You are here

Home » Content

Sağlıklı ve Koksidiyozlu Etlik Piliçlerde Sülfakinoksalin’in Farmakokinetiği

The Pharmacokinetics of Sulphaquinoxaline in Healthy and Coccidiosed Broiler Chickens

Journal Name:

  • Uludag University Journal of The Faculty of Veterinary Medicine

Publication Year:

  • 2014

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this study is to investigate the pharmacokinetics parameters of sulphaquinoxaline after single administration of 100 mg/kg b.w. to healty and Eimeria tenella (E. tenella) infected chickens. In this study, 35 one-day-old, male Avian race, broiler chicks were used. The animals were divided into 5 equal groups (Grup I, II, III, IV and V) and consisting of 7 chicks in each. The animals in Group IV and V were infected on 24th days with E. tenella inoculum that contains 10 000 E. tenella oocysts. The medicine was applied to all chickens on 30th days. The drug was given intravenously to Group I, intracrop to Group II and Group IV, in drinking water to Group III and Group V. After the drug administration; 0,08., 0,25., 0,50., 1., 1.5., 2., 4., 6., 8., 12., 18., 24., 30, and 36th hours, blood were taken from animals to heparinised tubes. The drug concentration levels in plasma samples were determined by spectrophotometry. The plasma concentration-time curve, deter-mined after the administration of sulphaquinoxaline intravenous, showed that the drug distributed according to two-compartment open model. When the drug given to coccidiosed animals intracrop, compared to healthy ani- mals, there were significant increases (p<0.05) in absorbtion rate constant (ka) and hybrid rate constants repre-senting the slopes of distribution phase (α); and there were significant decreases (p<0.05) in hybrid rate con-stants representing terminal phase half life (t1/2α), hybrid rate constants representing terminal phase half life (t1/2β), absorption half-life (t1/2a), average retention time of drug (MRT), drug elimination rate constant (k10) and plasma to maximum level (tmax). When given via drinking water to coccidiosed animals compared to healthy animals, there were statistically significant increases (p<0.05) in ka and α; and significant (p<0,05) decrease in t1/2α, t1/2β, t1/2a, distribution volume of central compartment (V1) an MRT. Finally, according to data came from healthy and coccidiosed chicken, if the medicine would be used at the dose of 100 mg /kg c.a. via drinking wa-ter, it should be repeated 18 hour intervals for the benefit of highest efficacy of medicine. In coccidiosis cases, there is no need for the different administration route, because of insignificancy regarding administration inter-vals.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada, sağlıklı ve deneysel olarak Eimeria tenella (E. tenella) ile koksidiyoz oluşturulan etlik piliçlere 100 mg/kg c.a. dozunda verilen sülfakinoksalin’in farmakokinetik parametrelerinin karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada günlük, 35 adet, erkek, Avian ırkı etçi civciv kullanıldı. Hayvanlar her bir grupta 7 hayvan olacak şekilde 5 eşit gruba (Grup I, II, III, IV ve V) ayrıldı. Grup IV ve V’te bulunan hayvanlara 24. günde 10 000 E. tenella oosisti içeren inokulum verildi. İlaç bütün gruplara 30. günde uygulandı. İlaç Grup I’de bulunan hayvanlara damar içi, Grup II ve Grup IV’te bulunan hayvanlara kursak içi, Grup III ve Grup V’te bulu-nan hayvanlara ise içme suyuna katılarak verildi. Hayvanlara ilaç verilmesini takiben 0.08., 0,25., 0,50., 1., 1.5., 2., 4., 6., 8., 12., 18., 24., 30., 36. saatlerde, heparinli tüplere kan alındı. Plazma örneklerindeki ilaç yoğunlukları spektrofotometrik olarak belirlendi. Sülfakinoksalinin damar içi verilmesini takiben belirlenen plazma yoğunluk-zaman eğrisinden ilacın