Histological Response of Broiler’s Immune Related Organs to Feeding Different Direct Fed Microbials


Authors

  • Nafisa A. Abd El-Azeem Department of Animal Production, National Research Centre, Dokki-12622, Giza, Egypt
  • Eman F. El-Daly Department of Animal Production, National Research Centre, Dokki-12622, Giza, Egypt
  • H.M.A. Hassan Department of Animal Production, National Research Centre, Dokki-12622, Giza, Egypt
  • Amani W. Youssef Department of Animal Production, National Research Centre, Dokki-12622, Giza, Egypt
  • M.A. Mohamed Department of Animal Production, National Research Centre, Dokki-12622, Giza, Egypt

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2015.331.337

Keywords:

Broiler, feed additives, histology, immune organs, probiotics

Abstract

An experiment was conducted to study the effect of feeding different commercial preparations of direct-fed microbials (DFM) used as growth promoters on weight and histology of immune related organs (bursa, thymus and spleen) in broilers. Two hundred unsexed 10 days old Cobb broiler chicks were individually weighed and divided into 4 groups (5 replicates of 10 chicks, each) and fed 4 different experimental diets. A mixture of Enterococcus faecium (Protexin®, DFM1), a mixture of Bacillus subtilis (Clostat®, DFM2) and Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast cells with its fermentation metabolites (Diamond®, DFM3) were supplemented to broiler diets and compared with the basal diet which served as control. Bursa, thymus and spleen were taken from birds at 36 days of age. The results showed significant (P<0.01) increase in spleen and bursa weight (relative to live body weight) in birds fed DFM supplemented diets compared with those fed the control diet of no supplement. Addition of DFM enhanced the activity of bursal follicles and may improve the bursa activity and caused improvement in thymus and spleen structure compared with the control. In conclusion, DFM supplemental levels have stimulated some histological change in the immune related organs which may result in improvement of chick immunity.

References

Alkhalf, A., M. Alhaj and I. Al-Homidan, 2010. Influence of probiotic supplementation on blood parameters and growth performance in broiler chickens. Saudi J. Biol. Sci., 17: 219-225.

Awad, W.A., K. Ghareeb, S. Abdel-Raheem and J. Bohm, 2009. Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic and synbiotic on growth performance, organ weights and intestinal histomorphology of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 88: 49-56.

Bai, A.P., Q. Ouyang, W. Zhang, C.H. Wang and S.F. Li, 2004. Probiotics inhibit TNF-a-induced interlukin-8 secretion of HT29 cells. World J. Gastroentrol., 10: 455-457.

Boushra, M.H., M.M. El-Hamamy, A.A. Dessouki and R.T. Hassan, 2011. Pathological study on the effect of probiotic in chickens infected with E. coli. Suez Canal Vet. Med. J., 16: 177-193.

Dalloul, R.A., H.S. Lillehoj, T.A. Shellem and J.A. Doerr, 2003. Enhanced mucosal immunity against Eimeria acervulina in broilers fed a Lactobacillus-based probiotic. Poult. Sci., 82: 62-66.

Duncan, D.B., 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11: 1-42.

El-Sheikh, A.M.H., E.A. Abdalla and M.H. Maysa, 2009. Study on productive performance, hematological and immunological parameters in a local strain of chicken as affected by mannanoligosaccharide under hot climate conditions. Egypt Poult. Sci., 29: 287-305.

Haghighi, H.R., J. Gong, C.L. Gyles, M.A. Hayes and H. Zhou et al., 2005. Modulation of antibody-mediated immune response by probiotics in chickens. Clin. Diagn. Lab. Immunol., 12: 1387-1392.

Hassan, H.M.A., A.W. Youssef, E.F. El-Daly, N.A. Abd El-Azeem and E.R. Hassan et al., 2014. Performance, caecum bacterial count and ileum histology of broilers fed different direct-fed microbials. Asian J. Poult. Sci., 8: 106-114.

Heckert, R.A., I. Estevez, E. Russek-Cohen and R. Pettit-Riley, 2002. Effects of density and perch availability on the immune status of broilers. Poult. Sci., 81: 451-457.

Hodges, R.D., 1974. The Histology of the Fowl. 1st Edn., Academic Press, New York, ISBN: 0123513502, Pages: 648.

Hu, Z. and Y. Guo, 2007. Effects of dietary sodium butyrate supplementation on the intestinal morphological structure, absorptive function and gut flora in chickens. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 132: 240-249.

