The Role of Streptococcus faecalis in the Antibiotic Growth Effect in Chickens

Huhtanen, C. N.; Pensack, J. M.

doi:10.3382/ps.0440830

Cited by 31 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…100-fold) in conventional husbandry conditions when compared to germ-free, antigen-free, or specific pathogen-free practices (Hooijkaas et al 1984, Pereira et al 1986, Bos et al 1988, Bakker et al 1995. Bacteria, especially the normal streptococci inhabitants of the gut, inoculated into germ-free chicks cause a 5-15% depression in growth, which can be ameliorated with antibiotics (Huhtanen andPensack 1965, Fuller et al 1979). Germ-free chicks fed diets adequate in energy have lower metabolisable energy intakes, greater rates of protein and energy retention, lower maintenance energy requirements, and ultimately greater rates of growth (5-30%) when compared to conventionally reared chicks (Table 3).…”

Section: Trade-offs Between Production and Immunitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Parameter Response measured BW gain 27%\in GF Chicks feed adequate protein diets Food intake similar Protein required for growth 23%\efficiency in GF 27%\efficiency in GF Energy required for growth ME intake CV\GF Chicks fed adequate energy in diets BW gain 7%\in GF 7%\in GF Protein retention Furuse and Yokota (1984a) ME retention 78%\in GF on low protein diets Chicks fed dietes that differed in protein Maintenance energy costs 20%\in CV Furuse et al (1991) Protein retention 15%\in GF Chicks fed complete diets with sorbose 17%\in GF ME retention BW gain 31%\in GF Fuller et al (1979) 5-15% decline in gnotobiotic BW gain GF chicks were innoculated with bacteria Freeman et al (1975) 17%\in GF Chicks fed a complete basal diet BW gain CV gain was 62-68% of GF BW gain Huhtanen and Pensack (1965) Table 4. Metabolic and developmental characteristics of mammals reared in germ-free (GF) or conventional (CV) environments and fed nutritionally adequate or inadequate diets.…”

Section: Reference and Experimental Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reference and experimental conditions Parameter Snyder and Wostmann (1987) Wistar rats fed ad lib or 70% ad lib for 2 yr CV and GF similar BW growth (ad lib) BW growth (70%) GF 12%\than CV rats at 2 yr Eggum and Chwalibog (1983) Gut microflora reduced 90% in Wistar rats using No difference with control. BW gain and ME m antibiotic (GF r ) G F r 19-22%\CV rats Efficiency of gain Wostmann et al (1983) GF and CV rats similar Adult Wistar rats in a food balance trial ME utilization CV\GF rats Energy absorption Yamanaka et al (1977) ICR strain mouse in energy balance trials ME requirement 44% more in CV mice GF mice inoculated with Staphylococcus ME intake had\intake Sewell et al (1975) Wistar rats fed a complete diet 20-30% lower in GF rats Metabolic rate Levenson et al (1966) Fischer rats compared by indirect calorimetry Lower in GF rats Rectal temperature Metabolic rate 15-20% lower in GF rats Livestock and chickens fed selected antibiotics in their feed, especially those residing in unsanitary environments, often show improved growth performance, feed efficiency, and reduced oxygen consumption (Coates et al 1952, Lev and Forbes 1959, Huhtanen and Pensack 1965, Freeman et al 1975, Yen et al 1985. Germ-free chickens do not respond to orally administered antibiotics, while conventional-reared birds can demonstrate a remarkable increase in body mass gain (Freeman et al 1975).…”

Section: Response Measuredmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trade‐offs in evolutionary immunology: just what is the cost of immunity?

Lochmiller¹,

Deerenberg²

2000

Oikos

1,756

1,608

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has become increasingly clear that life‐history patterns among the vertebrates have been shaped by the plethora and variety of immunological risks associated with parasitic faunas in their environments. Immunological competence could very well be the most important determinant of life‐time reproductive success and fitness for many species. It is generally assumed by evolutionary ecologists that providing immunological defences to minimise such risks to the host is costly in terms of necessitating trade‐offs with other nutrient‐demanding processes such as growth, reproduction, and thermoregulation. Studies devoted to providing assessments of such costs and how they may force evolutionary trade‐offs among life‐history characters are few, especially for wild vertebrate species, and their results are widely scattered throughout the literature. In this paper we attempt to review this literature to obtain a better understanding of energetic and nutritional costs for maintaining a normal immune system and examine how costly it might be for a host who is forced to up‐regulate its immunological defence mechanisms. The significance of these various costs to ecology and life history trade‐offs among the vertebrates is explored. It is concluded that sufficient evidence exists to support the primary assumption that immunological defences are costly to the vertebrate host.

show abstract

Section: Trade-offs Between Production and Immunitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reference and Experimental Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Response Measuredmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trade‐offs in evolutionary immunology: just what is the cost of immunity?

