Probitic activity of PROBIOLACTIL®, SUBTILPROBIO® and its mixture in broilers

Actividad probiótica de PROBIOLACTIL®, SUBTILPROBIO® y su mezcla en pollos de ceba

Biopreparations with Lactobacillus salivarius and Bacillus subtilis are used as probiotics in poultry farming due to their beneficial effects on the intestinal ecosystem. Objective. To evaluate the probiotic activity of the biopreparations PROBIOLACTIL^®, SUBTILPROBIO^® and their mixture on microbiological, productive and health indicators in broilers. Materials and methods. An experiment with a completely randomized design was carried out for 42 days with four treatments: T1. Control diet (control group), T2. PROBIOLACTIL^® (bioprepared with Lactobacillus salivarius C-65) + diet, T3. SUBTILPROBIO^® (Bioprepared with Bacillus subtilis E-44) + diet and T4. Mixture of both biopreparations + diet. Results. The treatments where the probiotics were applied presented an increase in total lactobacilli and anaerobes (p≤0.05) and a reduction in total coliforms. Live weight was higher in birds treated with the mixture, and weight gain, average daily gain, feed conversion and carcass yield were improved. The application of additives reduced mortality and increased viability in birds. Conclusions. The synergistic activity of Lactobacillus salivarius and Bacillus subtilis increases probiotic activity and favors the productive performance and viability of broilers.

1. Rehman A, Arif M, Sajjad N, Al-Ghadi MQ, Alagawany M, Abd El-Hack et al Dietary effect of probiotics and prebiotics on broiler performance, carcass, and immunity. Poult sci 2020; 99(12): 6946–6953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.09.043
2. Salam MA. Probiotics: Concept and applications. Bangladesh J of Med Sci 2014, 13 (4): 373-376. http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/bjms.v13i4.20550
3. Rondón A J, Milián G, Arteaga F, Samaniego L M, Bocourt R, Laurencio M, et al Probiotic effect of Lactobacillus salivarius on microbiological and immune indicators in chickens. Rev de la Soc Venez de Microb 2018; 38(1), ISSN 1317-973X
4. Milián G, Rodríguez M, Díaz D, Rondón AJ, Pérez M L, Boucourt R, et al Evaluation of the zootechnical additive SUBTILPROBIO® C-31 on feeding of laying hens in a commercial production unit. Cub J of Agric Sci 2019; 53 (2): 161-168. Corpus ID: 196675009
5. Luise D, Bosi P, Raff L, Amatucci L, Virdis S, Trevisi P. Bacillus spp. probiotic strains as a potential tool for limiting the use of antibiotics, and improving the growth and health of pigs and chickens. Front in microbiol 2022; 13:801827. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.801827
6. Al-Khalaifah HS. Benefits of probiotics and/or prebiotics for antibiotic-reduced poultry. Poul sci 2018; 97(11): 3807–3815. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey160
7. Rajput D S, Zeng D, Khalique A, Rajput S S, Wang H, Zhao Y, et al Pretreatment with probiotics ameliorate gut health and necrotic enteritis in broiler chickens, a substitute to antibiotics. AMB Express 2020; 10(1): 220. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-020-01153-w
8. Rondón A J, del Valle A, Milián G, Arteaga FG, Rodríguez M, Valdivia A, et al Obtención de un biopreparado simbiótico (mezcla de pulpa de Agave fourcroydes Lem. y PROBIOLACTIL®) para su aplicación en terneros. Rev Agrisost 2019; 25 (2): 1-9. ISSN 1025-0247
9. Rondón AJ, González J, Rodríguez M, Milián G, Martínez MM, Beruvides A, et al In vitro metabolic activity of Lactobacillus salivarius and its effect on productive and health indicators of lactating calves. Cub J of Agric Sci 2020; 54(2): 1-13. ISSN: 0034-7485
10. Ayala L, Boucourt R, Castro M, Dihigo L E, Milián G, Herrera M, et al Development of the digestive organs in piglets born from sows consuming probiotic before farrowing and during lactation. Rev Cub J of Agric Sci 2014; 48 (2), 347-351. ISSN: 0034-7485
11. Timmerman H M, Koning, C J, Mulder L, Rombouts F M, Beynen, A. C. Monostrain, multistrain and multispecies probiotics--A comparison of functionality and efficacy. Intern J of Food microb 2004, 96(3):219–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2004.05.012
12. Zhang W, Zhu Y H, Zhou D, Wu Q, Song D, Dicksved J, et al Oral Administration of a select mixture of Bacillus probiotics affects the gut microbiota and goblet cell function following Escherichia coli challenge in newly weaned pigs of genotype MUC4 that are supposed to be Enterotoxigenic E. coli F4ab/ac receptor negative. App and Environm Microb 2017; 83(3):e02747-16. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02747-16
13. Milián G. Obtención de cultivos de Bacillus spp. y sus endosporas. Evaluación de su actividad probiótica en pollos (Gallus gallus domesticus). Tesis presentada en opción al Grado Científico de Doctor en Ciencias Veterinarias 2009; Instituto de Ciencia Animal. La Habana. Cuba.
