Efficacy of a novel prebiotic and a commercial probiotic in reducing mortality and production losses due to cold stress and Escherichia coli challenge of broiler chicks

Abstract

Prebiotics consisting of resistant starch may alter intestinal ecology, thus modulating inflammation and increasing intestinal health through increased cecal production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA). Probiotics may directly alter the intestinal microbiome, resulting in the same effects. We hypothesize that adding prebiotics and probiotics to feed may protect the gut of young chicks under stress. Studies 1, 2, and 3 evaluated treatments in a cold stress (CS) and Escherichia coli (EC) oral challenge to 430 day-old broiler chicks for 3 wk. In study 1, prebiotics were administered as 15% of the diet during the first week only and consisted of the following: Hi-Maize resistant starch (HM), potato starch (PS), or raw potato (RP). In studies 2 and 3, the PS treatment was identical to study 1, and an additional probiotic treatment (PRO) was administered in feed and water. In study 1, PS protected BW during the first week and decreased the mortality of CS/EC-challenged birds during the first week and wk 3, while RP decreased the mortality of warm-brooded birds challenged with EC during the first week. In study 2, PS decreased and PRO increased the main effect mean (MEM) of the first week BW. PS and PRO numerically decreased the feed conversion ratio (FCR) by 23 and 29 points, respectively, in CS/EC-challenged birds with no effects on mortality. In study 3, PS decreased and PRO increased the first week and wk 3 MEM BW. PS numerically increased FCR by 16 points, while PRO decreased FCR by 2 points. Both PS and PRO tended to increase overall mortality, and PRO significantly increased mortality in the CS/EC challenge. These results suggest that the effects of PS may be too variable in this challenge model for further study; however, the PRO treatment improved production values and may have potential as an alternative to antibiotics during the first weeks after hatch.

Effects of N-acetylcysteine on the energy status and antioxidant capacity in heart and liver of cold-stressed broilers

“…Moreover, cold stress decreased the relative weights of both thymus and bursa, which were responsible for the generation of T and B lymphocytes, respectively. It was reported that cold stress could suppress the immune responses of chickens [19]. Dietary NAC mitigated the decrease of bursa relative weight in cold-stressed broilers, which might further modulate the function of B lymphocytes that derived from bursa in chickens.…”

“…We certify that there is no conflict of interest with any financial organization regarding the material discussed in the manuscript. [19], which decreased the availability of these amino acids. As ATP was required for proline synthesis [24], the reduced contents of ATP in heart and liver might also have contributed to the decrease of plasma proline level in broilers under cold condition.…”

Evaluation of yeast culture and direct-fed microbial on gut histology and serum components of broilers challenged with suboptimal diets under heat stress

“…Nevertheless, there are some reports indicating no significant impacts of these additives on gut and/or blood variables of poultry. Huff et al (2015) indicated that prebiotics did not consistently prevent the effects of the cold stress or Escherichia coli challenge. Also, supplementation with a prebiotic had no considerable effect on performance, immunity, and stress indicators (blood glucose, cholesterol, and corticosterone) in a study (Houshmand, Azhar, Zulkifli, Bejo, & Kamyab, 2012).…”

Influence of β-galacto-oligosaccharide on growth performance and components of intestinal barrier in broilers during heat stress

“…Production losses during thermal stress were reduced in poultry by the use of antibiotic growth promoters (Huff et al, 2015). But with the emergence of antibiotic-resistant superbugs and antibiotic residues in meat, their use in animal feed was banned by the European Commission in 2006(EC Regulation No.…”