edition>
					<publisher-name>Blackwell Publishing</publisher-name>
					<isbn>13:978-0-8138-2202-0</isbn>
					<comment>ISBN-10: 0-8138-2202-5</comment>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.academia.edu/35924772/Poultry_Coccidiosis_Diagnostic_and_Testing_Procedures_THIRD_EDITION">https://www.academia.edu/35924772/Poultry_Coccidiosis_Diagnostic_and_Testing_Procedures_THIRD_EDITION</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<mixed-citation>Dalloul RA, Lillehoj HS. 2006. Poultry coccidiosis: recent advancements in control measures and vaccine development. <italic>Expert. Rev. Vaccines</italic> 5:143-163. doi:10.1586/14760584.5.1.143. http://doi.org/10.1586/14760584.5.1.143</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Dalloul</surname>
							<given-names>RA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Lillehoj</surname>
							<given-names>HS.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2006</year>
					<article-title>Poultry coccidiosis: recent advancements in control measures and vaccine development</article-title>
					<source>Expert. Rev. Vaccines</source>
					<volume>5</volume>
					<fpage>143</fpage>
					<lpage>163</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1586/14760584.5.1.143</pub-id>
					<comment>http://doi.org/10.1586/14760584.5.1.143</comment>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<mixed-citation>Haug A, Williams R, Larsen S. 2006. Counting coccidial oocysts in chicken faeces: a comparative study of a standard McMaster technique and a new rapid method. <italic>Vet. Parasitol</italic>. 136:233-242. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2005.11.024</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Haug</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Williams</surname>
							<given-names>R</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Larsen</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2006</year>
					<article-title>Counting coccidial oocysts in chicken faeces: a comparative study of a standard McMaster technique and a new rapid method</article-title>
					<source>Vet. Parasitol</source>
					<volume>136</volume>
					<fpage>233</fpage>
					<lpage>242</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2005.11.024</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<mixed-citation>Hudman SP, Ketterson ED, Nolan V Jr. 2000. Effects of time of sampling on oocyst detection and effects of age and experimentally elevated testosterone on prevalence of coccidia in male dark-eyed juncos. <italic>The Auk</italic>. 117:1048-1051. http://doi.org/10.1093/auk/117.4.1048</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Hudman</surname>
							<given-names>SP</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Ketterson</surname>
							<given-names>ED</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nolan</surname>
							<given-names>V Jr</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2000</year>
					<article-title>Effects of time of sampling on oocyst detection and effects of age and experimentally elevated testosterone on prevalence of coccidia in male dark-eyed juncos</article-title>
					<source>The Auk</source>
					<volume>117</volume>
					<fpage>1048</fpage>
					<lpage>1051</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/auk/117.4.1048</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<mixed-citation>Johnson J, Reid WM. 1970. Anticoccidial drugs: lesion scoring techniques in battery and floor-pen experiments with chickens. <italic>Exp. Parasitol</italic>. 28(1):3-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-4894(70)90063-9</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Johnson</surname>
							<given-names>J</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Reid</surname>
							<given-names>WM.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1970</year>
					<article-title>Anticoccidial drugs: lesion scoring techniques in battery and floor-pen experiments with chickens</article-title>
					<source>Exp. Parasitol</source>
					<volume>28</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>3</fpage>
					<lpage>36</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0014-4894(70)90063-9</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<mixed-citation>Misof K. 2004. Diurnal cycle of Isospora spp. oocyst shedding in Eurasian blackbirds (<italic>Turdus merula</italic>). <italic>Can. J. Zool</italic>. 82:764-768. http://doi.org/10.1139/z04-054</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Misof</surname>
							<given-names>K.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2004</year>
					<article-title>Diurnal cycle of Isospora spp. oocyst shedding in Eurasian blackbirds (Turdus merula)</article-title>
					<source>Can. J. Zool</source>
					<volume>82</volume>
					<fpage>764</fpage>
					<lpage>768</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1139/z04-054</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<mixed-citation>Masood S, Abbas R Z, Iqbal Z, Mansoor MK, Sindhu Z, Zia MA, Khan JA. 2013. Role of Natural Antioxidants for the Control of Coccidiosis in Poultry. <italic>Pakistan Veterinary Journal</italic>. 33(4):401-407.<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260159600_Role_of_Natural_Antioxidants_for_the_Control_of_Coccidiosis_in_Poultry">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260159600_Role_of_Natural_Antioxidants_for_the_Control_of_Coccidiosis_in_Poultry</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Masood</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Abbas R</surname>
							<given-names>Z</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Iqbal</surname>
							<given-names>Z</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Mansoor</surname>
							<given-names>MK</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Sindhu</surname>
							<given-names>Z</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Zia</surname>
							<given-names>MA</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Khan</surname>
							<given-names>JA.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2013</year>
					<article-title>Role of Natural Antioxidants for the Control of Coccidiosis in Poultry</article-title>
					<source>Pakistan Veterinary Journal</source>
					<volume>33</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>401</fpage>
					<lpage>407</lpage>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260159600_Role_of_Natural_Antioxidants_for_the_Control_of_Coccidiosis_in_Poultry">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260159600_Role_of_Natural_Antioxidants_for_the_Control_of_Coccidiosis_in_Poultry</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<mixed-citation>McDougald LR, Fitz-Coy SH. 2013. Coccidiosis. In: Swayne DE, Glisson JR, McDougald LR, Nolan LK, Suarez D, Nair V. (eds). <italic>Diseases of Poultry</italic>. 13th ed. Wiley- Blackwell Publishing, Ames, Iowa, USA. Pp. 1148-1166. ISBN: 978-0-0470-95899-5.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>McDougald</surname>
