8954856055505db

مقایسۀ تأثیر پادزیست محرک رشد با برخی زیست‌یار‏های داخلی و محصولات همسان وارداتی بر شاخص‏های عملکردی، اقتصادی و ریخت‏شناسی رودۀ کوچک در جوجه‏های گوشتی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه پرورش و مدیریت طیور، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار، گروه پرورش و مدیریت طیور، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

3 استادیار، گروه پرورش و مدیریت طیور، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

4 دانشیار، بخش بیوتکنولوژی، مؤسسۀ تحقیقات واکسن و سرم‌سازی رازی، کرج، ایران

چکیده

این آزمایش باهدف بررسی‌ و ارزیابی تأثیر پادزیست (آنتی‏بیوتیک) محرک رشد با برخی زیست‌یار (پروبیوتیک)‏های داخلی و فرآورده‌های همسان وارداتی بر عملکرد، شاخص‏های اقتصادی و ریخت‏شناختی رودۀ کوچک با شمار 540 قطعه جوجۀ یک‌روزۀ گوشتی در قالب طرح کامل تصادفی با شش تیمار و پنج تکرار انجام شد. زیست‌یار‏های پدی‏گارد و لاکتوفید به‏عنوان فرآورده‌های داخلی و زیست‌یار‏های باکتوسل و پریمالاک به‏عنوان فرآورده‌های وارداتی استفاده شد. تیمارها شامل: 1- جیرۀ پایه (شاهد) و جیرۀ پایه به همراه 2- پادزیست 3- زیست‌یار باکتوسل 4- زیست‌یار پدی‏گارد 5- زیست‌یار پریمالاک 6- زیست‌یار لاکتوفید بودند. مقایسۀ مستقل برای مقایسۀ تأثیر زیست‌یار در برابر گروه‏های شاهد و پادزیست، زیست‌یار‏های ایرانی در برابر وارداتی و زیست‌یار‏های تک‏سویه در برابر چندسویه استفاده شد. در دورۀ آغازین پریمالاک باعث کاهش و تیمارهای پادزیست و باکتوسل موجب افزایش در خوراک مصرفی و افزایش وزن بدن شدند (05/0>P). این تغییرات تأثیری بر ضریب تبدیل غذایی نداشت (05/0>P). شاخص‏های اقتصادی، شاخص تولید و وزن بدن بین تیمارها تفاوت معنی‏دار نشان ندادند. پادزیست موجب کاهش طول پرز، سطح پرز و عمق کریپت شد و پریمالاک افزایش در ارتفاع و سطح پرز در میان‌روده (ژژونوم) را نشان داد (05/0>P). در مقایسۀ مستقل پادزیست در برابر زیست‌یار موجب بهبود در عملکرد، سود ناخالص و همچنین کاهش در طول میان‌روده، عمق کریپت، ارتفاع و سطح پرز شد (05/0>P). کاهش عمق کریپت در انتهای رودۀ کوچک (ایلئوم) تنها تغییر ایجادشده با مصرف زیست‌یار‏های داخلی در برابر فرآورده‌های وارداتی بود (05/0>P). به‌عنوان نتیجه‌گیری کلی، تفاوت معنی‏داری بین زیست‌یار‏های ایرانی، وارداتی و پادزیست آزمایشی نسبت به گروه شاهد در شاخص‏های عملکردی و اقتصادی در کل دوره مشاهده نشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparing the effects of growth antibiotic promoter, some Iranian probiotics and similar imported products on performance, economic indicators and small intestinal morphology of broilers

نویسندگان [English]

  • Aref Mahmoodtabar 1
  • Mohammad Amir Karimi Torshizi 2
  • Mohsen Sharafi 3
  • Naheed Mojgani 4
1 M.Sc. Student, Department of Poultry Science, Faculty of Agriculture Science Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Poultry Science, Faculty of Agriculture Science Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Poultry Science, Faculty of Agriculture Science Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
4 Associate Professor, Department of Biotechnology, Razi Serum and Vaccine Research Institute, Karaj, Iran
چکیده [English]

