Layer PDF
Layer PDF
Layer PDF
To cite this article: M.H. Hatab, M.A. Elsayed & N.S. Ibrahim (2016) Effect of some biological
supplementation on productive performance, physiological and immunological response of
layer chicks, Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences, 9:2, 185-192, DOI: 10.1016/
j.jrras.2015.12.008
Article history: The present study was carried out to evaluate the effects of biological (Bacillus subtilis and
Received 27 October 2015 Enterococcus faecium) supplementation on productive performance, physiological and
Received in revised form immunological response of Hy-line layer chicks. Total of 300 one-day old of Hy-line layer
28 December 2015 chicks, were randomly divided into three groups. The first group was fed a basal diet and
Accepted 30 December 2015 served as a control. While the second and third groups were fed the basal diet that sup-
Available online 13 January 2016 plemented with the probiotic mixture at the rate of 1 and 2 gm/kg of diet, respectively, until
10 weeks of age.
Keywords: Results indicated that treated groups with helpful bacteria (B. subtilis and E. faecium)
Probiotic showed significant effect on final body weight gain, feed conversion ratio and higher
Layer chicks antibody levels against Newcastle disease virus as compared to the control one. Moreover,
Immune response significant increase was recorded in the relative weight of carcass, liver, heart, kidney,
Performance proventiculus, small intestine, thymus, spleen, bursa of Fabricius and small intestine
length (cm) in all supplemented groups as compared to the control group. On the other
hand, there were no significant effects on serum total protein, albumin, globulin and
creatinine concentrations, while, serum ALP, ALT, AST activities, uric acid, triglycerides
and cholesterol concentrations in all treated groups were significantly lower than in con-
trol group. Furthermore, serum glucose, calcium, phosphorus concentrations and triiodo-
thyronine hormone level were significantly higher in treated groups than the control. Red
and white blood cell counts, hemoglobin level and hematocrit values were significantly
increased in all treated groups as compared to control group.
In conclusion, biological (B. subtilis and E. faecium) supplementation can be used as one
of important additive for enhancing the productive efficiency, and immunity of growing
Hy-line chicks.
Copyright © 2016, The Egyptian Society of Radiation Sciences and Applications. Production
and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (N.S. Ibrahim).
Peer review under responsibility of The Egyptian Society of Radiation Sciences and Applications.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2015.12.008
1687-8507/Copyright © 2016, The Egyptian Society of Radiation Sciences and Applications. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
186 J o u r n a l o f R a d i a t i o n R e s e a r c h a n d A p p l i e d S c i e n c e s 9 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 8 5 e1 9 2
tubes, one with lithium heparin to determine hematological feed consumption (g/bird) and feed conversion ratio are pre-
parameters and the other without anticoagulant and left to clot sented in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
then centrifuged at 1600 g for 15 min, and the resulting serum It was found that, weekly body weights (Table 2), daily
was stocked at 20 C for hormonal and chemical analyses. weight gain and final body weight (Table 3) were significantly
Serum total proteins, albumin, total calcium, inorganic increased in the treated groups as compared to the control
phosphorus, alkaline phosphates (ALP), uric acid, creatinine, during overall experimental period. The third group (2 g/kg
alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase diet) was significantly higher than the second group (1 g/kg
(AST), triglyceride, total cholesterol and glucose were deter- diet). Furthermore, weekly feed consumption (g/bird) and feed
mined colorimetrically using commercial kits produced by conversion ratio (Table 3), were significantly decreased in the
Stanbio Company, USA by computerized spectrophotometer third treated groups than the second group, and both of them
model Milton Roy 1201. Serum Glob values were calculated by were significantly decreased than the control group. These
subtracting albumin values from their corresponding total findings are in agreement with several reports demonstrating
proteins values of the same sample. Finally, triiodothyronin that probiotic supplemented to the birds improved the body
hormone (T3) was determined using radioimmunoassay (RIA) weight gains of the broiler chickens (Benites, Gilharry, Gernat,
Commercial Kit produced by IZOTOP Company (INSTITUTE OF & Murillo, 2008). Khaksefidi and Ghoorchi (2006) showed also
ISOTOPES Ltd.) (http://www.izotop.hu) and samples were that body weight gain of the birds fed diet supplemented with
counted on Pacard Gamma Counter. Concerning, blood he- 50 mg/kg of probiotic (B. subtilis) were significantly higher than
matological parameters, Red blood cells (RBCs) and white the control group and the feed conversion ratio was better. In
blood cells (WBCs) counts were determined according to Natt addition, Mountzouris et al. (2007) and Bansal et al. (2011)
and Herrick (1952). Hemoglobin concentration (Hb) and found that broilers treated with probiotic containing Ped-
packed cell volume (PCV %) were determined according to iococcus strain, Enterococcus strain, Lactobacillusstrains and Bifi-
Dacie and Lewis (1991). dobacterium strain in feed and water had better feed conversion
ratio.
