| Literature DB >> 35568942 |
Jinju Mao1,2,3, Yuan Wang4,5,6, Wenwen Wang1,2,3, Ting Duan1,2,3, Na Yin1,2,3, Tao Guo1,2,3, Hui Guo1,2,3, Na Liu1,2,3, Xiaoping An1,2,3, Jingwei Qi1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dandelion is becoming an exploitable alternative to the widely prohibited antibiotics in the poultry production. This research aimed to investigate the effects of dandelion on the growth performance and intestinal barrier function of broiler chickens maintained under standard condition of management. One-hundred and sixty 1-day-old Arbor Acres (AA) male broiler chickens were randomly divided into four groups, with five replicates of eight birds each. The birds were fed a basal diet supplemented without (control group, [CON]) or with 500 (low dose [LD]) or 1000 (high dose [HD]) mg/kg dandelion or with 250 mg/kg chlortetracycline 20% premix (CTC) for 42 days, including the starter phase (d 1 to 21) and the grower phase (d 22 to 42). Body weight (BW) of each bird and feed consumption of each replicate were measured at d 21 and d 42. The ileal tissues were collected on day 21 and 42 to determine expression of genes coding for tight junction protein and mucin as well as ELISA analysis for immune factor. The ileal digesta was collected for microbiota and short chain fatty acids analysis.Entities:
Keywords: Barrier function; Broiler; Dandelion; Growth performance; Microbiota composition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35568942 PMCID: PMC9107267 DOI: 10.1186/s12917-022-03278-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Vet Res ISSN: 1746-6148 Impact factor: 2.792
Effects of dandelion on growth performance of broilers
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| BW | ||||||
| 1 day | 44.48 | 44.34 | 44.67 | 45.42 | 0.321 | 0.68 |
| 21 day | 718.86 | 785.62 | 768.72 | 739.14 | 11.688 | 0.18 |
| 42 day | 2319.80 | 2569.90 | 2425.90 | 2355.30 | 40.795 | 0.13 |
| 1 to 21 day | ||||||
| ADG/g | 31.86 | 35.75 | 34.56 | 33.22 | 0.602 | 0.11 |
| ADFI/g | 47.84a | 40.18b | 44.42ab | 46.90a | 1.002 | 0.01 |
| F/G | 1.48a | 1.14b | 1.34a | 1.43a | 0.041 | < 0.01 |
| 22 to 42 day | ||||||
| ADG/g | 76.06 | 84.65 | 79.05 | 78.24 | 1.573 | 0.27 |
| ADFI/g | 139.79 | 145.38 | 130.81 | 129.33 | 2.770 | 0.12 |
| F/G | 1.86x | 1.70y | 1.71xy | 1.67y | 0.028 | 0.07 |
| 1 to 42 day | ||||||
| ADG/g | 54.19 | 60.12 | 56.62 | 55.49 | 0.987 | 0.17 |
| ADFI/g | 93.81a | 93.77a | 86.45b | 85.59b | 1.362 | 0.02 |
| F/G | 1.74x | 1.56y | 1.57y | 1.58y | 0.030 | 0.07 |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
a,bMeans (n = 5) in a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
x,yMeans (n = 5) in a row with different letters tended to be different (0.05 ≤ P < 0.10)
Effects of dandelion on ileal expression of genes coding for tight junction protein and mucin of broilers
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| 21 day | ||||||
| Claudin | 1.01c | 2.28b | 3.85a | 0.64c | 0.318 | < 0.01 |
| Occludin-1 | 1.01c | 2.19b | 3.63a | 0.70c | 0.295 | < 0.01 |
| ZO-1 | 0.93bc | 0.69c | 1.48b | 2.00a | 0.149 | < 0.01 |
| Mucin1 | 0.92b | 1.88a | 2.31a | 1.03b | 0.161 | < 0.01 |
| 42 day | ||||||
| Claudin | 1.01b | 2.31a | 1.25b | 0.93b | 0.151 | < 0.01 |
| Occludin-1 | 1.00b | 1.38a | 0.76bc | 0.62c | 0.085 | < 0.01 |
| ZO-1 | 1.06b | 1.22b | 2.72a | 2.64a | 0.190 | < 0.01 |
| Mucin1 | 1.01b | 1.89a | 0.84bc | 0.68c | 0.121 | < 0.01 |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
a,b,cMeans (n = 5) within a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