This exprement was conducted to compare the effects of antibiotic and some Iranian and similar importedprobiotics on performance, economic indicators and intestine morphology of broilers. 540 1-day old broilers were used in a completly randomized design with 6 treatments and 5 riplicates per treatment. Pedi-Guard and Lacto-Feed were used as Iranian and Bactocell and Primalac probiotics as imported products. Treatments were: 1) basal diet (control) and basal diet with: 2) antibiotic, 3) Bactocell probiotic, 4) Pedi-Guard probiotic, 5) Primalac probiotic and 6) Lacto-Feed probiotic. Orthogonal contrasts were used to compare the effect of probiotics versus control and antibiotic, Iranian probiotics versus imported products and single strain probiotics versus multi strains. Primalac decreased feed intake and body weight gain, while antibiotic and Bactocell increased the feed intake and body weight gain in the starter period (P<0.05). These changes did not change the feed conversion ratio. Economic indices, production efficiency factor and body weight did not show any significant differences. Antibiotic reduced villus height, surface area and the crypt depth and the Primalac showed an increase in villus height and surface area in the jejunum (P<0.05). Contrast of antibiotic versus probiotics resulted in improvement in performance, gross profit, as well as decrease in jejunum length, crypt depth, villus height, and surface area (P<0.05). Reduction in crypt depth in ileum was the only change caused by using Iranian probiotics versus imported products (P<0.05). As general conclusion, Iranian probiotics, imported probiotics and antibiotic were different from control group when judge based on performance and economic indexes.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • broiler
  • economic evaluation
  • gut health
  • Iranian probiotics
  • performance
  1. Abdelrahman, A. H., Kamel, H. H., Ahmed, W. M., Mogoda, O. S. & Mohamed, A. H. (2012). Effect of Bactocell® and Revitilyte-Plus as probiotic food supplements on the growth performance, hematological, biochemical parameters and humoral immune response of broiler chickens. World Applied Sciences Journal, 18(3), 305-316.
  2. Abdelrahman, W., Mohnl, M., Teichmann, K., Doupovec, B., Schatzmayr, G., Lumpkins, B. & Mathis, G. (2014). Comparative evaluation of probiotic and salinomycin effects on performance and coccidiosis control in broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 93(12), 3002-3008.
  3. Afshar Mazandaran, N. & Rajab, A. (2002). Probiotic and their uses in animal and poultry nutrition (3th ed.). Noorbakhsh. (In Persian)
  4. Anderson, D. B., McCracken, V. J., Aminov, R. I., Simpson, J. M., Mackie, R. I., Verstegen, M. W. A. & Gaskins, H. R. (2000). Gut microbiology and growth-promoting antibiotics in swine. In Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews. Series B, Livestock Feeds and Feeding, 70(2), 101-108.
  5. Ashayerizadeh, O., Dastar, B., Samadi, F., Khomeiri, M., Yamchi, A. & Zerehdaran, S. (2016). Effects of lactobacillus-based probiotic on performance, gut microflora, hematology and intestinal morphology in young broiler chickens challenged with Salmonella Typhimurium. Poultry Science Journal, 4(2), 157-165.
  6. Aviagen. )2014a(. Nutrition specifications: ROSS 308 Broiler. Aviagen Ltd., Newbridge, UK.
  7. Aviagen. )2014b(. Performance objectives: ROSS 308 Broiler. Aviagen Ltd., Newbridge, UK.
  8. Awad, W., Ghareeb, K. & Böhm, J. (2008). Intestinal structure and function of broiler chickens on diets supplemented with a synbiotic containing Enterococcus faecium and oligosaccharides. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 9(11), 2205-2216.
  9. Awad, W. A., Ghareeb, K., Abdel-Raheem, S. & Böhm, J. (2009). Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic and synbiotic on growth performance, organ weights, and intestinal histomorphology of broiler chickens. Poultry Science88, 49-56.
