Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Heterophil Phagocytic Activity Stimulated by Lactobacillus salivarius L61 and L55 Supplementation in Broilers with Salmonella Infection
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Heterophil Phagocytic Activity Stimulated by Lactobacillus salivarius L61 and L55 Supplementation in Broilers with Salmonella Infection
Sornplang, Pairat; Leelavatcharamas, Vichai; Soikum, Chaiyaporn;
  PDF(new window)
Newborn chicks are susceptible to Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis (SE). The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of Lactobacillus probiotic isolated from chicken feces on heterophil phagocytosis in broiler chicks. A total of 150 newborn broiler chicks were divided into 5 groups (30 chicks per group) as follows: group 1 (normal control), given feed and water only, group 2 (positive control) given feed, water and SE infection, group 3 (L61 treated) given feed, water, SE infection followed by Lactobacillus salivarius L61 treatment, group 4 (L55 treated) given feed, water, SE infection followed by L. salivarius L55 treatment, and group 5 given feed, water, SE infection followed by L. salivarius L61 + L55 combination treatment. After SE infection, L. salivarius treatment lasted for 7 days. The results showed that L. salivarius L61 and L. salivarius L55 treatment, either alone or combination of both, increased the survival rate after SE infection, and upregulated heterophil phagocytosis and phagocytic index (PI). Conversely, chick groups treated with Lactobacillus showed lower SE recovery rate from cecal tonsils than that of the positive control group. The PI values of the chicken group with SE infection, followed by the combination of L. salivarius L61 and L. salivarius L55 were the highest as compared to either positive control or normal control group. Two Lactobacillus strains supplementation group showed significantly (p<0.05) higher PI value at 48 h than 24 h after treatment.
Heterophil;Lactobacillus;Salmonella Enteritidis;Broiler Chicks;
 Cited by
Bai, S. P., A. M. Wu, X. M. Ding, Y. Lei, J. Bai, K. Y. Zhang, and J. S. Chio. 2013. Effects of probiotic-supplemented diets on growth performance and intestinal immune characteristics of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 92:663-670. crossref(new window)

Barrow, P. A., M. B. Huggins, M. A. Lovell, and J. M. Simpson. 1987. Observations on the pathogenesis of experimental Salmonella typhimurium infection in chickens. Res. Vet. Sci. 42:194-199.

Cardoso, M. O., A. R. Ribeiro, L. R. dos Santos, F. Pilotto, H. L. S. de Moraes, C. T. Pippi Salle, S. L. da Silveira Rocha, and V. P. do Nascimento. 2006. Antibiotic resistance in Salmonella Enteritidis isolated from broiler carcasses. Braz. J. Microbiol. 37:368-371. crossref(new window)

Chen, C. Y., H. Y. Tsen, C. L. Lin, B. Yu, and C. S. Chen. 2012. Oral administration of a combination of select lactic acid bacteria strains to reduce the Salmonella invasion and inflammation of broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 91:2139-2147. crossref(new window)

Gilliland, S. E., M. L. Speck, and C. G. Morgan. 1975. Detection of Lactobacillus acidophilus in feces of humans, pigs, and chickens. Appl. Microbiol. 30:541-545.

Gustafson, R. H. and J. D. Kobland. 1984. Factors influencing salmonella shedding in broiler chickens. J. Hyg. Camb. 92:385-394. crossref(new window)

Higgins, J. P., S. E. Higgins, A. D. Wolfenden, S. N. Henderson, A. Torres-Rodriguez, J. L. Vicente, B. M. Hargis, and G. Tellez. 2010. Effect of lactic acid bacteria probiotic culture treatment timing on Salmonella Enteritidis in neonatal broilers. Poult. Sci. 89:243-247. crossref(new window)

Higgins, S. E., G. F. Erf, J. P. Higgins, S. N. Henderson, A. D. Wolfenden, G. Gaona-Ramirez, and B. M. Hargis. 2007. Effect of probiotic treatment in broiler chicks on intestinal macrophage numbers and phagocytosis of Salmonella Enteritidis by abdominal exudate cells. Poult. Sci. 86:2315-2321. crossref(new window)

Khodadad, A., F. Farahmand, M. Najafi, and M. Shoaran. 2013. Probiotics for the treatment of pediatric Helicobacter pylori infection: A randomized double blind clinical trial. Iran J. Pediatr. 23:79-84.

Kramer, J., A. H. Visscher, J. A. Wagenaar, A. G. Boonstra-Blom, and S. H. M. Jeurissen. 2001. Characterization of the innate and adaptive immunity to Salmonella enteritidis PT1 infection in four broiler lines. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 79:219-223. crossref(new window)

Lowry, V. K., M. B. Farnell, P. J. Ferro, C. L. Swaggerty, A. Bahl, and M. H. Kogut. 2005. Purified $\beta$-glucan as an abiotic feed additive up-regulates the innate immune response in immature chickens against Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 98:309-318. crossref(new window)

National Research Council. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th edn. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.

Nousiainen, J. and J. Setala. 1998. Lactic acid bacteria as animal probiotics. In: Lactic Acid Bacteria (Eds. S. Salminen and A. von Wright). 2nd edn. Mercel Dekker, New York, USA. pp. 437-473.

O'Dea, E. E., G. M. Fasenko, G. E. Allison, D. R. Korver, G. W. Tannock, and L. L. Guan. 2006. Investigating the effects of commercial probiotics on broiler chick quality and production efficiency. Poult. Sci. 85:1855-1863. crossref(new window)

Pascual, M., M. Hugas, J. I. Badiola, J. M. Monfort, and M. Garriga. 1999. Lactobacillus salivarius CTC2197 prevents Salmonella enteritidis colonization in chickens. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:4981-4986.

Pi.tek, J., M. Gibas-Dorna, A. Olejnik, H. Krauss, K. Wierzbicki, W. .ukiewicz-Sobczak, and M. Glowacki. 2012. The viability and intestinal epithelial cell adhesion of probiotic strain combination: in vitro study. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 19:99-102.

Sornplang, P. and V. Leelavatcharamas. 2010. Antimicrobial susceptibility of probiotic lactobacilli isolated from chicken feces. KKU Res. J. 15:689-697.

Swaggerty, C. L., P. J. Ferro, I. Y. Pevzner, and M. H. Kogut. 2005. Heterophils are associated with resistance to systemic Salmonella enteritidis infections in genetically distinct chicken lines. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 43:149-154. crossref(new window)