							<given-names>LR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Fitz-Coy</surname>
							<given-names>SH.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2013</year>
					<chapter-title>Coccidiosis</chapter-title>
					<person-group person-group-type="editor">
						<name>
							<surname>Swayne</surname>
							<given-names>DE</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Glisson</surname>
							<given-names>JR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>McDougald</surname>
							<given-names>LR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nolan</surname>
							<given-names>LK</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Suarez</surname>
							<given-names>D</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Nair</surname>
							<given-names>V.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Diseases of Poultry</source>
					<edition>13</edition>
					<publisher-name>Wiley- Blackwell Publishing, Ames, Iowa</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>USA</publisher-loc>
					<fpage>1148</fpage>
					<lpage>1166</lpage>
					<isbn>978-0-0470-95899-5</isbn>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<mixed-citation>Naidoo V, McGaw L, Bisschop S, Duncan N, Eloff J. 2008. The value of plant extracts with antioxidant activity in attenuating coccidiosis in broiler chickens. <italic>Veterinary Parasitology</italic>. 153(3-4):214-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.02.013</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Naidoo</surname>
							<given-names>V</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>McGaw</surname>
							<given-names>L</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Bisschop</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Duncan</surname>
							<given-names>N</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Eloff</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2008</year>
					<article-title>The value of plant extracts with antioxidant activity in attenuating coccidiosis in broiler chickens</article-title>
					<source>Veterinary Parasitology</source>
					<volume>153</volume>
					<issue>3-4</issue>
					<fpage>214</fpage>
					<lpage>219</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.02.013</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<mixed-citation>NRC. National Research Council. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, ninthed. National Academy Press: Washington, DC. USA. Pp. 176. ISBN: 978-0-309-04892-7. https://doi.org/10.17226/2114</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>NRC. National Research Council</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>1994</year>
					<source>Nutrient Requirements of Poultry</source>
					<edition>ninth</edition>
					<publisher-name>National Academy Press</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>Washington, DC. USA</publisher-loc>
					<fpage>176</fpage>
					<lpage>176</lpage>
					<isbn>978-0-309-04892-7</isbn>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17226/2114</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<mixed-citation>Peek H, Landman W. 2011. Coccidiosis in poultry: anticoccidial products, vaccines and other prevention strategies. <italic>Veterinary Quarterly</italic>. 31(3):143-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.2011.605247</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Peek</surname>
							<given-names>H</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Landman</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>Coccidiosis in poultry: anticoccidial products, vaccines and other prevention strategies</article-title>
					<source>Veterinary Quarterly</source>
					<volume>31</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>143</fpage>
					<lpage>161</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/01652176.2011.605247</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<mixed-citation>SAS. Institute Inc. 2002. SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide. Cary, NC. USA. ISBN 1-59047-243-8.<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/91pdf/sasdoc_91/stat_ug_7313.pdf">https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/91pdf/sasdoc_91/stat_ug_7313.pdf</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<collab>SAS. Institute Inc</collab>
					</person-group>
					<year>2002</year>
					<source>SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide</source>
					<publisher-name>Cary</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>NC. USA</publisher-loc>
					<isbn>1-59047-243-8</isbn>
					<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/91pdf/sasdoc_91/stat_ug_7313.pdf">https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/91pdf/sasdoc_91/stat_ug_7313.pdf</ext-link>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<mixed-citation>Shirley MW, Smith AL, Blake DP. 2007. Challenges in the successful control of the avian coccidia. <italic>Vaccine</italic>. 25(30):5540-5547. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.12.030</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Shirley</surname>
							<given-names>MW</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Smith</surname>
							<given-names>AL</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Blake</surname>
							<given-names>DP.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2007</year>
					<article-title>Challenges in the successful control of the avian coccidia</article-title>
					<source>Vaccine</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>30</issue>
					<fpage>5540</fpage>
					<lpage>5547</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.12.030</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<mixed-citation>Shivaramaiah C, Barta JR, Hernandez-Velasco X, Téllez G, Hargis BM. 2014. Coccidiosis: recent advancements in the immunobiology of Eimeria species, preventive measures, and the importance of vaccination as a control tool against these Apicomplexan parasites. <italic>Veterinary Medicine (Auckl)</italic>. 5:23-34. http://doi.org/10.2147/VMRR.S57839</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Shivaramaiah</surname>
							<given-names>C</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Barta</surname>
							<given-names>JR</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Hernandez-Velasco</surname>
							<given-names>X</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Téllez</surname>
							<given-names>G</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Hargis</surname>
							<given-names>BM.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2014</year>
					<article-title>Coccidiosis: recent advancements in the immunobiology of Eimeria species, preventive measures, and the importance of vaccination as a control tool against these Apicomplexan parasites</article-title>