iki bölmeli dışarıya açık modele göre dağıldığı anlaşıldı. İlacın koksidiyozlu hayvanlara kursak içi verilmesi durumunda, sağlıklı hayvanlara göre emilme hız sabitesi (ka) ve dağılma dönemi hız sabite-sinde (α) önemli (p<0,05) bir artış; atılma dönemi yarı ömrü (t1/2β), dağılım dönemi yarı ömrü (t1/2α), emilme yarı ömrü (t1/2a), ilacın ortalama kalış süresi (MRT), atılma hız sabitesi (k10) ve doruk yoğunluğa ulaşma süresinde (tdoruk) önemli (p<0,05) düşüş tespit edildi. İlacın içme suyuyla verilmesinde ise, koksidiyozlu hayvanlarda sağ-lıklı hayvanlara göre ka ve α önemli (p<0,05) bir artış; t1/2β, t1/2a, t1/2α, merkezi bölme hacmi (V1) ve ilacın orta-lama kalış süresinde (MRT) önemli (p<0,05) bir düşüş tespit edildi. Sonuç olarak gerek sağlıklı, gerekse koksi-diyozlu hayvanlarda, içme suyu ile ilacın 100 mg/kg c.a. dozunda uygulanması durumunda etkili olabilmesi için 18 saat arayla kullanılması gerektiği tespit edilmiştir. Sağlıklı ve koksidiyozlu hayvanlarda uygulama sıklığı yönünden önemli bir farkın bulunmaması, koksidiyoz olgularında, farklı bir yolun izlenme zorunluluğunu da ortadan kaldırmaktadır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-saglikli-koksidiyozlu-etlik-piliclerde-sulfakinoksalinin-farmakokinetigi.pdf
  • 1-2
7
14
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Aylott M.V., Vestal, O.H., Stephens, J.F., Turk, D.E., 1968. Effect of coccidial infection upon passage rates of digestive tract content of chicks. Poult. Sci., 47, 900-904.
2. Banerjee N.C., Yadava, K.P., Jha, H.N., 1974. Distribution of sulphaquinoxaline in tissues of poultry. Ind. J. Physiol. Pharmacol., 18, 361-363.
3. Bevil R.F., 1988. Sulfonamides. In. Booth, N.H., (Ed.), Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeu-tics. 6 th Edition. Iowa State University, Ames, USA, pp.785-795.
4. Bratton A.C., Marshall, E.K., 1939. A new cou-pling component for sulphanilamide determina-tion. J. Biol. Chem., 128, 537-550.
5. Chadwick A., Rapson, E.B., Carlos, G.M., Lee, D.L., 1985. Circulating prolactin on concentra-tions in chickens with Eimeria tenella. Br. Poult. Sci., 26, 17-23.
6. De Gussem M., 2007. Coccidiosis in poultry: review on diagnosis, control, prevention and in-teraction with overall gut health. 16th European on Poultry Nutrition. Proceedings of the 16th Eu-ropean Symposium of World Poultry Science As-sociation, August, 26-30, Strasbourg, France.
7. El-Sayed M.G.A., Abd El-Aziz, M.I., El-Kholy, H.M.H., 1995. Kinetic behaviour of sul-phaquinoxaline and amprolium in chickens. Dtsch. Tierarztl. Wochenschr., 102, 481-485.
8. Fukata T., Komba, Y., Sasai, K., Baba, E., Ara-kawa, A., 1997. Evaluation of plasma chemistry and haematological studies on chickens infected with Eimeria tenella and E.acervulina. Vet. Rec., 141, 44-46.
9. Furusawa N., Tsuzukida, Y., 1998. Tissue con-centrations of sulphaquinoxaline administered in the food of laying hens. Br. Poult. Sci., 39, 683-685.
10.Hammond K.B., 1977. Drugs and children: Methods for therapeutics monitoring. Clin. Toxi-col., 10, 159-183.
11.Hoff R.B., Meneghini, L., Pizzolato, T.M., Peral-ba, M.C.R., Diaz-Cruz, M.S., Barcelo, D., 2014. Structural elucidation of sulfaquinoxaline meta-bolism products and their occurrence in biologic samples using High Resolution Orbitrap Mass Spectrometry. Anal. Chem., 86, 5579-5586.
12.Kalra C.S., Gill, B.S., Singh, H., 1996. Serum biochemical studies on interaction of aflatoxico-sis and coccidiosis in poultry. Indian Vet. J., 73, 504-508.
13.Kant V, Singh, P, Verma, P.K., Bais, I., Parmar, M.S., Gopal, A., Gupta, V., 2013. Anticoccidial drugs used in the poultry: An overview. Science International., 1, 261-5.
14.Kaya S., 2000. Kemoterapötikler. İçinde: Kaya, S., Pirinçci, İ., Bilgili, A., (Eds), Veteriner Uygu-lamalı Farmakoloji. 2. Cilt. Medisan Yayınevi, Ankara, s. 267-440.
