The effect of the symbiotic on enteromicrobiocenosis, biochemical and immunological status of broiler chickens against the background of experimental colibacteriosis

The article presents the results of the study of enterobiocenosis, biochemical parameters of blood serum and immune response of chickens under the influence of the symbiotic drug Biosib© PRO in experimental colibacillosis. Four groups of chickens were formed with 10 heads in each: Group I (positive control group), Group II (negative control), kept on a basic diet, Group III (experimental symbiotic) and Group IV (using an antibiotic). At the age of 16 days, experimental infection with E. coli O78 culture was carried out. To study the dynamics of enterobiocenosis, bacteriological and proteomic (MALDI-TOF) research methods were used, hematological, biochemical and immunobiological tests were carried out according to generally accepted methods. The studies showed that the use of the symbiotic in the experimental group of chickens contributed to the cessation of clinical signs of the disease on the 4th day, while in the group where the antibiotic was used, they continued for 5 days. When studying the parietal enteromicrobiocenosis in broiler chickens of experimental groups after infection with the E. coli O78 culture, the original culture was detected in 72.4% of cases in groups I and IV, while in birds of group III, E. coli O78 was detected in 30% of cases. In broiler chickens of experimental groups, I and IV after oral administration of E. coli, the frequency of detection of bifidobacterial and lactobacilli significantly decreased. In group III, the species and quantitative composition of other representatives of the microbial community of the small intestine did not change significantly. Against the background of the use of the symbiotic, an increase in the total number of erythrocytes, hemoglobin, in the blood serum - an increase in the total amount of protein, albumin, bactericidal, lysozyme and phagocytic activity, as well as an increase in live weight compared to birds that did not receive the drug were noted in experimental chickens.

1. Shenderov BA. Probiotic (symbiotic) bacterial languages Anaerobe. 2011; 17 (6): 490-495.

2. Novikova OB, Pavlova MA, Bartenev AA On the problem of colibacillosis in poultry farming. Effective animal husbandry. 2018; 6 (145): 64-66. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=35554711 (In Russ.)

3. Gerasimova AO, Novikova OB, Savicheva AA. Colibacillosis of birds - current issues. Veterinary science today. 2023; 12(4): 284-292. DOI 10.29326/2304-196X-2023-12-4-284-292. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=59693275(In Russ.)

4. Minelli E, Benini A. Relationship between number of bacteria and their probiotic effects. Microb Ecol Health Dis. 2008; (20): 180-3.

5. Yeoman Carl J, White BA. Gastrointestinal tract microbiota and probiotics in production animals. CJ Yeoman, BA White. Annu. Rev. Anim. Biosci. 2014; (2): 469-486.

6. Almada CN, Martinez C (eds.) Characterization of the intestinal microbiota and its interaction with probiotics and health impacts. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2015; 99 (10): 4175-99.

7. Wang X, Zhang P, Zhang X. Probiotics regulate gut microbiota: an effective method to Improve Immunity. Molecules, 2021; 26 (19) : 60-76.

8. La Fata G, Weber P, Mohajeri H. Probiotics and the gut immune system: indirect regulation. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2018; 10 (1): 11-21.

9. Novikova A F, Ovcharova E S, Savicheva A A. The influence of the probiotic biocomplex "AVIBIOLAKT" on the intestinal microflora of broiler chickens infected with the causative agent of colibacillosis of birds. Poultry farming. 2022;(11):89-93. DOI 10.33845/0033-3239-2022-71-11-89-93.

10. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=49811443 (In Russ.)

11. Prokkoeva Zh A, Novikova A F Probiotic strains and their consortium for the prevention and treatment of bacterial diseases of birds. Qualitative growth of the Russian agro-industrial complex: opportunities, problems and prospects: Proc. of the business program of the 27th international. agroindustrial. exhibition "Agrorus-2018". SPb: SPbSAU; 2018. Р. 204-207. (In Russ.)

12. Babina MP. Immune reactivity of broiler chickens in ontogenesis and its correction by microbial preparations. Vitebsk; 2002. 114р. (In Russ.)

13. Markin Yu A, Nesterov N. Reasonable alternative to antibiotics. Probiotics in diets for poultry. Animal Husbandry of Russia. 2018; ( 2); 8-11. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=32430939 (In Russ.)

14. Gindullin A. I. Possibilities of using probiotics based on lactobacilli in poultry farming. Scientific notes of the Kazan State Academy of Veterinary Medicine named after N.E. Bauman. 2013; 215: 74-77. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=20263009 (In Russ.)

15. Podchalimov MI, Gribanova EM., Matyushevsky LA. The influence of probiotics in feed on the productive and meat qualities of broiler chickens. Bulletin of the Voronezh State Agrarian University. 2013; 1 (36): 220-223. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=18970463 (In Russ.)

16. Roberfroid M, Gibson RM, Hoyles L. (eds.) Prebiotic effects: metabolic and health benefits. Br J. Nutr. 2010; 104 (l 2):61-63

17. Buyarov V. S. Metasova S. Yu. Efficiency of using the synbiotic "ProStor" in poultry farming. Scientific notes of Kazan University. Series: Natural sciences. 2019:161(3):408 -421. DOI 10.26907/2542-064X.2019.3.408-421. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42446495. (In Russ.)

18. Kudryavtseva AV, Shchepetkina SV. Use of liquid form of veterinary multibacterin to broiler chickens New pharmacological agents in veterinary medicine: Proceedings of the XIV International Interuniversity Scientific and Practical Conference, St. Petersburg, January 01 – 31, 2002. – St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State Academy of Veterinary Medicine; 2002. P. 29-30. (In Russ.)

19. Methodological guide to feeding agricultural poultry / Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, Federal Scientific Center "All-Russian Research and Technological Institute of Poultry Farming"; developers: I.A. Egorov [et al.] - Sergiev Posad, 2021. 359 p. (In Russ.)

20. Methodological guide for the use of DiaVetTest reagent kits for biochemical studies of animal blood serum (plasma) using automatic and semiautomatic analyzers. – Moscow: Federal State Budgetary Institution Central Medical and Veterinary Laboratory, Rosselkhoznadzor, 2018. 25 p. (In Russ.)

21. Smirnova, O.V. Determination of bactericidal activity of blood serum by photonephelometry / O.V. Smirnova, T.A. Kuzmina // J. Microbiology.1966; 4: 8-11 (In Russ.)

22. Dorofeychuk, V.G. Determination of lysozyme activity by nephelometric method / V.G. Dorofeychuk // Laboratory work. 1968; 1: 28-30 (In Russ.)

23. Mastitsky, S.E. Methodological manual for using the STATISTICA program in processing biological research data / Mastitsky S.E. // Minsk: RUP Institute of Fisheries, 2009. 76 p. (In Russ.)