Journal of Animal Sciences and Livestock Production Open Access

Keywords

Lactic acid bacteria; Digestibility; Broiler Chicks

Introduction

Description of problem

The amendment of the digestive system of broiler chicks in the early hour’s stage of their gut development with useful microorganisms is aim at instigating the development of beneficial bacteria by altering gastrointestinal microbiome to reduce harmful microbes competent of inflicting infection. Increase in the activity and balance of intestinal microbes in addition to bacterial enzymes, which are observed to promote the digestion of protein, lipid, carbohydrates, as well as synthesis of vitamins thereby contributing to the nutrition of the birds and reduction on the cost of production and odour in poultry houses [1]. Timmerman reported slight increase by 1.84% in broiler productivity in daily weight gain, feed efficiency, and mortality in broiler chickens fed Multispecies Probiotic Species (MSPB) of human origin [2].

The previous studies of Sadi, Sri-Harimurti, Rahayu reported that useful microbes provides protective function for animals from harassment by means of harmful organisms intended for causing ailment in the process of competition for critical nutrients and receptors on host cells during the production of bacteriocins as well as other inhibitory substances, thus, make the gut surroundings not conducive for pathogens to take possession of the gastrointestinal tracts [3]. In a related study, Ari reported beneficial micro-organisms as crucial to gene activation in the development, function and colonization of harmful microbes in the gastrointestinal tract of chickens and certain bacteria in broiler chickens might be associated with growth performance [4]. Sri-Harimurti, Widodo reported appreciably (p<0.05) progress in cumulative feed consumption, body weight gain and feed conversion ratio broilers fed lactic acid bacteria probiotics and development in body weight, average weight gain and feed conversion ratio of bird complemented with 2.0/100 kg of Lactobacillus acidophilus [5,6]. At the end of 28 days, probiotic supplementations extensively upgraded the body weight, daily weight gain of broiler chicks as a result of better feed conversion [7]. Development in broiler performance are repeatedly connected by means of increased in nutrient digestibility and energy consumption [8] and probiotics enhance accessibility of energy levels by increasing carbohydrate digestibility through improving organic material digestibility, in addition to diminishing bacterial β -glucuronidase, β -glucosidase and urea enzymes performance[9,10]. It is also, well recognized that probiotics modify gastrointestinal pH and flora towards increasing action of intestinal enzymes along with digestibility of nutrients [11]. The study, for that reason, considers the usage of lactic acid organisms as feed additive with the sole intend of promoting performance and nutrient digestibility.

Materials and Methods

Location of the study

The experiment was conducted within August to September, 2019 at the Poultry Unit of the Plateau State College of Agriculture, Garkawa. Garkawa town is located on latitude 80 58E and longitude 9045N, with an elevation of 240 m above sea level within the southern guinea savanna zone of Nigeria characterized by six months of rainy season (May to October) and six months of dry season (November to April), determined using Global Positioning System (GPS) [12].

Experimental diets preparation

Feed used for the experiment was formulated using least cost formulation software. Ingredients composition and calculated nutrients of the experimental diets are as presented in Table 1 below. Lactic AcidB acteria Probiotic (LABP) used as a diets of isonitrogenous (23% CP) and isocaloric (3005.48 kcal/kg) diets. Treatment 1 contained LABP minimum presence of 0.0 × 108 CFU, Treatment 2=7.2 × 108 CFU L. plantarum, Treatment 3=4.2 × 107 CFU Pediococcus pentosaceous, Treatment 4=1.8 × 108 CFU L. fermentum and Treatment 5=Combination of L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum for every ml. Freeze dried LABPs were then re-constituted with 100 ml of normal saline and one (1) ml was given directly to the birds immediately on arrival at the farm via oral dosing and repeated at week two and three, respectively.

Table 1: Ingredients and nutrient composition of broiler starts (0-4 weeks) diet (as fed basis).

