DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effects of Probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri Pg4 Strain on Intestinal Characteristics and Performance in Broilers

  • Yu, B. (Department of Animal Science, National Chung-Hsing University) ;
  • Liu, J.R. (Institute of Biotechnology, National Taiwan University) ;
  • Chiou, M.Y. (Department of Animal Science, National Chung-Hsing University) ;
  • Hsu, Y.R. (Department of Animal Science, National Chung-Hsing University) ;
  • Chiou, W.S. (Department of Animal Science, National Chung-Hsing University)
  • Received : 2006.08.10
  • Accepted : 2007.04.03
  • Published : 2007.08.01

Abstract

This study was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of using L. reuteri Pg4, a strain isolated from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract of healthy broilers, as a probiotic. In preliminary in vitro studies the Pg4 strain was proven capable of tolerating acid and bile salts, inhibiting pathogenic bacteria and can adhere to intestinal epithelial cells. The probiotic properties were then evaluated on the basis of the broiler's growth performance, intestinal microbial population and cecal volatile fatty acid and lactic acid concentrations under conventional feeding. Dietary supplementation of dried L. reuteri Pg4 decreased significantly feed intake in grower chickens and improved significantly the feed conversion by 5% in a 0-6 weeks feeding period compared with the control group. The Lactobacillus counts in the crop, ileum, and cecum of the probiotic group were higher than in the control group. The L. reuteri Pg4 strain was traceable in the GI tract of probiotic supplemented chicks and showed capability of survival in the intestine for a protracted period. The probiotic group had a higher lactic acid concentration and lower pH value in the cecum than the control chicks. Probiotic supplement also affected the histology of the intestinal mucosa of chicks. The present findings demonstrated that L. reuteri Pg4 possesses probiotic characteristics and it is suggested, therefore, that the organism could be a candidate for a new probiotic strain.

Acknowledgement

Supported by : ROC

References

  1. Amit-Romach, E., D. Sklan and Z. Uni. 2004. Micro flora ecology of the chicken intestine using 16S ribosomal DNA primers. Poult. Sci. 83:1093-1098. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/83.7.1093
  2. Annika, M., M. M. Manninen and H. Gylienberg. 1983. The adherence of lactic acid bacteria to the columnar epithelial cells of pigs and calves. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 55:241-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1983.tb01321.x
  3. Barrow, P. A. 1992. Probiotics for chickens. In Probiotics: The Scientific Basis (Ed. R. Fuller). Chapman and Hall. London, p. 255-257.
  4. Chou, L. S. and B. Weimer. 1999. Isolation and characterization of acid- and bile-tolerant isolates from strains of Lactobacillus acidophilus. J. Dairy Sci. 82:23-31. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75204-5
  5. Corrier, D. E., A. Hinton, R. L. Ziprin, R. C. Beier and J. R. DeLoach. 1990. Effect of dietary lactose on cecal pH, bacteriostatic volatile fatty acids, and Salmonella typhimurium colonization of broiler chicks. Avian Dis. 34:617-625. https://doi.org/10.2307/1591254
  6. Fuller, R. 1989. Probiotic in man and animals. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 66:365-378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1989.tb05105.x
  7. Gilliland, S. E. and D. K. Walker. 1990. Factors to consider when selecting cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus as a dietary adjunct to produce a hypocholesteroleric effect in humans. J. Dairy Sci. 73:905-911. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(90)78747-4
  8. Jin, L. Z., Y. W. Ho, N. Abdullah, H. Kudo and S. Jalaludin. 1997. Studies on the intestinal microflora of chicken under tropical condition. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 10:495-504. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1997.495
  9. Jin, L. Z., Y. W. Ho, N. Abdullah and S. Jalaludin. 1998. Acid and bile tolerance of Lactobacillus isolated from chicken intestine. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 27:183-185. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-765X.1998.00405.x
  10. Jones, F. T. 1991. Use of direct-fed microbials not new; way they work is still not clear. Feedstuff. 28:31-34.
  11. Kailasapathy, K. and J. Chin. 2000. Survival and therapeutic potential of probiotic organisms with reference to Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium spp. Immunol. Cell Biol. 78:80-88. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1711.2000.00886.x
  12. Khaksefidi, A. and Sh. Rahimi. 2005. Effect of probiotic inclusion in the diet of broiler chickens on performance, feed efficiency and carcass quality. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 18:1153-1156. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2005.1153
  13. Koenen, M. E., J. Kramer, R. van der Hulst, L. Heres, S. H. Jeurissen and W. J. Boersma. 2004. Immunomodulation by probiotic lactobacilli in layer- and meat-type chickens. Br. Poult. Sci. 45:355-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660410001730851
  14. Liu, J. R., B. Yu, S. H. Lin, K. J. Cheng and Y. C. Chen. 2005. Direct cloning of a xylanase gene from the mixed genomic DNA of rumen fungi and its expression in intestinal Lactobacillus reuteri. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 251:233-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsle.2005.08.008
  15. Marsili, R. T., H. Ostapenko, R. E. Simmons and D. E. Green. 1981. High performance liquid chromatographic determination of organic acids in dairy product. J. Food Sci. 46:52-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1981.tb14529.x
  16. NRC. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, ninth ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
  17. Parker, D. C. and R. T. McMillan. 1976. The determination of volatile fatty acids in the cecum of the conscious rabbit. Br. J. Nutr. 35:365-371. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19760042
  18. Patterson, J. A. and K. M. Burkholder. 2003. Application of prebiotics and probiotics in poultry production. Poult. Sci. 82:627-631. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/82.4.627
  19. Rambaud, J. C., Y. Bouhnik, P. Marteau and P. Pochart. 1993. Manipulation of the human gut micro flora. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 52:357-366. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS19930071
  20. Rammelsberg, M. and F. Radler. 1990. Antibacterial polypeptides of Lactobacillus species. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 69:177-184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1990.tb01507.x
  21. Reid, G. and R. Friendship. 2002. Alternatives to antibiotic use; probiotics for the gut. Anim. Biotechnol. 13:97-112. https://doi.org/10.1081/ABIO-120005773
  22. Sakata, T., T. Kojima, M. Fujieda, M. Takahashi and T. Michibata. 2003. Influences of probiotic bacteria on organic acid production by pig cecal bacteria in vitro. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 62:73-80. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS2002211
  23. SAS. 1999. SAS User's Guide: Ver. 8.0 SAS Institute., Cary, NC.
  24. Savage, D. C. 1977. Microbial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract. Ann. Re. Microbiol. 31:107-133. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.mi.31.100177.000543
  25. Song, Y. L., N. Kato, C. X. Liu, Y. Matsumiya, H. Kato and K. Watanabe. 2000. Rapid identification of 11 human intestinal Lactobacillus species by multiplex PCR assays using groupand species-specific primers derived from the 16S-23S rRNA intergenic spacer region and its flanking 23S rRNA. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 187:167-173.
  26. Steel, R. G. D. and J. H. Torrie. 1984. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biometrical Approach. (2nd Ed.) McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc. New York, USA.
  27. Strompfova, V., A. Laukova and A. C. Ouwehand. 2004. Selection of enterococci for potential canine probiotic additives. Vet. Microbiol. 100:107-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2004.02.002
  28. Tannock, G. W., A. Tilsala-Timisjarvi, S. Rodtong, J. Ng, K. Munro and T. Alatossava. 1999. Identification of Lactobacillus isolates from the gastrointestinal tract, silage, and yoghurt by 16S-23S rRNA gene intergenic spacer region sequence comparisons. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65:4264-4267.
  29. Thompson, J. L. and M. Hinton. 1997. Antibacterial activity of formic acid and propionic acid in the diet of hens on Salmonella in the crop. Br. Poult. Sci. 38:59-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071669708417941
  30. Uni, Z., Y. Noy and D. Sklan. 1995. Posthatch changes in morphology and function of the small intestines in heavy and light strain chicks. Poult. Sci. 74: 1622-1629. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0741622
  31. Watkins, B. A. and F. H. Kratzer. 1983. Effect of oral dosing of Lactobacillus strains on gut colonization and liver biotin on broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 62:2088-2094. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0622088
  32. Watkins, B. A. and F. H. Kratzer. 1984. Drinking water treatment with commercial preparation of a concentrated Lactobacillus culture for broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 63:1671-1673. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0631671
  33. Yu, B., H. Y. Tsen and P. W. S. Chiou. 1999. Cecal culture nhances performance and prevents Salmonella infection in broilers. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 8:195-204. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/8.2.195

