We evaluated the effect of a Lactobacillus-based probiotic culture (FM-B11) for reduction of Salmonella Enteritidis in neonatal broiler chicks. In all experiments, chicks were challenged with approximately 10(4) cfu of Salmonella Enteritidis upon arrival at our laboratory, and the treatments were administered 1 h postchallenge. Cecal tonsil samples were obtained 24 h posttreatment and enriched for Salmonella Enteritidis recovery. The first experiment compared the effects of oral administration of doses of 10(4), 10(6), and 10(8) cfu/chick. In this experiment, doses of 10(6) and 10(8) both significantly reduced Salmonella Enteritidis recovery compared with controls (15 vs. 85% Salmonella Enteritidis positive), but 10(4) cfu did not significantly reduce Salmonella Enteritidis recovery. The second experiment compared the efficacy of oral administration of the live probiotic culture, with or without supernatant removed, to inactivated cultures or supernatant alone. Live probiotic organisms, with or without supernatant, significantly reduced Salmonella Enteritidis in this experiment, but inactivated or cell-free treatments did not reduce Salmonella Enteritidis. In the final 2 experiments, differing doses of probiotic culture were administered on the vent lips, where the treatment was taken into the lower gastrointestinal tract via cloacal drinking. Concentrations of probiotic culture from 10(2) to 10(7) cfu/chick significantly reduced Salmonella Enteritidis, and there was no difference in Salmonella Enteritidis recovery between treatment concentrations. These data suggest that this Lactobacillus-based probiotic culture may be efficacious for reduction of Salmonella Enteritidis in neonatal chicks.

Increasing sociopolitical concerns with antibiotic use have led to investigations of potential alternatives for food safety and growth promotion. Direct-fed microbials (DFM) including spore-based probiotics are amenable to feed inclusion and are extremely stable. We isolated several Bacillus spp. from environmental and poultry sources and tested them for their ability to reduce Salmonella in vitro. In a preliminary in vivo trial, day-of-hatch chicks and poults were randomly assigned to the following treatments (24 birds/treatment): control and one of 8 DFM candidates at 10(6) spores/g of feed. Chicks and poults were tagged, weighed, and orally challenged with Salmonella Typhimurium (ST). Body weight gain and ST recovery were measured 11 d posthatch. Total percentages of ST-positive crop and ceca were significantly lower (P < 0.05) in at least 3 DFM candidates compared with control. Additionally, beneficial effects on BW gain were observed in at least 5 DFM candidates (P < 0.05) compared with control. In a second study, birds treated with NP122 (identified as Bacillus subtilis) had significantly lower (P < 0.05) cecal ST than control and benefitted BW gain irrespective of the presence or absence of a Salmonella challenge. In conclusion, NP122 markedly reduced ST recovery and increased BW gain in both chicks and poults. This provides preliminary evidence that this isolate may have potential use as a DFM in poultry.

In the present study, a series of experiments were conducted to evaluate the ability of a combination of 3 ATCC lactobacilli (LAB3) or a commercially available probiotic culture (PROB) to reduce Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis (Salmonella Enteritidis) in broiler chicks. Additionally, we varied the timing of PROB administration in relationship to Salmonella challenge and determined the influence on recovery of enteric Salmonella. In experiments 1 to 3, chicks were randomly assigned to treatment groups and were then challenged via oral gavage with Salmonella Enteritidis. Chicks were treated 1 h after Salmonella Enteritidis challenge with LAB3 or PROB. Twenty-four hours posttreatment, cecal tonsils were collected for recovery of enteric Salmonella. In experiments 4 to 7, day-of-hatch chicks were randomly assigned to treatment groups and were then treated with PROB via oral gavage and placed into pens. Chicks were challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis 24 h after treatment via oral gavage. At 24 h after Salmonella Enteritidis challenge, cecal tonsils were collected and recovery of enteric Salmonella was determined. In experiments 8 to 10, 1-d-old chicks were randomly assigned to treatment groups and were then challenged via oral gavage with Salmonella Enteritidis and placed into pens. Chicks were treated 24 h after challenge with PROB via oral gavage. Twenty-four hours post PROB treatment, cecal tonsils were collected and enriched as described above. It was found that PROB significantly reduced cecal Salmonella Enteritidis recovery 24 h after treatment as compared with controls or LAB3-treated chicks in experiments 1 to 3 (P<0.05). Administration of PROB 24 h before Salmonella Enteritidis challenge significantly reduced recovery of Salmonella Enteritidis in 2 out of 4 experiments and no reduction in cecal Salmonella Enteritidis was observed when chicks were challenged with Salmonella Enteritidis and treated 24 h later with PROB. These data demonstrate that PROB more effectively reduced Salmonella Enteritidis than LAB3, and the timing of PROB treatment affects Salmonella Enteritidis-associated reductions.

