Response of broiler chickens to <i>Lactobacillus</i> and <i>Bifidobacterium</i> probiotic strains

Abstract

The effects of two Lactobacillus and two Bifidobacterium probiotic strains (given daily in an amount of 10 9-10 10 live cells per bird, in water) as well as an antibiotic, avilamycin (8 mg/kg of diet), were determined. The live body weight of chickens in groups receiving probiotics or avilamycin (2625-2665 g) was higher than in the control group (2564 g), however the differences were not significant. The feed conversion ratio was significantly better in most of the investigated groups in comparison with the control. Chemical, physicochemical and sensory evaluation of the meat did not show significant differences between groups. The relatively high population count of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus in the control group (~10 8 cfu/g of caecal contents) was slightly lower in comparison with the investigated groups (10 8-10 9 cfu/g).

The Effect of Various Probiotic Strains or Avilamycin Feed Additive on Immune Defense Markers and Acute-Phase Response to Salmonella Infection in Chickens

“…This is in agreement with the avilamycin-fed chickens showing partially decreased immune factors mediating the killing of pathogens, which is in contrast to the enhancement of immune response caused by probiotics. However, in our previous work [6], the average live body weight of 39-day-old chickens fed with avilamycin (2,655 g) or with the same probiotic strains as employed in the current work under similar conditions (from 2,625 g in the L. acidophilus group to 2,665 g in the B. animalis group) did not differ significantly and was slightly higher when compared to the controls (2,564 g). Thus, different levels of immune defense markers and acute-phase reaction, considered as an immunological stress in our model and, therefore, possibly influencing catabolic activities, did not seem to affect the body weight of the treated chickens.…”

“…We monitored the augmentation of ceruloplasmin content as a marker of acute-phase response and compared the effect of the feed additives on a large number of chickens (280) over a period of 6 weeks. We employed the chicken-animal model to continue the work of previous studies that demonstrated the growth-promoting effect of probiotics-the probiotics-fed and antibiotics-fed chickens did not show a significant difference in body weight [6]. We also showed the in vitro reduction in Salmonella by the probiotics strains [6,11] used in the current work.…”

“…All strains were deposited in the Culture Collection of the Department of Food Microbiology at the Institute of Animal Reproduction and Food Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Olsztyn, Poland. They were previously identified according to their classification, biochemical features, survival in low pH and in bile salts, adhesion to the intestinal epithelium and antagonistic activity against foodborne pathogens [6].…”

“…Microbiological analyses were performed according to our standard procedures [6,30] immediately after sampling at the end of the experiment in each group of chickens. We focused on the intestine and on the cecum, which are the gastrointestinal tract regions [31] most populated with microflora that influence the control of intestinal pathogens [5].…”

“…The consumption of animal food products is also associated with foodborne infections in humans. The use of probiotics in poultry showed both weight gain [5][6][7] and the elimination of bacterial infection, including Salmonella, which ranks among the leading causes of foodborne infections [8][9][10][11]. Probiotics are thus considered as a nutritional tool in animal feeds for stimulating growth, inhibiting pathogens, and enhancing meat quality [1,9,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”