Effects of Protexin Probiotic and Aquablend Avian Antibody on Performance and Immune System of Broiler Chickens

محورهای موضوعی : Camel

ن. جباری ¹ (Department of Animal Science, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
ا. فتاح ² (Department of Animal Science, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
ف. شیرمحمد ³ (Department of Animal Science, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)

تاریخ دریافت : 1395/02/08 تاریخ پذیرش : 1395/09/25 تاریخ انتشار : 1395/09/11

کلید واژه: Performance, immune system, broilers, aquablend avian, protexin,

چکیده مقاله :

This study was conducted to investigate the effects of protexin probiotic and aquablend avian antibody on the performance and immune system of broilers. In this experiment, 320 1-day-old male broiler chicks of the Ross 308, with 5 treatments and 4 replications in a completely randomized design were distributed in experimental units (cages). The treatments include: control (C), protexin (P1), protexin (P2) with double there commended dose, aquablend (A1) and aquablend (A2) aquablend twice there commended amount. The results showed that protexin probiotic and aquablend avian antibody in different doses had no significant effects on average weight gain and feed consumption of broilers at different week (P>0.05). A significant difference between treatments was observed in feed conversion ratio at the second and fifth weeks (P<0.05). Consumption protexin probiotic and aquablend avian antibody with different doses has significant effect on the relative weight of carcasses (P<0.01). Consumption protexin probiotic and aquablend avian antibody with different doses had no significant effect on antibody titers produced in primary and secondary challenge with sheep red blood cells (P>0.05). According to results of this research, it seems that the using of protexin probiotic and aquablend avian antibody has not importance effect on improving the performance of broilers except for carcass weight.

چکیده انگلیسی:

این مطالعه به منظور بررسی اثرات پروبیوتیک پروتکسین و آنتی­بادی آکوآبلند بر عملکرد و سیستم ایمنی جوجه­های گوشتی انجام شد. در این آزمایش تعداد 320 قطعه جوجه خروس گوشتی یکروزه از سویه راس 308 با 5 تیمار و 4 تکرار در قالب طرح کامل تصادفی در واحدهای آزمایشی (قفس) توزیع شدند. تیمارهای آزمایشی شامل: شاهد (C)، پروتکسین (P1)، پروتکسین (P2) با دو برابر مقدار توصیه شده، آکوابلند (A1) و آکوابلند (A2) با دو برابر مقدار توصیه شده بود. نتایج آزمایش نشان دادند که پروبیوتیک پروتکسین و آنتی­بادی آکوآبلند در دزهای مختلف اثر معنی­داری بر متوسط ​​افزایش وزن و خوراک مصرفی جوجه­های گوشتی در هفته­های مختلف نداشتند (05/0<P). اختلاف معنی­داری بین تیمارها در ضریب تبدیل غذایی در هفته دوم و پنجم مشاهده شد (05/0>P) مصرف پروبیوتیک پروتکسین و آنتی­بادی آکوآبلند با دزهای مختلف اثر قابل ملاحظه­ای بر وزن نسبی لاشه داشت (01/0>P). مصرف پروبیوتیک پروتکسین و آنتی­بادی آکوآبلند با دزهای مختلف اثر معنی­داری بر تیتر آنتی­بادی با سلول­های قرمز خون گوسفند تولید شده در چالش اولیه و ثانویه نداشت (05/0<P). با توجه به نتایج حاصل از این پژوهش، به نظر می­رسد که استفاده از پروبیوتیک پروتکسین و آنتی­بادی آکوآبلند اثر مهمی در بهبود عملکرد جوجه­های گوشتی به جز وزن لاشه نداشت.

منابع و مأخذ:

Ayasan T. (2013). Effects of dietary inclusion of protexin (probiotic) on hatchability of Japanese quails. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 83(1), 78-81.

Ayasan T., Ozcan B.D., Baylan M. and Canogullari S. (2006). The Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic protexin on egg yield parameters of Japanese quails (Coturnix coturnix Japonica). Int. J. Poult. Sci. 5(8), 776-779.

Balevi T., Ucan U.S., Coskun B., Kurtoglu V. and Cetingul S. (2000). Effect of a commercial probiotic in the diet on performance and humoral immune system in layers. Hayvanc. Arast. Derg. 10, 25-30.

Chen Y.C. and Nakthong C. (2005). Improvement of laying hen performance by dietary prebiotic chicory oligofructose and inulin. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 4, 103-108.

Dibner J.J. and Richards J.D. (2005). Antibiotic growth promoters in agriculture: history and mode of action. Poult. Sci. 84, 634-643.

Gaskins H.R., Collier C.T. and Anderson D.B. (2002). Antibiotics as growth promotants: mode of action. Anim. Biotechnol. 13, 29-42.

Ghafoor A., Naseem S., Younus M. and Nazir J. (2005). Immunomodulatory effects of multistrain probiotics on broiler chickens vaccinated against avian influenza virus. Poult. Sci. 4, 777-780.

Graham J.P., Boland J.J. and Silbergeld E. (2007). Growth promoting antibiotics in food animal production: an economic analysis. Public. Health Rep. 122, 79-87.

Kabir S.M.L., Rahman M.M., Rahman M.B., Rahman M.M. and Ahmed S.U. (2003). The dynamics of probiotics on growth performance and immune response in broilers. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 3(5), 361-364.

Lee H.Y., Andalibi P., Webster S.K., Moon K., Teufert S.H., Kang J.D., Li M., Nagura T., Ganz D. and Lim J. (2004). Antimicrobial activity of innate immune molecules against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Moraxella catarrhalis and nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae. BMC Infect. Dis. 4, 12.

Munns P.L. and Lamont S.J. (1991). Research note: effects age and immunization interval on the immunity response T-cell dependent and T-cell independent antigens in chickens. Poult. Sci. 70(11), 2371-2374.

NRC. (1994). Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, 9^th Rev. Ed. National Academy Press, Washington, DC., USA.

PhillipsI. (2007). Withdrawal of growth-promoting antibiotics in Europe and its effects in relation to human health. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 30(2), 101-107.

Rus H., Cudrici C. and Niculescu F. (2005). The role of the complement system in innate immunity. Immunol. Res. 33, 103-112.

SAS Institute. (1996). SAS^®/STAT Software, Release 6.11. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC. USA.

Shahsavari K. (2006). The effect of probiotics on the yield and quality eggs of breeder hens. MS Thesis. TarbiatModares Univ., Tehran, Iran.

Thomke S. and Elwinger K. (1998). Growth promotants in feeding pigs and poultry ii; mode of action of antibiotic growth promotants. Ann. Zootech. 47, 153-167.

Verstegen M.W. and Williams B.A. (2002). Alternatives to the use of antibiotics as growth promoters for monogastric animals. Anim. Biotechnol. 13, 113-127.

Witte W. (2000). Selective pressure by antibiotic use in livestock. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents. 16(1), 19-24.

Zakeri A. and Kashefi P. (2011). The comparative effects of five growth promoters on broiler chickens humoral immunity and performance. Anim. Vet. Adv. 10(9), 1097-1101.