Health and Growth of Veal Calves Fed Milk Replacers With or Without Probiotics

Abstract

Four experiments with 1-wk-old veal calves were conducted to assess the influence of probiotics on growth and health indicators. In experiments 1 and 2, the liquid probiotic supplements were administered daily from experimental d 1 to 15. The treatment period in experiments 3 and 4 was extended to 56 d. The probiotics used were a multispecies probiotic (MSPB) containing different probiotic species of human origin, or a calf-specific probiotic (CSPB) containing 6 Lactobacillus species isolated from calf feces and selected on the basis of a combination of characteristics. When the data for the 4 experiments were pooled, the probiotics enhanced growth rate during the first 2 wk. During the 8-wk experimental period, average daily gain and feed efficiency were significantly improved in the probiotic-treated groups. The MSPB-induced increase in weight gain was greater when the control calves were considered less healthy based on a health score (an index of diarrhea and therapeutic treatments). Probiotic treatment tended to diminish mortality. The CSPB treatment reduced the incidence of diarrhea and the fecal counts of coliforms. When therapeutic treatment was intensive in the control calves, the ingestion of probiotics reduced the percentage of calves that required therapy and the amount of treatments needed against digestive or respiratory diseases. There was no clear difference in the efficiency of the MSPB and CSPB preparations. Further research is necessary to identify underlying mechanisms and to evaluate the potential of probiotics to improve respiratory health in veal calf production.

Effects of kefir as a probiotic source on the performance of goat kids

“…On the other hand, the efficacy of probiotics depends on the adaptation of microbial species to the environmental conditions and their ability to survive and compete with pathogens in the gastrointestinal tract, and is closely related with the dose and microbial composition of the probiotic source. Different results from the studies using commercial or natural probiotic supplements with different doses of lactic acid bacteria and yeast have so far been obtained (Cruywagen et al, 1996;Agarwal et al, 2002;Ayışığı et al, 2005;Timmerman et al, 2005). The doses of kefir (1.2x10 9 cfu/kg LW) and the commercial probiotic source (2.15x10 5 cfu/kg LW) supplemented to kids in the present study were similar to the doses used in other studies reported in the literature.…”

IgA production, coliforms analysis and intestinal mucosa morphology of piglets that received probiotics with viable or inactivated cells

“…The efficacy of viable monospecies probiotics compared against viable multispecies is still controversial, without conclusive results (Timmerman et al 2004(Timmerman et al , 2005. Our hypo-thesis that the differences observed among groups are mostly due to the viable condition of the cells rather than to the number of species in the probiotics is more strongly supported, because it is known that viable cells adhere to intestinal mucosa and inactivated cells do not.…”

Desempenho de bezerros leiteiros recebendo probiótico contendo Bacillus subtilis e Bacillus licheniformis

“…Os probióticos são definidos como aditivos alimentares de microrganismos vivos os quais os benefícios afetam o animal hospedeiro melhorando o equilíbrio da microbiota intestinal (FULLER et al,1989). Segundo Vanbelle et al (1990), após uma dosagem oral efetiva, são capazes de estabelecer-se no trato gastrintestinal e manter ou aumentar a microbiota natural, ajudando a prevenir a colonização por microrganismos patogênicos, assegurando melhor utilização dos nutrientes (HOLZAPFEL et al, 2001;SCHAREK et al, 2005;GUO et al, 2006). Há inúmeros trabalhos verificando a utilização de probióticos em bezerros, pois as primeiras semanas de vida são muito importantes para seu desenvolvimento e produção futuros.…”

“…Alguns destes trabalhos mostram melhora no desempenho dos animais (KAWAKAMI et al, 2010;KOWALSKI et al, 2009;JATKAUSKAS et al, 2010), diminuição na incidência de diarreia (JATKAUSKAS et al, 2010;KIM et al, 2011), enquanto outros autores não tiveram efeitos significativos (BAYATKOUHSAR et al, 2013;FRIZZO et al, 2010). O que se destaca em alguns destes trabalhos é que os efeitos esperados dos probióticos apresentam-se mais significativos quando os animais estão sob estresse (TIMMERMAN et al, 2005;CRUYAGEN et al, 1995, RIDELL et al, 2010 Sun et al (2010), utilizou cepas de Bacillus subtilis natto durante a fase de aleitamento em bezerros suplementados no sucedâneo. Os animais suplementados apresentaram a eficiência alimentar 18% maior do que os animais do grupo controle.…”