Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Bacillus subtilis and Lactic Acid Bacteria Probiotics Influences Intestinal Mucin Gene Expression, Histomorphology and Growth Performance in Broilers

  • Aliakbarpour, H.R. (Department of Animal Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University) ;
  • Chamani, Mohammad (Department of Animal Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University) ;
  • Rahimi, G. (Laboratory for Molecular Genetics and Animal Biotechnology, Department of Animal Sciences, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University) ;
  • Sadeghi, A.A. (Department of Animal Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University) ;
  • Qujeq, D. (Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Faculty of Medicine, Babol University of Medical Sciences)
  • Received : 2012.02.28
  • Accepted : 2012.04.26
  • Published : 2012.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of commercial monostrain and multistrain probiotics in diets on growth performance, intestinal morphology and mucin gene (MUC2) expression in broiler chicks. Three hundred seventy-eight 1-d-old male Arian broiler chicks were allocated in 3 experimental groups for 6 wk. The birds were fed on a corn-soybean based diet and depending on the addition were labeled as follows: control-unsupplemented (C), birds supplemented with Bacillus subtilis (BS) and lactic acid bacteria (LAB) based probiotics. Each treatment had 6 replicates of 21 broilers each. Treatment effects on body weight, feed intake, feed conversion ratio and biomarkers such as intestinal goblet cell density, villus length, villus width, and mucin gene expression were determined. Total feed intake did not differ significantly between control birds and those fed a diet with probiotics (p>0.05). However, significant differences in growth performance were found. Final body weight at 42 d of age was higher in birds fed a diet with probiotics compared to those fed a diet without probiotic (p<0.05). Inclusion of Bacillus subtilis based probiotic in the diets also significantly affected feed conversion rate (FCR) compared with control birds (p<0.05). No differences in growth performance were observed in birds fed different types of probiotic supplemented diets. Inclusion of lactic acid bacteria based probiotic in the diets significantly increased goblet cell number and villus length (p<0.05). Furthermore, diets with Bacillus subtilis based probiotics significantly increased gene expression (p<0.05), with higher intestinal MUC2 mRNA in birds fed diet with probiotics compared to those fed the control diet. In BS and LAB probiotic fed chicks, higher growth performance may be related to higher expression of the MUC2 gene in goblet cells and/or morphological change of small intestinal tract. The higher synthesis of the mucin gene after probiotic administration may positively affect bacterial interactions in the intestinal digestive tract, intestinal mucosal cell proliferation and consequently efficient nutrient absorption.

Keywords

References

  1. Applegate, T. J., V. Klose, T. Steiner, A. Ganner and G. Schatzmayr. 2010. Probiotics and phytogenics for poultry: Myth or reality? J. Appl. Poult. Res. 19:194-210. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2010-00168
  2. Awad, W. A., K. Chareeb, S. Abdel-Raheem and J. Bohm. 2009. Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic and symbiotic on growth performance, organ weight and intestinal histomorphology of broiler chickens. Poult Sci. 88:49-56. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00244
  3. Awad, W. A., J. Bohm, E. Razzazi-Fazeli, K. Ghareeb and J. Zentek. 2006. Effect of addition of a probiotic microorganism to broiler diets contaminated with deoxynivalenol on performance and histological alterations of intestinal villi of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 85:974-979. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.6.974
  4. Azzam, M. M. M., X. T. Zou, X. Y. Dong and P. Xie. 2011. Effect of supplemental L-threonine on mucin 2 gene expression and intestine mucosal immune and digestive enzymes activities of laying hens in environments with high temperature and humidity. Poult. Sci. 90:2251-2256. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2011-01574
  5. Bansal, G. R., V. P. Singh and N. Sachan. 2011. Effect of probiotic supplementation on performance of broilers. Asian J. Anim. Sci. 5:277-284. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajas.2011.277.284
  6. Baurhoo, B., P. R. Ferket and X. Zhao. 2009. Effects of diets containing different concentrations of mannanoligosaccharide or antibiotics on growth performance, intestinal development, cecal and litter microbial populations, and carcass parameters of broilers. Poult. Sci. 88:2262-2272. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00562
  7. Burkholder, K. M., K. L. Thompson, M. E. Einstein, T. J. Applegate and J. A. Patterson. 2008. Influence of stressors on normal intestinal microbiota, intestinal morphology and susceptibility to Salmonella enteritidis colonization in broilers. Poult. Sci. 87:1734-1741. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00107
  8. Caballero-Franco, C., K. Keller, C. De Simone and K. Chadee. 2006. The VSL#3 probiotic formula induces mucin gene expression and secretion in colonic epithelial cells. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 292:315-322. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpgi.00265.2006
  9. Chen, K. L., W. L. Kho, S. H. You, R. H. Yeh, S. W. Tang and C. W. Hsieh. 2009. Effects of Bacillus subtilis var. natto and Saccharomyces cerevisiae mixed fermented feed on the enhanced growth performance of broilers. Poult. Sci. 88:309-315. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00224
  10. Chichlowski, M., W. J. Croom, F. W. Edens, B. W. McBride, R. Qiu, C. C. Chiang, L. R. Daniel, G. B. Havenstein and M. D. Koci. 2007. Microarchitecture and spatial relationship between bacteria and ileal, cecal and colonic epithelium in chicks fed a direct-fed microbial, Primalac, and Salinomycin. Poult. Sci. 86:1121-1132. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/86.6.1121
  11. Dalloul, R. A., H. S. Lillehoj, T. A. Shellem and J. A. Doerr. 2003. Enhanced mucosal immunity against Eimeria acervulina in broilers fed a Lactobacillus-based probiotic. Poult. Sci. 82:62-66. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/82.1.62
  12. Deplancke, B. and H. R. Gaskins. 2001. Microbial modulation of innate defense: Goblet cells and the intestinal mucus layer. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 73:1131-1141.