Lochmiller¹,

Deerenberg²

2000

Oikos

1,756

1,608

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Various authors have suggested that the low lipid digestibility in broiler chickens fed diets with a high content of NSPs may be due to bacterial overgrowth in the small intestine and subsequent excessive deconjugation of bile acids, which reduces their efficacy in solubilizing lipids (Huhtanen and Pensack, 1965;Salih et al, 1991). The adjusted crude protein digestibility shows the highest value for hulless barley (5) and the lowest value for untreated barley (2) (P < 0.05).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Comparison of performance and digestibility characteristics of broilers fed diets containing treated hulled barley or hulless barley

Moharrery¹

2006

Czech J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was performed with growing chickens (14 to 56 days of age) to evaluate the effects of feeding a barley-based diet. The treatments were maize diet (1) as a control, barley diet with (4) or without (2) the commercial enzyme β-glucanase, barley treated with rumen fluid without protozoa (3) and hulless barley (5). The effects of treatments were investigated in a 42-day trial using 360 sexed broiler chickens. In a digestibility trial, 15 male broiler chicks were used at 45 days of age. In this regard, five treatments were offered to chickens in three replications individually. The experimental design for performance investigation was a completely randomised one with a 5 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. Each of the five treatments was replicated three times per sex (n = 3). The levels of barley in treatments (2) to (5) were 35% during the growing (14 to 42 days) and finishing (42 to 52 days) period. At the end of trial, two birds from each pen were selected and slaughtered. Blood samples were taken just before slaughter of birds. No significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed between (3) to (5) treatments with maize diet in weight gains, feed intake and feed conversion, but barley with no treatment (2) showed lower weight gain compared to the enzyme treatment and hulless barley diet (P < 0.05). Ether extract digestibility decreased significantly in all barley diets compared with maize diet (P < 0.05). Digestibility of DM, CP, and NFE was lower in barley diet with no treatment, in comparison with other treatments (P < 0.05). Reduction of serum cholesterol was observed in birds on hulless barley diet (P < 0.05), but serum triacylglycerols and glucose did not show any significant differences between treatments (P > 0.05). Mean percentage yield of breast showed the highest percentage in barley diet with no treatment (P < 0.05) and abdominal fats were produced in lowest amounts in carcasses on hulless barley diets (P < 0.05).    

show abstract

“…In the past the organism responsible for producing growth depression in chickens had been designated Strep. fueculis (Huhtanen & Pensack 1965;Eyssen & De Somer 1967). The published characteristics of these strains do not, however, allow a distinction to be made between their classification as Strep.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Correlation of Growth Depression of Chicks with the Presence of Streptococcus faecium in the Gut

Houghton¹,

Fuller²,

Coates³

1981

Journal of Applied Bacteriology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although Streptococcus faecium appeared rapidly in the gut of chicks reared in fumigated premises, the growth of the birds was not always depressed. Growth depression was often associated with the growth of Strep. faecium in the duodenum. The growth depression produced by mono-association of germ-free chicks with Strep. faecium grown aerobically was variable. A less variable response which was statistically significant was obtained by growing the inoculum anaerobically.IN A SERIES of experiments in which groups of bacteria isolated from conventional birds were re-established in gnotobiotic chicks, Fuller et al. (1979) showed that of those organisms tested only Streptococcus faeciurn was capable of depressing the growth of chickens. Confirmation of the role of Strep. faecium in growth depression was sought by examining how closely growth depression and colonization of the gut by this organism were associated in conventional birds and how consistently a growthdepressing strain of Sfrep. faecium depressed the growth of gnotobiotic chicks.

show abstract

The Role of Streptococcus faecalis in the Antibiotic Growth Effect in Chickens

Cited by 31 publications

References 11 publications

Trade‐offs in evolutionary immunology: just what is the cost of immunity?

Trade‐offs in evolutionary immunology: just what is the cost of immunity?

Comparison of performance and digestibility characteristics of broilers fed diets containing treated hulled barley or hulless barley

Correlation of Growth Depression of Chicks with the Presence of Streptococcus faecium in the Gut

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About