Animal population, management and design

Two hundred (200) broiler chicks (Ross 308 Strain) of mixed sexes were obtained from a reputable farm and raised in broiler battery cage system. Warmth was supplemented for a period of three weeks using croford a locally fabricated charcoal heater. Feed and non-medicated water were then given ad libitum. Vaccination scheduled of National Veterinary Research Institute Vom was followed for Gunmboro and Newcastle disease, respectively. Two hundred (200) Ross 308 broiler chicks were divided into five groups of 40 chicks replicated four times with ten birds each in a completely randomized design.

Data collections for growth and nutrient digestibility

Feed intake and body weights of the chicks were assess weekly using a sensitive weighing scale at the end of the week while body weight gain per unit of feeds eaten was determined as final live weight minus initial weight. FCR of the birds were determined as total feed intake divided total body weight gain and protein efficiency ratio calculated as gain in body weight divided by protein intake of the diet. Where Protein Intake (PI)=feed intake dry matter multiplied by crude protein in the diet. Performance index (100%) was calculated by the equation established by North (1981). Performance index=live body weight in Kg divided by FCR and multiplied by 100%. Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER)w as determined as body weight gain divided by total energy intake multiplied by 100%. Where Energy Intake (EI)=feed intake dry matter multiplied by energy in the diet. Survival percentage was recorded as they occurred in the course of the experiment and convey as percentage. i.e. total number of dead birds divided by total number of birds alive multiplied by 100%.

At the end of week three remaining birds per replicates were used for apparent nutrients digestibility study. The birds in each cage were offered a quantity of feeds per day after which fecal samples were collected for 4 days, weighed, sun dried for 24 hours and re-weighed daily. Thereafter, the fecal samples were pooled, bulked, milled and thoroughly mixed to obtain homogenous mixture. Samples from each replicates were then taken and analysed for proximate nutrients composition as proposed by AOAC [13]. Apparent digestibility was determined using established formular of Mc Donald (1995) as nutrient consumed minus nutrient voided in feeds divided by nutrient consumed multiplied by100%. The ME kcal/kg of the diet and fecal samples were calculated using Pauzenga (1985) as: 37 × %CP+81.8 × %EE+35.5 × %NFE [14-16].

Statistical analysis

Data collected for each variable was analysed by one way ANOVA using SPSS 21.0 version (SPSS, 2010) and where significant meand ifferences were noticed, means were separated using the same package [17].

Results and Discussion

Table 2 below present results of growth performance of broiler chicks fed Lactic Acid Bacteria (LABPs) as feed additive. No significant (p>0.05)d ifferences were noted on:i nitial body weight and survival percentage, but considerable (p<0.05) disparity were noticed on: final live weight, daily feed intake, weight gain, feed conversion ratio, protein intake, protein efficiency ratio, energy intake, energy efficiency ratio and performance index of broiler chicks fed LABPs.

Table 2: Effect of lactic acid bacteria Probiotics on growth performance of broiler starter.

Significant (p<0.05) elevated final live weights were noticed in broiler chicks fed L. Plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum lactic acids bacteria probiotic compared to those fed single strain of lactic acid bacteria probiotics. Broiler chicks fed Pediococus pentosceus had the lowest live weight among LABP’s single strain based diets. This agrees with the study of (Sri- Harimurti) thta erported incerased in body weight an d effective performance of chickens fed Lactobacillus culture [18]. But Ashayerizadeh reported no significant improvement int he performance of birds fed mixture of Lactobacillus culture [19].

Broiler chicks offered Lactobacillus plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and Lactobacillus fermentum had the same pattern ofs ignificant (p<0.05)v ariations for daily feed and feed protein intake along with energy efficiency ratio which were similar to control treatment except protein intake. Significant reduction in daily feed and energy intake was prominent in chicks fed multiples lactic acid bacteria (T5). However, lower feed intake, protein intake and energy efficiency ratio in multiple strains of LABP’s produced higher weight gain which could be due wider site for intestinal nutrient absorption that that led to improvement.

Higher protein and energy utilization was visible in chicks supplemented with multiple LABP which yielded higher performance index than single LABP. Broiler chicks fed L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum had the best feed conversion and energy utilizations when compared to other dietary treatments. The proliferation of lactic acids bacteria like lactobacillus used in this study contributed immensely in producing others microbes that aid the breakdown of feed particles due to microbial-host interaction as reported by Ari and Forte, these microbial interaction improves nutrients utilization for the production of more body tissues as a results of enzymatic activities that might contributed to the production of amylase, protease and other intrinsic factors in the GIT that might increase surface area and promotes the absorption of nutrients that translated to higher body weight gain[4,7]. The production ofp olypeptide bacet riocin by LAB inhibited the growth harmful microbes. This corroborated with the outcomes of Hassan [20].

