Effect of probiotic on morphology of digestive system and immune system in broiler chicks | ||
| تحقیقات دامپزشکی و فرآوردههای بیولوژیک | ||
| Editorial, Volume 23, Issue 3, September 2010, Pages 27-33 PDF (398.36 K) | ||
| Authors | ||
| S.M Mehdizadeh* 1; H Lotfolahian1; A Shahneh2; S.A Mirhadi1; S.A Hosseini; A.R Alinejad3 | ||
| 1Member of Scientific Board of Animal Sciences Institute | ||
| 2Professor of Animal Sciences Faculty, Tehran University | ||
| 3MSc Student of Inslamic Azad University, Ghaemshahr Branch | ||
| Abstract | ||
| An experiment was conducted under completely randomized design to study the effect of different levels of probiotic Biomin IMBO (0.0, 0.05, 0.1, 0.15 per cent) in starter, (0.0, 0.025, 0.05, 0.075 per cent) in grower and (0.0, 0.0125, 0.025, 0.0375 per cent) in finisher diets on morphology of digestive system and immuno system of broiler chicks for 49 days. 400 day old chicks (mixed male and female) were procured and divided in to four treatments and four replicates (25 chicks in each replicate). Morphology of digestive system was studied through slaughtering of 2 chicks from each treatment at the end of experiment. Microorganism colonies in the gut (small intestine) were counted. Immune system was studied as production of different Anti body through SRBC injection in chicks. As result was revealed, probiotic had significantly effect on morphology of small intestine (villi, height and the length of crypts cells) as compare to control groups (p<0.01). It was observed that, most differences owed to treatment 2,3 and 4 as compare to control group(p<0/01). In case of crypt cells (width and depth of cells), treatments 3, 2 and 4 had significant differences with control group (p<0.01).Where as differences among themselves were not significant. probiotic also had significantly effects on levels of blood anti-body production in various treatments (p<0.01). Incase of one week after injections of SRBC, treatment 2 showed decreasing trend of producing anti-body, as compare to other experimental groups, and differences were significant (p<0.05). Even though, after two weeks of post injections, the lowest levels of anti-body production were owed to treatment 3 and 4 as compare to other groups (p<0.05). The highest and the lowest levels of anti-body titrations against Newcastle virus after injection SRBC were owed to treatment 4 and 3 respectively, as compare to other groups and differences between them were significant (p<0.05). The highest and the lowest levels of anti-body titrations of Bronchitis along with influenza were belong to treatments 3 and 2 respectively as compare to other experimental groups (p<0.05). By this knowledge, it can be proposed to the poultry industries to use pobiotic (Biomin IMBO) safely at the rate of 1.0, 0.5 and 0.25 kg/ton in the broiler chicks rations when they are reared under ideal conditions. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Heavy metals; Petroleum pollution | ||
| References | ||
|
1- بصیری ، ع . (1385) طرح های آماری در علوم کشاورزی . انتشارات دانشگاه شیراز.## 2- پاکزاد، پ. (1369) اصول و تفسیر آزمایش های بالینی به انضمام مباحث پادگن، پادتن، کمپلمان و تست های پوستی. انتشارات جهاد دانشگاهی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی شهید بهشتی.## 3- خاک سفیدی، ا. (1381) مقایسه ی اثر پروبیوتیک و آنتی بیوتیک بر عملکرد و سیستم ایمنی جوجههای گوشتی. پایان نامه ی فوق لیسانس. دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.## 4- رشیدی، ق. (1372) پروبیوتیک به عنوان جایگزینی برای آنتی بیوتیک. پژوهش و سازندگی. 19: 67-61. ## 5- فاضلی نسب، م. (1385) اثر توأم آنزیم، پروبیوتیک و آنتی بیوتیک بر عملکرد و قابلیت هضم مواد مغذّی جوجه های گوشتی. پایان نامه فوق لیسانس. دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.## 6- کریمی، ک. (1381) تأثیر پروبیوتیک بر ساختمان رودهی جوجههای گوشتی. پایان نامه فوق لیسانس. دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.## 7- ملک زاده، ف و شهامت، م. 371 . میکربیولوژی عمومی. انتشارات شهر آب. ## 8- Ahmad, L. (2004) Effect of probiotic (protexin) on the growth of broilers with special reference to the small intestinal crypt cells proliferation. Phil, M Thesis. Biotechnol. Cent.Peshaw.Univ. ##
