Biology of the Gastrointestinal Tract in Poultry

Scanes, Colin G.; Pierzchała-Koziec, Krystyna

doi:10.3184/175815514x14162292284822

Cited by 31 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 302 publications

(374 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…7). Our data coincide with previous reports, in which GRP was reported to be mainly expressed in the endocrine cells of proventriculus (Vaillant et al 1979, Buffa et al 1982, Yamanaka et al 1989, Scanes & Pierzchala-Koziec 2014. These findings suggest that cGRP may be secreted into the circulation by these endocrine cells under certain stimuli and thus exert its endocrine/paracrine/autocrine actions on chicken tissues (Fig.…”

Section: Tissue Expression Of Cgrp and Cgrpr: Evidence For Cgrp Beingsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…As in mammals, both GRP and NMB and their putative receptors also exist in non-mammalian vertebrates, including birds, frogs and teleosts (Vaillant et al 1979, McDonald et al 1980, Nagalla et al 1992, Volkoff et al 2000, Xu & Volkoff 2009, Yun et al 2015. Moreover, there are also lines of evidence showing that GRP/NMB play important roles in many physiological processes in nonmammalian vertebrates, such as inhibition of food intake in chickens and teleosts following central or peripheral administration (Tachibana et al 2010a,b, Schroeter et al 2015, and regulation of gastric acid secretion, gallbladder motility, crop-emptying rate, pancreatic fluid and protein secretion in chickens or turkeys (Linari & Linari 1975, Campbell et al 1991, 1994, Tachibana et al 2010b, Scanes & Pierzchala-Koziec 2014. However, in contrast to the extensive studies in mammals, the identity, signaling property and expression of the receptors for GRP and NMB have not been fully characterized in nonmammalian vertebrates including birds (Iwabuchi et al 2003, Ohki-Hamazaki et al 2005.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characterization of NMB, GRP and their receptors (BRS3, NMBR and GRPR) in chickens

Huang

Cui

et al. 2017

Journal of Molecular Endocrinology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The two structurally and functionally related peptides, gastrin-releasing peptide (GRP) and neuromedin B (NMB) play critical roles in many physiological/pathological processes in mammals. However, the information regarding the expression and functionality of avian NMB, GRP and their receptors is limited. Here, we characterized cNMB, cGRP and their receptors (cNMBR, cGRPR and cBRS3) in chickens. Our results showed that: (1) cNMBR and cGRPR expressed in CHO cells could be potently activated by cNMB and cGRP, respectively, as monitored by cell-based luciferase reporter assays, indicating that cNMBR and cGRPR are cNMB- and cGRP-specific receptors; strikingly, BRS3 of chickens (/spotted gars), which is orthologous to mouse bombesin receptor subtype-3 (BRS3), could be potently activated by GRP and NMB, demonstrating that both peptides are the endogenous ligands for chicken (/spotted gar) BRS3; (2) quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) revealed that is widely expressed in chicken tissues with abundant expression in the ovary, pancreas, proventriculus, spinal cord and brain, whereas, and are mainly expressed in the brain and testes; (3) interestingly, qPCR, Western blot and immunostaining revealed that cGRP is predominantly expressed in the anterior pituitary and mainly localized to LH-cells, suggesting that cGRP is likely a novel pituitary hormone in chickens. In summary, our data help to uncover the roles of GRP, NMB and their receptors in birds, and provide the first persuasive evidence from an evolutionary prospective that in vertebrates, GRP and NMB are the endogenous ligands for BRS3, an orphan receptor that has puzzled endocrinologists for more than two decades.

show abstract

Section: Tissue Expression Of Cgrp and Cgrpr: Evidence For Cgrp Beingsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterization of NMB, GRP and their receptors (BRS3, NMBR and GRPR) in chickens

Huang

Cui

et al. 2017

Journal of Molecular Endocrinology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The gut is one of the most important tissues able to influence the expression of different FE phenotypes due to its function in nutrient digestion and absorption, as well as for its immunological role (which will be discussed in the “Disease resistance” section) [ 31 ].…”

