علوم دامی ایران

علوم دامی ایران

اثر برخی پروبیوتیک ‏های طیور تولیدی ایران بر مؤلفه‌های عملکردی، شاخص‌های اقتصادی و ریخت‏ شناسی روده کوچک جوجه‏ های گوشتی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
عارف محمودتبار 1
محمد امیر کریمی ترشیزی 2
محسن شرفی 3
ناهید مژگانی 4
1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، گروه پرورش و مدیریت طیور، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار، گروه پرورش و مدیریت طیور، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
3 استادیار، گروه پرورش و مدیریت طیور، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران
4 دانشیار، بخش بیوتکنولوژی، موسسه تحقیقات واکسن و سرم‌سازی رازی، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران
10.22059/ijas.2018.249544.653602
چکیده
این آزمایش با هدف مقایسه اثر برخی پروبیوتیک‏های طیور تولید ایران بر مؤلفه­های عملکردی، شاخص‏های اقتصادی و ریخت‏شناسی روده کوچک با استفاده از 500 قطعه جوجه گوشتی یک‌روزه سویه تجاری راس 308 در قالب طرح کاملاً تصادفی با 5 تیمار و 5 تکرار انجام شد. تیمارهای آزمایشی شامل: 1- جیره پایه (شاهد) و جیره پایه به همراه پروبیوتیک­های 2- باکتوژن® 3- دی‏پرو® 4- های‏پروتکت® و 5- پروبیتاز® بودند. در سنین 24 و 41 روزگی، یک قطعه پرنده جنس نر از هر واحد آزمایشی برای بررسی شاخص‏های ریخت‏شناسی روده کوچک کشتار گردید. مقایسات مستقل برای مقایسه اثر پروبیوتیک در مقابل شاهد انجام شد. نتایج این مطالعه نشان دادند که تیمارهای حاوی پروبیوتیک تأثیر معنی‏داری بر افزایش وزن بدن و ضریب تبدیل غذایی نداشتند. مصرف پروبیوتیک های‏پروتکت® موجب کاهش مصرف خوراک در کل دوره آزمایش نسبت به سایر تیمارهای حاوی پروبیوتیک شد (05/0≥P). وزن بدن نهایی، شاخص تولید اروپایی، شاخص‏های اقتصادی و درصد لاشه تحت تأثیر تیمارهای آزمایشی قرار نگرفتند. استفاده از پروبیوتیک‏ها تأثیر معنی‏داری بر طول نسبی و شاخص‏های ریخت‌شناسی تهی­روده و ایلئوم نداشت. در مقایسه مستقل، استفاده از تیمارهای حاوی پروبیوتیک در مجموع باعث افزایش هزینه خوراک مصرفی نسبت به گروه شاهد گردید (05/0>P). بر طبق نتایج این مطالعه، به­نظر می­رسد که استفاده از پروبیوتیک‏های مورد بررسی در مقایسه با گروه شاهد، تأثیر معنی‏داری بر عملکرد صفات، شاخص‏های اقتصادی و ریخت‏شناسی روده کوچک جوجه­های گوشتی پرورش داده شده در شرایط بهینه نداشت.
کلیدواژه‌ها
ایلئوم
ضریب تبدیل غذایی
عملکرد
لاشه
وزن بدن

عنوان مقاله English

The effect of some poultry probiotics produced in Iran on performance parameters, economic indices 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 Breeding and Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Poultry Breeding and Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Poultry Breeding and Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
4 Associate Professor, Department of Biotechnology, Razi Vaccine Research Institute, Agricultural Research and Education Organization, Karaj, Iran
چکیده English

