Application of prebiotics and probiotics in poultry production

Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA.
Poultry Science (Impact Factor: 1.67). 05/2003; 82(4):627-31. DOI: 10.1093/ps/82.4.627
Source: PubMed


The intestinal microbiota, epithelium, and immune system provide resistance to enteric pathogens. Recent data suggest that resistance is not solely due to the sum of the components, but that cross-talk between these components is also involved in modulating this resistance. Inhibition of pathogens by the intestinal microbiota has been called bacterial antagonism, bacterial interference, barrier effect, colonization resistance, and competitive exclusion. Mechanisms by which the indigenous intestinal bacteria inhibit pathogens include competition for colonization sites, competition for nutrients, production of toxic compounds, or stimulation of the immune system. These mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, and inhibition may comprise one, several, or all of these mechanisms. Consumption of fermented foods has been associated with improved health, and lactic acid bacteria (lactobacilli and bifidobacteria) have been implicated as the causative agents for this improved health. Research over the last century has shown that lactic acid bacteria and certain other microorganisms can increase resistance to disease and that lactic acid bacteria can be enriched in the intestinal tract by feeding specific carbohydrates. Increased bacterial resistance to antibiotics in humans has caused an increase in public and governmental interest in eliminating sub-therapeutic use of antibiotics in livestock. An alternative approach to sub-therapeutic antibiotics in livestock is the use of probiotic microorganisms, prebiotic substrates that enrich certain bacterial populations, or synbiotic combinations of prebiotics and probiotics. Research is focused on identifying beneficial bacterial strains and substrates along with the conditions under which they are effective.

216 Reads
  • Source
    • "Probiotics and prebiotics are recommended to be added not only to the human diet but also into the forage of different vertebrates as well as invertebrates (e.g., Weese and Arroyo 2003; Patterson and Burkholder 2003; Ötleş 2013; Verlinden et al. 2006; Bagheri et al. 2008; Talpur et al. 2012). Certainly, the most beneficial effect is observed when organisms are provided with probiotics that had been previously isolated from themselves. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The study was conducted to investigate the effect of Lactobacillus rhamnosus (a commercial probiotic) and inulin (a prebiotic) on the survival rates of honeybees infected and uninfected with Nosema ceranae, the level of phenoloxidase (PO) activity, the course of nosemosis, and the effect on the prevention of nosemosis development in bees. The cells of L. rhamnosus exhibited a high rate of survival in 56.56 % sugar syrup, which was used to feed the honeybees. Surprisingly, honeybees fed with sugar syrup supplemented with a commercial probiotic and a probiotic + prebiotic were more susceptible to N. ceranae infection, and their lifespan was much shorter. The number of microsporidian spores in the honeybees fed for 9 days prior to N. ceranae infection with a sugar syrup supplemented with a commercial probiotic was 25 times higher (970 million spores per one honeybee) than in a control group fed with pure sucrose syrup (38 million spores per one honeybee). PO activity reached its highest level in the hemolymph of this honeybee control group uninfected with N. ceranae. The addition of probiotics or both probiotics and prebiotics to the food of uninfected bees led to the ~2-fold decrease in the PO activity. The infection of honeybees with N. ceranae accompanied an almost 20-fold decrease in the PO level. The inulin supplemented solely at a concentration of 2 μg/mL was the only administrated factor which did not significantly affect honeybees' survival, the PO activity, or the nosemosis infection level. In conclusion, the supplementation of honeybees' diet with improperly selected probiotics or both probiotics and prebiotics does not prevent nosemosis development, can de-regulate insect immune systems, and may significantly increase bee mortality.
    Parasitology Research 10/2015; DOI:10.1007/s00436-015-4761-z · 2.10 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In the chickens' gastro intestinal tract (GIT) the number and variety of bacteria are highest in the ceca (10 10 –10 11 cells/g) (Barnes et al., 1972; Bjerrum et al., 2006). The cecal microbiome plays an important role in fermentation processes and production of short chain fatty acids (SCFA) (Patterson and Burkholder, 2003; Rehman et al., 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Microbiota in the gastro-intestinal tract are closely related to both the intestinal and overall health of the host. Experimental chickens have always been euthanized in order to identify and quantify the bacteria in cecal content. In this study, quantification and identification of the microbial populations in cecal drop, cecal content and fecal drop samples from chickens showed that cecal drop contains a bacterial community that is very similar (concerning bacterial diversity, richness and species composition) to cecal content, as opposed to the bacterial community found in fecal drop. Cecal drop analysis thus allows for longitudinal experiments on chickens' cecal bacteria. The varying results in the analysis of fecal samples questions the method's reliability in reflecting the true cecal microbiota in chickens. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    Journal of microbiological methods 08/2015; 117. DOI:10.1016/j.mimet.2015.08.006 · 2.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Inoculating 1-d old chicks with competitive exclusion cultures or more classical probiotics serves as a nice model for determining the modes of action and efficacy of these microorganisms. Because of the susceptibility of 1-d-old chicks to infection, this practice is also of commercial importance (Patterson and Burkholder, 2003). Selim et al., (2009) reported that CE orally gavaged to newly hatched chicks (only once) was more efficient in promoting good performance and balanced intestinal microbial ecology in favour of the beneficial bacteria than commercial probiotic preparations that may lack the compatibility with the management conditions prevailed. "
    [Show description] [Hide description]
    DESCRIPTION: This study was initiated with the aim of comparing the growth performance, immunity response and the change in duodenum microbiota of Arbor Acres broiler chicks that maintained during summer season with providing two distinguished sources of beneficial micro-organisms that were self developed undefined anaerobic culture isolated from the digestive tract of adult healthy broilers (competitive exclusion; CE) and commercial probiotic based on some Bacillus spp bacteria. Two hundred 1-day-old unsexed chicks (averaged 41 g), divided equally into five groups of four replicates each, were reared during June-August months and had the same managerial procedures throughout the growth trial term. Experimental groups were ordered according to the following regime: G1: A control group was fed the basal diet without treatment, G2: One dose oral gavage with 1 ml (1 x 1010 cfu) of CE/chick administrated at day-1 post-hatch within 6 hours after chicks had been arrived to the farm, G3: Two doses oral gavage with CE/chick (1 x 1010 cfu, each), administrated twice; 1st time at day-1 post-hatch within 6 hours after chicks had been arrived to the farm and another repeated dose (1 x 1010 cfu/ml) at day 11 of age, G4: was fed on the basal diet supplemented with Microguard (0.1 g/kg diet), only during starter period and then chicks were switched to the control diets during grower and finisher periods and G5: was fed on the basal diets supplemented with Microguard (0.1 g/kg diet) during starter and grower and not during finisher feeding.
Show more

Similar Publications


216 Reads
Available from