  10. Bahram Pour, J.B. & Kermanshahi, H. (2010). Effects of cecal cultures and a commercial probiotic (PrimaLac®) on performance and serum lipids of broiler chickens. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 9(10), 1506-1509.
  11. Bai, S.P., Wu, A.M., Ding, X.M., Lei, Y., Bai, J., Zhang, K.Y. & Chio, J.S. (2013). Effects of probiotic-supplemented diets on growth performance and intestinal immune characteristics of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 92(3), 663-670.
  12. Beiki, M., Dayyani, N. & Hashemi, S.M. (2013). The effects of Fermacto, Bactocell and Biostrong in antibiotic-free diets on the performance of broilers. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research, 12, 1535-1542.
  13. Blajman, J.E., Frizzo, L.S., Zbrun, M.V., Astesana, D.M., Fusari, M.L., Soto, L.P., Rosmini, M.R. & Signorini, M.L. (2014). Probiotics and broiler growth performance: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. British Poultry Science, 55(4), 483-494.
  14. Caspary, W.F. )1992(. Physiology and pathophysiology of intestinal absorption. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 55, 299-308.
  15. Chamani, M. (2016). Efficacy of Bactocell® and Toyocerin® as probiotics on growth Performance, blood parameters and intestinal morphometry of turkey poults. Iranian Journal of Applied Animal Science, 6, 211-218.
  16. Chichlowski, M., Croom, J., McBride, B. W., Daniel, L., Davis, G. & Koci, M. D. (2007a). Direct-fed microbial PrimaLac and salinomycin modulate whole-body and intestinal oxygen consumption and intestinal mucosal cytokine production in the broiler chick. Poultry Science, 86(6), 1100-1106.
  17. Chichlowski, M., Croom, W. J., Edens, F. W., McBride, B. W., Qiu, R., Chiang, C. C., Daniel, L. R., Havenstein, G. B. & Koci, M. D. (2007b). Microarchitecture and spatial relationship between bacteria and ileal, cecal, and colonic epithelium in chicks fed a direct-fed microbial, PrimaLac, and salinomycin. Poultry Science, 86(6), 1121-1132.
  18. Cox, C. M. & Dalloul, R. A. (2014). Immunomodulatory role of probiotics in poultry and potential in ovo application. Beneficial Microbes, 6, 45-52.
  19. Denbow, D. M. (2000). Gastrointestinal anatomy and physiology. In: Sturkie’s Avian Physiology. Edited by G. C., Whittow. Academic Press. California. USA.
  20. Dibner, J. J. & Richards, J. D. (2005). Antibiotic growth promoters in agriculture: history and mode of action. Poultry Science, 84(4), 634-643.
  21. England, J. A., Watkins, S. E., Saleh, E., Waldroup, P. W., Casas, I. & Burnham, D. (1996). Effects of Lactobacillus reuteri on live performance and intestinal development of male turkeys. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 5(4), 311-324.
  22. Ferket, P. R. (2003). Controlling gut health without the use of antibiotics. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Carolina Poultry Nutrition Conference, pp. 57-68.
  23. Fuller, R. (1989). Probiotics in man and animals. Journal of Applied Bacteriology, 66 (5), 365-378.
  24. Gadde, U., Kim, W. H., Oh, S. T. & Lillehoj, H. S. (2017). Alternatives to antibiotics for maximizing growth performance and feed efficiency in poultry: a review. Animal Health Research Reviews, 1-20.
  25. Graham, J. P., Boland, J. J. & Silbergeld, E. (2007). Growth promoting antibiotics in food animal production: an economic analysis. Public Health Reports, 122, 79-87.
  26. Grimes, J. L., Rahimi, S., Oviedo, E., Sheldon, B. W. & Santos, F. B. O. (2008). Effects of a direct-fed microbial (primalac) on turkey poult performance and susceptibility to oral Salmonella challenge. Poultry Science, 87(7), 1464-1470.
