↓ Skip to main content

Effects of dietary supplementation of probiotic, Clostridium butyricum, on growth performance, immune response, intestinal barrier function, and digestive enzyme activity in broiler chickens…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
144 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of dietary supplementation of probiotic, Clostridium butyricum, on growth performance, immune response, intestinal barrier function, and digestive enzyme activity in broiler chickens challenged with Escherichia coli K88
Published in
Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40104-016-0061-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ling Zhang, Lingling Zhang, Xiu’an Zhan, Xinfu Zeng, Lin Zhou, Guangtian Cao, An’guo Chen, Caimei Yang

Abstract

Colibacillosis caused by enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (E. coli) results in economic losses in the poultry industry. Antibiotics are usually used to control colibacillosis, however, E. coli has varying degrees of resistance to different antibiotics. Therefore the use of probiotics is becoming accepted as an alternative to antibiotics. In this study, we evaluated the effects of Clostridium butyricum (C. butyricum) on growth performance, immune response, intestinal barrier function, and digestive enzyme activity in broiler chickens challenged with Escherichia coli (E. coli) K88. The chickens were randomly divided into four treatment groups for 28 days. Negative control treatment (NC) consisted of birds fed a basal diet without E. coli K88 challenge and positive control treatment (PC) consisted of birds fed a basal diet and challenged with E. coli K88. C. butyricum probiotic treatment (CB) consisted of birds fed a diet containing 2 × 10(7) cfu C. butyricum/kg of diet and challenged with E. coli K88. Colistin sulfate antibiotic treatment (CS) consisted of birds fed a diet containing 20 mg colistin sulfate/kg of diet and challenged with E. coli K88. The body weight (BW) and average day gain (ADG) in the broilers of CB group were higher (P < 0.05) than the broilers in the PC group overall except the ADG in the 14-21 d post-challenge. The birds in CB treatment had higher (P < 0.05) concentration of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) at 3 and 7 d post-challenge, and higher (P < 0.05) concentration of interleukin-4 (IL-4) at 14 d post-challenge than those in the PC treatment group. The concentration of serum endotoxin in CB birds was lower (P < 0.05) at 21 d post-challenge, and the concentrations of serum diamine oxidase in CB birds were lower (P < 0.05) at 14 and 21 d post-challenge than in PC birds. Birds in CB treatment group had higher (P < 0.05) jejunum villi height than those in PC, NC, or CS treatment at 7, 14, and 21 d post-challenge. In comparison to PC birds, the CB birds had lower (P < 0.05) jejunum crypt depth during the whole experiment. The birds in CB or CS treatment group had higher (P < 0.05) activities of amylase and protease at 3, 7, and 14 d post-challenge, and higher (P < 0.05) activity of lipase at 3, 7 d post-challenge than PC birds. In all, these results indicate that dietary supplementation with C. butyricum promotes immune response, improves intestinal barrier function, and digestive enzyme activities in broiler chickens challenged with E. coli K88. There is no significant difference between the C. butyricum probiotic treatment and the colistin sulfate antibiotic treatment. Therefore, the C. butyricum probiotic may be an alternative to antibiotic for broiler chickens.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 <1%
Unknown 135 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 15%
Student > Master 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 41 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 29%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 17 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 42 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 January 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology
#582
of 903 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,031
of 405,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 903 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 405,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.