Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T08:19:55.030Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of yeast with bacteriocin from rumen bacteria on growth performance, caecal flora, caecal fermentation and immunity function of broiler chicks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2012

C. Y. CHEN ,
C. YU ,
S. W. CHEN ,
B. J. CHEN  and
H. T. WANG
C. Y. CHEN
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Technology, National Taiwan University, No. 50, Lane 155, Sec. 3, Keelung Road, Taipei, Taiwan
C. YU
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, No.1 Xuefu Road Laopi Village, Neipu, Pingdong, Taiwan
S. W. CHEN
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Technology, National Taiwan University, No. 50, Lane 155, Sec. 3, Keelung Road, Taipei, Taiwan
B. J. CHEN
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Technology, National Taiwan University, No. 50, Lane 155, Sec. 3, Keelung Road, Taipei, Taiwan
H. T. WANG*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Chinese Culture University, No. 55, Hwa-Kang Road, Taipei, Taiwan
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: rumen@seed.net.tw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The aim of the current study was to investigate the effects of bacteriocin of Ruminococcus albus 7 that is expressed by yeast on growth performance, caecal flora, caecal fermentation and immunity function of broilers. A total of 180, one-day-old healthy broiler chicks were randomly divided into three groups: control, bacteriocin (2·5 g/kg feed) and nosiheptide (NHT) (2·5 mg/kg, as antibiotic control). Growth performance, caecal flora, caecal fermentation products and immunoglobulin (Ig) concentration were determined when chicks were 21 and 35 days old. The gene expression of avian β-defensin (AvBD) and mucin (MUC2) were measured at 35 days old. The supplementation of bacteriocin and NHT had no significant effect on body weight gain (BWG) during the experimental period. Bacteriocin supplementation significantly enhanced the growth of Lactobacillus (P<0·05) and resulted in higher lactate concentration (P<0·01) in broiler caeca at 21 days old. Both bacteriocin and NHT supplementation resulted in lower Escherichia coil (P=0·072) and Enterococcus (P=0·038) counts than in the control group at 35 days old. The bacteriocin treatment group tended to increase bile IgA and showed higher bile IgA than the NHT treatment group (P=0·059) at 35 days old. Higher levels of AvBD1, AvBD4 and MUC2 gene expression were observed in the NHT treatment group (P<0·05), but expression of AvBD9 was significantly decreased in both bacteriocin and NHT treatment groups (P<0·05). In conclusion, bacteriocin supplementation elevated the caecal Lactobacillus counts and affected the immunity function. These benefits suggested that bacteriocin supplementation could be a potential alternative to antibiotics in broiler feed.

Type
Animal Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 151 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 287 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arbor Acres Farm (1996). Arbor Acres Broiler Breeder Manual. Huntsville, AL, Canada: Arbor Acres Farm, Inc.Google Scholar
Akbari, M. R., Haghighi, H. R., Chambers, J. R., Brisbin, J., Read, L. R. & Sharif, S. (2008). Expression of antimicrobial peptides in cecal tonsils of chickens treated with probiotics and infected with Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology 15, 1689–1693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baurhoo, B., Ferket, P. R. & Zhao, X. (2009). Effects of diets containing different concentrations of mannanoligosaccharide or antibiotics on growth performance, intestinal development, cecal and litter microbial populations, and carcass parameters of broilers. Poultry Science 88, 2262–2272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bryant, M. P. & Robinson, I. M. (1968). Effects of diet, time after feeding, and position sampled on numbers of viable bacteria in the bovine rumen. Journal of Dairy Science 51, 1950–1955.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chassard, C. & Bernalier-Donadille, A. (2006). H2 and acetate transfers during xylan fermentation between a butyrate-producing xylanolytic species and hydrogenotrophic microorganisms from the human gut. FEMS Microbiology Letters 254, 116–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
COA (2002). Feed Control Act of Taiwan. Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C: Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan.Google Scholar