  13. Dharmani, P., V. Srivastava, V. Kissoon-Singh and K. Chadee. 2008. Role of Intestinal mucins in Innate host defense mechanisms against pathogens. J. Innate Immun. 8:123-135.
  14. Flint, J. F. and M. R. Garner. 2009. Feeding beneficial bacteria: A natural solution for increasing efficiency and decreasing pathogens in animal agriculture. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 18:367-378. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2008-00133
  15. Forder, R. E. A., G. S. Howarth, D. R. Tivey and R. J. Hughes. 2007. Bacterial modulation of small intestinal goblet cells and mucin composition during early post-hatch development of poultry. Poult. Sci. 86:2396-2403. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2007-00222
  16. Geyra, A., Z. Uni and D. Sklan. 2001. Enterocyte dynamics and mucosal development in the post-hatch chick. Poult. Sci. 80:776-782. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/80.6.776
  17. Girish. C. K. and T. K. Smith. 2008. Effects of feeding blends of grains naturally contaminated with Fusarium mycotoxins on small intestinal morphology of turkeys. Poult. Sci. 87:1075-1082. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2007-00379
  18. Horn, N. L., S. S. Donkin, T. J. Applegate and O. Adeola. 2009. Intestinal mucin dynamics: response of broiler chicks and white pekin ducklings to dietary threonine. Poult. Sci. 88:1906-1914. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00009
  19. Iwashita, J., S. Yukita, S. Hiroko, T. Nagatomo, S. Hiroshi and A. Tatsuya. 2003. mRNA of MUC2 is stimulated by IL-4, IL-13 or TNF-$\alpha$ through a mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway in human colon cancer cells. Immunol. Cell Biol. 81:275-282. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1711.2003.t01-1-01163.x
  20. Kabir, S. M. L. 2009. The role of probiotics in the poultry industry. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 10:3531-3546. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms10083531
  21. Karimi-Torshizi, M. A., S. Rahimi, N. Mojgani, S. Esmaeilkhanian and J. L. Grimes. 2008. Screening of indigenous strains of lactic acid bacteria for development of a probiotic for poultry. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 21:1495-1500. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2008.80081
  22. Leuschner, R. G. K. and J. Bew. 2003. Enumeration of probiotic bacilli spores in animal feed: interlaboratory study. J. AOAC Int. 86:568-575.
  23. Liu, T., R. She, K. Wang, H. Bao, Y. Zhang, D. Luo, Y. Hu, Y. Ding, D. Wang and K. Peng. 2008. Effects of rabbit Sacculusrotundus antimicrobial peptides on the intestinal mucosal immunity in chickens. Poult. Sci. 87:250-254. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2007-00353
  24. Livak, K. J. and T. D. Schmittgen. 2001. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real- time quantitative PCR and $2^{-{\Delta}{\Delta}ct}$ method. Methods 25:402-408. https://doi.org/10.1006/meth.2001.1262
  25. Mack, D. R., S. Michail, S. Wei, L. McDougall and M. A. Hollingsworth. 1999. Probiotics inhibit enteropathogenic E. coli adherence in vitro by inducing intestinal mucin gene expression. Am. J. Physiol. 276:941-950.
