ISSN 2410-7751 (Print)
ISSN 2410-776X (Online)
"Biotechnologia Acta" v. 7, no 4, 2014
https://doi.org/10.15407/biotech7.04.025
Р. 25-34, Bibliography 56, Ukrainian.
Universal Decimal classification: 636.5: 611.3
BIOTECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURAL POULTRY MICROFLORA
Garda S. A.1, S. G. Danilenko2, G. S. Litvinov1
1National Technical University of Ukraine «Kyiv Polytechnic Institute»
2Institute of Food Resources of the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
Probiotics based on normal microflora of the birds using perspective strains become increasingly popular for treatment and prophylaxis of dysbacteriosis in poultry.
The purpose of the work is the biotechnological data analysis of the composition and functions of the microflora of different birds’ biotopes. One of biotechnological methods for the study of bacterial flora in the birds is a method of in vivo bacteriological control — analysis of group samples of fresh droppings. To study bird bacterial microflora the method based on vital bacteriological control (group sample study of fresh brood) is the most effective. Only 60–70% of microorganisms are identified during the analysis of bowels bird microflora. It is shown that the normal microflora of the birds has a protective function because it is colonized on epithelial intestinal area and competes for power sources, has a wider set of enzymes, and also produces a wide range of exometabolites that determine their antagonistic action on pathogenic and conditionally pathogenic transient microorganisms.
To improve modern technologies concerning cultivation of various breeds of birds with high genetic potential it needs full understanding of endogenous microflora role in a bird body. We found that as a source of probiotic strains it is better to use gastrointestinal tract laying hens and/or to make a selection of group tests of their fresh litter. Thus the best probiotic properties are characterized by microorganisms genera Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus. The results could be used for selection of promising strains to create a acomplex probiotic.
Key words: poultry, flora, birds, microorganisms, biocenosis, probiotic.
© Palladin Institute of Biochemistry of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 2014
References
1. Danilevskaya N. V. Farmakostimulation of animal productivity probiotic preparations: Avtoref. dis. doktora.vet. nauk. 2007, 48 p. (Іn Russian).
2. Kletykova L. V., Kozlov A. B. Clinical and laboratory evaluation of the impact of probiotics on the body of chickens. Shuya: GOU VPO «ShGPU». 2010, 2 (4), 78. (Іn Russian).
3. Mechnykov I. I. Nature of Man. Moskow: Izdatelstvo akademii nauk SSSR, 1961. 290 p. (Іn Russian).
4. Chekmarev A., Danylevskaya N., Abdullaev A. Application of laktobifidol in conjunction with lysine in broiler fattening. Ptitsevodstvo. 2005, N 2, P. 15–16. (Іn Russian).
5. Babyn V. N. Molecular aspects of symbiosis in host-system microflora. Gastroenterologiia, Hepatologiia, Coloproctologiia. 1998, N 6, P. 76–81. (Іn Russian).
6. Gerasymenko V. V. Morfokinetic effect of the microflora of the gastrointestinal tract of geese on the body. Vestnik OGU. 2005, N 2, P. 133–137. (Іn Russian).
7. Gudkova A. U., Muhammedov Z. R., Vyatkin A. P., Shishkarev S. A., Kuzmichyova O. V. Features of formation of immunity in birds to Newcastle disease ascariasis. Uch. zapiski Kazan. GAVM. 2006, V. 184, P. 83–88. (Іn Russian).
8. Gunchak A. V., Kaminska M. V., Ratich I. B, Stoyanovska G. M. Effect of different levels of iodine in diet of laying hens on performance and mikrobotsenoz in blind and colon. Proceedings of the IX Conference on Ukrainian poultry industry with international participation Actual problems of modern poultry, Alushta, 15–18 September 2008. V. 1, P. 37–46. (Іn Russian).
9. Donnyk I. M. Analysis of the dysbiotic disturbances in the gut of poultry flocks industrial. Agrarnyj vestnik Urala. 2007, N 6, P. 36–38 (Іn Russian).
10. Kaminska M. V., Ratich I. B, Stoyanovska G. M. Effect of different levels of iodine in diet of laying hens on performance and mikrobotsenoz in blind and colon. Proceedings of the IX Conference on Ukrainian poultry industry with international participation Actual problems of modern poultry, Alushta, 15–18 September 2008. V. 1, P. 37–46. (Іn Russian).
