Response of Nursery Pigs to a Synbiotic Preparation of Starch and an Anti-<i>Escherichia coli</i>K88 Probiotic

Krause, Denis O.; Bhandari, S. K.; House, James D.; Nyachoti, C. M.

doi:10.1128/aem.01427-10

Cited by 56 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, the number of Escherichia decreased sharply in all treatment groups, most remarkably in the LAC group. Previous reports showed that the lactulose effect was most distinguishable on the population of Escherichia , specifically enterotoxigenic and enteropathogenic E. coli K88 at post‐weaning (Konstantinov et al ., ; Krause et al ., ; Guerra‐Ordaz et al ., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Revealing the combined effects of lactulose and probiotic enterococci on the swine faecal microbiota using 454 pyrosequencing

Chae

Pajarillo

et al. 2016

Microbial Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryDemand for the development of non‐antibiotic growth promoters in animal production has increased in recent years. This report compared the faecal microbiota of weaned piglets under the administration of a basal diet (CON) or that containing prebiotic lactulose (LAC), probiotic Enterococcus faecium NCIMB 11181 (PRO) or their synbiotic combination (SYN). At the phylum level, the Firmicutes to Bacteroidetes ratio increased in the treatment groups compared with the CON group, and the lowest proportion of Proteobacteria was observed in the LAC group. At the family level, Enterobacteriaceae decreased in all treatments; more than a 10‐fold reduction was observed in the LAC (0.99%) group compared with the CON group. At the genus level, the highest Oscillibacter proportion was detected in PRO, the highest Clostridium in LAC and the highest Lactobacillus in SYN; the abundance of Escherichia was lowest in the LAC group. Clustering in the discriminant analysis of principal components revealed distinct separation of the feeding groups (CON, LAC, PRO and SYN), showing different microbial compositions according to different feed additives or their combination. These results suggest that individual materials and their combination have unique actions and independent mechanisms for changes in the distal gut microbiota.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Revealing the combined effects of lactulose and probiotic enterococci on the swine faecal microbiota using 454 pyrosequencing

Chae

Pajarillo

et al. 2016

Microbial Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Genetic predisposition and environment factors (i.e., microbial pathogens, nutrition) contribute to the development of this disease. The increased research over the past few decades has advanced our understanding the specific microbial pathogens responsible for triggering piglet diarrhea (Krause et al, 2010; Larsson et al, 2014). Recently, an increased number of neonatal diarrhea cases in the swine industry were found to be associated with additional pathogens (Kongsted et al, 2014; Larsson et al, 2015), making the management of diarrhea even harder.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structure and Function of the Fecal Microbiota in Diarrheic Neonatal Piglets

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diarrhea is a leading cause of increased mortality in neonatal and young piglets. Aberration of the gut microbiota is one important factor in the etiology of piglet diarrhea. However, information regarding the structure and function of the gut microbiome in diarrheic neonatal piglets is limited. To investigate the composition and functional potential of the fecal microbiota in neonatal piglets, we performed 16S rRNA gene sequencing on 20 fecal samples from diarrheic piglets and healthy controls, and metagenomics sequencing on a subset of six samples. We found striking compositional and functional differences in fecal microbiota between diarrheic and healthy piglets. Neonatal piglet diarrhea was associated with increases in the relative abundance of Prevotella, Sutterella, and Campylobacter, as well as Fusobacteriaceae. The increased relative abundance of Prevotella was correlated with the reduction in Escherichia coli and the majority of beneficial bacteria that belonging to the Firmicutes phylum (e.g., Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Lactobacillus, Clostridium, and Blautia) in diarrheic piglets. The differentially functional gene abundances in diarrheic piglets were an increase in bacterial ribosome, and contributed primarily by the genera Prevotella, this indicates a growth advantage of the Prevotella in diarrheic conditions. Additional functional gene sets were associated with the reduction of polyamine transport, monosaccharide and sugar-specific PTS transport, amino acid transport, and two-component regulatory system. These profiles likely impact the ability to transport and uptake nutrients, as well as the ability to fight microbial infections in the piglet gut ecosystem. This work identifies a potential role for Prevotella in the community-wide microbial aberration and dysfunction that underpins the pathogenesis of piglet diarrhea. Identification of these microbial and functional signatures may provide biomarkers of neonatal piglet diarrhea.