  27. Gunal, M., Yayli, G., Kaya, O., Karahan, N. & Sulak, O. (2006). The effects of antibiotic growth promoter, probiotic or organic acid supplementation on performance, intestinal microflora and tissue of broilers. International Journal of Poultry Science, 5(2), 149-155.
  28. Habibi, S., Khojasteh, S. & Jafari, M. (2013). The effect of Bactocell and Protexin probiotics on performance and carcass characteristics of broiler chickens. Journal of Novel Applied Sciences, 2(11), 565-570.
  29. Hahn-Didde, D. & Purdum, S.E. (2015). Prebiotics and probiotics used alone or in combination and effects on pullet growth and intestinal microbiology. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 25(1), 1-11.
  30. Hume, M. E. (2011). Historic perspective: prebiotics, probiotics, and other alternatives to antibiotics. Poultry Science, 90(11), 2663-2669.
  31. Huyghebaert, G., Ducatelle, R. & Van Immerseel, F. (2011).  An update on alternatives to antimicrobial growth promoters for broilers. The Veterinary Journal, 187(2), 182-188.
  32. Imondi, A. R. & Bird, F. H. )1966(. The turnover of intestinal epithelium in the chick. Poultry Science, 45(1), 142-147.
  33. Jabbari, N., Fattah, A. & Shirmohammad, F. (2016).  The effects of Protexin probiotic and aquablend avian antibody on performance and immune system of broiler chickens. Iranian Journal of Applied Animal Science, 6(4), 951-956.
  34. Jahanbani, H., Hosseini-Vashan, S. J., Ghiasi, S. E. & Mohammadi, A. (2016). Effect of Enterococcus facium isolates from Coracias garrulus and Lactofeed probiotic on performance, blood parameters and intestine microflora of broiler chickens. Animal Production Research, 4(4), 47-61. (in Farsi)
  35. Karimi Torshizi, M. A., Moghaddam, A. R., Rahimi, S. & Mojgani, N. (2010).  Assessing the effect of administering probiotics in water or as a feed supplement on broiler performance and immune response. British Poultry Science, 51(2), 178-184.
  36. Kim, G.B., Seo, Y.M., Kim, C.H. & Paik, I.K. (2011). Effect of dietary prebiotic supplementation on the performance, intestinal microflora, and immune response of broilers. Poultry Science, 90, 75-82.
  37. Komijani, A. & Sobhani, H. (2005). Economic analysis theory and application. (8th ed.). University of Tehran. (In Persian)
  38. Miles, R.D., Butcher, G.D., Henry, P.R. & Littell, R.C. (2006). Effect of antibiotic growth promoters on broiler performance, intestinal growth parameters, and quantitative morphology. Poultry Science, 85(3), 476-485.
  39. Mohan, B., Kadirvel, R., Natarajan, A. & Bhaskaran, M. (1996). Effect of probiotic supplementation on growth, nitrogen utilisation and serum cholesterol in broilers. British Poultry Science, 37(2), 395-401.
  40. Mountzouris, K. C., Tsirtsikos, P., Kalamara, E., Nitsch, S., Schatzmayr, G. & Fegeros, K. (2007). Evaluation of the efficacy of a probiotic containing Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus, and Pediococcus strains in promoting broiler performance and modulating cecal microflora composition and metabolic activities. Poultry Science, 86(2), 309-317.
  41. Ohimain, E. I. & Ofongo, R. T. (2012). The effect of probiotic and prebiotic feed supplementation on chicken health and gut microflora: a review. International Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 4(2), 135-143.
  42. Palamidi, I., Fegeros, K., Mohnl, M., Abdelrahman, W. H. A., Schatzmayr, G., Theodoropoulos, G. & Mountzouris, K.C. (2016). Probiotic form effects on growth performance, digestive function, and immune related biomarkers in broilers. Poultry Science, 95(7), 1598-1608.