					<source>Veterinary Medicine (Auckl)</source>
					<volume>5</volume>
					<fpage>23</fpage>
					<lpage>34</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2147/VMRR.S57839</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<mixed-citation>Tewari A, Maharana B. 2011. Control of poultry coccidiosis: changing trends. <italic>Journal of Parasitic Diseases</italic>. 10-17. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12639-011-0034-7</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Tewari</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Maharana</surname>
							<given-names>B.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2011</year>
					<article-title>Control of poultry coccidiosis: changing trends</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Parasitic Diseases</source>
					<fpage>10</fpage>
					<lpage>17</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s12639-011-0034-7</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B23">
				<mixed-citation>Williams R. 2005. Intercurrent coccidiosis and necrotic enteritis of chickens: rational, integrated disease management by maintenance of gut integrity. <italic>Avian Pathol</italic>. 34:159-180. http://doi.org/10.1080/03079450500112195</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Williams</surname>
							<given-names>R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2005</year>
					<article-title>Intercurrent coccidiosis and necrotic enteritis of chickens: rational, integrated disease management by maintenance of gut integrity</article-title>
					<source>Avian Pathol</source>
					<volume>34</volume>
					<fpage>159</fpage>
					<lpage>180</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B24">
				<mixed-citation>Williams RB. 1973. Effects of different infection rates on the oocyst production of <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> or <italic>Eimeria tenella</italic> in the chicken. <italic>Parasitology</italic>. 67:279-288. http://doi.org/10.1017/s0031182000046515</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>Williams</surname>
							<given-names>RB.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>1973</year>
					<article-title>Effects of different infection rates on the oocyst production of Eimeria acervulina or Eimeria tenella in the chicken</article-title>
					<source>Parasitology</source>
					<volume>67</volume>
					<fpage>279</fpage>
					<lpage>288</lpage>
					<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/s0031182000046515</pub-id>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
		<fn-group>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn1">
				
				<p>Clave: 2020-59.</p>
			</fn>
		</fn-group>
	</back>
	<sub-article article-type="translation" id="s1" xml:lang="en">
		<front-stub>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Short Note</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Evaluation of oocyst shedding of <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> and <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> in broiler chickens</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<abstract>
				<title>ABSTRACT:</title>
				<p>The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the day and the time of sample collection of an experimental challenge with <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (EM) and <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (EA) in broiler chickens. One- day old male Cobb-Vantress broiler chickens were randomly allocated to one of three groups with ten replicates (n=8 chickens/replicate). Chickens were placed in battery cages with a controlled age- appropriate environment: Group 1) Negative control (no challenge or treatment); 2) Challenge control (<italic>Eimeria</italic> challenge only); 3) Challenge + Salinomycin. Challenged chickens were orally gavaged with the mixed culture of EM/EA (10,000 sporulated EM containing 4% wild-type EA) at 14 days of age. Performance parameters were recorded at days 7, 14, 20, and 23. Lesions scores were recorded post-mortem on days 20 and 23. Oocyst per gram (OPG) was performed on days six, seven, and eight post-challenge, and samples were collected at 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM on each day, respectively. Oocyst counts were significantly different (P &lt; 0.05) between morning and afternoon on day six post coccidia challenge. The results of this study show that the day and the time at which samples are collected can have a significant effect on the reliability and validity of data.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>Eimeria maxima</kwd>
				<kwd>Eimeria acervulina</kwd>
				<kwd>oocysts shedding</kwd>
				<kwd>performance parameters</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</front-stub>
		<body>
			<sec sec-type="intro">
				<title>INTRODUCTION</title>
				<p>Coccidiosis presently proves to be a major and pressing protozoan disease in the poultry industry worldwide (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Dalloul and Lillehoj, 2006</xref>). Coccidiosis is caused by a protozoan parasite from the genus <italic>Eimeria</italic>. The life cycle of coccidial parasites includes asexual and sexual replication stages and begins when a bird ingests sporulated oocysts from the environment, as described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Conway and McKenzie (2007)</xref>. After ingestion, four sporocysts contained in a single sporulated oocyst release two sporozoites. The release of the sporozoites is caused by digestive activity within the chicken. Released sporozoites will then “invade epithelial cells in a specific zone of the intestine or ceca;” which is dependent on the <italic>Eimeria</italic> species (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Chapman, 2003</xref>). Within the cell, sporozoites become trophozoites and feed for twelve to forty-eight hours to grow and eventually asexually divide via schizogony, or merogony; this stage is known as a schizont or meront. Within the parasite, the merozoite stages form and are released after the schizont matures and ruptures, which takes three days. This first generation of merozoites will invade more epithelial cells and repeat the multiplication process. The second generation of merozoites may induce a third schizogonous cycle; this too is dependent on the <italic>Eimeria</italic> species. Both male (microgametocytes) and female (macrogametocytes) gametocytes will form. Macrogametocytes will grow into macrogametes. Microgametocytes will mature, rupture, and release biflagellate microgametes that fertilize the female macrogametes. Following fertilization, a “thickened wall forms around the macrogamete, forming a zygote” (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Conway and McKenzie, 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">McDougald and Fitz-Coy, 2013</xref>). At the conclusion of this cycle, a new oocyst is formed and will pass through the bird’s droppings after rupturing its host cell (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Tewari and Maharana, 2011</xref>).</p>