Presented in Table 3 is comparative apparent nutrient digestibility of broiler chicks fed lactic acid bacteria probiotic. Addition of LABP’s as feed additive had significant (p<0.05) effects on dry matter, crude protein, crude fibre, ash and nitrogen free extract and no significant difference for digestible ether extract and metabolizable energy. Comparative apparent nutrient digestibility dry matter, crude protein, crude fibre and ether extract contents vary from 84.47-88.66%, 75.93-81.98%, 31.52-61.32% and 93.20-94.70% and that of ash, nitrogen free extract and energy varies from 58.30-70.75%, 95.01-97.84% and 90.57-92.53%.

Table 3: Effect of lactic acid bacteria probiotics on nutrient digestibility of broiler chicks.

Lactic acid bacteria probiotics utilization as feed additives in this study enhances dry matter content of broiler chicks fed control treatment and Lactobillusplantarum followed by treatment Pediococcus pentosaceous, and L. fermentum, while significant decreased was reported in birds fed mixtures of LAB as: L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum. However, significant (P<0.05) increased in dry matter content reported in these treatments increases the feed intake of the birds and as significant decreased was observed in broiler chicks fed treatment 5 mixtures of L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum.

Management of LABP’s based diets significantly (p<0.05) increase protein digestibility in broiler chicks supplemented with Lactobacillus plantarum which was statistically similar to the control birds followed by Pediococcus pentosaceous and mixtures of L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum; whereas L. fermentum (T4) had the least protein utilization.

Chicks fed dietary treatment the control, Lactobacillus plantarum, and L. plantarum had significant (p<0.05) higher crude fibre utilization due to none released of sufficient intestinal enzymes that could handle fibre digestion. This means that LABP’s did not properly decompose feed organic matter consumed like cellulose and lignin. Broiler chicks fed Pediococcus pentosaceous and mixtures LABP (T5) significantly decreased fibre content of the diets. Decreased in fibre content in T5 might be connected to ceacal fermentation that produces lactic acids and hydrogen peroxide as end product [21]. Feeding broiler chicks with mixture of lactic acids microorganisms created more surface area for microbial survival, thereby promoting digestive development which aid in promoting digestibility of protein and fat. Insignificant (p>0.05) difference for ether extract across treatment groups could mean LABP’s provides good substrates for fat metabolisms. Ash percentage ranged from 58.30-70.75%, thought, significant (p<0.05) higher ash percentage was noted in T2 followed by T1 and T4, while T5 had the least percentage ash digestibility.

Treatment 1,2,3,and 4 had significant (p<0.05) higher absorption of nitrogen free extract being major component of the feed with appetite stimulation but, some intrinsic properties of single indigenous microorganisms supplementation did not influence feed conversion ratio, protein efficiency ratio, energy efficiency ratio and performance index of the birds [22]. However, low nitrogen free extract digestibility in mixtures of L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum yielded better feed conversion ratio which led to significant increase in performance index of broiler chicks fed. The energy utilization of broiler chicks was statistically similar regardless of treatment groups [23].

Conclusion

Poultry feeds as a potential route of entry for pathogens into meat was modified with a village of beneficial bacteria known as lactic acids probiotics to reduce pathogen load and to alter the digestive system for the digestion of nutrients. Broiler chicks fed T5 (L. plantarum, Pediococcus pentosaceous and L. fermentum) had the best feed conversion, protein and energy ratio utilizations which yield better body weight resulted to higher performance index. The abundance of lactic acids bacteria like lactobacillus used in this study contributed immensely to improvement in feed conversion ratio of T5 which led to higher body weight due to microbial-host associations. However, low crude fibre and nitrogen free extract digestibility in T5 yielded better feed conversion ratio which led to significant increase in performance index of broiler chicks fed combination of indigenous microbial organisms.