Effects of dandelion on ileal immunity of broilers. (ng/g protein)
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| 21 day | ||||||
| sIgA | 379.43 | 405.13 | 424.38 | 428.07 | 18.889 | 0.80 |
| IL-1 | 40.02 | 36.98 | 39.74 | 42.60 | 1.465 | 0.67 |
| IL-2 | 96.85 | 85.01 | 77.17 | 82.13 | 4.925 | 0.55 |
| IL-10 | 31.25 | 43.83 | 41.18 | 43.47 | 2.720 | 0.36 |
| TNF-α | 44.86ab | 35.81b | 34.75b | 49.25a | 2.219 | 0.04 |
| 42 day | ||||||
| sIgA | 381.33 | 371.96 | 442.15 | 476.59 | 18.078 | 0.11 |
| IL-1 | 37.97 | 35.05 | 45.21 | 39.09 | 2.364 | 0.52 |
| IL-2 | 66.75 | 73.81 | 80.64 | 66.35 | 4.254 | 0.63 |
| IL-10 | 37.71 | 36.56 | 37.81 | 35.81 | 2.088 | 0.99 |
| TNF-α | 39.50 | 37.85 | 38.43 | 38.07 | 1.905 | 0.99 |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
a,bMeans (n = 5) within a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
Effects of dandelion on the alpha-diversity of ileal microbiota of broilers
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| 21 day | ||||||
| observed_species | 277a | 178ab | 136b | 135b | 20.226 | 0.03 |
| shannon | 4.05a | 2.86b | 2.32b | 2.80b | 0.204 | 0.01 |
| simpson | 0.87a | 0.72b | 0.62b | 0.74ab | 0.031 | 0.02 |
| ace | 280.76a | 184.36ab | 142.48b | 145.15b | 19.580 | 0.03 |
| chao1 | 279.94a | 180.82ab | 136.95b | 137.36b | 20.244 | 0.02 |
| 42 day | ||||||
| observed_species | 432 | 334 | 410 | 571 | 37.701 | 0.16 |
| shannon | 2.72 | 3.14 | 3.52 | 4.11 | 0.240 | 0.22 |
| simpson | 0.58y | 0.69xy | 0.80x | 0.85x | 0.041 | 0.06 |
| ace | 483.00 | 387.50 | 458.50 | 624.46 | 39.969 | 0.20 |
| chao1 | 475.80 | 367.40 | 458.70 | 624.81 | 39.534 | 0.13 |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
a,bMeans (n = 5) within a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
x,yMeans (n = 5) in a row with different letters tended to be different (0.05 ≤ P < 0.10)
Effects of dandelion on the relative abundances of ileal microbiota at the phyla level (%)1
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| 21 day | ||||||
| Firmicutes | 74.26y | 90.57x | 92.29x | 87.57xy | 2.687 | 0.09 |
| Cyanobacteria | 11.06 | 6.36 | 4.86 | 8.28 | 1.574 | 0.57 |
| Proteobacteria | 3.25 | 1.91 | 2.55 | 3.49 | 0.484 | 0.69 |
| Bacteroidetes | 9.01a | 0.82b | 0.13b | 0.22b | 1.169 | < 0.01 |
| 42 day | ||||||
| Firmicutes | 86.04 | 90.62 | 73.78 | 81.47 | 3.352 | 0.35 |
| Cyanobacteria | 4.99 | 0.83 | 14.15 | 10.73 | 2.471 | 0.24 |
| Proteobacteria | 4.74 | 6.28 | 9.54 | 3.67 | 1.286 | 0.42 |
| Bacteroidetes | 3.12 | 1.19 | 1.60 | 2.08 | 0.530 | 0.64 |
| Actinobacteriota | 0.33y | 0.40y | 0.35y | 1.17x | 0.131 | 0.05 |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
1Only bacteria with a relative abundance greater than 1% are shown in the table
a,bMeans (n = 5) within a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
x,yMeans (n = 5) in a row with different letters tended to be different (0.05 ≤ P < 0.10)
Effects of dandelion on the relative abundances of ileal microbiota at the genera level (%)1
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| 21 day | ||||||
| 39.21b | 64.20a | 62.68ab | 80.89a | 5.071 | 0.02 | |
| 5.79 | 9.05 | 3.76 | 9.76 | 1.793 | 0.64 | |
| 8.99 | 8.46 | 3.50 | 5.67 | 1.352 | 0.47 | |
| 11.06 | 6.36 | 4.86 | 8.28 | 1.574 | 0.57 | |
| 0.94 | 0.66 | 1.14 | 1.54 | 0.270 | 0.74 | |
| 2.81 | 2.57 | 1.11 | 2.14 | 0.499 | 0.68 | |
| 5.73a | 0.67b | 0.07b | 0.15b | 0.783 | 0.01 | |
| 2.90 | 0.93 | 0.83 | 1.29 | 0.626 | 0.66 | |
