Evaluation of in ovo Bacillus spp. based probiotic administration on horizontal transmission of virulent Escherichia coli in neonatal broiler chickens.
Escherichia coli
in ovo
broiler
hatchers
probiotic
Journal
Poultry science
ISSN: 1525-3171
Titre abrégé: Poult Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0401150
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2019
01 Dec 2019
Historique:
received:
11
07
2019
accepted:
06
09
2019
pubmed:
25
9
2019
medline:
22
4
2020
entrez:
25
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study evaluated the effect of in ovo Bacillus spp. base probiotic (BBP) administration on hatchability, Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) recovery, performance, and microbiota composition in 2 independent trials using a virulent E. coli seeder challenge model. In each trial, one hundred and eighty 18-day-old embryos were allocated into 1 of 2 groups: Control and treated group (inoculated with 107 BBP). On day 19 of embryogenesis, seeder embryos (n = 18) were inoculated with 4.5 × 104E. coli/mL+272 μg/mL tetracycline and segregated into mesh hatching bags. Twelve chicks per group were euthanized at hatch and at day 7 to evaluate the gastrointestinal composition of total GNB or total aerobic pasteurized bacteria. Also, in trial 2, ceca content from five chickens at day 7 were collected to evaluate microbiota composition. Embryos inoculated with BBP showed a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in the total number of GNB at day-of-hatch (DOH) and day 7. Probiotic treatment increased BW at DOH and day 7, and BW gain (days 0 to 7) when compared with Control chickens. Proteobacteria phylum was significantly reduced, while the Firmicutes was significantly increased by the BBP as compared to the Control (P < 0.05). At family level, Enterobacteriaceae was significantly decreased, while the Lachnospiraceae was significantly elevated in the BBP as compared to the Control group (P < 0.05). The genus Oscillospira was significantly enriched in the BBP group, whereas the unidentified genus of family Enterobacteriaceae in the Control group (P < 0.05). The BBP group increased the bacterial species richness, although there was no significant difference between treatments (P > 0.05). Interestingly, beta diversity showed a significant difference in bacterial community structure between Control and BBP groups (P < 0.05). The results of the present study suggest that in ovo administration of a BBP can reduce the severity of virulent E. coli horizontal transmission and infection of broiler chickens during hatch. The reduction in the severity of the transmission and infection by the BPP might be achieved through alterations of microbiota composition and its community structure.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31549175
pii: S0032-5791(19)57955-X
doi: 10.3382/ps/pez544
pmc: PMC8913981
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6483-6491Informations de copyright
© 2019 Poultry Science Association Inc.
Références
Nature. 2007 Jan 11;445(7124):153
pubmed: 17215830
Benef Microbes. 2010 Nov;1(4):367-82
pubmed: 21831776
Avian Pathol. 2008 Aug;37(4):355-66
pubmed: 18622850
Poult Sci. 2014 Feb;93(2):340-6
pubmed: 24570455
Anim Nutr. 2018 Dec;4(4):358-366
pubmed: 30564755
J Microbiol. 2012 Aug;50(4):613-7
pubmed: 22923109
BMC Gastroenterol. 2013 Jan 26;13:20
pubmed: 23351032
PLoS One. 2017 May 3;12(5):e0176555
pubmed: 28467461
Food Funct. 2015 Sep;6(9):3165-76
pubmed: 26227569
Ital J Pediatr. 2013 Feb 24;39:15
pubmed: 23433508
Gut Pathog. 2013 Aug 13;5(1):23
pubmed: 23941657
mSystems. 2017 Mar 7;2(2):
pubmed: 28289731
Cell Mol Immunol. 2011 Mar;8(2):110-20
pubmed: 21278760
Front Vet Sci. 2016 Oct 20;3:95
pubmed: 27812526
Front Vet Sci. 2016 Feb 19;3:11
pubmed: 26925404
Environ Microbiol. 2017 Mar;19(3):835-841
pubmed: 28028921
J Agric Food Chem. 2015 Sep 16;63(36):7885-95
pubmed: 26306709
Front Vet Sci. 2014 Oct 14;1:3
pubmed: 26664911
Immunity. 2009 Sep 18;31(3):368-76
pubmed: 19766080
Poult Sci. 2014 Jul;93(7):1793-800
pubmed: 24812242
Gastroenterology. 2014 May;146(6):1513-24
pubmed: 24440671
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Sep 2;100(18):10452-9
pubmed: 12923294
Poult Sci. 1998 May;77(5):654-61
pubmed: 9603351
Front Microbiol. 2017 Jul 04;8:1243
pubmed: 28725219
Poult Sci. 2017 Jul 1;96(7):2074-2082
pubmed: 28160004
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 15;104 Suppl 1:8627-33
pubmed: 17494762
Bioessays. 2011 Aug;33(8):574-81
pubmed: 21732396
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006 Jul;72(7):5069-72
pubmed: 16820507
Poult Sci. 2002 Oct;81(10):1486-91
pubmed: 12412913
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Mar 15;108 Suppl 1:4516-22
pubmed: 20534432
BMC Biol. 2009 Jan 15;7:2
pubmed: 19146674
Br Poult Sci. 2015;56(6):723-32
pubmed: 26539833
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2006 Apr;290(4):C1018-30
pubmed: 16306130
Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2012 Dec;41(4):843-54
pubmed: 23101690
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 07;10(4):e0122390
pubmed: 25849537
Poult Sci. 2003 Jul;82(7):1108-12
pubmed: 12872966
J Leukoc Biol. 2004 Jul;76(1):15-24
pubmed: 14966194
Biosens Bioelectron. 2003 Oct 30;19(1):59-66
pubmed: 14558999
Nature. 2011 Jan 27;469(7331):543-7
pubmed: 21270894
Genome Biol Evol. 2014 Mar;6(3):703-13
pubmed: 24625961
ISME J. 2011 Feb;5(2):169-72
pubmed: 20827291
Trends Microbiol. 2016 Jul;24(7):523-524
pubmed: 26996766
Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Mar;12(3):381-8
pubmed: 16704773
Poult Sci. 2013 Mar;92(3):671-83
pubmed: 23436518
Front Vet Sci. 2015 Dec 17;2:75
pubmed: 26734618
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Nov 28;20(44):16489-97
pubmed: 25469017
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2008 Feb;6(2):121-31
pubmed: 18180751
BMC Vet Res. 2018 Dec 4;14(1):383
pubmed: 30514391
Gut Microbes. 2012 Sep-Oct;3(5):449-54
pubmed: 22825494
Physiol Rev. 2010 Jul;90(3):859-904
pubmed: 20664075
Front Vet Sci. 2015 Aug 17;2:25
pubmed: 26664954
Poult Sci. 2019 Nov 1;98(11):5330-5335
pubmed: 31289817
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2012 Jul;1258:52-9
pubmed: 22731715
Avian Pathol. 2014;43(4):305-9
pubmed: 24820534
Front Vet Sci. 2019 Apr 24;6:108
pubmed: 31106209
PLoS One. 2010 Aug 13;5(8):e12149
pubmed: 20730104
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 Aug;37(8):852-857
pubmed: 31341288
Rev Sci Tech. 1997 Aug;16(2):525-41
pubmed: 9501366