Section: Intermediary Metabolismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of omics technologies for a deeper insight into quali-quantitative production traits in broiler chickens: A review

Zampiga

Flees

Meluzzi

et al. 2018

J Animal Sci Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The poultry industry is continuously facing substantial and different challenges such as the increasing cost of feed ingredients, the European Union’s ban of antibiotic as growth promoters, the antimicrobial resistance and the high incidence of muscle myopathies and breast meat abnormalities. In the last decade, there has been an extraordinary development of many genomic techniques able to describe global variation of genes, proteins and metabolites expression level. Proper application of these cutting-edge omics technologies (mainly transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics) paves the possibility to understand much useful information about the biological processes and pathways behind different complex traits of chickens. The current review aimed to highlight some important knowledge achieved through the application of omics technologies and proteo-genomics data in the field of feed efficiency, nutrition, meat quality and disease resistance in broiler chickens.

show abstract

“…Therefore, gut mucosa plays a crucial role in bird's physiology since it must be permeable to nutrients, electrolytes and water, and at the same time is a barrier against bacteria and antigens translocation to the lamina propria. In addition, the small intestine also has an important immunological, endocrine and regulatory function (Scanes & Pierzchala-Koziec, 2014) which can deeply affect health status (Sugiharto, 2016), as well as feeding behaviour and overall energy homeostasis in the chickens (Honda, Saneyasu, & Kamisoyama, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in productive performance and intestinal transcriptomic profile in two modern fast‐growing chicken hybrids

Zampiga

Bertocchi

Bosi

et al. 2018

Animal Physiology Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to characterize growth performance and ileum transcriptomic profile of two fast‐growing chicken hybrids (HA and HB). A total of 1,170 one‐day‐old female chicks (n = 585 per genotype) were weighed and randomly divided into 18 pens (9 replications/group). Both the groups received the same commercial diet (starter, 0–9 days; grower I, 10–21 days; grower II, 22–34 days; and finisher, 35–43 days). Body weight (BW), daily feed intake (DFI) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) were determined on a pen basis at the end of each feeding phase. At the processing (43 days), incidence of footpad dermatitis (FPD) was evaluated on all the birds and ileum mucosa was collected from 1 bird/replication. Total mRNA was extracted to perform microarray analysis (Chicken Gene 1.1ST Array Strip), and an exploratory pathway analysis was then conducted (Gene Set Enrichment Analysis software). The two genotypes showed different growth patterns throughout the study. HA birds exhibited higher BW and better FCR than HB after 9 days (228 vs. 217 g and 1.352 vs. 1.419, respectively, p < 0.05). At 21, 34 and 43 days, HB birds reported higher BW (807 vs. 772 g; 1,930 vs. 1,857 g and 2,734 vs. 2,607 g, respectively; p < 0.01), DFI (74.9 vs. 70.6 g bird−1 day−1, p < 0.01; 144.4 vs. 139.6 g bird−1 day−1, p = 0.06; and 196.5 vs. 182.4 g bird−1 day−1, p < 0.01) and similar FCR compared to HA ones. HB group showed a higher percentage of birds with no FPD (75% vs. 48%; p < 0.001). Transcriptomic analysis revealed enriched gene sets for mitochondria, cellular energy metabolism, and cell structure and integrity in ileum mucosa of HA broilers and enriched gene sets for immune system activation, cell signalling and inflammation in HB ones. In conclusion, these results indicated that the two chicken genotypes are characterized by different growth patterns, feeding behaviour and gene expression profiles in the intestinal mucosa.

show abstract

Biology of the Gastrointestinal Tract in Poultry

Cited by 31 publications

References 302 publications

Characterization of NMB, GRP and their receptors (BRS3, NMBR and GRPR) in chickens

Characterization of NMB, GRP and their receptors (BRS3, NMBR and GRPR) in chickens

Application of omics technologies for a deeper insight into quali-quantitative production traits in broiler chickens: A review

Differences in productive performance and intestinal transcriptomic profile in two modern fast‐growing chicken hybrids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About