show abstract

“…The study by Krause et al (2010) concluded that the use of E. coli probiotic strains UM-2 and UM-7 against ETEC K88 in the presence of raw potato starch positively impacted on piglet growth performance and resulted in a reduction of diarrhea and increased microbial diversity in the gut. In another study, the synbiotic combination of lactulose and L. plantarum JC1 strain showed a good potential to be used to control post-weaning colibacillosis in piglets (GuerraOrdaz et al 2014).…”

Section: Prevention Of Diarrheamentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunomodulating effects of probiotics for microbiota modulation, gut health and disease resistance in pigs

Roselli

Pieper

Rogel–Gaillard

et al. 2017

Animal Feed Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms HIGHLIGHTS-Updated literature overview about probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics on pig gut health is provided -Both in vivo studies performed in pigs and in vitro studies conducted in pig intestinal cell lines are described -A critical outcome of the described results is provided -The concept of "proxy measurements" for pig gut health is widely discussed -The link between gut microbiota and mucsal immune system is described Abstract:Probiotics are live microorganisms that can confer a health benefit on the host, and amongst various mechanisms probiotics are believed to exert their effects by production of antimicrobial substances, competition with pathogens for adhesion sites and nutrients, enhancement of mucosal barrier integrity and immune modulation. Through these activities probiotics can support three core benefits for the host: supporting a healthy gut microbiota, a healthy digestive tract and a healthy immune system. More recently, the concept of combining probiotics and prebiotics, i.e. synbiotics, for the beneficial effect on gut health of pigs has attracted major interest, and examples of probiotic and prebiotic benefits for pigs are pathogen inhibition and immunomodulation. Yet, it remains to be defined in pigs, what exactly is a healthy gut. Because of the high level of variability in growth and feed conversion between individual pigs in commercial production systems, measuring the impact of probiotics on gut health defined by improvements in overall productivity requires large experiments. For this reason, many studies have concentrated on measuring the effects of the feed additives on proxies of gut health including many immunological measures, in more controlled experiments. With the major focus of studying the balance between gut microbiology, immunology and physiology, and the potential for prevention of intestinal disorders in pigs, we therefore performed a literature review of the immunomodulatory effects of probiotics, either alone or in combination with prebiotics, based on in vivo, in vitro and ex vivo porcine experiments. A 3 consistent number of studies showed the potential capacity in terms of immunomodulatory activities of these feed additives in pigs, but contrasting results can also be obtained from the literature.Reasons for this are not clear but could be related to differences with respect to the probiotic strain used, experimental settings, diets, initial microbiota colonization, administration route, time and frequency of administration of the probiotic strain and sampling for analysis. Hence, the use of proxy measurements of enteric health based on observable immunological parameters presents significant problems at the moment, and cannot be considered robust, reliable predictors of the probiotic activity in vivo, in relation to pig gut health. In c...

show abstract

Response of Nursery Pigs to a Synbiotic Preparation of Starch and an Anti-Escherichia coliK88 Probiotic

Cited by 56 publications

References 40 publications

Revealing the combined effects of lactulose and probiotic enterococci on the swine faecal microbiota using 454 pyrosequencing

Revealing the combined effects of lactulose and probiotic enterococci on the swine faecal microbiota using 454 pyrosequencing

Structure and Function of the Fecal Microbiota in Diarrheic Neonatal Piglets

Immunomodulating effects of probiotics for microbiota modulation, gut health and disease resistance in pigs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About