| 1.87 | 0.93 | 0.71 | 1.41 | 0.298 | 0.56 | |
| 3.27a | 0.15b | 0.07b | 0.07b | 0.451 | 0.01 | |
| 42 day | ||||||
| 80.52 | 83.70 | 63.77 | 61.48 | 4.053 | 0.11 | |
| 4.97 | 0.62 | 14.14 | 10.71 | 2.478 | 0.23 | |
| 3.28 | 0.81 | 6.00 | 1.03 | 1.123 | 0.34 | |
| 0.58 | 1.85 | 2.13 | 1.11 | 0.318 | 0.31 | |
| 1.88 | 0.37 | 0.42 | 0.68 | 0.347 | 0.40 | |
| 0.46 | 1.44 | 0.75 | 1.28 | 0.250 | 0.51 | |
| 0.07b | 0.10b | 0.87ab | 2.61a | 0.357 | 0.02 | |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
1Only bacteria with a relative abundance greater than 1% are shown in the table
a,bMeans (n = 5) within a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
Effects of dandelion on the SCFA concentrations in ileal digesta of broilers. (μg/g)
| Items | Treatment group | SEM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | LD | HD | CTC | |||
| 21 day | ||||||
| Acetic acid | 8.03 | 7.78 | 6.18 | 5.04 | 0.952 | 0.67 |
| Propionic acid | 0.37xy | 0.40xy | 0.25y | 0.99x | 0.125 | 0.07 |
| Butyric acid | 0.17b | 0.25ab | 0.15c | 0.28a | 0.018 | 0.01 |
| Total SCFA | 8.41 | 9.59 | 7.95 | 6.31 | 1.000 | 0.71 |
| 42 day | ||||||
| Acetic acid | 7.23 | 9.02 | 4.26 | 6.66 | 1.026 | 0.46 |
| Propionic acid | 0.30 | 0.51 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.083 | 0.26 |
| Butyric acid | 0.05 | 0.09 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.036 | 0.56 |
| Total SCFA | 7.52 | 9.63 | 4.57 | 6.82 | 1.093 | 0.46 |
CON The control treatment, LD The low dose of dandelion treatment, HD The high dose of dandelion treatment, CTC The chlortetracycline treatment, SEM Standard error of the mean
a,bMeans (n = 5) within a row with different letters differed significantly (P < 0.05)
x,yMeans (n = 5) in a row with different letters tended to be different (0.05 ≤ P < 0.10)
Dietary composition and nutrient levels of basal diets
| Items | Starter phase | Grower phase |
|---|---|---|
| Ingredient (%) | ||
| Corn | 52.50 | 58.80 |
| Soybean meal | 40.00 | 33.80 |
| Soybean oil | 3.00 | 3.00 |
| Dicalcium phosphate | 1.90 | 1.80 |
| Limestone | 1.08 | 1.22 |
| Salt | 0.37 | 0.37 |
| Lysine | 0.05 | 0.03 |
| Methionine | 0.19 | 0.07 |
| Premix1 | 0.80 | 0.80 |
| Choline | 0.11 | 0.11 |
| Total | 100.00 | 100.00 |
| Nutrient levels2 | ||
| Metabolic energy (MJ/kg) | 12.42 | 12.62 |
| Crude protein (%) | 22.27 | 19.24 |
| Ether extract (%) | 4.69 | 5.45 |
| Crude fiber (%) | 3.50 | 3.26 |
| Ca (%) | 1.17 | 1.18 |
| Total phosphorus (%) | 0.82 | 0.77 |
| Non-phytate phosphorus (%) | 0.53 | 0.49 |
| Lysine (%) | 1.39 | 1.22 |
| Methionine (%) | 0.35 | 0.32 |
| Threonine (%) | 0.90 | 0.80 |
| Tryptophan (%) | 0.78 | 0.70 |
1The premix provided the following per kg of diet: VA, 9000 IU; VD3, 3000 IU; VE, 26 mg; VK3, 1.20 mg; VB1, 3.00 mg; VB2, 8.00 mg; VB6, 4.40 mg; VB12, 0.012 mg; nicotinic acid, 45 mg; folic acid, 0.75 mg; biotin, 0.20 mg; choline, 1100 mg; D-pantothenic acid, 15 mg; Fe, 100 mg; Cu, 10 mg; Zn, 108 mg; Mn, 120 mg; I 1.5 mg; Se, 0.35 mg
2Metabolic energy is a calculated value, while the others are measured values
Sequences of primers used in this study
| Gene | Primer sequences (5’ → 3’) | Product size (bp) | Gene ID |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claudin | F:CCGCTGTCCTGAGCAGAGTT | 161 | 424910 |
| R:TTTCCAGTGGCGATACCTAC | |||
| Occludin-1 | F:GGTTCCTCATCGTCATCCTG | 149 | 396026 |
| R:TTCTTCACCCACTCCTCCAC | |||
| ZO-1 | F:CTAAGGGGAAGCCAACTGAT | 215 | 415388 |
| R:ATTCTGAGGTGGAGGAGGGT | |||
| Mucin1 | F:ATATCCGTGCCGCTGGTT | 239 | 426412 |
| R:GCCGGGCGTTGTTAATGT |