2.3. Immunological test In this study, biological “B. subtilis and E. faecium” supple-
mentation is effective in promoting poultry growth and
At the end of the experiment, six birds from each group were improving feed conversion ratio. This result may be due to “ B.
chosen at random and housed in multidisc batteries. Each bird subtilis and E. faecium” supplementation enhancing the syn-
was vaccinated against Newcastle disease with NDV clone 30 thesis of certain vitamins, providing digestive enzymes and
(Nobilis ND Clone 30; Intervet) by eye-drop. Blood samples increasing the production of volatile fatty acids that finally are
were collected from wing vein using an insulin syringe at metabolized in favor of the host (Fuller, 2001). The treatment
three times 3, 7 and 9 days of post-vaccination. Blood was with biological supplementation may also increase the uptake
allowed to clot then centrifuged immediately to separate of nutrients from gastrointestinal tract through their indirect
serum to determine immune response (antibody titer) of the effect on its permeability (Higgins et al., 2008). In this mention,
chickens derived from vaccination against Newcastle disease Mountzouris et al. (2007) and Alkhalf et al. (2010) reported that
virus by performed Hemagglutination inhibition (HI) test on probiotic's immunomodulatory activity and ability to fortify
serum samples according to the method of (King & Seal, 1998). beneficial members of the intestinal microflora, improving
efficiency of digestion and nutrient absorption processes of
2.4. Statistical analysis the host. Particularly, it was also worth noting that birds
treated with “B. subtilis and E. faecium” displayed a great
One way, analysis of variance was done using the SAS General
Liner Model procedure (SAS Institute, 2002). The main factor
was the treatment (bacteria supplementation). Significance
level was set at P < 0.05. Mean values were compared using Table 2 e Effects of biological (Bacillus subtilis and
Duncan's Multiple Range Test (Duncan, 1955) when significant Enterococcus faecium) supplementation on live body
differences existed. The model used was: Yij ¼ m þ Ti þ eijWhere: weight of layer chicks.
Body weight (g), Experimental groups
Yij ¼ any value from the overall population. m ¼ the overall weekly
0 g/kg diet 1 gm/kg diet 2 gm/kg diet
mean.
Ti ¼ the effect of the ith treatment (i ¼ 1, control& 2, bac- Initial body weight 40.9 ± 0.67a 41.4 ± 0.93a 40.4.0 ± 0.76a
At 1st week 61.1 ± 1.14b 65.0 ± 0.95a 65.69 ± 0.71a
teria supplementation).
At 2 nd week 91.3 ± 0.70c 101 ± 1.60b 109.8 ± 1.50a
eij ¼ the random error associated with the jth individual. At 3rd week 139.9 ± 0.70c 158.8 ± 1.17b 179.4 ± 1.20a
At 4th week 229.7 ± 1.26c 253.9 ± 1.53b 288.8 ± 1.24a
At 5th week 334.85 ± 2.5c 379.1 ± 1.91b 417.14 ± 2.2a
3. Results and discussion At 6 th week 480.2 ± 2.40c 522.0 ± 2.14b 586.4 ± 2.1a
At 7th week 626.3 ± 1.70c 693.0 ± 1.42b 761.95 ± 1.8a
At 8th week 790.6 ± 1.30c 878.2 ± 1.85b 969.1 ± 1.94a
3.1. Effect of biological supplementation on productive
At 9th week 987.5 ± 2.50c 1104 ± 1.18b 1211 ± 2.04a
performance Final body weight 1307.5 ± 2.30c 1369.2 ± 1.74b 1467.8 ± 2.3a
Table 3 e Effects of biological (Bacillus subtilis and Table 4 e Effects of biological supplementation on relative
Enterococcus faecium) supplementation on growth and weight of carcass and some organs of layer chicks.
