| Literature DB >> 31291967 |
Shilan Wang1, Bingqian Yao1, Hang Gao1, Jianjun Zang2, Shiyu Tao1, Shuai Zhang1, Shimeng Huang1, Beibei He1, Junjun Wang3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Probiotics are important for pigs to enhance health and intestinal development, which are potential alternative to antibiotics. Many studies have reported the functions of single bacterial strain as probiotic on the animals. In this study, we evaluated effects of combined probiotics on growth performance, inflammation and intestinal microbiota in weaned pigs. One hundred and eight pigs, weaned at 28 day old (7.12 ± 0.08 kg), were randomly divided into the 3 dietary treatments with 6 pens and 6 pigs per pen (half male and half female). The experimental period lasted for 28 days and treatments were as follows: i. CONTROL: basal diet; ii. Antibiotic: the basal diet plus 75 mg· kg- 1 chlortetracycline; and iii. Probiotics: basal diet plus 4% compound probiotics.Entities:
Keywords: Combined Lactobacillus fermentum and Pediococcus acidilactici; Growth performance; Inflammation; Intestinal microbiota; Weaned pigs
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31291967 PMCID: PMC6617942 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-019-1991-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.741
Effect of combined probiotics on the growth performance of weaned pigs1
| Items | Control | Antibiotic | Probiotics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial weight (kg) | 7.11 ± 0.86 | 7.10 ± 0.99 | 7.13 ± 0.89 | 0.99 |
| Final weight (kg) | 15.25 ± 1.01 | 15.57 ± 1.34 | 17.39 ± 1.36 | 0.03 |
| d1–14 | ||||
| ADG (g/d) | 197.88 ± 4.59b | 199.47 ± 6.87b | 247.38 ± 23.47a | 0.04 |
| ADFI (g/d) | 400.33 ± 23.93 | 376.28 ± 14.84 | 409.38 ± 21.53 | 0.45 |
| F/G | 2.03 ± 0.14 | 1.89 ± 0.09 | 1.70 ± 0.17 | 0.27 |
| d14–28 | ||||
| ADG (g/d) | 383.75 ± 18.45b | 405.73 ± 14.87b | 485.75 ± 23.78a | 0.01 |
| ADFI (g/d) | 739.30 ± 45.70 | 779.07 ± 30.82 | 876.33 ± 52.75 | 0.12 |
| F/G | 1.92 ± 0.03a | 1.92 ± 0.03a | 1.80 ± 0.04b | 0.04 |
| d1–28 | ||||
| ADG (g/d) | 290.83 ± 9.47b | 302.60 ± 9.13b | 366.58 ± 12.80a | < 0.01 |
| ADFI (g/d) | 569.80 ± 34.61 | 577.67 ± 15.42 | 642.83 ± 36.90 | 0.19 |
| F/G | 1.96 ± 0.06 | 1.91 ± 0.03 | 1.75 ± 0.08 | 0.07 |
| Diarrhea rate2 | 18.10 ± 3.08 | 19.94 ± 1.79 | 14.24 ± 6.07 | 0.16 |
1 n = 6 per treatment. All values are means ± SEM
2 Diarrhea rate was for overall period
a, b Different letters means there were statistically significant differences among three treatments when P-value < 0.05
Effect of combined probiotics on the immune response in serum of weaned pigs1
| Items | Control | Antibiotic | Probiotics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IgA (g/L) | 0.89 ± 0.11 | 0.81 ± 0.07 | 0.85 ± 0.05 | 0.34 |
| IgG (g/L) | 7.19 ± 1.90 | 7.1 ± 0.87 | 7.3 ± 1.34 | 0.98 |
| IL-10 (pg/mL) | 60.60 ± 6.29a | 46.91 ± 8.42b | 62.96 ± 1.21a | 0.02 |
| IL-1β (pg/mL) | 48.18 ± 6.29a | 40.89 ± 5.67b | 38.45 ± 3.28b | 0.02 |
| IL-6 (pg/mL) | 92.04 ± 8.74a | 77.89 ± 6.61b | 72.99 ± 9.97b | 0.02 |
| TNF-a (pg/mL) | 81.55 ± 7.29 | 75.80 ± 3.89 | 75.76 ± 2.03 | 0.17 |
| IFN-γ (pg/mL) | 64.50 ± 8.05a | 48.45 ± 3.83b | 32.46 ± 8.01c | < 0.01 |
1 Serum samples were obtained from one pig randomly selected from each replicate, which means six pigs per group. All values are means ± SEM
a, b, c Different letters means there were statistically significant differences among three treatments when P-value < 0.05
Alpha-diversity of bacterial community in the caecal and colonic digesta of weaned pigs1
| Sample | Control | Antibiotic | Probiotics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caecal digesta | ||||
| Sobs | 420.00 ± 24.88 | 364.00 ± 39.15 | 315.00 ± 58.80 | 0.08 |
