Literature DB >> 1419530

Defined cultures and prospects.

S Stavric1.   

Abstract

Resistance of young chicks to Salmonella colonization can be increased by treating them with suspensions or anaerobic cultures of gut content from healthy, adult birds. Unfortunately, such treatments have an unknown bacterial composition and are therefore not acceptable to regulatory agencies in some countries. Efforts are continuing to identify components in the gut microflora that are involved in the protective process. The ultimate aim is to identify bacteria that may be used, either alone or in mixtures (defined cultures), as a prophylactic treatment of chicks against Salmonella colonization. Although much research has been done in this area, a defined culture treatment with a potency and stability equivalent to that of undefined culture has not been developed. Since the mechanism of protection is not clear, there are no reliable criteria for selecting potentially protective strains. The most effective mixtures contain large numbers of bacterial cultures (about 50 isolates). These mixtures are comparable to undefined faecal cultures in protecting chicks against challenge levels of up to 10(4) Salmonella/chick. However, they are not protective for turkey poults. Mixtures containing lower number of strains are generally less protective. It appears that obligate and facultative anaerobes from different genera are required for protection. Mixtures containing strains from only one genus, e.g. Lactobacillus or Bifidobacterium, are generally not effective. Maintenance of intestinal isolates on laboratory media, as well as in storage at -70 degrees C, results in a progressive decrease in their protective ability. The protective ability of mixtures or individual strains can be partially restored by in vivo passage. A promising criterion for isolating and/or screening potentially protective isolates is based on the adherence of native microflora to the caecal wall of treated chicks. Despite substantial efforts and some progress in the development of defined cultures, the prospects are not very encouraging. Until the exact mechanism of protection is elucidated, the basis for selecting the required strains will be difficult to define.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1419530     DOI: 10.1016/0168-1605(92)90056-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Food Microbiol        ISSN: 0168-1605            Impact factor:   5.277


  10 in total

1.  Role of volatile fatty acids in development of the cecal microflora in broiler chickens during growth.

Authors:  P W van Der Wielen; S Biesterveld; S Notermans; H Hofstra; B A Urlings; F van Knapen
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 4.792

2.  A simulation of microbial competition in the human colonic ecosystem.

Authors:  M E Coleman; D W Dreesen; R G Wiegert
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Competitive exclusion of Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis by Lactobacillus crispatus and Clostridium lactatifermentans in a sequencing fed-batch culture.

Authors:  Paul W J J van der Wielen; Len J A Lipman; Frans van Knapen; Steef Biesterveld
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Lactobacillus salivarius CTC2197 prevents Salmonella enteritidis colonization in chickens.

Authors:  M Pascual; M Hugas; J I Badiola; J M Monfort; M Garriga
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 4.792

5.  Inhibition of Campylobacter jejuni colonization in chicks by defined competitive exclusion bacteria.

Authors:  J L Schoeni; A C Wong
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 6.  Recent Advances in Screening of Anti-Campylobacter Activity in Probiotics for Use in Poultry.

Authors:  Manuel J Saint-Cyr; Muriel Guyard-Nicodème; Soumaya Messaoudi; Marianne Chemaly; Jean-Michel Cappelier; Xavier Dousset; Nabila Haddad
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 5.640

7.  Contact with adult hen affects development of caecal microbiota in newly hatched chicks.

Authors:  Tereza Kubasova; Miloslava Kollarcikova; Magdalena Crhanova; Daniela Karasova; Darina Cejkova; Alena Sebkova; Jitka Matiasovicova; Marcela Faldynova; Alexandra Pokorna; Alois Cizek; Ivan Rychlik
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Gut Anaerobes Capable of Chicken Caecum Colonisation.

Authors:  Tereza Kubasova; Miloslava Kollarcikova; Magdalena Crhanova; Daniela Karasova; Darina Cejkova; Alena Sebkova; Jitka Matiasovicova; Marcela Faldynova; Frantisek Sisak; Vladimir Babak; Alexandra Pokorna; Alois Cizek; Ivan Rychlik
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2019-11-21

Review 9.  An Introduction to the Avian Gut Microbiota and the Effects of Yeast-Based Prebiotic-Type Compounds as Potential Feed Additives.

Authors:  Stephanie M Roto; Peter M Rubinelli; Steven C Ricke
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2015-09-02

Review 10.  Fame and future of faecal transplantations--developing next-generation therapies with synthetic microbiomes.

Authors:  Willem M de Vos
Journal:  Microb Biotechnol       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 5.813

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.