feed performance of layer chicks. Relative weight of Experimental groups
Growth Experimental groups carcass and some
0 g/kg diet 1 gm/kg 2 gm/kg
performance organs
0 g/kg diet 1 gm/kg diet 2 gm/kg diet diet diet
Daily weight gain (g) 18.1 ± 1.5c 18.97 ± 1.3b 20.39 ± 1.5a Carcass 55.6 ± 0.580c 64.8 ± 0.32b 69.64 ± 0.62a
Feed intake (g)/bird 2825.5 ± 2.3a 2778.2 ± 2.3b 2746.4 ± 2.3c Liver 1.82 ± 0.016b 1.99 ± 0.023a 2.04 ± 0.023a
Feed conversion ratio 2.13 ± 0.3a 2.06 ± 0.3b 1.87 ± 0.3c Heart 0.51 ± 0.012c 0.53 ± 0.009 ab
0.56 ± 0.015a
Proventiculus 0.34 ± 0.005c 0.38 ± 0.004b 0.42 ± 0.007a
a,b,c e Means in the same row with different superscripts are
Kidney 0.53 ± 0.007c 0.60 ± 0.003 b
0.64 ± 0.015a
significantly different (P 0.05).
Small intestine 4.97 ± 0.040b 6.13 ± 0.070a 6.15 ± 0.07a
thymus 0.54 ± 0.011c 0.62 ± 0.0.013 b
0.67 ± 0.006a
Spleen 0.22 ± 0.005c 0.26 ± 0.006b 0.29 ± 0.002a
increase in body weight and feed conversion by 7.72, 12.3%, Bursa 0.29 ± 0.003c 0.33 ± 0.005 b
0.38 ± 0.007a
Bursa 0.29 ± 0.003c 0.33 ± 0.005b 0.38 ± 0.007a
respectively, more than those of the control group.
Small intestine 11 ± 0.0700c 11.83 ± 0.048 b
12.2 ± 0.13a
Therefore, in our study, improvement in growth perfor-
length(cm)
mance and feed conversion ratio of the chicks supplemented
a,b,c e Means in the same row with different superscripts are
diet with “B. subtilis and E. faecium” may be attributed to the
significantly different (P 0.05).
total effect of supplementation on the maintenance of bene-
ficial microbial population that improving feed intake, diges-
tion and the uptake of nutrients (fatty acids and glucose) and
weight compared with control group. The effect of probiotic
increasing digestive enzyme activity.
on the relative weight of thymus was also investigated in this
study as shown in Table 4. Probiotic supplementation was
significantly increased the relative weight of thymus in all
3.2. Effect of biological supplementation on carcass
probiotic treatment groups as compared to the control group.
traits and relative organ weights
The significant increase in weight of thymus may be due to the
effect of probiotic bacteria on the functional activities of the
Data in Table 4 showed that, the relative weight of carcass,
immune system responses which led to increase in the
liver, heart, kidney, proventiculus, small intestine, thymus,
number of lymphocytes in the primary lymphoid organs.
spleen, bursa of Fabricius and small intestine length (cm) were
Measurement of immune organ weight is a common
significantly increased in the treated group as compared to the
method for evaluation of immune status in chickens (Heckert,
control during overall experimental period. And they highly
Estevez, Russek-Cohen, & Pettit, 2002). Such related organs
significantly increased in the third group (2 g/kg diet) than the
include thymus, bursa of Fabricius, liver and spleen. Good
second group (1 g/kg diet). These results were totally coincided
development of these organs is crucial for optimal Ig synthesis
with the observations of Awad et al. (2009) who reported that
(Glick, 1977). Therefore, beneficial effects of “B. subtilis and E.