9- Awood, M.H.H. (2003) Probiotics, prebiotics and immune-stimulation: more than an alternation for antibiotic growth promoters. Biom.Newsletter.1: 4 ##
10- Cross, M.L. (2002). Microbes versus microbes: immune signals generated by probiotic lactobacilli and their role in protection against microbial pathogens.FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol.34:245-253.##
11- Dalloul, R. A, H. S, Lillehoj, T.A, Shellem and J.A, Doerr (2003). Enhanced mucosal immunity against Timeria acervulina in broilers fed a lactobacillus based probiotic. Poult.Sci.82:62-66.##
12- Dalloul, R. A, H. S, Lillehoj (2005). Recent advances in immuno-modulation and vaccination strategies against coccidiosis . Avian. Dis. 49:1-8. ##
13- Donker, R.A, Nieuwland, M.G.B. andVander ZiJPP A.J. (1990). Heat-Stress Influences on Antibody Production in Chicken Lines Selected for High and Low Immune Responsiveness. Poult. Sci. 69:599-607 ##
14- Fuller, R. (1989). Probiotics in man and animals.J.APPL.Bacterial.66: 365-374. ##
15- Fuller, R. (1992). History and development of probiotics.Chapman & Hall. London. ##
16- Havenaar, R, Spanhaak S, (1994). Probiotics from an immunological point of view. Curr. Opion.Biotech.5:320-325. ##
17- Iji, P.A, Hughes., R.J, Choct M, and Tivey D.R, (2001). Intestinal structure and functional of broiler chickens on wheat based diets supplemented with a microbial anzyme.Asian- Astralian. J. Anim. Sci. 14: 54-60.##
18- Jin, L.Z, Ho., Y.W, Abdullah N, and Jalaludin S, (1997). Probiotic in poultry: modes of action.Worlds.Poult.Sci.53 (4):351-368.##
19- Kabir, S.M.L, Rahman., M.M, Rahman M. B, and Ahmad S.U, (2002) The dynamics of probiotics on growth performance and immune response in broilers. Bangl.Agricul.Univ. Mymensingh-2202.##
20- Koenen, M.E, Karmer., J, van der Hulst., R, Heres., L, Jeurissen S.H, and Boersma W.J, (2004) Immunomodulation by probiotic lactobacilli in laye and meat-type chickens. Br.Poult.Sci.45:355-366.##
21- Mieles, R.D., Buther, G.D., Henry, P. R and Littell R. C, (2006) Effect of antibiotic growth promoters on broiler performance, intestinal growth parameters, and quantitive morphology. Poult.Sci.85: 476-785.##
22- Mohan, B, Kadirvel,R., Natarajan, A., Bhaskaran, M. (1996). Effect of probiotic supplementation on growth, nitrogen utilization and serum cholesterol in broiler. Br. Poult.Sci.37:395-401.##
23- Mohnl, M.(2006). Benefits from using biomin C-X and biomin imbo in Poultry Production. Biom. Imbo. Newsletter. 4(37).##
24- Nahashon, S.N, Nakaue H.S, and Mirosh I.W (1996). Performance of single comb white leghorn fed a diet supplemented with a live microbial during the growth and egg laying phases. Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol. 57:25-38.##
25- Panda , A.K, Reddy.,M.R, Rao., S.V.R , Raju M.V.L.N ,and Praharaj N.K, (2000). Growth, carcass characteristics, immuno competence and response Escherichia coli of broiler fed diet with various level of probiotic. Arch. Geflugelk. 64:152-156.##
26- Parker, R.B. (1974) Probiotic, the other half of antibiotic story. Animal Nutri. Health. 29: 4-8. ##
27- Rowghani, E, Arab M, and Akbarian A, (2007) Effects of a probiotic and other feed additives on performance and immune response of broiler chicks.Dep. Anim.Sci. Shiraz.Univ. Shiraz. Iran.##
28- Savage, D.C. (1987). Factors influencing biocontrol of bacterial pathogens in the intestine. Food.Technol.41:82-87.##
29- SAS Institute ( 1997) SAS. A user,s Guide: Statistic. Version 5. SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC.##
30- Shoeib, H.K, Madian A.H, (2002) A study on the effect of breeding diets containing probiotics (pronifer and biogen) on growth performance, intestinal flora and hematological picture of broiler chicks.Assiut.Vet.Med.J.47:112-125.##
31- Watkins, B. A, Miller B.F, (1982) In vivo inhibitory effects of lactobacillus acidophilus against pathogenic Escherichia coli in gnotobiotic chicks.Poult.Sci.61: 1289-1308.##
32- Xu, Z.R, Hu., V.H, Xia., M.S, Zhan X. A, and Wang Q. (2003). Effect of dietary fructooligosaccharida on digestive enzyme activities intestinal, micro flora and morphology of male broilers: Poult.Sci.Association Inc.## | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 1,245 PDF Download: 636 |
||
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb