| Literature DB >> 31549175 |
M A Arreguin-Nava1, B D Graham2, B Adhikari2, M Agnello3, C M Selby2, X Hernandez-Velasco4, C N Vuong2, B Solis-Cruz5, D Hernandez-Patlan5, J D Latorre2, G Tellez2, B M Hargis2, G Tellez-Isaias2.
Abstract
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.Entities:
Keywords: zzm321990 Escherichia colizzm321990 ; zzm321990 in ovozzm321990 ; broiler; hatchers; probiotic
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31549175 PMCID: PMC8913981 DOI: 10.3382/ps/pez544
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Poult Sci ISSN: 0032-5791 Impact factor: 3.352
Effect of in ovo administration of Bacillus spp. base probiotic (BBP) on microbial composition in the gastrointestinal tract of hatching broiler chickens, hatchability, body weight (g), and horizontal transmission of virulent E. coli during hatch.
| Treatment | Gram-negative bacterial recovery DOH (Log10 cfu/g) | Gram-negative bacterial recovery day 7 (Log10 cfu/g) | Hatchability (%) | Average BW DOH (CV) | Average BW day 7 (CV) | Average BWG days 0 to 7 (CV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trial 1 | ||||||
| 5.70 ± 0.28 | 7.43 ± 0.12 | 174/180 (96.66%) | 40.03 ± 0.07 | 164.56 ± 2.52 | 116.93 ± 2.63 | |
| 4.32 ± 0.91 | 4.11 ± 0.47 | 175/180 (97.22%) | 47.77 ± 0.86 | 175.15 ± 2.71 | 127.38 ± 2.69 | |
| Trial 2 | ||||||
| 4.92 ± 0.32 | 6.34 ± 0.33 | 176/180 (97.77%)) | 41.30 ± 0.03 | 161.31 ± 2.68 | 111.81 ± 1.91 | |
| 3.41 ± 0.81 | 3.89 ± 0.35 | 178/180 (98.88%) | 42.77 ± 0.11 | 181.15 ± 2.71 | 138.38 ± 3.69 |
Hatchability total: hatched chickens/total embryos placed (%). Body weight (BW), n = 30.
Indicates significant difference between columns (P < 0.05).
Figure 1Relative abundance of bacterial phyla recovered from Control and Bacillus base probiotic (BBP) in trial 2.
Differentially abundant bacterial taxa at different levels of taxonomic classification in 2 treatment groups: Control and BBP (Wilcoxon test, P < 0.05).
| Control | BBP | |
|---|---|---|
| Phylum Level | ||
| Proteobacteria | Firmicutes | |
| Family Level | ||
| Enterobacteriaceae | Lachnospiraceae | |
| Genus Level | ||
| Unidentified genus |
Figure 2Relative abundance of bacterial families recovered on two treatment groups: Control and Bacillus base probiotic (BBP) in trial 2. NA represent those sequence reads which were not assigned at the family level, however, were assigned at the higher level of taxonomic classification.
Figure 3Relative abundance of bacterial genera recovered on2treatment groups: Control and Bacillus base probiotic (BBP) in trial 2. NA represent those sequence reads which were not assigned at the genus level, however, were assigned at the higher level of taxonomic classification. Others represent minor bacterial genera whose average relative abundance across all samples was <0.1%.
Figure 4The alpha diversity of two treatment groups: Control and Bacillus base probiotic (BBP) in trial 2. The alpha diversity was calculated by observed OTUs metric (A) and Shannon's index (B), where the statistical significant difference between treatment groups was calculated by Wilcoxon test. NS represent non-significant difference between treatment groups (P > 0.05).
Figure 5The PCoA plot showing the significant difference in beta diversity between 2 treatment groups: Control and Bacillus base probiotic (BBP) in trial 2. PERMANOVA, P < 0.05.