carcass yield percentage was significantly increased in the
faecium” supplementation in the gastrointestinal tract could
probiotic fed broilers as compared with the control. Alkhalf
result in an improvement of overall health, performance and
et al. (2010) showed a significant increase in carcass yield
immune response of layer chicks.
percentage and immune organ weights in the probiotic sup-
plemented broiler chicks as comparison with the control
group. Zhang, Ma, and Doyle (2006) found that some probiotics 3.3. Effect of biological supplementation on blood
or synbiotics increased body weight of the chickens. Also, biochemical and hormonal
these results are in similar to the results of Waldroup, Fritts,
and Fenglan (2003). The significant increases in the absolute Data in Table 5 clearly showed no significant difference was
weight of the immune organs (thymus and bursa) were in recorded among the three groups (P 0.05) in serum total
harmony with the results of previous studies Wang, Du, Bai, protein, albumin, globulin and creatinine concentrations.
and Li (2003). The increase in the relative weight of spleen is While serum alkaline phosphatase, ALT, AST, uric acid, tri-
also in agreement with the findings of Willis, Isikhuemhen, glycerides and total cholesterol concentrations showed a sig-
and Ibrahim (2007) who found that the feeding broilers on nificant decrease in all treated groups than the control.
probiotic caused increases in the relative weights of spleen of Furthermore, serum concentration of glucose, calcium, inor-
treatment group. ganic phosphorus, and triiodothyronin hormone, showed a
The significant increase in relative weight of bursa of significant increase in the treated groups than the control
Fabricius may be attributed to increase the number of im- group.
mune cells. Findings encountered in this study is in agree- Our results were coincided with Al-Kassie, Al-Jumaa, and
ment with that of Shoeib, Sayed, Sotohy, and Abdel Ghaffar Jameel (2008) and Aluwong et al. (2012) who's showed no sig-
(1997) who found that the bursa of Fabricious in probiotic nificant differences in total protein, albumin and globulin
treated group showed an increase in the number of follicles between treatments with probiotics and control group. In
with high plasma cell reaction in the medulla. Meanwhile, Teo addition, Santoso, Tanaka, and Ohtania (1995) recorded that
and Tan (2007) observed that birds provided feed supple- the probiotics had a lower levels of AST and ALT enzymes.
mented with B. subtilis had a significantly heavier bursa While, Hussein (2014) reported that there were no effect on
J o u r n a l o f R a d i a t i o n R e s e a r c h a n d A p p l i e d S c i e n c e s 9 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 8 5 e1 9 2 189
nutrient absorption processes and protein metabolism. Dhama, K., Mahendran, M., Simmi, T., & Chauhan, R. S. (2008).
Moreover, as regard to B. subtilis and E. faecium (2 gm/kg diet) Beneficial effects of probiotics and prebiotics in livestock
group displayed a great increase in body weight and feed and poultry: the current perspectives. Intas Polivet, 9(1),
1e13.
conversion by 7.72, 12.3%, respectively, more than those of the
Dhama, K., & Singh, S. D. (2010). Probiotics improving poultry
control group. Accordingly, we recommended add B. subtilis health and production: an overview. Poultry Punch, 26(3), 41.
and E. faecium to the diet of growing Hy-line chicks as one of Duncan, D. B. (1955). Multiple range and multiple F tests.
important additive for enhancing the productive efficiency, Biometrics, 11, 1e42.
and immunity without side effect on blood biochemical level. Fuller, R. (2001). The chicken gut micro flora and probiotic
supplements. Journal of Poultry. Science, 38, 189e196.
Gaggı̀a, F., Mattarelli, P., & Biavati, B. (2010). Probiotics and
prebiotics in animal feeding for safe food production.
references International Journal of Food Microbiology, 141, 15e28.
Glick, B. (1977). The bursa of Fabricius and immunoglobulin
synthesis. International Review of Cytology, 48, 345e402.
Abd El-Baky, A. A. (2007). Clinicopathological studies on probiotics in Guo, C., & Zhang, L. (2010). Cholesterol-lowering effects of
chickens. PhD. thesis. Fac. Vet. Med., Cairo University. probioticsea review. Wei sheng wu xue bao¼ Acta microbiologica
Abdollahi, M. R., Kamyab, A., Bazzazzadekan, A., Nik-khah, A., & Sinica, 50(12), 590e599.
Shahneh, A. Z. (2003). Effect of differentlevels of bacterial Hajati, H., & Rezaei, M. (2010). The application of probiotics in
probiotic on broilers performance. Proceedings of the British poultry production. International Journal of Poultry Science, 9,
Society of Animal Scienc, 185. 298e304.
Al-Kassie, G. A. M., Al-Jumaa, Y. M. F., & Jameel, Y. J. (2008). Effect Hajjaj, H., Duboc, P., Fay, L. B., Zbinden, I., Mace, K., &
of probiotic (Aspergillus niger) and prebiotic (Taraxacum Niederberger, P. (2005). Aspergillus oryzae produces
officinale) on blood picture and biochemical properties of compounds inhibiting cholesterol biosynthesis downstream
broiler chicks. Department of Veterinary Public Health, of dihydrolanosterol. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 242, 155e159.
Veterinary Medical College, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Hashemzadeh, F., Shaban, R., Mohammad, A., Karimi, T., & Ali
Iraq International Journal of Poultry Science, 7, 1182e1184. Akbar, M. (2013). Effects of probiotics and antibiotic
Alkhalf, A., Alhaj, M., & Al-Homidan, I. (2010). Influence of supplementation on serum biochemistry and intestinal
probiotic supplementation on immune response of broiler microflora in broiler chicks. International Journal of Agriculture
chicks. Egyptian Poultry Science, 30, 271e280. and Crop Sciences, 5, 2394e2398.
Aluwong, T., Raji, M. A., Hassan, B. F., Kawu, M. U., Kobo, P. I., & Heckert, R. A., Estevez, I., Russek-Cohen, E., & Pettit, R. R. (2002).
Ayo, J. O. (2012). Effect of diferente levels of supplemental Effects of density and perch availability on the immune status
yeast on performance ı́ndices and serum biochemistry of of broilers. Poultry Science, 81, 451e457.
broiler chickens. The Open Conference Proccedings Journal, Higgins, J. P., Andreatti, F. R. L., Higgins, S. E., Wolfenden, A. D.,
3(Suppl. 1-M7), 41e45. Tellez, G., & Hargis, B. M. (2008). Evaluation of Salmonella-lytic
Awad, W. A., Ghareeb, K. S., Abdel-Raheem, H., & Bohm, J. (2009). properties of bacteriophages isolated from commercial broiler
Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic and synbiotic on houses. Avian Diseases, 52(1), 139e142.
growth performance, organ weights and intestinal Hussein, A. F. (2014). Effect of biological additives on growth
histomorphology of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 88, 49e56. indices and physiological responses of weaned najdi ram
Bansal, G. R., Singh, V. P., & Sachan, N. (2011). Effect of probiotic lambs. Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences,
supplementation on the performance of broilers. Asian Journal 2(6), 597e607.
of Animal Sciences, 5, 277e284. Jouybari, M. G., Malbobi, M. A., Irani, M., & Pour, V. R. (2010). The
Benites, V., Gilharry, R., Gernat, A. G., & Murillo, J. G. (2008). Effect effect of novel probiotic on performance and serum
of dietary mannan oligosaccharide from bio-mos or SAF- concentration of cholesterol and triglycerides in broiler
mannan on live performance of broiler chickens. Journal of chicken. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(45), 7771e7774.
Applied Poultry Research, 17, 471e475. Kamgar, M., Pourgholam, R., Ghiasi, M., & Ghane, M. (2013).
Boirivant, M., & Strober, W. (2007). The mechanism of action of Studies on Bacillus subtilis, as potential [probiotics, on the
probiotics. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology, 23(6), 679e692. biochemical parameters of rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus
Cavit, A. (2003). Effect of dietary probiotic supplementation on mykiss (Walbaum) to challenge infections. Advanced Studies in
growth performance in the chicken. Turkish Journal of Biology, 5, 37e50.
Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 28, 887e891. Kander, M. (2004). Effect of Bifidobacterium sp. On the health state
Cetin, N., Güçlü, B. K., & Cetin, E. (2005). The effects of probiotic of piglets, determined on the basis of hematological and
and mannanoligosaccharide on some haematological and biochemical indices. Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural
immunological parameters in turkeys. Journal of Veterinary Universities, Veterinary Medicine. available on http://www.ejpau.
Medicine. A, Physiology, Pathology, Clinical Medicine, 52, 263e267. media.pl/volume7/issue2/veterinary/art-07.html. Access on
Chotinsky, D., & Mihaylov, R. (2013). Effect of probiotics and 12.10.14.
avotan on the level of thyroid hormones in the blood plasma Kawahara, E., Ueda, T., & Nomura, S. (1991). In vitro phagocytic
of broiler chickens. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, activity of whitespotted shark cells after injection with
19(4), 817e821. Aermonas salmonicida extra cellular products. Gyobyo Kenkyu,
Dacie, J., & Lewis, S. (1991). Practical hematology (7th ed., pp. 26, 213e214.
37e48). Churchill Livingstone. Khaksefidi, A., & Ghoorchi, T. (2006). Effect of probiotic on
Das, H. K., Medhi, A. K., & Islam, M. (2005). Effect of probiotics on performance and immunocompetence in broiler chicks.
certain blood parameter and carcass characteristics of broiler Poultry Science, 43, 296e300.
chicken. Indian Journal of Poultry Science, 40, 83e86. King, D. J., & Seal, B. S. (1998). Biological and molecular
Dawson, A., McNaughton, F. J., Goldsmith, A. R., & Degen, A. A. characterization of Newcastle disease virus (NDV) field
(1994). Ratite-like neoteny induced by neonatal thyroidectomy isolates with comparisons of reference NDV strains and
of European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris). Journal of Zoology, 232, pathogenicity chicken or embryo passage of selected isolates.
633e639. London. Avian Diseases, 42, 507e516.
192 J o u r n a l o f R a d i a t i o n R e s e a r c h a n d A p p l i e d S c i e n c e s 9 ( 2 0 1 6 ) 1 8 5 e1 9 2
LaFleur, B. M., & LaFleur, B. D. (2008). Exploring medical language: A Scholz, A. K. E., Ade, P., Marten, B., Weber, P., Timm, W., A2il, Y.,
student-directed approach (7th ed., p. 398). St. Louis, Missouri, et al. (2007). Prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics affect
USA: Mosby Elsevier. mineral absorption, bone mineral content, and bone
McNabb, F. M. A. (2000). Thyroids (pp. 461e471). in Sturkie’s Avian structure. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 838Se846S.
Physiology. Shareef, A. M., & Al-Dabbagh, A. S. A. (2009). Effect of probiotic
Mountzouris, K. C., Tsistsikos, P., Kalamara, E., Nitsch, S., (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on performance of broiler chicks.
Schatzmayr, G., & Fegeros, K. (2007). Evaluation of the Iraqi Journal of Veterinary Sciences, 23, 23e29.
efficacy of a probiotic containing Lactobacillus, Shoeib, H. K., Sayed, A. N., Sotohy, S. A., & Abdel Ghaffar, S. K.
Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus and Pediococcus strains in (1997). Response of broiler chicks to probiotic (pronifer)
promoting broiler performance and modulating cecal supplementation. Assiut Veterinary Medical Journal, 36,
microflora composition and metabolic activity. Poultry 103e116.
Science, 86, 309e317. Skorve, J., Alshurbaji, A., Asiedu, D., Bjorkhem, I., Berge, L., &
Nahashon, S. N., Nakaue, H. S., & MIrosh, L. W. (1996). Berge, R. k (1993). Mechanism of hypolipidemic effect
Performance of single comb White Leghorn layers fed a diet sulfur-substituted hexadecanedioic acid (3-thiadicarboxylic
with a live microbial during the growth and egg laying phases. acid) in normolipidemic rats. Journal of Lipid Research, 34,
Animal Feed Science and Technology, 57, 25e38. 1177e1185.