  26. Mattar, A. F., H. Daniel, R. A. Teitelbaum, F. Drongowski, C. M. Yongy, Harmon and A. G. Coran. 2002. Probiotics up-regulate MUC-2 mucin gene expression in a Caco-2 cell-culture model. Pediatr. Surg. Int. 18:586-590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-002-0855-7
  27. Mountzouris, K. C., P. Tsitrsikos, I. Palamidi, A. Arvaniti, M. Mohnl. G. Schatzmayr and K. Fegeros. 2010. Effect of probiotic inclusion levels in broiler nutrition on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, plasma immunoglobulins, and cecal microflora composition. Poult. Sci. 89:58-67. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00308
  28. National Research Council. 1994. Nutrient requirements of poultry, 8th ed. Natl. Acad. Press. Washington, DC, USA.
  29. O'Dea, E. E., G. M. Fasenko, G. E. Allison, D. R. Korver, G. W. Tannock and L. L. Guan. 2006. Investigating the effects of commercial probiotics on broiler chick quality and production efficiency. Poult. Sci. 85:1855-1863. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.10.1855
  30. Ohh, S. J. 2011. Meta-analysis to draw the appropriate regimen of enzyme and probiotic supplementation to pigs and chicken diets. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 24:573-586. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.r.06
  31. Onderci, M., N. Sahin, G. Cikim, A. ydyn and I. Ozercan. 2008. $\alpha$-glucanase-producing bacterial culture improves performance and nutrient utilization and alters gut morphology of broilers fed a barley-based diet. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 146:87-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.11.005
  32. Rahimi, S., J. L. Grimes, O. Fletcher, E. Oviedo and B. W. Sheldon. 2010. Effect of a direct-fed microbial (Primalac) on structure and ultrastructure of small intestine in turkey poults. Poult. Sci. 88:491-503.
  33. SAS Institute. 2003. SAS user's guide. Version 9.1 ed. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
  34. Smirnov, A., D. Sklan and Z. Uni. 2004. Mucin dynamics in the chick small intestine are altered by starvation. J. Nutr. 134:736-742.
  35. Smirnov, A., R. Perez, E. Amit-Romach, D. Sklan and Z. Uni. 2005. Mucin dynamics and microbial population in chicken small intestine are changed by dietary probiotic and antibiotic growth promoter supplementation. J. Nutr. 135:187-192.
  36. Tanabe, H., K. Sugiyama, T. Matsuda, S. Kiriyama and T. Morita. 2005. Small intestinal mucins are secreted in proportion to the settling volume in water of dietary indigestible components in rats. J. Nutr. 135:2431-2437.
  37. Tellez, G., S. E. Higgins, A. M. Donoghue and B. M. Hargis. 2006. Digestive physiology and the role of microorganisms. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 15:136-144. https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/15.1.136
  38. Thompson, K. L. and T. J. Applegate. 2006. Feed withdrawal alters small intestinal morphology and mucus of broilers. Poult. Sci. 85:1535-1540. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.9.1535
  39. Timmerman, H. M., A. Veldman, E. van den Elsen, F. M. Rombouts and A. C. Beynen. 2006. Mortality and growth performance of broilers given drinking water supplemented with chicken-specific probiotics. Poult. Sci. 85:1383-1388. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.8.1383
  40. Uni, Z., A. Smirnov and D. Sklan. 2003. Pre- and post-hatch development of goblet cells in the broiler small intestine: effect of delayed access to feed. Poult. Sci. 82:320-327. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/82.2.320
  41. Vila, B., A. Fontgibell, I. Badiola, E. Esteve-Garcia, G. Jiménez, M. Castillo and J. Brufau. 2009. Reduction of Salmonella entericavar. Enteritidis colonization and invasion by Bacillus cereus var. toyoi inclusion in poultry feeds. Poult. Sci. 88:975-979. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00483
  42. Willis, W. L. and L. Reid. 2008. Investigating the effects of dietary probiotic feeding regimens on broiler chicken production and Campylobacter jejuni presence. Poult. Sci. 87:606-611. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2006-00458
  43. Zhou, X., Y. Wang, Q. Gu and W. Li. 2010. Effect of dietary probiotic, Bacillus coagulans, on growth performance, chemical composition, and meat quality of Guangxi Yellow chicken. Poult. Sci. 89:588-593. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00319

Cited by

  1. Effect of Dietary Live or Killed Kimchi Lactic Acid Bacteria on Growth Performance, Nutrient Utilization, Gut Microbiota and Meat Characteristics in Broiler Chicken vol.40, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2013.40.1.057
  2. Effects of <i>Bacillus subtilis</i> KN-42 on Growth Performance, Diarrhea and Faecal Bacterial Flora of Weaned Piglets vol.27, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2013.13737
  3. Effects of Bacillus subtilis, Kefir and β-Glucan Supplementation on Growth Performance, Blood Characteristics, Meat Quality and Intestine Microbiota in Broilers vol.43, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2016.43.3.159