This experiment was conducted to compare the effect of some poultry probiotics produced in Iran on performance parameters, economic indicators and small intestinal morphology of broilers using 500 one-day-old Ross 308 broilers in a completely randomized design with 5 treatments and 5 replicates per each treatment. The experimental treatments were: 1- basal diet (control), 2- basal diet + Bacto-Gene® probiotic, 3- basal diet + Di-Pro® probiotic, 4- basal diet + Hypro-Tect® probiotic and 5- basal diet + Probitaz® probiotic. At 24 and 41 days of age, one male broiler chick was slaughtered from each experimental unit. Orthogonal contrasts were done to compare the effect of probiotics versus control. The results of this study showed that the treatments containing probiotic had no significant effect on body weight gain and feed conversion ratio. The utilization of probiotic Hypro-Tect® resulted in significant reduction in feed consumption in whole experimental period compare to other treatments containing probiotic (P≤0.05). The final body weight, European efficiency factor, economic indices and carcass percentage were not affected by experimental treatments. The utilization of probiotics had no significant effect on intestinal relative length and morphological indices of jejunum and ileum. In orthogonal contrast, the utilization of treatments containing probiotic increased feed cost as compared to control group (P<0.05). According to the results of this study, it seems that the utilization of studied probiotics had no significant effect on performance parameters, economic indices and small intestinal morphology of broilers reared in optimal condition as compared to control group.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Body weight
Carcass
feed conversion rate
ileum
Performance
  1. 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, 3002-3008.
  2. Andremont, A. (2000). Consequences of antibiotic therapy to the intestinal ecosystem. In Annales Francaises d'anesthesie et de Reanimation, 19, 395-402.
  3. Angel, R., Dalloul, R. A. & Doerr, J. (2005). Performance of broiler chickens fed diets supplemented with a direct-fed microbial. Poultry Science, 84, 1222-1231.
  4. 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, 157-165.
  5. Aviagen. )2014a(. Nutrition specifications: ROSS 308 Broiler. Aviagen Ltd., Newbridge, UK.
  6. Aviagen. )2014b(. Performance objectives: ROSS 308 Broiler. Aviagen Ltd., Newbridge, UK.
  7. Awad, W.A., Böhm, J., Razzazi-Fazeli, E., Ghareeb, K. & Zentek, J. (2006). Effect of addition of a probiotic microorganism to broiler diets contaminated with deoxynivalenol on performance and histological alterations of intestinal villi of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 85, 974-979.
  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, 2205-2216.
  9. 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.
  10. 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, 483-494.
  11. Caspary, W. F. (1992). Physiology and pathophysiology of intestinal absorption. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 55, 299-308.
  12. 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.
  13. 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, 1100-1106.
  14. 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, 1121-1132.
  15. Dibner, J. J. & Richards, J.D. (2005). Antibiotic growth promoters in agriculture: history and mode of action. Poultry Science, 84, 634-643.
  16. Faria Filho, D. E., Torres, K. A. A., Faria, D. E., Campos, D. M. B. & Rosa, P. S. (2006). Probiotics for broiler chickens in Brazil: systematic review and meta-analysis. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 8, 89-98.
  17. Feedsoft® Professional. (2007). Version 3.19. Richardson, Texas, USA.
  18. Forte, C., Acuti, G., Manuali, E., Casagrande Proietti, P., Pavone, S., Trabalza-Marinucci, M., Moscati, L., Onofri, A., Lorenzetti, C. & Franciosini, M. P. (2016). Effects of two different probiotics on microflora, morphology, and morphometry of gut in organic laying hens. Poultry Science, 95, 2528-2535.
  19. 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, 9, 1-20.
  20. 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, 565-570.
  21. 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, 1-11.
  22. Huyghebaert, G., Ducatelle, R. & Van Immerseel, F. (2011).  An update on alternatives to antimicrobial growth promoters for broilers. The Veterinary Journal, 187, 182-188.
  23. 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, 951-956.
  24. Jadhav, K., Sharma, K. S., Katoch, S., Sharma, V. K. & Mane, B. G. (2015). Probiotics in broiler poultry feeds: A review. Journal of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, 1, 04-16.
  25. 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, 47-61. (in Farsi)
  26. Jin, L. Z., Ho, Y. W., Abdullah, N. & Jalaludin, S. (1997). Probiotics in poultry: modes of action. World's Poultry Science Journal, 53, 351-368.
  27. 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, 178-184.
  28. Komijani, A., & Sobhani, H. (2005). Economic Analysis Theory and Application. (8th ed.). University of Tehran. (in Farsi)
  29. Mikulski, D. L., Jankowski, J., Naczmanski, J., Mikulska, M. & Demey, V. (2012). Effects of dietary probiotic (Pediococcus acidilactici) supplementation on performance, nutrient digestibility, egg traits, egg yolk cholesterol, and fatty acid profile in laying hens. Poultry Science, 91, 2691-2700.
  30. Mountzouris, K. C., Tsitrsikos, P., Palamidi, I., Arvaniti, A., Mohnl, M., Schatzmayr, G. & Fegeros, K. (2010). Effects of probiotic inclusion levels in broiler nutrition on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, plasma immunoglobulins, and cecal microflora composition. Poultry Science, 89, 58-67.
  31. 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, 135-143.
  32. 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, 1598-1608.
  33. 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, 221-229.
  34. Phillips, I. (2007). Withdrawal of growth-promoting antibiotics in Europe and its effects in relation to human health. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 30, 101-107.
  35. Pousty, I. & Adibmoradi, M. (2006). Histotechnique. (1st ed.). University of Tehran. (in Farsi)
  36. 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, 491-503.
  37. Ramlah, A. H. & Tan, C. K. (1995). Effects of probiotic supplementation on broiler performance. Pertanika Journal of Tropical Agricultural Science, 18, 109-112.
  38. 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.
  39. Salehnia, M. (2001). General and Advance Histological Technique. (1st ed.). Paygan. (In Persian).
  40. Sarangi, N. R., Babu, L. K., Kumar, A., Pradhan, C. R., Pati, P. K. & Mishra, J. P. (2016). Effect of dietary supplementation of prebiotic, probiotic, and synbiotic on growth performance and carcass characteristics of broiler chickens. Veterinary World, 9, 313-319.
  41. SAS Institute. (2003). SAS/STAT® User’s guide, version 9.1. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
  42. Smirnov, A., Perez, R., Amit-Romach, E., Sklan, D. & Uni, Z. (2005). Mucin dynamics and microbial populations in chicken small intestine are changed by dietary probiotic and antibiotic growth promoter supplementation. The Journal of Nutrition, 135, 187-192.
  43. Smith, J. M. (2014). A review of avian probiotics. Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery, 28, 87-94.
  44. 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, 1092-1100.
  45. 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, 1-8.
  46. 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, 1383-1388.
  47. Walker, W. A. & Duffy, L.C. (1998). Diet and bacterial colonization: role of probiotics and prebiotics. The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, 9, 668-675.
  48. 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, 1332-1340.
  49. Yakhkeshi, S., Rahimi, S. & Gharib Naseri, K. (2011). The effects of comparison of herbal extracts, antibiotic, probiotic and organic acid on serum lipids, immune response, GIT microbial population, intestinal morphology and performance of broilers. Journal of Medicinal Plants, 1, 80-95.
  50. Zhang, Z. F. & Kim, I. H. (2014). Effects of multistrain probiotics on growth performance, apparent ileal nutrient digestibility, blood characteristics, cecal microbial shedding, and excreta odor contents in broilers. Poultry Science, 93, 364-370.
علوم دامی ایران
دوره 49، شماره 3
پاییز 1397
صفحه 415-425

  • تاریخ دریافت 17 دی 1396
  • تاریخ بازنگری 04 آبان 1397
  • تاریخ پذیرش 04 آبان 1397