Natt, M. P., & Herrick, C. A. (1952). A new blood count diluents for Strompfova , V., Marcina
kova , M., Simonova , M., Gancarcı́kova
, S.,
counting the erythrocytes and leucocytes of chicken. Poultry Jonecova , Z., Scirankova , L., et al. (2006). Enterococcus faecium
Science, 31, 735e738. EK13-an enterocin aproducing strain with probiotic character
Noverr, M. C., & Huffnagle, G. B. (2004). Trends in Microbiology, 12, and its effect in piglets. Anaerobe, 12, 242e248.
562e568. Teo, A. Y., & Tan, H. M. (2007). Evaluation of the performance and
Owosibo, A. O., Odetola, O. M., Odunsi, O. O., Adejinmi, O. O., & intestinal gut microflora of broilers fed on corn-soy diets
Lawrence, A. O. O. (2013). Growth, haematology and serum supplemented with Bacillus subtilis PB6 (CloSTAT). Journal of
biochemistry of broilers fed probiotics based diets. African Applied Poultry, 16, 296e303.
Journal of Agricultural Research, 8(41), 5076e5081. Thongsong, K. S., Thongsong, B., & Chavananikul, V. (2008). Blood
Paryad, A., & Mahmoudi, M. (2008). Effect of different levels of haematological-cholesterol profile and antibody titer response
supplemental yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on of broilers withadded probiotic containing both bacteria and
performance, blood constituents and carcass characteristics yeast or an antibiotic in drinking water. Thai Journal of
of broiler chicks. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 3, Veterinary Medicine, 38, 45e56.
835e842. Waldroup, P. W., Fritts, C. A., & Fenglan, Y. (2003). Utilization of
Rowghani, E., Arab, M., & Akbarian, A. (2007). Effects of probiotic Bio-Mos® mannan oligosaccharide and Bioplex® copper in
and other feed additives on performance and immune broiler diets. International Journal of Poultry Science, 2, 44e52.
response of broiler chicks. International Journal of Poultry Wang, X. W., Du, Y. G., Bai, X. F., & Li, S. G. (2003). The effect of
Science, 6, 261e265. oligochitosan on broiler gut flora, microvilli density, immune
Salarmoini, M., & Fooladi, M. H. (2011). Efficacy of Lactobacillus function and growth performance. Acta Zoonutrim Sinica, 15,
acidophilus as probiotic to improve broiler chicks 32e45.
performance. Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology, 13, Willis, W. L., Isikhuemhen, O. S., & Ibrahim, S. A. (2007).
165e172. Performance assessment of broiler chickens given mushroom
Salim, H. A., Abd-Allah, O. A., & Fararh, K. M. (2011). Effect of extract alone or in combination with probiotics. Poultry Science,
feeding probiotic on hematological, biochemical properties 86, 1856e1860.
and immune response in broiler. Benha Veterinary Medical Yalcin, S., Yalcin, S., Uzunoglu, K., Duyum, H. M., & Eltan, O.
Journal, 22, 35e43. (2012). Effects of dietary yeast autolysate (Saccharomyces
Santos, A. A., & Ferket, P. R. (2006). Nutritional strategies to cerevisiae) and black cumin seed (Nigella sativa L.) on
modulate microflora. In 33rd Annual Carolina poultry Nutrition performance, egg traits, some blood characteristics and
Conference. Sheraton Imperial Hotel, RTP, NC. antibody production of laying hens. Livestock Science, 145,
Santoso, U., Tanaka, K., & Ohtania, S. (1995). Effect of dried 13e20.
Bacillus subtilis culture on growth, body composition and Zhang, G., Ma, L., & Doyle, M. P. (2006). Efficiency of probiotics,
hepatic lipogenic enzyme activity in female broiler chicks. prebiotics and synbiotics on weight increase of chickens (Gallus
British Journal of Nutrition, 74, 523e529. Domesticus). http://www.ugacfs.org/research/pdfs/
SAS Institute. (2002). SAS STAT user's guide. Version 9.0. Cary, NC: Poultry2006.pdf.
SAS Inst. Inc.