Competitive exclusion against Salmonella Enteritidis in layer chickens by yoghurt microbiota: Impact on egg production, protection and yolk-antibody and cholesterol levels
2007
Tayeb I.T. | Nehme P.A. | Jaber L.S. | Barbour E.K. | Tayeb, I.T., Department of Animal Production, College of Agriculture, University of Dohuk, Dohuk, Iraq | Nehme, P.A., Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon | Jaber, L.S., Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon | Barbour, E.K., Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon, Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, American University of Beirut, P.O. Box 11-0236, Beirut, Lebanon | Barbour, E.K.; Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences, American University of Beirut, P.O. Box 11-0236, Beirut, Lebanon; email: [email protected] | University: American University of Beirut; Faculty: Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences; Department: Animal and Veterinary Sciences; | Animal and Veterinary Sciences | [email protected] | Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences | Tayeb, IT | Nehme, PA | Jaber, LS | Barbour, EK | Barbour, EK (reprint author), Amer Univ Beirut, Fac Agr and Food Sci, Dept Anim Sci, POB 11-0236, Beirut, Lebanon. | barbour, elie-P-6166-2014 | American University of Beirut
Aims: This work aims at studying the impact of competitive exclusion of Salmonella serotype Enteritidis infection in layer chickens, by microbiota of fresh and dried-modified yoghurt, on egg production and weight, protection against infection, and on yolk-antibody and cholesterol levels. Methods and Results: Four groups of 27-week-old layer chickens were included in this study. After an initial enrofloxacin treatment, groups 1 and 2 were administered fresh or dry yoghurt (respectively) for 14 days. Groups 1, 2 and 3 were challenged intraoesophageally with Salm. Enteritidis, on the sixth day of yoghurt administration, while group 4 was left unchallenged and without yoghurt administration. No significant difference in percent infectivity of visceral organs with Salm. Enteritidis was observed between the groups. The yoghurt administered groups showed an early significant antibody response in their yolk on the seventh day postchallenge (P 0.05) and highest egg production and weight. Finally, the egg yolk cholesterol concentration was higher in Salm. Enteritidis-challenged groups than that observed in the unchallenged group. Conclusions: The results point to the possible involvement of yoghurt administration in immunopotentiation and improvement of egg production and weight. Significance and Impact of the Study: These findings warrant further research that could improve immunity and production in layer chickens infected with Salm. Enteritidis. © 2007 The Authors.
显示更多 [+] 显示较少 [-]ALLAIN CC, 1974, CLIN CHEM, V20, P475; Amavisit P, 2001, VET MICROBIOL, V79, P63, DOI 10.1016-S0378-1135(00)00340-0; Barbour EK, 2002, VACCINE, V20, P2249, DOI 10.1016-S0264-410X(02)00107-X; BARBOUR EK, 1993, AM J VET RES, V54, P1306; Brashears MM, 2003, J FOOD PROTECT, V66, P355; Burnham MR, 2003, POULTRY SCI, V82, P577; Casula G, 2002, APPL ENVIRON MICROB, V68, P2344, DOI 10.1128-AEM.68.5.2344-2352.2002; CDC Executive Summary, 2003, SMALLP RESP PLAN GUI, P1; Desmidt M, 1997, VET MICROBIOL, V56, P99, DOI 10.1016-S0378-1135(96)01350-8; Dey BP, 2003, POULTRY SCI, V82, P199; Donatelli I, 2001, J GEN VIROL, V82, P623; DOYLE EM, 2001, ALTERNATIVES ANTIBIO, P1; *ENV AG, 2003, MICR SEW SLUDG 4; GAST R, 2002, US ANIM HLTH ASS P; GAST RK, 1994, INT J FOOD MICROBIOL, V21, P107, DOI 10.1016-0168-1605(94)90204-6; GAST RK, 1990, AVIAN DIS, V34, P438, DOI 10.2307-1591433; Gast RK, 2002, AVIAN DIS, V46, P629, DOI 10.1637-0005-2086(2002)046[0629:COSECI]2.0.CO;2; GRUNBERG SM, 1984, P AN M AM SOC CLIN, V3, P63; Gurtler M, 2004, INT J FOOD MICROBIOL, V90, P107, DOI 10.1016-S0168-1605(03)00300-3; Heyman M., 2000, J AM COLL NUTR, V19, P137; Hofacre CL, 2002, AVIAN DIS, V46, P198, DOI 10.1637-0005-2086(2002)046[0198:EOACCE]2.0.CO;2; HUMPHREY TJ, 1994, INT J FOOD MICROBIOL, V21, P31, DOI 10.1016-0168-1605(94)90197-X; Jin LZ, 1996, J APPL BACTERIOL, V81, P201, DOI 10.1111-j.1365-2672.1996.tb04501.x; Kopp-Hoolihan L, 2001, J AM DIET ASSOC, V101, P229, DOI 10.1016-S0002-8223(01)00060-8; LINDQUIST J, 1998, LAB MANUAL FOOD MICR; Marteu P.R., 2001, AM J CLIN NUTR S2, V73, P430; Murase T, 2005, J FOOD PROTECT, V68, P718; NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, 1984, NUTR REQ POULTR; NURMI E, 1973, NATURE, V241, P210, DOI 10.1038-241210a0; Pasin G, 1998, FOOD CHEM, V61, P255, DOI 10.1016-S0308-8146(97)00072-1; PAULKAUR I, 2002, EUR J PHARM SCI, V15, P1; Rajashekara G, 1998, DIAGN MICR INFEC DIS, V32, P147, DOI 10.1016-S0732-8893(98)00091-1; Rotger R, 1999, Int Microbiol, V2, P177; Servin AL, 2004, FEMS MICROBIOL REV, V28, P405, DOI 10.1016-j.femsre.2004.01.003; SILLANPAA J, 2001, THESIS U HELS; SUZUKI S, 1994, INT J FOOD MICROBIOL, V21, P89, DOI 10.1016-0168-1605(94)90203-8; Tuohy KM, 2003, DRUG DISCOV TODAY, V8, P692, DOI 10.1016-S1359-6446(03)02746-6; VANCUTSEM PM, 1990, CORNELL VET, V80, P173; VANDEGIESSEN AW, 1994, INT J FOOD MICROBIOL, V21, P89; van der Wielen PWJJ, 2002, APPL ENVIRON MICROB, V68, P555, DOI 10.1128-AEM.68.2.555-559.2002; Zhu XY, 2002, APPL ENVIRON MICROB, V68, P124, DOI 10.1128-AEM.68.1.124-137.2002
显示更多 [+] 显示较少 [-]