11. Donnyk I. M. Analysis of the dysbiotic disturbances in the gut of poultry flocks industrial. Agrarnyj vestnik Urala. 2007, N 6, P. 36–38 (Іn Russian).
12. Kablucheeva T. I. Influence of microflora on the digestion of carbohydrates in the intestines of birds at different levels of protein in the diet. Vestnik Ros. аkad. s.-kh. nauk. 2007, N 3, P. 82–84. (Іn Russian).
13. Kaminska M. V., Kolysnik G. V., Kulai U. V., Boretska, N. I., Tenacious N.I., Gural S. V., Nebilovsky Y. V., Nechay G.I. Changes in the composition of intestinal microflora of Japanese quail when using probiotic supplements. Naukovo-tehnichnyi byuleten. 2009, 10(2), 270–274. (Іn Russian).
14. Kamynskaia M. V., Kolysnik G. V., Nechai G. I., Boretskaia N. I., Gural S. V. Using yeast biomass correction microbocenosis animal bowels. Tezisy dokladov Mezhdunarodnoj nauchno-prakticheskoj konferentsii, Respublika Belarus, Zholdino, 9–10 October 2008. P. 280–281. (Іn Russian).
15. Kuvaeva I. B. Body metabolism and intestinal microflora. Moskva: Medicina, 1976. 248 p. (Іn Russian).
16. Nasonova T. A. Modern ideas about the importance of the normal microflora of the body in health and disease. Uspekhi sovr. biologii. 1983, 96, 1(4), 139–151. (Іn Russian).
17. Nikolicheva T. A. The role of microflora in the assimilation nebelkovogoazota and fermentation processes in the digestive tract of laying hens: Avtoref. diss. na soiskanie uchon. stepeni kand. biol. nauk. / T. A. Nikolicheva. Borovsk: 03.00.20., 1975. 23 p. (Іn Russian).
18. Parfenov A. I. Intestinal microbial flora and dysbiosis. Rus. med. zh., 1998, 6(18), 1170–1173. (Іn Russian).
19. Sydorenko S. V. Infectious process as a dialogue between the host and parasite. Klin.mikrobiol. antimikrob. khimioterapiia. 2001, 3(4), 301–315. (Іn Russian).
20. Tymoshko M. A. Microflora of the digestive tract of young farm animals. Kishinev: Shtiintsa, 1990. 189 p. (Іn Russian).
21. Havkin A. I. Microbiocenosis intestinal and immunity. Ros. med. zhurnal. 2003, 11(3), 33–40 (Іn Russian).
22. Shilov S. O. Immune status, natural microbiocenosis intestines of birds and methods of their correction: Avtoref. diss. na soiskanie uchjon. stepeni kand. biol. nauk. Ufa, 2000. 22 p. (Іn Russian).
23. Rozhdenstvenskaia T. N., Borisenkova A. N., Novikova O. B. Control and reduce the possibility of contamination of carcases pathogenic and epidemiologically dangerous microflora. New global trends in the production of poultry meat and eggs: mat. scientific-practical. conf., Rzhavki, 22–24 October 2006. P. 202–205. (Іn Russian).
24. Abrams G. D. Microbial effect on mucosal structure and function. Amer. J. Clin. Nutr. 1977, V. 30, P. 415–419.
25. Ahmad I. Effect of probiotics on broilers perormance. J. Poult. Sci. 2006, 5(6), 593–597.
26. Ayasan T., Ozcan B., Baylan M. The effect of dietary inclusion of probiotic protexin on egg yieldparameters of Japanese quails (Coturnixcoturnix japonica). Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2006, 5(8), 776–779.
27. Bandaru S. R. Effect of intestinal microflora on calcium, phosphorus and magnesium metabolism in. J. Nutr. 1969, N 99, P. 353–362.
28. Barnes E. M. The isolation and properties of the predominantana erobic bacteria in the caeca of chickens and turkeys. Brit. Poultry Sci. 1970, 11(4), 467–481.
29. Bordello S. P. Bacteria and gastrointestinal secretion and motility. Scand. J. Gastroenterology. 1986, N 93, P. 342–348.
30. Bruno M. E. Common mechanistic action of bacteriocins fromlactic acidbacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1993, V. 59, P. 3003–3010.
31. Clemens E. T. Sites of organic acid production and pattern of digesta movement in the gastrointestinal tract of. Nutr. 1975, N 105, P. 1341–1350.
