Effects of Dietary Probiotic on Growth Performance, Nutrients Digestibility, Blood Characteristics and Fecal Noxious Gas Content in Growing Pigs

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of dietary complex probiotic (Lactobacillus acidophilus, 1.0×10 7 CFU/g; Saccharomyces cerevisae, 4.3×10 6 CFU/g; Bacillus subtilis 2.0×10 6 CFU/g) on growth performance, nutrients digestibility, blood characteristics and fecal noxious gas content in growing pigs. Ninety [(Duroc×Yorkshire)×Landrace] pigs with the average initial BW of 39.75±1.97 kg were allocated into three treatments by a randomized complete block design. There were five pens per treatment with six pigs per pen. Dietary treatments include: 1) CON (basal diet); 2) CP1 (basal diet+complex probiotic 0.1%) and 3) CP2 (basal diet+ complex probiotic 0.2%). During the entire experimental period of 6 weeks, results showed that addition of complex probiotic at the level of 0.2% to diet increased ADG significantly (p<0.05). Also, digestibilities of DM and N tended to increase, however, no significant differences were observed (p>0.05). Blood characteristics (IgG, Albumin, total protein, RBC, WBC and lymphocyte) of pigs were not affected (p>0.05) by complex probiotic supplementation. Fecal NH 3 -N was decreased (11.8%) significantly by the addition of complex probiotic (p<0.05), but no effects were observed on fecal acetic acid, propionic acid and butyric acid concentrations (p>0.05). In conclusion, results in this experiment indicated that dietary complex probiotic supplementation had a positive effect on growing pigs performance and could decrease fecal NH 3 -N concentration.

Effect of a dietary probiotic blend on performance, blood characteristics, meat quality and faecal microbial shedding in growing-finishing pigs

“…Thus, dietary supplementation of probiotics indicated few or no significant evidence on pig blood characteristics. In agreement with the current findings, Chen et al (2005), Meng et al (2010), and Lan et al (2016) stated that feeding a probiotic blend to pigs did not influence blood traits. Conversely, it was found that probiotics supplementation in pigs determined an improvement of red blood cells .…”

“…On the contrary, others had negative findings (Quadros et al, 2001). These variable results of the effect of probiotics may be because of aspects such as bacteria strains, level of supplementation, composition of diet, feeding management, feed form and interaction with other dietary additives (Chesson, 1994;Chen et al, 2005;Meng et al, 2010). According to the current results, Česlovas et al (2005) found that probiotics affected meat crude protein amount positively in pigs.…”

“…However, butyric acid concentration was significantly reduced in pigs fed SLAB51 (P <0.05). Thus, based on these findings, dietary supplementation with probiotics proved to be a viable approach to decreasing animal excreta pollution, as stated by Chen et al (2005). According to this study and the current trial, in a report by Jeon et al (1996), it was found that feeding probiotic blend to pigs led to a significant reduction of faecal NH 3 -N. In the present study, the authors detected a significant decrease in butyric acid, an important indicator of improved microbial activity.…”

“…However, the literature reported variable findings. Chen et al (2005) suggested that average bodyweight gain was significantly improved by the addition of probiotics in growing pigs when fed 0.2% of probiotic blend in diet. According to the authors' research findings, Alexopoulos et al (2004) and, more recently, Ross et al (2010) and Yan & Kim (2013) found that dietary probiotics inclusion led to a higher ADG, ADFI, and FCR than in pigs fed no probiotics.…”

“…Faecal ammoniacal nitrogen (NH 3 -N) concentration was determined according to the methods of Chaney & Marbach (1962). The volatile fatty acids (VFA) measured in this experiment included acetic acid, propionic acid and butyric acid, according to the method reported by Chen et al (2005).…”