14. Rondón A J. Obtención de biopreparados a partir de lactobacilos autóctonos del tracto digestivo de pollos y evaluación de su efecto probiótico en estos animales. Tesis presentada en opción al grado científico de Doctor en Ciencias Veterinarias 2009; Instituto de Ciencia Animal. La Habana, Cuba
15. AgroMet. Boletín Agrometeorológico Nacional, 2da década, Marzo 2021, 40(8): ISSN 1999-8082. Disponible en: http://www.insmet.cu/AgroBoletin/pdf/4008-2021.pdf
16. UCAN-IIA. Instructivo Técnico. Producción avícola. Pollos de engorde. Tecnología de crianza y regulaciones sanitarias generales 1998
17. Caldwell D R, Bryant M P. Medium without fluid for non selective enumeration and isolation of rumen bacteria. Appl Microbiol 1966; 14:794. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.14.5.794-801.1966
18. Hungate R E, Macy J. The roll-tube method for cultivation of strict anaerobes. Bulletins from the Ecological Research Committee 1973; 17:123–126. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111550
19. Di Rienzo J A, Casanoves F, Balzarini M G, González L, Tablada M, Robledo, Y. C. InfoStat versión 2017. Grupo InfoStat, FCA, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina, 2017;. URL http://www. infostat. com. ar
20. Tukey J W. Comparing individual means in the analysis of variance. Biometrics 1949; 5(2): 99–114. PMID: 18151955
21. Castillo Y, Miranda I. COMPAPROP: Sistema para comparación de proporciones múltiples. Rev. Protección Veg 2014; 29(3): 231-234. ISSN 1010-2752
22. GOC. Decreto-Ley 31/2021 “De Bienestar Animal” Disponible en: http://www.gacetaoficial.gob
23. Kober A, Riaz Rajoka M S, Mehwish H M, Villena J, Kitazawa H. Immunomodulation Potential of Probiotics: A Novel Strategy for Improving Livestock Health, Immunity, and Productivity. Microorganisms 2022; 10(2): 388. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10020388
24. Melara E G, Avellaneda M C, Valdivié M, García-Hernández Y, Aroche R, Martínez Y. Probiotics: Symbiotic Relationship with the Animal Host. Animals: an open access journal from MDPI 2022; 12(6): 719. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12060719
25. Vera L E, Cedeño M E, Solorsano L J, Bonilla M J. Efecto de una mezcla probiótica en el comportamiento productivo en pollos de ceba. Rev de Prod Cienc e Invest 2019; 2(15). https://doi.org/10.29018/issn.2588-1000vol2iss15.2018pp8-12
26. Aliakbarpour H R, Chamani M, Rahimi G, Sadeghi A, Qujeq Q. The Bacillus subtilis and lactic acid bacteria probiotics influences intestinal mucin gene expression, histomorphology and growth performance in broilers. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2012; 25(9): 1285–1293. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12110
27. Rondón A J, Milian G, Rodríguez M, Beruvides A. Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus salivarius in animals of zootechnical interest. Cub J of Agric Sci 2020, 54(2):1-13. ISSN0034-7485
28. Milián G, Beruvides A, Pérez Y, Rodríguez M, Rondón A J, Pérez M L, et al Efecto de la inclusión del aditivo zootécnico SUBTILPROBIO® en la producción de diferentes categorías pecuarias en el territorio matancero. Cub J of Agric Sci 2022; 56(3). ISSN: 0034-7485
29. Blajman J E. Desarrollo de un inóculo probiótico para pollos parrilleros y monitoreo durante su tránsito intestinal y en órganos del medio interno. Tesis doctoral. Sistema Nacional de Repositorios digitales 2017. Disponible en: https://repositoriosdigitales.mincyt.gob.ar/vufind/Record/UNLBT_96090bd0ee7fb8d1b058e3aa30de407d. Fecha de consulta: 1 de noviembre de 2022