| Ace | 484.93 ± 28.01 | 416.52 ± 44.75 | 366.36 ± 58.34 | 0.05 |
| Chao | 484.75 ± 30.28 | 420.03 ± 36.42 | 373.23 ± 68.57 | 0.05 |
| Shannon | 4.40 ± 0.24 | 3.77 ± 0.58 | 3.71 ± 0.60 | 0.18 |
| Simpson | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 0.07 ± 0.06 | 0.07 ± 0.04 | 0.43 |
| Colonic digesta | ||||
| Sobs | 475.33 ± 9.07 | 427.33 ± 47.06 | 381.67 ± 34.65 | 0.05 |
| Ace | 521.66 ± 23.2 | 476.79 ± 43.89 | 446.49 ± 34.49 | 0.11 |
| Chao | 529.69 ± 30.55 | 480.54 ± 50.12 | 476.30 ± 60.38 | 0.30 |
| Shannon | 4.62 ± 0.07 | 4.08 ± 0.38 | 3.74 ± 0.50 | 0.06 |
| Simpson | 0.03 ± 0.002 | 0.05 ± 0.03 | 0.09 ± 0.06 | 0.06 |
1 Caecal and colonic digesta samples were obtained from three pigs per group and their microbiota composition were analyzed using 16S rRNA sequencing. All values are means ± SEM
Fig. 1Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) based on Bray_curtis distance. Different symbols represent different groups. (a) PCoA plot for the caecal digesta microbial communities. (b) PCoA plot for the colonic digesta microbial communities. Circles: control group; triangles: antibiotic group; rhombus: probiotics group
Fig. 2Dominant phylum of caecal and colonic digesta obtained from weaned pigs (a) Changes in caecal microbiota composition of control, antibiotic, probiotics group at the phylum level. (b) Changes in colonic microbiota composition of control, antibiotic, probiotics group at the phylum level. “*” means there were statically significant differences (P < 0.05)
Fig. 3Characterization of communities on genus level. Caecal and colonic relative abundance of microbial genus of weaned piglets fed the basic diet (control), antibiotics and probiotics. (C_ca: caecal samples of control group; A_ca: caecal samples of antibiotic group; P_ca: caecal samples of probitocs group; C_co: colonic samples of control group; A_co: colonic samples of antibiotic group; P_co: colonic samples of probitocs group)
Fig. 4Linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) analysis microbiota in the caecal and colonic chyme of weaned pigs from phylum to genus levels. The linear discriminant analysis (LDA) plots indicate species that can be used as biomarkers, which was determined by ranking them according to their effect size. Different colors represent different groups. (a) LDA analysis of the caecum microbial. C_ca (caecal samples of control group), red bars; A_ca (caecal samples of antibiotic group), blue bars; P_ca (caecal samples of probiotics group), green bars. (b) LDA analysis of the colonic microbial. C_co (colonic samples of control group), red bars; P_co (colonic samples of probiotics group), green bars
Concentrations of short chain fatty acids in the caecal and colonic digesta of weaned pigs1
| Item | Control | Antibiotic | Probiotics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caecal digesta | ||||
| lactic acid (mg/g) | 2.66 ± 0.52 | 2.57 ± 0.63 | 2.91 ± 0.03 | 0.67 |
| Acetic acid (mg/g) | 5.29 ± 0.58b | 5.32 ± 0.28b | 6.23 ± 0.49a | 0.03 |
| Propionic acid (mg/g) | 3.02 ± 0.70b | 2.92 ± 0.24b | 3.73 ± 0.45a | 0.02 |
| Butyric acid (mg/g) | 1.32 ± 0.39 | 1.75 ± 0.48 | 1.54 ± 0.41 | 0.34 |
| Colonic digesta | ||||
| lactic acid (mg/g) | 5.30 ± 0.54a | 3.87 ± 0.66b | 5.60 ± 0.53a | 0.01 |
| Acetic acid (mg/g) | 5.93 ± 0.33 | 5.92 ± 0.48 | 6.49 ± 0.59 | 0.21 |
| Propionic acid (mg/g) | 3.02 ± 0.41a | 2.53 ± 0.30b | 3.07 ± 0.30a | 0.04 |
| Butyric acid (mg/g) | 1.54 ± 0.22 | 1.76 ± 0.28 | 1.60 ± 0.25 | 0.47 |
1 The digesta samples were obtained from the caecum and colon of three pigs per group and the concentrations of SCFAs were measured. All values are means ± SEM
a, b Different letters means there were statistically significant differences among three treatments when P-value < 0.05