15.Kaya S., Baydan, E., Bilgili, A., Yarsan, E., Şeker, Y., 1996. Etlik piliçlerde enrofloksasinin farmakokinetiği ve manganla enrofloksasin arasında emilme yönünden etkileşme. Ankara Üniv. Fak. Derg., 43, 195-202.16. Levine N.D., 1985. Apicomplexa: The Coccidia Proper. In: Levine, N.D. (Ed), Veterinary Proto-zoology. Iowa State University Pres, Ames, USA, pp. 130-232.
17. Li T., Qiao, G.L., Hu, G.Z., Meng, F.D., Qiu, Y.S., Zhang, X.Y., Guo, W.X., Yie, H.L., Li, S.F., Li, S.Y., 1995. Comparative plasma and tis-sue pharmacokinetics drug residue profiles of dif-ferent chemotherapeutics in flows and rabbits. J. Vet. Pharmacol. Therap., 18, 260-273.
18. Lindsay D.S., Blagburn, B.L., 1995. Antiproto-zoan drugs. In: Adams, H.R. (Ed), Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. Iowa State Uni-versity Pres, Ames. pp. 950-968.
19. Luders H., Lai, K.W., Hinz, K.H., 1974. Blut-und Gewebespiegel von Sulfametazin und Sulfa-quinoxalin bei Broilern nach Verabreichung der Medikamente über das Trinkwasser. Zbl. Vet. Med. B., 21, 110-118.
20.Mathis G.F., McDougald, L.R. McMurray, B., 1984. Effectiveness of therapeutic anticoccidial drugs against recently isolated coccidia. Poult. Sci., 63, 1149-1153.
21.Mcdougald L.R., Reid, W.M., 1991. Protozoa. In: Calnek, B.W., Barnes, H.J., Beard, C.W., Reid, H.W. (Eds.), Diseases of Poultry. Yoder. Iowa State Univ. Pres.Ames, USA pp. 781-797.
22. Mimioğlu M., Göksu, K., Sayın, F., 1969. Veter-iner ve Tıbbi Protozooloji II. Ankara Üniv. Vet. Fak. Yayın: 248.
23.Mouafo A.N., Richard, F., Entzeroth, R., 2000. Observation of sutures in the oocyst wall of Ei-meria tenella (Apicomplexa). Parasitol. Res., 86, 1015-1017.
24.Okursoy S., 2001. Tavuklarda coccidiosis. İçinde: Dinçer Ş. (Ed), Coccidiosis. Parazitoloji Derneği, Yayın No:17, İzmir, s. 163-176
25.Reid W.M., 1991. Protozoa. In: Calnek, B.W., John Barnes, H., Beard, C. W. , Reid, W.M., Yoder, H.W. (Eds), Diseases of Poultry. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA, pp. 779.
26.Ruff M. D., 1999. Important parasites in poultry production systems. Vet. Parasitol., 84, 337-347.
27. Schildt C.S., Herrick, C.A., 1955. The effect of cecal coccidiosis on the motility of the digestive tract of the domestic fowls. J. Parasitol., 41, 18-19.
28. Schlenker F.S., Simmons, B.K., 1950. The ab-sorption, distribution, and excretion of sul-phaquinoxaline in poultry. Am. J. Vet. Res., 11, 291-295.
29. Shumaker R.C., 1986. PKCALC. A basic interac-tive computer program for statistical and phar-macokinetic analysis of data. Drug Metab. Rev., 17, 331-348.
30. Spoo J.W., Jim, J.E., 1995. Chemotherapy of microbial diseases. In: Adams, H.R. (Ed.), Veter-inary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA pp. 753-773.
31. Stephan B., Rommel, M., Daugschies, A., Haberkorn, A., 1997. Studies of resistance to an-ticoccidials in Eimeria field isolates and pure Ei-meria strains. Vet. Parasitol., 69, 19-29.
32. Sumano H., Fuentes, V., Ocampo, L., 1990. Pharmacokinetic aspects of a sulphachloro-pyridazine trimethoprim preparation in normal and diseased fowl. Br. Poult. Sci., 31, 627-634.
33.Wagner J.G., 1975. Fundamentals of clinical pharmacokinetics. Chicago: Drug Intelligence Pub Inc-USA.
34.White G., Willams, R.S., 1983. Evaluation of a mixture of trimethoprim and sulphaquinoxaline for the treatment of bacterial and coccidial dis-eases of poultry. Vet. Rec., 113, 608-612.
35.Witlock D.R., 1983. Physiological basis of blood loss during Eimeria tenella infection. Avian Dis., 27, 1043-1051.
36.Witlock D.R., Ruff, M.O., Chute, M.B., 1981. Physiogical basis of Eimeria tenella-induced mortality individual chickens. J. Parasitol., 67, 65-69.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com