Effects of probiotic inclusion levels in broiler nutrition on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, plasma immunoglobulins, and cecal microflora composition

Abstract

The aim of this work was to investigate the effect of inclusion levels of a 5-bacterial species probiotic in broiler nutrition. Five hundred twenty-five 1-d-old male Cobb broilers were allocated in 5 experimental treatments for 6 wk. The experimental treatments received a corn-soybean coccidiostat-free basal diet and depending on the addition were labeled as follows: no addition (C), 10(8) cfu probiotic/kg of diet (P1), 10(9) cfu probiotic/kg of diet (P2), 10(10) cfu probiotic/kg of diet (P3), and 2.5 mg of avilamycin/kg of diet (A). Each treatment had 3 replicates of 35 broilers each. Treatment effects on broiler growth performance and biomarkers such as ileal and total tract nutrient digestibility, plasma Ig concentration, and cecal microflora composition were determined. Differences among treatments were considered significant when P < or = 0.05. Overall BW gain was significantly higher in treatment P1 (2,293 g) compared with P2 (2,163 g), C (2,165 g), and P3 (2,167 g), with A (2,230 g) being intermediate and not different from P1. Overall feed conversion ratio values were similar and significantly better for P1 (1.80) and A (1.80) compared with P2 (1.87), C (1.89), and P3 (1.92). Ileal apparent digestibility coefficients (ADC) of CP and ether extract were higher in A. Generally, treatments A and P1 showed an improved total tract ADC for DM, organic matter, ash, ether extract, and AME(n) values. The total tract ADC of CP was higher in P1, C, and P2. There were no differences between treatments regarding plasma Ig in 14- and 42-d-old broilers. Treatments P2 and P3 were effective at beneficially modulating cecal microflora composition. In particular, the lower cecal coliform concentration (log cfu/g of wet digesta) was seen in P2 (6.12) and P3 (4.90) in 14- and 42-d-old broilers, respectively, whereas at 42 d, P3 and P2 had the highest Bifidobacterium (8.31; 8.08) and Lactobacillus concentrations (8.20; 7.86), respectively. It is concluded that probiotic inclusion level had a significant effect on broiler growth responses, nutrient ADC, AME(n), and cecal microflora composition.

Influence of different prebiotics and mode of their administration on broiler chicken performance

“…The enhanced colonization of the intestines with the microflora, apart from significant effects on the host's growth performance, gut immunity and development, can increase the energy requirements for the maintenance of the bacterial population inhabiting the chickens' gastrointestinal tract. It was also demonstrated by Mountzouris et al (2010) that the inclusion of the growing dosages of probiotics into broilers' feed caused the proportional increase in the FCR, especially in the grower and finisher growth phases. It is generally accepted that the bacterial species inhabiting the gut compete for the nutrients with the host, which results in an higher energy uptake (Furuse and Yokota, 1985).…”

Effect of Bacillus subtilis, Clostridium butyricum and Lactobacillus acidophilus endospores on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, meat quality, relative organ weight, microbial shedding and excreta noxious gas emission in broilers

“…Dietary treatments were (1) CON (antibiotic free diet), (2) ANT1 (CON + enramycin 5 ppm), (3) ANT2 (CON + avilamycin 5 ppm), (4) TSP1 (CON + 0.1% TSP), and (5) TSP2 (CON + 0.2% TSP). It is well accepted that enramycin and avilamycin can be used as antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) to compare the efficacy of probiotics (Mountzouris et al 2010;Abudabos 2012). Broiler chickens were raised in a temperature-controlled room with three floors of stainless steel pens of identical size (1.75 × 1.55 m).…”

“…As a result, the poultry industry must develop alternatives to antibiotics to maintain health and performance under commercial conditions. Probiotics have been increasingly adopted as an alternative to antibiotic growth promoters in poultry diets (Mountzouris et al 2010;Zhang and Kim 2014). Probiotics, which are live cultures of harmless bacteria or yeast species that equilibrate intestinal microflora to benefit the host (Ferencik et al 2000;Chen et al 2013), have been demonstrated to be helpful in maintaining the intestinal ecosystem and enhancing animal health.…”

Effect ofBacillus SubtilisSpore (GalliPro®) Nutrients Equivalency Value on Broiler Chicken Performance

“…Probiotic bacteria have numerous and different influences on the host. The use of probiotics which can help to improve poultry performance (Bai et al, 2013;Amerah et al, 2013;Apata, 2008;Mountzouris et al, 2007) improves intestinal microbial balance (Fuller, 1989;Mountzouris et al, 2010) and immune response (Talebi et al, 2008;Apata, 2008). Naglaa (2013) studied the effects of probiotics on turkey behaviour.…”