Ahmad, I., 2006. Effect of probiotics on broilers performance. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 5: 593-597.

Katanbaf, M.N., E.A. Dunnington and P.B. Siegel, 1989. Restricted feeding in early and late-feathering chickens. 1. Growth and physiological responses. Poult. Sci., 68: 344-351.

Tarek, K., M. Mohamed, B. Omar and B. Hassina, 2012. Morpho-histological study of the thymus of broiler chickens during post-hashing age. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 11: 78-80.

Landy, N. and A. Kavyani, 2013. Effects of using a multi-strain probiotic on performance, immune responses and cecal microflora composition in broiler chickens reared under cyclic heat stress condition. Iran. J. Applied Anim. Sci., 3: 703-708.

Leblanc, J., I. Fliss and C. Matar, 2004. Induction of a humoral immune response following an Escherichia coli, O157:H7 Infection with an immunomodulatory peptidic fraction derived from Lactobacillus helveticus-fermented milk. Clin. Vaccine Immunol., 11: 1171-1181.

Martins, F.S., R.M. Nardi, R.M. Arantes, C.A. Rosa, M.J. Neves and J.R. Nicoli, 2005. Screening of yeasts as probiotic based on capacities to colonize the gastrointestinal tract and to protect against enteropathogen challenge in mice. J. Gen. Applied Microbiol., 51: 83-92.

Mroz, Z., S.J. Koopmans, A. Bannink, K. Partanen, W. Krasucki, M. Overland and S. Radcliffe, 2006. Carboxylic Acids as Bioregulators and Gut growth Promoters in Nonruminants. In: Biology of Nutrition in Growing Animals, Mosenthin, R., J. Zentek and T. Zebrowska (Eds.). Elsevier, London, UK., ISBN-13: 9780444512321, pp: 81-133.

NRC., 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th Edn., National Academy Press, Washington, DC., USA., ISBN-13: 9780309048927, Pages: 176.

Pelicano, E.R.L., P.A. Souza, H.B.A. Souza, A. Oba, E.A. Norkus, L.M. Kodawara and T.M.A. Lima, 2004. Performance of broilers fed diets containing natural growth promoters. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Avic., 6: 231-236.

SAS., 1990. SAS/STAT User's Guide: Statistics. 4th Edn., Vol. 6, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.

Teo, A.Y. and H.M. Tan, 2007. Evaluation of the performance and intestinal gut microflora of broilers fed on corn-soy diets supplemented with Bacillus subtilis PB6 (CloSTAT). J. Applied Poult. Res., 16: 296-303.

Tollba, A.A.H., 2010. Reduction of broilers intestinal pathogenic micro-flora under normal or stressed condition. Egypt. Poult. Sci. J., 30: 249-270.

Willis, W.L., O.S. Isikhuemhen and S.A. Ibrahim, 2007. Performance assessment of broiler chickens given mushroom extract alone or in combination with probiotics. Poult. Sci., 86: 1856-1860.

Xu, Z.R., C.H. Hu, M.S. Xia, X.A. Zhan and M.Q. Wang, 2003. Effects of dietary fructooligosaccharide on digestive enzyme activities, intestinal microflora and morphology of male broilers. Poult. Sci., 82: 1030-1036.

Yakhkeshi, S., S. Rahimi and N.K. Gharib, 2011. The effects of comparison of herbal extracts, antibiotic, probiotic and organic acid on serum lipids, immune response, GIT microbial population, intestinal morphology and performance of broilers. J. Med. Plants, 10: 80-95.

Zhang, Z.F., J.H. Cho and I.H. Kim, 2013. Effects of Bacillus subtilis UBT-MO2 on growth performance, relative immune organ weight, gas concentration in excreta and intestinal microbial shedding in broiler chickens. Livestock Sci., 155: 343-347.

Zhang, Z.F., T.X. Zhou, X. Ao and I.H. Kim, 2012. Effects of β-glucan and Bacillus subtilis on growth performance, blood profiles, relative organ weight and meat quality in broilers fed maize-soybean meal based diets. Livest. Sci., 150: 419-424.

Downloads

Published

2015-05-15

Issue

Section

Research Article

How to Cite

El-Azeem, N. A. A., El-Daly, E. F., Hassan, H., Youssef, A. W., & Mohamed , M. (2015). Histological Response of Broiler’s Immune Related Organs to Feeding Different Direct Fed Microbials. International Journal of Poultry Science, 14(6), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2015.331.337