  4. Probiotic level effects on growth performance, carcass traits, blood parameters, cecal microbiota, and immune response of broilers vol.88, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765201620150071
  5. and its application to goose feed vol.4, pp.10, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.171012
  6. Effects of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens LFB112 in the diet on growth of broilers and on the quality and fatty acid composition of broiler meat vol.57, pp.9, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1071/AN16119
  7. and the intestinal microbiota vol.58, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2017.1307322
  8. The Effects of Direct-fed Microbial Supplementation, as an Alternative to Antibiotics, on Growth Performance, Intestinal Immune Status, and Epithelial Barrier Gene Expression in Broiler Chickens vol.9, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-9275-9
  9. At-hatch administration of probiotic to chickens can introduce beneficial changes in gut microbiota vol.13, pp.3, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194825
  10. Effects of dietary Bacillus amyloliquefaciens supplementation on growth performance, intestinal morphology, inflammatory response, and microbiota of intra-uterine growth retarded weanling piglets vol.9, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-018-0236-2
  11. Short-term toxicity of dibutyl phthalate to mice intestinal tissue pp.1477-0393, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1177/0748233718807303
  12. Probiotics and plant-derived compounds as eco-friendly agents to inhibit microbial toxins in poultry feed: a comprehensive review pp.1614-7499, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3197-2
  13. -induced necrotic enteritis and growth performance in broilers vol.102, pp.5, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12937
  14. as direct-fed microbial antibiotic alternatives to enhance growth, immunity, and gut health in poultry vol.47, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/03079457.2018.1464117
  15. Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Zinc and Multi-Microbe Probiotic on Growth Traits and Alteration of Intestinal Architecture in Broiler pp.1867-1314, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-018-9424-9
  16. The use of probiotics as eco-friendly alternatives for antibiotics in poultry nutrition vol.25, pp.11, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1687-x
  17. 유용 미생물 첨가가 육계 생산성, 맹장 내 균총 및 유해가스 발생량에 미치는 영향 vol.41, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5536/kjps.2014.41.4.227
  18. Lactobacillus plantarum 첨가 고추장의 C57BL/6 마우스에서 대장염 예방 증진효과 vol.24, pp.8, 2012, https://doi.org/10.11002/kjfp.2017.24.8.1188
  19. The Difference in the Mucus Organization Between the Small and Large Intestine and Its Protection of Selected Natural Substances. A Review vol.62, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.2478/fv-2018-0037
  20. Effect of Probiotic Saccharomyces spp. on Duck Egg Quality Characteristics and Mineral and Cholesterol Concentrations in Eggshells and Yolks vol.18, pp.11, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2019.1075.1083
  21. In vitro assessment of immunomodulatory and anti-Campylobacter activities of probiotic lactobacilli vol.9, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-54494-3
  22. Improved utilization of soybean meal through fermentation with commensal Shewanella sp. MR-7 in turbot (Scophthalmus maximus L.) vol.18, pp.None, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-019-1265-z
  23. The potential for inoculating Lactobacillus animalis and Enterococcus faecium alone or in combination using commercial in ovo technology without negatively impacting hatch and post-hatch performance vol.98, pp.12, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pez441
  24. Novel Strategies for Efficient Production and Delivery of Live Biotherapeutics and Biotechnological Uses of Lactococcus lactis : The Lactic Acid Bacterium Model vol.8, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.517166
  25. Dietary Supplementation With Bacillus subtilis Direct-Fed Microbials Alters Chicken Intestinal Metabolite Levels vol.7, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00123
  26. Probiotics, Prebiotics, Synbiotics, and Paraprobiotics as a Therapeutic Alternative for Intestinal Mucositis vol.11, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.544490
  27. Detection of Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB) from Local Breed Chicken Gut as Probiotic Agent in Livestock vol.19, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2020.197.203
  28. Cecal microbiome composition and metabolic function in probiotic treated broilers vol.15, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225921
  29. Effect of Fermented Cow and Soymilk as Probiotic on Energy Metabolism and Nutrient Retention in Broiler Chicken vol.19, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2020.277.281
  30. The Gut Microbiota of Laying Hens and Its Manipulation with Prebiotics and Probiotics To Enhance Gut Health and Food Safety vol.86, pp.13, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.00600-20
