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

Top Cited Papers
Open Access
Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The aim of this work was to investigate the efficacy of a new multibacterial species probiotic in broiler nutrition. The probiotic contained 2 Lactobacillus strains, 1 Bifidobacterium strain, 1 Enterococcus strain, and 1 Pediococcus strain. Four hundred 1-d-old male Cobb broilers were allocated in 4 experimental treatments for 6 wk. The experimental treatments received a corn-soybean basal diet and were as follows: “control,” with no other additions; “probiotic in feed and water,” (PFW) with probiotic administered at 1 g/kg of feed for the whole period and in water on scheduled intervals during the first 4 wk; “probiotic in feed,” (PF) with probiotic in feed as in PFW; and “antibiotic,” (AB) with addition of avilamycin at 2.5 mg/kg of feed. Salinomycin Na was used as a coccidiostat. Each treatment had 5 replicates of 20 broilers. Treatment effects on parameters of broiler performance and cecal microbial ecology were determined. Broiler BW, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio were determined on a weekly and overall basis. Cecal microflora composition, concentration of volatile fatty acids, and activities of 5 bacterial glycolytic enzymes (α-galactosidase, β-galactosidase, α-glucosidase, β-glucosidase, and β-glucuronidase) were determined at the end of the experiment. Overall, treatment PFW displayed a growth-promoting effect that did not differ from AB. Overall, feed conversion ratio in treatment AB was significantly better (P ≤ 0.01) than the control treatment, whereas treatments PFW and PF were intermediate and not different from AB. Concentrations of bacteria belonging to Bifidobacterium spp., Lactobacillus spp., and gram-positive cocci were significantly (P ≤ 0.05) higher in treatments PFW and PF compared with the control and AB treatments. Treatments PFW and PF had significantly higher specific activities of α-galactosidase and β-galactosidase compared with the control and AB treatments. In conclusion, probiotic treatment PFW displayed a growth-promoting effect that was comparable to avilamycin treatment. In addition, treatments PFW and PF modulated the composition and, to an extent, the activities of the cecal microflora, resulting in a significant probiotic effect.
Funding Information
  • European Commission (QLK5-CT-2002-71662)