32. Corrier D. E., Snodgrass J. D., Hinton A. J. Effect of anaerobic cecal microflora and dietary lactose on Salmonella colonization in bobwhite quail (Colinusvirginianus). Poult. Sci. 1992, 71(12), 2022–2026.
33. De Pablo M. A., Gafortio J. J., Gallego A. Evaluation of immunomodulatory effects of nisin-containing dietson mice. FEMS Immunol. Med. Microbiol. 1999, V. 24, P. 35–42.
34. De Simone C., Ciardi A., Grassi A. Effect of Bifidobacterium bifidum and Lactobacillus acidophilus gut mucosa and peripheral blood B lymphocytes. Immunopharm. Immunotoxicol. 1992, 14(1–2), 331–340.
35. Edwards C. A. Intestinal flora during the first months of life: newpers pectives. Brit. J. Nutr. 2002, V. 88, P. 11–18.
36. Fioramonti J. Probiotics and their effect on gut. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2003,V. 17, P. 711–724.
37. Fuller R. Ecological studies on the lactobacillus flora associated with the crop epithelium of the fowl. J. Аppl. Bacteriol. 1973, V. 36, P. 131–139.
38. Fuller R. Microbial activity in the alimentary tract of birds. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 1984, V. 43, P. 55–61.
39. Furuse M. Gut microflora modify fatty acid composition in liverand egg yolk lipids of laying Japanese quail (Coturnixcoturnix japonica). Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1992, 103(3), 569–571.
40. Gabriel I. La microflore digestive des volailles: facteurs devariation et consequences pour l’animal. INRAProd. Anim. 2005, V. 18, P. 309–322.
41. Gardiner K. R., Erwin P. J., Anderson N. H. Lactulose as an antiendotoxin in experimental colitis. Brit. J. Surg. 1995, V. 82, P. 469–472.
42. Gebbers J. O. Functional morphology of the mucosal barrier. Microecol. Terapy. 1984, V. 14, P. 117–123.
43. German A. J., Day M. J., Ruaux C. G. Comparison of direct and indirect tests for small intestinal bacterialovergrowth and antibiotic-responsive diarrhea in dogs. J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2003, V. 17, P. 33–43.
44. Gibson G. R. Regulatory effects of bifidobacteria on the growth ofother colonic bacteria. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 1994, 77(4), 412–420.
45. Gokce I. Production of an E. coli toxin protein; colicin A in E. coliusing an inducible system. Turk. J. Chem. 2003, V. 27, P. 323–332.
46. Gordon H. A. The gnotobiotic animal as a tool in the study ofhostmicrobiol relationships. Bact. Rev. 1971, V. 35, P. 611–619.
47. Heaton K. W. The role of the large intestine in cholesterol gallstoneformation. Bile acids in hepatobiliary diseases. 2000, V. 3, P. 192–199.
48. Riddel C. The influence of diet on necrotic enteritis in broiler chickens. Avian Dis. 1992, V. 36, P. 499–503.
49. Rolfe R. D. Interactions among microorganisms of the indigenous intestinal flora and their influence on the host. Rev. Infect. Dis. 1984, V. 6, Suppl. 1, P. 73–79.
50. Salanitro J. P., Blake I. G., Muirhead P. A. Studies of the cecal microflora of commercial broiler chickens. J. Appl. Microbiol. 1974, 28(3), 439–447.
51. Scupham A. J. Succession in the intestinal microbiota of preadolescent turkeys. FEMS Mikrobiologicheskaia ekologiia. 2007, 60(1), 136–147. (Іn Russian).
52. Soderholm J. D. Stress and gastrointestinal tract II. Stress and intestinal barrier function. Fiziologiia. 2001, N 280, P. 7–13. (Іn Russian).
53. Kigel N. F. New Bacterial drug «Bifidyn» animal and its biological properties. Veterinarnaia medicina. 1999, N 10, P. 8–9. (In Russian).
54. Kalashnikova A. P. Norms and animal feeding rations: Spravochnoe posobie. 3-e izdanie, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe. Moskva, 2003, N 3, Р. 456. (In Russian).
55. Danylevskaia N. V. Pharmacological aspects of probiotics. Veterinariia. 2005, N 11, P. 6–9. (In Russian).
56. Strompfova V. Effect of Bacteriocin-Like Substance Produced by Enterococcus faecium EF55 on the Composition of Avian Gastrointestinal Microflora. Acta Vet. BRNO. 2003, N 72, P. 559–564. (In Russian).