  31. Supplementing neonatal Jersey calves with a blend of probiotic bacteria improves the pathophysiological response to an oral Salmonella enterica serotype Typhimurium challenge vol.103, pp.8, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2019-17480
  32. Effects of fermented feeds and ginseng polysaccharides on the intestinal morphology and microbiota composition of Xuefeng black-bone chicken vol.15, pp.8, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237357
  33. Effect of multienzymes + probiotic supplementation in fermented shea butter cake based diets on the carcass traits and the biochemistry of broiler chickens vol.12, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.15547/ast.2020.03.036
  34. Intestinal Anti-Inflammatory Improvement with Fenugreek Seeds as A prebiotic and Synbiotic with Lactobacillus acidophilus in Rats Experimentally Infected with Escherichia coli vol.44, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.30539/ijvm.v44i2.984
  35. Effects of microbial fermented sesame meal and enzyme supplementation on the intestinal morphology, microbiota, pH, tibia bone and blood parameters of broiler chicks vol.19, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051x.2020.1755378
  36. The Response of Broiler Chicks to Dietary Supplementation with a Probiotic, Acidifiers Blend, and Their Combination vol.23, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9061-2021-1511
  37. Antimicrobial peptides as an additive in broiler chicken nutrition: a meta-analysis of bird performance, nutrient digestibility and serum metabolites vol.30, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.22358/jafs/136400/2021
  38. Positive Influence of a Probiotic Mixture on the Intestinal Morphology and Microbiota of Farmed Guinea Fowls (Numida meleagris) vol.8, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.743899
  39. Probiotics Bacillus licheniformis Improves Intestinal Health of Subclinical Necrotic Enteritis-Challenged Broilers vol.12, pp.None, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.623739
  40. Probiotics: an Antibiotic Replacement Strategy for Healthy Broilers and Productive Rearing vol.13, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-020-09640-z
  41. Modulation of Morphology and Glycan Composition of Mucins in Farmed Guinea Fowl (Numida meleagris) Intestine by the Multi-Strain Probiotic Slab51® vol.11, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020495
  42. A Newly Developed Synbiotic Yogurt Prevents Diabetes by Improving the Microbiome-Intestine-Pancreas Axis vol.22, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22041647
  43. Effects of novel probiotic strains of Bacillus pumilus and Bacillus subtilis on production, gut health, and immunity of broiler chickens raised under suboptimal conditions vol.100, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.11.048
  44. Supplementation of postbiotic RI11 improves antioxidant enzyme activity, upregulated gut barrier genes, and reduced cytokine, acute phase protein, and heat shock protein 70 gene expression levels in h vol.100, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.12.011
  45. Antilisterial Potential of Lactic Acid Bacteria in Eliminating Listeria monocytogenes in Host and Ready-to-Eat Food Application vol.12, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/microbiolres12010017
  46. Bacillus Subtilis 29784 as a Feed Additive for Broilers Shifts the Intestinal Microbial Composition and Supports the Production of Hypoxanthine and Nicotinic Acid vol.11, pp.5, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051335
  47. Probiotics, Photobiomodulation, and Disease Management: Controversies and Challenges vol.22, pp.9, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22094942
  48. Bacteriocinogenic Bacillus spp. Isolated from Korean Fermented Cabbage (Kimchi)-Beneficial or Hazardous? vol.7, pp.2, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation7020056
  49. A Review of the Effects and Production of Spore-Forming Probiotics for Poultry vol.11, pp.7, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11071941
  50. Assessment of Intestinal Immunity and Permeability of Broilers on Partial Replacement Diets of Two-Stage Fermented Soybean Meal by Bacillus velezensis and Lactobacillus brevis ATCC 367 vol.11, pp.8, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11082336
  51. Effect of the use of probiotic Bacillus subtilis (QST 713) as a growth promoter in broilers: an alternative to bacitracin methylene disalicylate vol.100, pp.9, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101372
  52. Growth, Chemical Composition, Histology and Antioxidant Genes of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Fed Whole or Pre-Processed Nannochloropsis oceanica and Tetraselmis sp. vol.6, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes6030023
  53. Dietary Clostridium butyricum and Bacillus subtilis Promote Goose Growth by Improving Intestinal Structure and Function, Antioxidative Capacity and Microbial Composition vol.11, pp.11, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113174
  54. The Application of Bacillus subtilis for Adhesion Inhibition of Pseudomonas and Preservation of Fresh Fish vol.10, pp.12, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10123093