Corrier, D. E., Hinton, A., Ziprin, R. L. & Deloach, J. R. (1990). Effect of dietary lactose on Salmonella colonization of market-age broiler chickens. Avian Diseases 34, 668–676.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cromwell, G. L., Stahly, T. S., Speer, V. C. & O'Kelly, R. (1984). Efficacy of nosiheptide as a growth promotant for growing-finishing swine: a cooperative study. Journal of Animal Science 59, 1125–1128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derensy-Dron, D., Krzewinski, F., Brassart, C. & Bouquelet, S. (1999). Beta-1,3-galactosyl-N-acetylhexosamine phosphorylase from Bifidobacterium bifidum DSM 20082: characterization, partial purification and relation to mucin degradation. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry 29, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dibner, J. J. & Richards, J. D. (2005). Antibiotic growth promoters in agriculture: history and mode of action. Poultry Science 84, 634–643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferket, P. R. (2004). Alternatives to antibiotics in poultry production: responses, practical experience and recommendations. In Nutritional Biotechnology in the Feed and Food Industries (Eds Lyons, T. P. & Jacques, K. A.), pp. 57–67. Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Fernandez, F., Hinton, M. & Van Gils, B. (2002). Dietary mannan-oligosaccharides and their effect on chicken caecal microflora in relation to Salmonella enteritidis colonization. Avian Pathology 31, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuller, R. (1977). The importance of Lactobacilli in maintaining normal microbial balance in the crop. British Poultry Science 18, 85–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gálfi, P. & Neogrády, S. (1996). Short chain fatty acids (acidifiers) as probiotics in diets for piglets. In Fourth International Feed Production Conference, Piacenza (Ed. Piva, G.), pp. 25–26. Milan, Italy: Bureau Veritas.Google Scholar
Hall, L. E., Shirley, R. B., Bakalli, R. I., Aggrey, S. E., Pesti, G. M. & Edwards, H. M. (2003). Power of two methods for the estimation of bone ash of broilers. Poultry Science 82, 414–418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsieh, Y. H., Wang, H. T., Chen, B. J. & Chen, C. Y. (2010). Effect of antibiotics and antibiotic-free feed additives on growth performance and intestinal absorption in broiler chickens. In The 14th Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies Animal Science Congress Proceedings (Ed. Chinese Society of Animal Science), Vol. 2, pp. 969–972. Pingtung, Taiwan, ROC: Asian-Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies.Google Scholar
Karimi Torshizi, M. A., Moghaddam, A. R., Rahimi, S. & Mojgani, N. (2010). Assessing the effect of administering probiotics in water or as a feed supplement on broiler performance and immune response. British Poultry Science 51, 178–184CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klaenhammer, T. R. (1993). Genetics of bacteriocins produced by lactic acid bacteria. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 12, 39–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, D. N., Lyu, S. R., Wang, R. C., Weng, C. F. & Chen, B. J. (2011). Exhibit differential functions of various antibiotic growth promoters in broiler growth, immune response and gastrointestinal physiology. International Journal of Poultry Science 10, 216–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, U. & Kreipe, H. (2004). Real-time PCR-based assay for quantitative determination of methylation status. Methods in Molecular Biology 287, 207–218.Google ScholarPubMed
Li, H. J. & Zou, X. T. (2005). Effects of nosiheptide on immunity function in broilers. Chinese Journal of Veterinary Science 25, 534–535.Google Scholar
Louis, P. & Flint, H. J. (2009). Diversity, metabolism and microbial ecology of butyrate-producing bacteria from the human large intestine. FEMS Microbiology Letters 294, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mack, D. R., Ahrne, S., Hyde, L., Wei, S. & Hollingsworth, M. A. (2003). Extracellular MUC3 mucin secretion follows adherence of Lactobacillus strains to intestinal epithelial cells in vitro. Gut 52, 827–833.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattar, A. F., Teitelbaum, D. H., Drongowski, R. A., Yongyi, F., Harmon, C. M. & Coran, A. G. (2002). Probiotics up-regulate MUC-2 mucin gene expression in a Caco-2 cell-culture model. Pediatric Surgery International 18, 586–590.Google Scholar
McGinnis, C. H. Jr., Johnson, C. A. & Fox, J. E. (1978). The effect of nosiheptide, a new antibiotic, on body weight gain and feed efficiency in broiler chicks. Poultry Science 57, 1641–1645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menendez, A. S. & Finlay, B. B. (2007). Defensins in the immunology of bacterial infections. Current Opinion in Immunology 19, 385–391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monsma, D. J. & Marlett, J. A. (1995). Rat cecal inocula produce different patterns of short-chain fatty acids than fecal inocula in in vitro fermentations. Journal of Nutrition 125, 2463–2470.Google ScholarPubMed
