Selected prebiotics and synbiotics administered in ovo can modify innate immunity in chicken broilers.
Chicken
In ovo
Innate immunity
Prebiotic
Synbiotic
Journal
BMC veterinary research
ISSN: 1746-6148
Titre abrégé: BMC Vet Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101249759
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Apr 2019
03 Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
26
04
2018
accepted:
26
03
2019
entrez:
5
4
2019
pubmed:
5
4
2019
medline:
30
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
A previous study showed that prebiotics and synbiotics administered in ovo into the egg air cell on the 12th day of incubation enhance the growth and development of chickens. However, the influence of this procedure on the development and efficiency of the innate immune system of broiler chickens is unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate whether the early (on the 12th day of embryo development) in ovo administration of selected prebiotics (inulin - Pre1 and Bi Chickens (broiler, Ross 308) that were treated with Pre1 exhibited a decreased H/L ratio on D7, but an increased H/L ratio was observed on D21 and D35. In the remaining experimental groups, an increase in the H/L ratio was observed on D21 and D35. The oxidative potential of leukocytes measured using the NBT test increased on D21 in Pre2 and Syn1 groups. The rate of the phagocytic ability of leukocytes increased in Pre1 and Syn1 groups on D21. The phagocytic index decreased in Pre1 and Syn2 groups on D21 and D35. Concurrently, the count of WBC in circulating blood decreased on D21 in Pre1, Pre2, and Syn1 groups. The hematocrit value was increased in Syn1 chickens on D21, in Pre1 chickens on D35, and in Syn2 chickens on both time points. Early in ovo treatment of chicken embryos with prebiotics and synbiotics may temporarily modulate not only the production/maturation of leukocytes but also their reactivity.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
A previous study showed that prebiotics and synbiotics administered in ovo into the egg air cell on the 12th day of incubation enhance the growth and development of chickens. However, the influence of this procedure on the development and efficiency of the innate immune system of broiler chickens is unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate whether the early (on the 12th day of embryo development) in ovo administration of selected prebiotics (inulin - Pre1 and Bi
RESULTS
RESULTS
Chickens (broiler, Ross 308) that were treated with Pre1 exhibited a decreased H/L ratio on D7, but an increased H/L ratio was observed on D21 and D35. In the remaining experimental groups, an increase in the H/L ratio was observed on D21 and D35. The oxidative potential of leukocytes measured using the NBT test increased on D21 in Pre2 and Syn1 groups. The rate of the phagocytic ability of leukocytes increased in Pre1 and Syn1 groups on D21. The phagocytic index decreased in Pre1 and Syn2 groups on D21 and D35. Concurrently, the count of WBC in circulating blood decreased on D21 in Pre1, Pre2, and Syn1 groups. The hematocrit value was increased in Syn1 chickens on D21, in Pre1 chickens on D35, and in Syn2 chickens on both time points.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Early in ovo treatment of chicken embryos with prebiotics and synbiotics may temporarily modulate not only the production/maturation of leukocytes but also their reactivity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30943971
doi: 10.1186/s12917-019-1850-8
pii: 10.1186/s12917-019-1850-8
pmc: PMC6448256
doi:
Substances chimiques
Blood Proteins
0
Prebiotics
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
105Références
Br Poult Sci. 2002 May;43(2):213-7
pubmed: 12047084
FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2003 Aug 18;38(1):9-12
pubmed: 12900049
J Physiol Biochem. 2004 Jun;60(2):85-91
pubmed: 15457926
J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med. 2005 Aug;52(6):263-7
pubmed: 16050905
Folia Biol (Krakow). 2005;53(1-2):13-20
pubmed: 16212103
J Dairy Res. 2006 Nov;73(4):492-8
pubmed: 16987435
Poult Sci. 2006 Nov;85(11):1900-6
pubmed: 17032821
Poult Sci. 2007 Nov;86(11):2315-21
pubmed: 17954580
Poult Sci. 2008 Sep;87(9):1694-9
pubmed: 18753434
Fish Physiol Biochem. 2009 Aug;35(3):467-78
pubmed: 18931930
Folia Biol (Krakow). 2004;52(3-4):135-42
pubmed: 19058551
J Nutr. 2009 Jul;139(7):1404-9
pubmed: 19474157
Br Poult Sci. 2010 Apr;51(2):178-84
pubmed: 20461578
Poult Sci. 2011 Jan;90(1):75-82
pubmed: 21177446
Poult Sci. 2011 Oct;90(10):2301-10
pubmed: 21934014
Poult Sci. 2013 Jun;92(6):1560-3
pubmed: 23687152
Polim Med. 2013 Jul-Sep;43(3):153-8
pubmed: 24377181
Poult Sci. 2014 Apr;93(4):818-29
pubmed: 24706958
Am J Vet Res. 2014 Nov;75(11):997-1003
pubmed: 25350090
Folia Biol (Krakow). 2014;62(3):277-85
pubmed: 25403081
Poult Sci. 2015 Jun;94(6):1209-19
pubmed: 25877410
Poult Sci. 2015 Aug;94(8):1909-16
pubmed: 26112038
Am J Vet Res. 2015 Nov;76(11):975-82
pubmed: 26512543
Poult Sci. 2016 Jan;95(1):19-29
pubmed: 26527705
Poult Sci. 2017 Jan 1;96(1):169-183
pubmed: 27433012
BMC Vet Res. 2016 Aug 05;12(1):163
pubmed: 27496016
BMC Vet Res. 2017 Aug 17;13(1):248
pubmed: 28814309
BMC Vet Res. 2018 Dec 17;14(1):402
pubmed: 30558599
Avian Dis. 1983 Oct-Dec;27(4):972-9
pubmed: 6360120
Br Poult Sci. 1994 May;35(2):309-13
pubmed: 8062114