  43. Pelicano, E. R. L., Souza, P. A., Souza, H. B. A., Figueiredo, D. F., Boiago, M. M., Carvalho, S. R. & Bordon, V. F. (2005). Intestinal mucosa development in broiler chickens fed natural growth promoters. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 7(4), 221-229.
  44. Pluske, J. R., Hampson, D. J. & Williams, I. H. (1997). Factors influencing the structure and function of the small intestine in the weaned pig: a review. Livestock Production Science, 51(1), 215-236.
  45. Podolsky, D. K. (1993). Regulation of intestinal epithelial proliferation: a few answers, many questions. American Journal of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology, 264(2), G179-G186.
  46. Pousty, I. & Adibmoradi, M. (2006). Histotechnique. (1st ed). University of Tehran. (In Persian)
  47. Rahimi, S., Grimes, J.L., Fletcher, O., Oviedo, E. & Sheldon, B.W. (2009). Effect of a direct-fed microbial (Primalac) on structure and ultrastructure of small intestine in turkey poults. Poultry Science, 88(3), 491-503.
  48. Russell, S. M. & Grimes, J. L. (2009). The effect of a direct-fed microbial (Primalac) on turkey live performance. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 18(2), 185-192.
  49. Safalaoh, A. C. L. (2006). Body weight gain, dressing percentage, abdominal fat and serum cholesterol of broilers supplemented with a microbial preparation. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 6, 1-10.
  50. Salehnia, M. (2001). General and advance histological technique. (1st ed). Paygan. (in Farsi)
  51. Salim, H. M., Kang, H. K., Akter, N., Kim, D. W., Kim, J. H., Kim, M. J., Na, J. C., Jong, H. B., Choi, H. C., Suh, O. S. & Kim, W. K. (2013). Supplementation of direct-fed microbials as an alternative to antibiotic on growth performance, immune response, cecal microbial population, and ileal morphology of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 92(8), 2084-2090.
  52. Solis de los Santos, F., Farnell, M. B., Tellez, G., Balog, J. M., Anthony, N. B., Torres-Rodriguez, A., Higgins, S., Hargis, B. M. & Donoghue, A. M. (2005). Effect of prebiotic on gut development and ascites incidence of broilers reared in a hypoxic environment. Poultry Science, 84(7), 1092-1100.
  53. Taheri, H. R., Kokabi Moghadam, M., Kakebaveh, M. & Harakinezhad, T. (2014). Growth performance and immune response of broiler chickens fed diets supplemented with probiotic and (or) prebiotic preparations. Journal of Livestock Science and Technologies, 2(2), 1-8.
  54. Timmerman, H. M., Veldman, A., Van den Elsen, E., Rombouts, F. M. & Beynen, A. C. (2006). Mortality and growth performance of broilers given drinking water supplemented with chicken-specific probiotics. Poultry Science, 85(8), 1383-1388.
  55. Walker, W. A. & Duffy, L. C. (1998). Diet and bacterial colonization: role of probiotics and prebiotics. The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, 9(12), 668-675.
  56. Wang, X., Farnell, Y. Z., Peebles, E. D., Kiess, A. S., Wamsley, K. G. S. & Zhai, W. (2016). Effects of prebiotics, probiotics, and their combination on growth performance, small intestine morphology, and resident Lactobacillus of male broilers. Poultry Science, 95(6), 1332-1340.
  57. Xu, Z. R., Hu, C. H., Xia, M. S., Zhan, X. A. & Wang, M. Q. (2003). Effects of dietary fructooligosaccharide on digestive enzyme activities, intestinal microflora and morphology of male broilers. Poultry Science, 82(6), 1030-1036.
  58. Yeo, J. & Kim, K. I. (1997). Effect of feeding diets containing an antibiotic, a probiotic, or yucca extract on growth and intestinal urease activity in broiler chicks. Poultry Science, 76(2), 381-385.