Affiliation:
1. Department of Animal Nutrition , Poznań University of Life Sciences , Wołyńska 33, 60-637 Poznań , Poland
2. Department of Biotechnology and Food Microbiology , Poznań University of Life Sciences , Wojska Polskiego 48, 60-627 Poznań , Poland
3. Department of Innovative Biomaterials and Nanotechnologies , Institute of Natural Fibres and Medicinal Plants , Wojska Polskiego 71b, 60-630 Poznań , Poland
Abstract
Abstract
The aim of the research was to determine the affectivity of 4 different eubiotic preparations on the growth performance of pigs, microbial status, the integrity of intestinal mucosa, and some blood parameters. The experiment was conducted for 28 days on 48 male piglets allocated to six dietary treatments. Group 1 was offered a diet without eubiotic; 2 – a diet with acids mixture; 3 – phytobiotic, medium-chain fatty acids (MCFA) and yeast; 4 – probiotic, MCFA, and yeast; 5 – phytobiotic, probiotic, acids mixture, and sodium butyrate; 6 – phytobiotic, probiotic, MCFA, and sodium butyrate. The average daily weight gains and feed intake were recorded. Blood samples, digesta samples, and ileal tissue samples were collected for studies. There was no significant difference in gain, feed intake, or FCR among the treatments as well as in the ileal and caecal pH value, microbial content, and total SCFA content in caecal digesta. Ammonia content in ileal digesta was significantly higher in comparison with other groups and in caecal digesta was significantly higher in group 6 in comparison with groups 1 and 2. Villi height was significantly higher (P<0.05) in groups 2, 3 and 6 compared to the control. Villi height to crypt depth ratio was significantly higher (P<0.05) in groups 5 and 2, but the most promising effects seem to be from combinations 3 and 4. In comparison with control: in groups 2, 3 and 5 higher ALT, glucose and triglyceride; in groups 3, 4 and 5 higher total protein and cholesterol; in group 4 higher albumin and in group 6 higher BUN, were found. Generally, used eubiotic preparations affected gut morphology and some blood parameters but did not affect microbiota, pig growth or feed utilization.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献