Modern broilers have been genetically selected for an increased growth rate and improved feed conversion, but they are also more susceptible to ascites. Ascites occurs when there is an imbalance between available oxygen and the oxygen demand of the broiler. We hypothesized that promoting neonatal gut development with a prebiotic, such as Aspergillus meal (Prebiotic-AM), would enhance gut efficiency, decrease the oxygen demand of the gut, and reduce ascites incidence. In this study, we compared the effect of Prebiotic-AM on ascites incidence and gut development in commercial broilers reared at a local altitude (390 m above sea level) and a simulated high altitude (2,900 m above sea level). Half of the birds received a National Research Council recommended corn-soybean ration, and the other half received the same ration supplemented with 0.2% Prebiotic-AM. These 2 groups were further divided into a local altitude group and a simulated high altitude group for a total of 4 treatment combinations. Tissues were collected on d 1, 3, 7, 14, and 21 from the duodenum and lower ileum and placed in 10% buffered formalin for morphometric analysis. At a simulated high altitude, ascites incidence was 68% for birds fed the Prebiotic-AM supplement compared with 92% ascites incidence in birds given the control feed. The simulated high altitude decreased (P < 0.05) gut development, but prebiotic-treated birds reared in hypoxic conditions had similar gut development to control birds reared at local altitude. These data suggest that a feed ration supplemented with Prebiotic-AM may reduce the effect of hypoxia on broiler gut development and ascites incidence.

The use of defined probiotic cultures in the poultry industry has recently become more common. However, few conclusive studies regarding their efficacy under commercial conditions have been reported in the scientific literature. We conducted a study that included 118 commercial turkey hen lots, ranging from 1,542 to 30,390 hens per lot, of either Nicholas or Hybrid genetic lines, to look at the effect of a selected commercial Lactobacillus-based probiotic (FM-B11) on turkey BW, performance, and health. Sixty lots received the probiotic, whereas 58 lots were controls without probiotic. The probiotic was administered for 3 consecutive days at placement (day of age) and at move-out (around 6 wk of age, movement from brooder to grower houses). The parameters collected, calculated, and analyzed (significance level P < 0.05) were market BW, average daily weight gain, feed conversion ratio, and cost of production. There was no interaction effect between the genetic line and probiotic effect. Therefore, data from the 2 genetic lines were combined for the statistical analysis of the probiotic effect. The probiotic significantly improved market BW and average daily gain by 190 and 1.63 g, respectively. The feed conversion ratio was not statistically different between treatments (2.176 vs. 2.192 for the probiotic and control, respectively). However, the cost of production was lower in the probiotic-treated (58.37 cents/kg of live turkey) than in the control (59.90 cents/kg of live turkey) lots. Condemnation rates were not significantly different between lots. When each premise was compared by level of performance as good, fair, or poor (grouping based on historical analysis of 5 previous flocks), the probiotic appeared to increase the performance of the poor and fair farms. Use of the selected commercial probiotic resulted in increased market BW and reduced cost of production.