30. Xu C, Wei F, Yang X, Feng Y, Liu, D, Hu Y. Lactobacillus salivarius CML352 Isolated from chinese local breed chicken modulates the gut microbiota and improves intestinal health and egg quality in late-phase laying hens. Microorganisms 2022; 10(4): 726. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10040726
31. Chen X, Ishfaq M, Wang J. Effects of Lactobacillus salivarius supplementation on the growth performance, liver function, meat quality, immune responses and Salmonella Pullorum infection resistance of broilers challenged with Aflatoxin B1. Poult sci 2022; 101(3): 101651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101651
32. Mohamed T M, Sun W, Bumbie G Z, Elokil A A, Mohammed K, Zebin R, et al Feeding Bacillus subtilis ATCC19659 to broiler chickens enhances growth performance and immune function by modulating intestinal morphology and cecum microbiota. Front in Microbiol 2022; 12: 798350. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.798350
33. Xu Y, Yu Y, Shen Y, Li Q, Lan J, Wu Y, et al Effects of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus licheniformis on growth performance, immunity, short chain fatty acid production, antioxidant capacity, and cecal microflora in broilers. Poult sci 2021; 100(9): 101358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101358
34. Wang J, Ishfaq M, Miao Y, Li, Z, Hao M, Wang C. et al Dietary administration of Bacillus subtilis KC1 improves growth performance, immune response, heat stress tolerance, and disease resistance of broiler chickens. Poul sci 2022; 101(3): 101693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101693
35. Zhang R, Li Z, Gu X, Zhao J, Guo T, Kong J. Probiotic Bacillus subtilis LF11 Protects Intestinal Epithelium Against Salmonella Infection. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology 2022; 12: 837886. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.837886
36. Medina-Saavedra T, Arroyo-Figueroa G, Herrera-Méndez C, Mexicano-Santoyo, L. Bacillus subtilis como probiótico en avicultura: aspectos relevantes en investigaciones recientes. Abanico veterinario 2017; 7(3): 14-20. https://doi.org/10.21929/abavet2017.73.1
37. Darbandi A, Asadi A, Mahdizade Ari M, Ohadi E, Talebi M, Halaj Zadeh M, et al Bacteriocins: Properties and potential use as antimicrobials. J of Clin Lab Anal 2022; 36(1): e24093. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.24093
38. Juricova H, Matiasovicova J, Faldynova M, Sebkova A, Kubasova T, Prikrylova H, et al Probiotic Lactobacilli do not protect chickens against Salmonella Enteritidis infection by competitive exclusion in the intestinal tract but in feed, outside the chicken host. Microorganisms 2022; 10(2): 219. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10020219
39. Arteaga F, Rondón A J, Milián G, Laurencio M, Narváez G, Velez L A, et al Efecto de una mezcla probiótica de Bacillus subtilis 20Bp y Lactobacillus brevis 40Lp en indicadores productivos y de salud de pollos de ceba. Cub J of Agric Sci 2020; 54(1): 67-76. Epub 01 de marzo de 2020. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2079-34802020000100067&lng=es&tlng=es.
40. Iqbal Z, Ahmed S, Tabassum N, Bhattacharya R, Bose D. Role of probiotics in prevention and treatment of enteric infections: a comprehensive review. 3 Biotech 2021; 11(5): 242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-021-02796-7