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the supports of the Dr. M.A.Dasbak (Provost Plateau State College of Agriculture, Garkawa) for provision of Livestock Teaching and Research Farm used in this study. Our appreciation goes to Mr. S.Y.Igyem, Mrs. S.J.Mangde and Mr. R.J.Dantayi for their contributions during data collection process.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there has been no conflict of interests.

References

1. Reddy DV (2010) Principle of Animal Nutrition and Technology 2nd edition
2. Timmerman HM, Veldman A, Elsen EV, Rombouts FM, Beynen AC (2006) Mortality and Growth Performance of Broilers Given Drinking Water Supplemented with Chicken-Specific Probiotics. Poult Sci 85:1383–1388
3. Harimurti S, Rahayu ES (2010) Utilization of indigenous lactic acid bacteria probiotics as a substitute for antibiotic in broiler chickens
4. Ari MM, Iji PA, Bhuiyan MM (2016) Promoting the proliferation of beneficial microbial populations in chickens. Poult Sci J 72:785-792
5. Stanley D, Geier MS, Hughes RJ, Denman SE, Moore RJ (2013) Highly variable microbiota development in the chicken gastrointestinal tract. PLoS One 8:e84290
6. Harimurti S,Widodo H (2014). Effect of indigenous probiotics lactic acid bacteria on performance, intestinal length and weight of internal organs of broiler chicken
7. Forte C, Manuali E, Abbate Y, Papa P, Vieceli L, et.al (2018) Dietary Lactobacillus acidophilus positively influences growth performance, gut morphology, and gut microbiology in rurally reared chickens. Poult Sci 97:930-936
8. Alam MJ, Ferdaushi Z (2018).Use of probiotics instead of antibiotics in broiler production. Progress agric 29:359-370
9. Olukosi OA, Cowieson AJ, Adeola O(2008). Energy utilization and growth performance of broilers receiving diets supplemented with enzymes containing carbohydrase or phytase activity individually or in combination. Br Poult Sci 99:682–690
10. Jin LZ, Ho YW, Abdullah N, Jalaludin S (1997) Probiotics in poultry: Modes of action. Poult Sci J 53:352-368
11. Jin LZ, Ho YW, Abdullah N, Jalaludin S (2000) Digestive and bacterial enzyme activities in broilers fed diets supplemented with Lactobacillus cultures. Poult Sci J 79:886–891
12. Dierck NA (1989) Biotechnology aids to improve feed and feed digestion: Enzymes and fermentation. Arch Anim Nutr Berl 39:241–261
13. Official Methods of Analysis, Association of Analytical Chemists.17th edition
14. Guluwa LY (2014) Feed value of water soaked sweet orange (citrus sinensis) peel meal in broiler production.
15. Mc Donald P, Edwards RA, Greenhalgh JFD, Morgan CA, Sinclair LA(1995). Anim Nutr 7th edition
16. Pauzenga U (1985) Feeding Parent stock. Int J Zoo Res 22-25
17. SPSS(2010) Statistical package for Social Science.
18. Harimurti S, Rahayu ES, Kurniasih (2010).Utilization of indigenous lactic acid bacteria probiotics as a substitute for antibiotic in broiler chickens.
19. Ashayerizadeh A, Dabiri N, Mirzadeh Kh, Ghorbani MR (2011) Effects of dietary inclusion of several biological feed additives on growth response of broiler chickens. J Cell Anim Biol 5:61-65
20. Hassan M, Kjos M, Nes IF, Diep DB, Lotfipour F (2012) Natural antimicrobial peptides from bacteria characteristics and potential application to fight against antibiotics resistance. J Appl Microbiol 113:723–736
21. Harley JP, Prescott LM (1993) Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology. Brown Publishers, US
22. Harimurti S,Widodo H (2014). Effect of indigenous probiotics lactic acid bacteria on performance, intestinal length and weight of internal organs of broiler chicken
23. Sadi T, Rahim N, Rashdi AA, Nejis NA, Hassan R (2006) Bio prospecting and management of microorganisms. National conference on agro biodiversity conservation and sustainable utilization 129–130