Cited by

  1. culture on gosling growth performance vol.49, pp.4, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660802213459
  2. on growth performance, faecal microbial population, small intestine villus height and faecal volatile fatty acids in broilers vol.50, pp.3, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660902873947
  3. on growth performance, fecal microflora, volatile fatty acids and villi height in broilers vol.81, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-0929.2009.00701.x
  4. A Potent Probiotic Strain from Cheddar Cheese vol.51, pp.3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12088-011-0072-y
  5. Serovar Choleraesuis Infection in Swine vol.2013, pp.1741-4288, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/568528
  6. Study and use of the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri in pigs: a review vol.6, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-015-0014-3
  7. Effects of Bacillus subtilis, Kefir and β-Glucan Supplementation on Growth Performance, Blood Characteristics, Meat Quality and Intestine Microbiota in Broilers vol.43, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2016.43.3.159
  8. Purification of Antilisterial Peptide (Subtilosin A) from Novel Bacillus tequilensis FR9 and Demonstrate Their Pathogen Invasion Protection Ability Using Human Carcinoma Cell Line vol.7, pp.1664-302X, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01910
  9. Expression of the Clonostachys rosea lactonohydrolase gene by Lactobacillus reuteri to increase its zearalenone-removing ability vol.16, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-017-0687-8
  10. Evaluation of Probiotic Potential of Some Native Lactobacillus Strains on the Growth Performance and Serum Biochemical Parameters of Japanese Quails (Coturnix Coturnix Japonica) during Rearing Period vol.19, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2016-0393
  11. Diversity and Probiotic Potential of Lactic Acid Bacteria Isolated from Horreh, a Traditional Iranian Fermented Food pp.1867-1314, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-9282-x
  12. Effect of probiotic and vinegar on growth performance, meat yields, immune responses, and small intestine morphology of broiler chickens vol.17, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2018.1424570
  13. Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Zinc and Multi-Microbe Probiotic on Growth Traits and Alteration of Intestinal Architecture in Broiler pp.1867-1314, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9424-9
  14. A Preliminary Study on Probiotic Characteristics of Sporosarcina spp. for Poultry Applications pp.1432-0991, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-019-01647-2