A B S T R A C T This review examines the scientific basis for claims that commercial probiotics prevent diarrhoea and increase digestive performance in young farm animals. Suppression of pathogenic coliforms in the stomach and intestine by competitive growth and bacteriocidal secretions of lactic acid bacteria justifies the use of lactobacilli in probiotics. However, there is as yet insufficient evidence to support the notion of a beneficial digestive role for this gut microflora.

I. The effects of various factors on rates of flow and composition of digesta leaving the abomasum of preruminant calves were studied. The possible relation of some of these effects to the development of serum antibodies to certain dietary constituents has also been examined. Two situations were distinguished : (a) unsensitized responses, shown by calves receiving milk protein or soya-bean products for the first one or two occasions; (b) sensitized responses, shown by calves receiving certain soya-bean products, after a number of these feeds had been given.2. For unsensitized calves, the rate of flow of total digesta from the abomasum was greater in the first few hours after a feed consisting of a mineral solution was given, than after cow's milk was given. This difference was apparently due to differences in the composition of digesta entering the duodenum. Total digesta flows after giving synthetic milk feeds, prepared from different protein sources, were similar to those after cow's milk was given.3. For sensitized calves, rates of flow of total digesta from the abomasum were greatly affected by the nature of the protein source used in the diet. Soya-bean flour (heated or unheated) generally caused inhibition of flow for some hours after feeding; a soya-bean protein isolate (isoelectric) had a similar but smaller effect, but a soya-bean concentrate (prepared by alcohol extraction of a soya-bean flour) and milk protein had little or no effect. The inhibition, believed to be a sign of more general disorders, appeared to be caused by a factor entering the duodenum which induced a change in the way in which the calf responded, probably as the result of a gastrointestinal allergy. 4.Calves given soya-bean flour or a soya-bean protein isolate (isoelectric) in their diets for several weeks, showed respectively high and low titres of serum antibodies to an antigen prepared from soya-bean flour. Calves given alcohol-extracted soya-bean concentrate had no similar antibodies.5. In addition to variations in total digesta flow, dietary nitrogen compounds were held up in the abomasum to different extents after different feeds. After a whole-milk feed or a synthetic feed prepared from casein, a slow, steady release of N occurred over at least 9 h. N hold-up after giving soya-bean-containing feeds was slight for the soya-bean flour, but extremely marked for the soya-bean protein isolate (isoelectric). The latter hold-up was followed after several hours by a rapid outflow of N from the abomasum.The movement of digesta from the abomasum of a calf given a feed of cow's milk is a slow, well-controlled process (Ash, 1964; Mylrea, 1966a). The rate of flow of digesta is most rapid immediately after this type of feed and decreases progressively with time, although a considerable flow continues for many hours and remains appreciable even after an 18 h fast. With increasing time the digesta contain greater proportions of materials of endogenous origin, but certain dietary constituents continue to be found for many hours. This applies ...

Milk replacers containing skim milk powder or a mixture of whey and soy protein provided by a hydrolyzed soy protein isolate or a heated soybean flour were fed to 1-mo-old calves for 101 d. The isolate and the flour provided 56 and 72% of dietary proteins, respectively. Digestibility of feed constituents was measured between 9 to 14 d and 65 to 70 d of treatment. Digestive function was evaluated by measurement of ruminal pH, plasma kinetics of triglyceride and glucose concentrations, and xylose absorption. Antibody production was also recorded. Growth and carcass characteristics were satisfactory for the control diet and the diet based on soy isolate, partly because of high apparent digestibility of protein and lack of antibody synthesis in response to soy isolate. In contrast, protein from soybean flour was poorly digested and highly immunogenic. Ruminal pH at 2.5 h after the meal was unaffected by dietary treatments. Postprandial changes in concentrations of triglycerides and glucose in plasma suggested a lack of abomasal clotting with both diets based on soy. Xylose concentration in plasma was only slightly affected by dietary treatment and calf age. Hydrolyzed soy protein is suitable for veal calves and can account for at least half of protein intake.

No abstract

In calves fed heated soyabean flour, abnormal digesta movement and impaired nutrient absorption were related to morphological disturbances in villi structure. Dietary soyabean antigens were de-tectable in several regions of the small intestine. It is concluded that calves suffer from an allergic reaction to immunologicallv active sovabean Droteins.