				<p><italic>Eimeria</italic> spp. oocysts, from a single or several simultaneous infections, are excreted in feces over a period of several days. Oocysts shedding starts low, reaches a plateau, and then decreases until the disease runs its course (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Clarke, 1979</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Williams, 1973</xref>). Interestingly, several investigators have reported that oocyst counts differ between morning and evening sampling collections (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Hudman <italic>et al</italic>., 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brown <italic>et al</italic>., 2001</xref>). This variability has been recognized for several years but has largely been overlooked (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Misof, 2004</xref>). Recently, however, it has been shown that, the day post-inoculation and the time of day at which samples are collected can have a significant effect on the reliability and validity of the data (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Brawner and Hill, 1999</xref>). Hence, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate the influence of oocyst shedding variation and day of sampling on experimental challenge with <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> and <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> in broiler chickens.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="materials|methods">
				<title>MATERIALS AND METHODS</title>
				<sec>
					<title>Challenge strains</title>
					<p>Oocysts of <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> M6 (EM) and wild-type <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (EA) were provided by Dr. John. R. Barta, University of Guelph, Canada. The methods for detecting and recovering oocysts from infected chickens, oocyst sporulation, and the preparation of infective doses, were conducted as described previously (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Haug <italic>et al</italic>., 2006</xref>). A dosetitration study was performed to determine the EM/EA coccidia co-challenge dose before starting the experimental trial. At 13 days of age, broilers were weighed, divided into three groups (n = 15/group), and challenged with three different doses (10,000, 20,000, or 40,000) of sporulated oocysts in 1 mL volume by oral gavage. The fourth group of chicks was kept as a negative control. Five days post-challenge, body weight (BW) and body weight gain (BWG) were recorded. In the present study, challenged chickens were orally gavaged at 9:00 am with the mixed culture of EM/EA (10,000 sporulated EM containing 4% wild-type EA) at 14 days of age as this dosage reduced BWG by 35.82%. This is based on the criterion that the challenge dose must cause sub-clinical coccidiosis, consisting of a reduction between 25-35 % in BWG without the presence of clinical signs.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Animal source and experimental design</title>
					<p>Two hundred and forty one-day-old male Cobb-Vantress broiler chickens (Fayetteville, AR, USA) were weighed and randomly allocated to one of three groups with ten replicates (n=8 chickens/replicate). Chickens were placed in battery cages, with a controlled age- appropriate environment: Group 1) Negative control (no challenge or treatment); 2) Challenge control (<italic>Eimeria</italic> challenge only); 3) Challenge + Salinomycin at 60 g/ton (Bio- Cox 60, Huvepharma, Peachtree City, GA 30269). Chicks received <italic>ad libitum</italic> access to water and feed for 23 days. An experimental starter diet (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t6">Table 1</xref>) was formulated to approximate the nutritional requirements of broiler chickens as recommended by the National Research Council (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">NRC, 1994</xref>) and adjusted to breeder's recommendations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Cobb, 2015</xref>). Chickens received 23 hours of light from days 1 to 4, 20 hours of light from days 5 to 14, and 18 hours of light from days 15 to 23. Light intensity was set at 30- footcandle the first week, 1-foot candle from days eight to fourteen, and 0.5-footcandle from days 15 to 23. Temperature and light were set to mimic commercial conditions from d 1-21 in all rooms with a gradual reduction on temperature from 32 to 24°C and relative humidity at 55 ± 5%.</p>
					<p>
						<table-wrap id="t6">
							<label>Table 1</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Ingredient composition and nutrient content of a corn-soybean starter diet used in all experimental groups on as-is basis.</title>
							</caption>
							<table>
								<colgroup>
									<col/>
									<col/>
								</colgroup>
								<thead>
									<tr>
										<th align="left">Item</th>
										<th align="center">Starter diet</th>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<th align="left">Ingredients (%)</th>
										<th align="left"> </th>
									</tr>
								</thead>
								<tbody>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Corn</td>
										<td align="center">57.34</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Soybean meal</td>
										<td align="center">34.66</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Poultry fat</td>
										<td align="center">3.45</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Dicalcium phosphate</td>
										<td align="center">1.86</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Calcium carbonate</td>
										<td align="center">0.99</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Salt</td>
										<td align="center">0.38</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">DL-Methionine</td>
										<td align="center">0.33</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">L-Lysine HCl</td>
										<td align="center">0.31</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Threonine</td>
										<td align="center">0.16</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Vitamin premix<sup>1</sup></td>
										<td align="center">0.20</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Mineral premix<sup>2</sup></td>
										<td align="center">0.10</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Choline chloride 60%</td>
										<td align="center">0.20</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Antioxidant<sup>3</sup></td>
										<td align="center">0.02</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Calculated analysis</td>
										<td align="left"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Metabolizable energy (kcal/ kg)</td>
										<td align="center">3,035</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Crude protein (%)</td>
										<td align="center">22.16</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Ether extract (%)</td>
										<td align="center">5.68</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Lysine (%)</td>
										<td align="center">1.35</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Methionine (%)</td>
										<td align="center">0.64</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Methionine + cystine (%)</td>
										<td align="center">0.99</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Threonine (%)</td>
										<td align="center">0.92</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Tryptophan (%)</td>
										<td align="center">0.28</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Total calcium</td>
										<td align="center">0.90</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Available phosphorus</td>
										<td align="center">0.45</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Determined analysis</td>
										<td align="left"> </td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Crude protein (%)</td>
										<td align="center">21.15</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Ether extract (%)</td>
										<td align="center">6.05</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Calcium (%)</td>
										<td align="center">0.94</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Phosphorus (%)</td>
										<td align="center">0.73</td>
									</tr>
								</tbody>
							</table>
							<table-wrap-foot>
								<fn id="TFN5">
									<label><sup>1</sup></label>
									<p>Vitamin premix was supplied by the following per kg: vitamin A, 20,000 IU; vitamin D3, 6,000 IU; vitamin E, 75 IU; vitamin K3, 6.0 mg; thiamine, 3.0 mg; riboflavin, 8.0 mg; pantothenic acid, 18 mg; niacin, 60 mg; pyridoxine, 5 mg; folic acid, 2 mg; biotin, 0.2 mg; cyanocobalamin, 16 µg; and ascorbic acid, 200 mg (Nutra Blend LLC, Neosho, MO 64850). <sup>2</sup>Mineral was premix supplied at the following per kg: manganese, 120 mg; zinc, 100 mg; iron, 120 mg; copper, 10 to 15 mg; iodine, 0.7 mg; selenium, 0.4 mg; and cobalt, 0.2 mg (Nutra Blend LLC, Neosho, MO 64850). <sup>3</sup>Ethoxyquin.</p>
								</fn>
							</table-wrap-foot>
						</table-wrap>
					</p>
					<p>Performance parameters: body weight (BW), body weight gain (BWG), feed intake (FI), and feed conversion rate (FCR) were recorded at days 7, 14, 20, and 23. On day 20, half of the chickens from each replicate were weighed and euthanized while the remaining chickens were weighed and euthanized on day 23 in order to evaluate macroscopic lesions according to the scoring system of Johnson and Reid (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Johnson and Reid, 1970</xref>). Oocyst per gram (OPG) was evaluated on days six, seven, and eight post-challenge, and samples were collected at 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM on each day, respectively. All animal handling procedures complied with the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Explicitly, the IACUC approved this study under protocol #21020.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>Data and statistical analysis</title>
					<p>Lesions scores, oocyst per gram, and performance data were subjected to ANOVA as a completely randomized design using the GLM procedure of SAS (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">SAS, 2002</xref>). For growth performance parameters (BW, BWG, FI, and FCR), each replicate cage was considered as an experimental unit. Treatment means were partitioned using Duncan's multiple range test at P&lt;0.05 indicating statistical significance.</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="results|discussion">
				<title>RESULTS AND DISCUSSION</title>
				<p>The results of the evaluation of body weight, body weight gain, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio in broiler chickens challenged with coccidia are summarized in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 2</xref>. All three groups started with similar BW; however, at d 7, there was an increase in the BW of chickens treated with Salinomycin. By day 20 (6 days post-challenge), the the negative control group (no challenged or treated) and challenge Salinomycin treated group exhibited a significant increase in BW when compared with the challenged control group (P &lt; 0.05). Interestingly, by day 23 (9 days post-challenge), there were only significant differences in BW between the negative control group and challenge control. A similar trend was observed in BWG and FCR. No significant differences were observed in FI among the three groups (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t7">Table 2</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t7">
						<label>Table 2</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Evaluation of body weight, body weight gain, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio in broiler chickens challenged with coccidia.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">Item</th>
									<th align="center">Negative control (no challenge or treatment)</th>
									<th align="center">Challenge control (<italic>Eimeria</italic> challenge only)</th>
									<th align="center">Challenge + treated Salinomycin Sodium (60 g/ton)</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Body weight (g)</td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0</td>
									<td align="center">46.60 ± 0.19</td>
									<td align="center">46.16 ± 0.36</td>
									<td align="center">46.70 ± 0.42</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 7</td>
									<td align="center">145.05 ± 2.16 <sup>ba</sup></td>
									<td align="center">144.48 ± 2.51 <sup>ba</sup></td>
									<td align="center">148.95 ± 2.33 <sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 14</td>
									<td align="center">401.30 ± 7.28 <sup>bc</sup></td>
									<td align="center">402.63 ± 9.21 <sup>bac</sup></td>
									<td align="center">429.16 ± 5.11 <sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 20</td>
									<td align="center">736.14 ± 11.23 <sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">671.97 ± 16.35 <sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">751.09 ± 8.00 <sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 23</td>
									<td align="center">927.51 ± 20.06 <sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">781.25 ± 42.28 <sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">881.38 ± 23.87 <sup>ba</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Body weight gain (g)</td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 7</td>
									<td align="center">98.45 ± 2.13 <sup>ba</sup></td>
									<td align="center">98.31 ± 2.54 <sup>ba</sup></td>