Mountzouris, K. C., Tsitrsikos, P., Palamidi, I., Arvaniti, A., Mohnl, M., Schatzmayr, G. & Fegeros, K. (2010). Effects of probiotic inclusion levels in broiler nutrition on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, plasma immunoglobulins, and cecal microflora composition. Poultry Science 89, 58–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nava, G. M., Bielke, L. R., Callaway, T. R. & Castañeda, M. P. (2005). Probiotic alternatives to reduce gastrointestinal infections: the poultry experience. Animal Health Research Review 6, 105–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niewold, T. A. (2007). The nonantibiotic anti-inflammatory effect of antimicrobial growth promoters, the real mode of action? A hypothesis. Poultry Science 86, 605–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nousiainen, J. T. (1991). Comparative observations on selected probiotics and olaquindox as feed additives for piglets around weaning. 2. Effect on villus length and crypt depth in the jejunum, ileum, caecum and colon. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 66, 224–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NRC (1994). Nutrient Requirements of Poultry (9th revised edn). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Ricke, S. C. (2003). Perspectives on the use of organic acids and short chain fatty acids as antimicrobials. Poultry Science 82, 632–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roura, E., Homedes, J. & Klasing, K. C. (1992). Prevention of immunologic stress contributes to the growth-permitting ability of dietary antibiotics in chicks. Journal of Nutrition 122, 2383–2390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roush, W. B. & Tozer, P. R. (2004). The power of tests for bioequivalence in feed experiments with poultry. Journal of Animal Science 82 (E Suppl.), E110–E118.Google ScholarPubMed
SAS Institute Inc. (1997). SAS/STAT User's Guide, Release 6.12. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.Google Scholar
Savage, T. F., Cotter, P. F. & Zakrzewska, E. I. (1996). The effect of feeding a mannan oligosaccharide on Immunoglobulins, plasma IgG and bile IgA of Wrolstad MW male turkeys (abstract). Poultry Science 75 (Suppl. 1), 143.Google Scholar
Sklan, D., Melamed, D. & Friedman, A. (1994). The effect of varying levels of vitamin A on immune response in the chick. Poultry Science 73, 843–847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smirnov, A., Perez, R., Amit-Romach, E., Sklan, D. & Uni, Z. (2005). Mucin dynamics and microbial populations in chicken small intestine are changed by dietary probiotic and antibiotic growth promoter supplementation. Journal of Nutrition 135, 187–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smirnov, A., Sklan, D. & Uni, Z. (2004). Mucin dynamics in the chick small intestine are altered by starvation. Journal of Nutrition 134, 736–742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spring, P., Wenk, C., Dawson, K. A. & Newman, K. E. (2000). The effects of dietary mannanoligosaccharides on cecal parameters and the concentrations of enteric bacteria in the ceca of Salmonella-challenged broiler chicks. Poultry Science 79, 205–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Der Wielen, P. W. J. J., Biesterveld, S., Notermans, S., Hofstra, H., Urlings, B. A. P. & Van Knapen, F. (2000). Role of volatile fatty acids in development of the cecal microflora in broiler chickens during growth. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 66, 2536–2540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Dijk, A., Veldhuizen, E. J. & Haagsman, H. P. (2008). Avian defensins. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology 124, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Immerseel, F., Ducatelle, R., De Vos, M., Boon, N., Van De Wiele, T., Verbeke, K., Rutgeerts, P., Sas, B., Louis, P. & Flint, H. J. (2010). Butyric acid-producing anaerobic bacteria as a novel probiotic treatment approach for inflammatory bowel disease. Journal of Medical Microbiology 59, 141–143.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Visek, W. J. (1984). Ammonia: its effects on biological systems, metabolic hormones, and reproduction. Journal of Dairy Science 67, 481–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, H. T., Yu, C., Hsieh, Y. H., Chen, S. W., Chen, B. J. & Chen, C. Y. (2011). Effects of albusin B (a bacteriocin) of Ruminococcus albus 7 expressed by yeast on growth performance and intestinal absorption of broiler chickens – its potential role as an alternative to feed antibiotics. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 91, 2338–2343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. A., Verstegen, M. W. A. & Tamminga, S. (2001). Fermentation in the large intestine of single-stomached animals and its relationship to animal health. Nutrition Research Review 14, 207–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, H. W. & Wang, H. T. (2008). The effect of adding rumen bacteriocin in feed on the growth performance and gut flora in broilers (abstract). Journal of Chinese Society Animal Science 37 (Suppl.), 117.Google Scholar