ObjectiveThis study was conducted to evaluate the effect of probiotics (Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecium) and xylo-oligosaccharide (XOS) supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, serum profiles, intestinal health, fecal microbiota and noxious gas emission in weanling pigs.MethodsA total of 240 weanling pigs ([Yorkshire×Landrace]×Duroc) with an average body weight (BW) of 6.3±0.15 kg were used in this 28-day trial. Pigs were randomly allocated in 1 of the following 4 dietary treatments in a 2×2 factorial arrangement with 2 levels of probiotics (0 and 500 mg/kg probiotics) and XOS (0 and 200 mg/kg XOS) based on the BW and sex.ResultsAdministration of probiotics or XOS improved average daily gain (p<0.05) during 0 to 14 d and the overall period, while pigs that were treated with XOS had a greater average daily gain and feed efficiency (p<0.05) compared with unsupplemented treatments throughout 15 to 28 d and the whole experiment. Either probiotics or XOS treatments increased the apparent total tract digestibility of nutrients (p<0.05) during 0 to 14 d. No effects on serum profiles were observed among treatments. The XOS increased villus height: crypt depth ratio in jejunum (p<0.05). The supplementation of probiotics (500 mg/kg) or XOS (200 mg/kg) alone improved the apparent total tract digestibility of dry matter, nitrogen and gross energy on d 14, the activity of trypsin and decreased fecal NH3 concentration (p<0.05). Administration of XOS decreased fecal Escherichia coli counts (p<0.05), while increased lactobacilli (p<0.05) on d 14. There was no interaction between dietary supplementation of probiotics and XOS.ConclusionInclusion of XOS at 200 mg/kg or probiotics (Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecium) at 500 mg/kg in diets containing no antibiotics significantly improved the growth performance of weanling pigs. Once XOS is supplemented, further providing of probiotics is not needed since it exerts little additional effects.
This study was conducted to determine the effect of methylsulfonylmethane (
MSM
) on growth performance, immune function, antioxidant capacity, and meat quality in Pekin ducks. A total of 960 female 1-day-old Pekin ducklings (53.3 ± 0.4 g) were randomly allotted to 3 treatments with 8 replicates of 40 birds, based on their body weight (
BW
). The experiment lasted 6 wks, and dietary treatments included a corn–soybean meal–based diet supplemented with 0%, 0.15%, and 0.3% MSM, that is, CON, MSM1, and MSM2, respectively. Growth performance, serum profiles, and meat quality were determined. During the period of days 22–42, BW gain (
BWG
) in MSM2 treatment was higher (
P
< 0.05) and feed-to-gain ratio (F/G) was lower (
P
< 0.05) than those of CON and MSM1 treatments. BW gain and final BW in MSM2 treatment were increased (
P
< 0.05) compared with CON and MSM1 treatments during the period of days 1–42. Serum activities of superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase, total antioxidative capacity, and concentrations of interleukin-2 and interleukin-6 were higher (
P
< 0.05) in MSM2 than in CON treatment. Ducks in the MSM2 treatment group had lower (
P
< 0.05) serum malondialdehyde, interferon gamma, and tumor necrosis factor-α levels than those in the CON treatment group. The supplementation of MSM increased (
P
< 0.05) water-holding capacity and redness (a*) and decreased (
P
< 0.05) values for 2-thiobarbituric acid and drip loss on day 5. Ducks in the MSM2 treatment group had higher (
P
< 0.05) pH
24h
than those in the CON treatment group. Taken together, the inclusion of MSM (0.3%) increased final BW and BWG during periods of days 22–42 and days 1–42, reduced feed-to-gain ratio during the period of days 22–42, and resulted in positive effects on immunity, antioxidant capacity, and meat quality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.