									<td align="center">102.25 ± 2.36 <sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 7 to 14</td>
									<td align="center">256.26 ± 6.15</td>
									<td align="center">258.16 ± 7.55</td>
									<td align="center">280.21 ± 3.82 <sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 14 to 20</td>
									<td align="center">334.84 ± 5.67 <sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">269.34 ± 11.69 <sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">321.93 ± 5.47 <sup>a</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 23</td>
									<td align="center">890.31 ± 29.18 <sup>a</sup></td>
									<td align="center">735.65 ± 42.60 <sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">834.03 ± 23.61</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Feed intake (g)</td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 14</td>
									<td align="center">609.89 ± 12.51</td>
									<td align="center">621.93 ± 16.27</td>
									<td align="center">641.06 ± 15.45</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 20</td>
									<td align="center">930.19 ± 37.87</td>
									<td align="center">909.81 ± 36.98</td>
									<td align="center">770.41 ± 30.53</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 23</td>
									<td align="center">1323.79 ± 31.08</td>
									<td align="center">1198.68 ± 57.19</td>
									<td align="center">1325.55 ± 29.11</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Feed conversion ratio (adjusted)</td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 14</td>
									<td align="center">1.50 ± 0.03</td>
									<td align="center">1.53 ± 0.03</td>
									<td align="center">1.50 ± 0.04</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 20</td>
									<td align="center">1.44 ± 0.01 <sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">1.49 ± 0.02</td>
									<td align="center">1.45 ± 0.02</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">d 0 to 23</td>
									<td align="center">1.41 ± 0.06 <sup>b</sup></td>
									<td align="center">1.54 ± 0.03</td>
									<td align="center">1.51 ± 0.03</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN6">
								<p> Chickens were challenged with <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (M6) and <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (wild type) by oral gavage at 14 days. <sup>a-c</sup> Mean values in the same row that do not share a common letter differ significantly (P &lt; 0.05). Each value represents the mean ± standard error. Ten replicates, n = 8.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>
					<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 3</xref> shows the results of the evaluation of <italic>E. maxima</italic> oocyst per gram count in the feces of broilers on day 6 through day 8 post-challenge at different times of the day, the average per day. Although there was some recovery of oocysts from unchallenged untreated control chickens, there was significantly less OPG in this group compared to both challenge groups. No significant difference in OPG was observed between both challenge groups during the three days of evaluation (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 3</xref>). In the present study, it was remarkable to find that EM oocysts were excreted in very high numbers on day 6 post-challenge in the evening for all three experimental groups. When combining and obtaining the average OPG, day 6 showed a higher number of EM oocysts, and the expected significant differences between the OPG amongst the three experimental groups were observed (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 3</xref>). Similarly, significant differences were found in the lesion scores for EM for both evaluation days (20 and d 23) between the three experimental groups. Nevertheless, a higher number of oocysts were recovered on d 20 in both challenged groups compared to d 23 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t8">Table 3</xref>). In the present study, negative control chickens were randomly assigned into the experimental groups that were challenged with coccidia. Perhaps, that is the reason that these chickens showed some infection, due to cross contamination of feces among the cages. Clearly, in future studies, negative control chickens must be placed in a separate room and if this is not possible, separate, and isolated cages.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t8">
						<label>Table 3</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Evaluation of <italic>E. maxima</italic> oocyst per gram count<sup>1</sup> in the feces of broilers on day 6 through day 8 post challenge at different times of the day and average per day.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="center">Treatment</th>
									<th align="center">Day 6 / 9:00 AM (day 20)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 6 / 6:00 PM(day 20)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 6 Average AM/PM</th>
									<th align="center">Day 7 / 9:00 AM (day 21)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 7 / 6:00 PM (day 21)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 7 Average AM/PM</th>
									<th align="center">Day 8 / 9:00 AM (day 22)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 8 / 6:00 PM (day 22)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 8 Average AM/PM</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Negative</td>
									<td align="center">239 ±</td>
									<td align="center">1,880 ±</td>
									<td align="center">1,059 ±</td>
									<td align="center">2,214 ±</td>
									<td align="center">465 ±</td>
									<td align="center">1,340 ±</td>
									<td align="center">312 ±</td>
									<td align="center">504 ±</td>
									<td align="center">408 ±</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">control</td>
									<td align="center">123.12<sup>b z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">350.09<sup>b y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">192.37 <sup>b z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">2,055.28<sup>b y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">164.91<sup>b z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">1,080.81 <sup>b z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">247.92<sup>b z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">399.77<sup>b z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">319.28 <sup>b y</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Challenge</td>
									<td align="center">39,756 ±</td>
									<td align="center">392,859 ±</td>
									<td align="center">216,308 ±</td>
									<td align="center">258,783 ±</td>
									<td align="center">73,803 ±</td>
									<td align="center">166,293 ±</td>
									<td align="center">39,751 ±</td>
									<td align="center">12,844 ±</td>
									<td align="center">26,298 ±</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">control</td>
									<td align="center">8,540.64<sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">53742.38<sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">26,680.84 <sup>a x</sup></td>
									<td align="center">34093.03 <sup>a w</sup></td>
									<td align="center">20,753.83 <sup>a x</sup></td>
									<td align="center">24,541.92 <sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">10,808.39 <sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">2,256.07 <sup>a z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">5888.63 <sup>a z</sup></td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Challenge + treated</td>
									<td align="center">28,060 ±</td>
									<td align="center">304,517 ±</td>
									<td align="center">166,288 ±</td>
									<td align="center">180,752 ±</td>
									<td align="center">86,940 ±</td>
									<td align="center">133,846 ±</td>
									<td align="center">23,440 ±</td>
									<td align="center">11,966 ±</td>
									<td align="center">17,703 ±</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Salinomycin Sodium</td>
									<td align="center">11,708.46<sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">31,024.37<sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">11,708.46 <sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">39,771.21<sup>a w</sup></td>
									<td align="center">22,231.97<sup>a x</sup></td>
									<td align="center">39,771.21 <sup>a y</sup></td>
									<td align="center">5,199.72<sup>a yz</sup></td>
									<td align="center">1,207.11<sup>a z</sup></td>
									<td align="center">5199.72 <sup>a z</sup></td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>The results of the evaluation of <italic>E. acervulina</italic> oocyst per gram count in the feces of broilers on day 6 through day 8 post-challenge at different times of the day, the average per day, and lesions scores on days 20 and 23 are summarized on <xref ref-type="table" rid="t9">Table 4</xref>. A similar trend was observed in the OPG for EA<italic>,</italic> although more oocysts were present on day 23 in the challenged groups than day 20 (<xref ref-type="table" rid="t9">Table 4</xref>). Macroscopic intestinal lesions scores on days 20 and 23 of age are showed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t10">table 5</xref>. In summary, oocyst counts were significantly different between morning and evening on d 6 post-challenge. The increased shedding of oocysts in the evening samples collections are in accordance with earlier studies of the diurnal excretion of <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp. oocysts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Hudman <italic>et al</italic>., 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brown <italic>et al</italic>., 2001</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Misof, 2004</xref>).</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t9">
						<label>Table 4</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Evaluation of <italic>E. acervulina</italic> oocyst per gram count<sup>1</sup> in the feces of broilers on day 6 through day 8 post challenge at different times of the day and average per day.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="center">Treatment</th>
									<th align="center">Day 6 / 9:00 AM (day 20)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 6 / 6:00 PM(day 20)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 6 Average AM/PM</th>
									<th align="center">Day 7 / 9:00 AM (day 21)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 7 / 6:00 PM (day 21)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 7 Average AM/PM</th>
									<th align="center">Day 8 / 9:00 AM (day 22)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 8 / 6:00 PM (day 22)</th>
									<th align="center">Day 8 Average AM/PM</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Negative</td>
									<td align="left">83 ±</td>
									<td align="left">52 ±</td>
									<td align="left">55 ± 29.65c y</td>
									<td align="left">0 ± 0c z</td>
									<td align="left">0 ± 0b z</td>
									<td align="left">0 ± 0 c z</td>
									<td align="left">52 ±</td>
									<td align="left">26 ±</td>
									<td align="left">52 ±</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">control</td>
									<td align="left">28.07 a y</td>
									<td align="left">30.20 c y</td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
									<td align="left"> </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">Challenge</td>
									<td align="left">1,000 ±</td>
									<td align="left">5,993 ±</td>
									<td align="left">3,497 ±</td>
									<td align="left">6,656 ±</td>
									<td align="left">3,007 ±</td>
									<td align="left">4,831 ±</td>
									<td align="left">1,800 ±</td>
									<td align="left">779 ±</td>
									<td align="left">1,289 ±</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="center">control</td>
									<td align="left">319.03 a yz</td>
									<td align="left">995.74 a w</td>
									<td align="left">352.58a y</td>
									<td align="left">1924.02 a w</td>
									<td align="left">1266.66 a x</td>
									<td align="left">1580.37a y</td>
									<td align="left">212.01 ab y</td>
									<td align="left">228.56 ab z</td>
									<td align="left">182.52ba z</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Challenge + treated</td>
									<td align="left">194 ±</td>
									<td align="left">1,849 ±</td>
									<td align="left">1,022 ±</td>
									<td align="left">2,287 ±</td>
									<td align="left">1,912 ±</td>
									<td align="left">2,099 ±</td>
									<td align="left">1,339 ±</td>
									<td align="left">552 ±</td>
									<td align="left">945 ±</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Salinomycin Sodium</td>
									<td align="left">54.9 a z</td>
									<td align="left">498.62 b w</td>
									<td align="left">241.84b y</td>
									<td align="left">335.90 b w</td>
									<td align="left">514.33 a w</td>
									<td align="left">270.65b y</td>
									<td align="left">88.24 b x</td>
									<td align="left">99.01 b y</td>
									<td align="left">69.81b z</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN7">
								<p>Chickens were challenged with <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (M6) and <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (wild type) by oral gavage at 14 days of age. <sup>1</sup>Each value represents the mean ± standard error. Five replicates/ n = 5. <sup>a-c</sup> Mean values in the same column that do not share a common letter differ significantly. <sup>w-z</sup> Mean values in the same row that do not share a common letter differ significantly (P &lt; 0.05). <sup>2</sup>Each value represents the mean ± standard error. Ten replicates/n = 8. <sup>a-c</sup> Mean values in the same column that do not share a common letter differ significantly.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t10">
						<label>Table 5</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Macroscopic intestinal lesions scores<sup>1</sup> on days 20 and 23 of age for broiler chickens challenged with <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> and <italic>E. maxima</italic>.</title>
						</caption>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="center">Treatment</th>
									<th align="center" colspan="2"><italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic></th>
									
									<th align="center" colspan="2"><italic>Eimeria maxima</italic></th>
									
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th align="left"> </th>
									<th align="center">day 20</th>
									<th align="center">day 23</th>
									<th align="center">day 20</th>
									<th align="center">day 23</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="right">Negative control</td>
									<td align="center">0.00 ± 0.00c</td>
									<td align="center">0.00 ± 0.00c</td>
									<td align="center">0.05 ± 0.03 c</td>
									<td align="center">0.00 ± 0.00 c</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="right">Challenge control</td>
									<td align="center">0.80 ± 0.12a z</td>
									<td align="center">1.45 ± 0.11a y</td>
									<td align="center">1.93 ± 0.10 a y</td>
									<td align="center">1.25 ± 0.08 a z</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Challenge + treated Salinomycin Sodium</td>
									<td align="center">0.48 ± 0.11b z</td>
									<td align="center">0.90 ± 0.09b y</td>
									<td align="center">1.28 ± 0.14 b y</td>
									<td align="center">0.77 ± 0.09 b z</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN8">
								<p>Chickens were challenged with <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic> (M6) and <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic> (wild type) by oral gavage at 14 days of age. <sup>1</sup>Each value represents the mean ± standard error. Five replicates, n = 5. <sup>a-c</sup> Mean values in the same column that do not share a common letter differ significantly. <sup>w-z</sup> Mean values in the same row that do not share a common letter differ significantly, (P &lt; 0.05). <sup>2</sup>Each value represents the mean ± standard error. Ten replicates, n = 8. <sup>a-c</sup> Mean values in the same column that do not share a common letter differ significantly, (P &lt; 0.05).</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>Coccidiosis remains one of the most critical diseases in poultry and results in the annual loss of millions of US dollars by the poultry industry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Williams, 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Chapman, 1999</xref>). One common practice in managing coccidiosis is the use of prophylactic drugs and antimicrobials that inhibit the development of sporozoites/ merozoites. However, the poultry industry is now experiencing increasing drug resistance in <italic>Eimeria</italic> strains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Abbas <italic>et al</italic>., 2012</xref>). Thus, pressure from decreasing chemical efficacy has increased demand for new treatment methods such as through plant products. As there are clear advantages to an effective controlling agent without complications with <italic>Eimeria</italic> drug resistance, there is merit in searching for effective methods with mechanisms alternative to traditional anticoccidial chemotherapeutics (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Naidoo <italic>et al</italic>., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Masood <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>). Vaccination against coccidiosis is one alternative to chemical use. When vaccinating against coccidiosis, the natural immune system of the animal is employed to combat potential infections in the future (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Shivaramaiah <italic>et al</italic>., 2014</xref>). Conventionally, live or attenuated parasites are utilized and <italic>Eimeria</italic> specific vaccines can incorporate multiple species or strains (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Shivaramaiah <italic>et al</italic>., 2014</xref>). Attenuated <italic>Eimeria</italic> parasites can be selected through “precociousness,” in which “drug-sensitive, virulent strains of <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp.” are allowed to pass through a species host, reproducing, and being developed into attenuated vaccines (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Peek and Landman, 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Shirley <italic>et al</italic>., 2007</xref>).</p>
				<p>Previous research has described circadian variation in oocyst shedding across multiple avian host species (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Hudman <italic>et al</italic>., 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Brown <italic>et al</italic>., 2001</xref>). Consequently, if circadian variation in oocyst shedding is not accounted for, the results of such testing are unreliable and may be misleading (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Misof, 2004</xref>). A suitable method for obtaining accurate data seems to be to restrict the sampling period.</p>
				<p>The results of this study show that the day and the time at which samples are collected can have a significant impact on data and reinforces the importance of collecting the fecal samples at the same time of day post-challenge. Oocyst counts were significantly different between morning and afternoon on day six post coccidia challenge. Coccidia load sampling should be restricted to the second half of the total daylight time. This more restrictive period should thus be considered as the preferred period for obtaining reliable information.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="conclusions">
				<title>CONCLUSIONS</title>
				<p>The results of this study show that the day and the time at which samples are collected can have a significant impact on data and reinforces the importance of collecting the fecal samples at the same time of day post-challenge. Coccidia load sampling should be restricted to the second half of the total daylight time. This more restrictive period should thus be considered as the preferred period for obtaining reliable information.</p>
				<p>Funding: Research was supported in part by funds provided by USDA-NIFA Sustainable Agriculture Systems, Grant No. 2019-69012-29905. Title of Project: Empowering US Broiler Production for Transformation and Sustainability USDA-NIFA (Sustainable Agriculture Systems): No. 2019-69012-29905</p>
				<p>Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.</p>
			</sec>
		</body>
	</sub-article>
</article>