Table 1.
Primer sequences used in the RT-qPCR reaction
| Gene | Forward primer | Reverse primer |
|---|---|---|
| ACTB | CACAGATCATGTTTGAGACCTT | CATCACAATACCAGTGGTACG |
| G6PDH | CGGGAACCAAATGCACTTCGT | GGCTGCCGTAGAGGTATGGGA |
| CLDN1 | TCTTCATCATTGCAGGTCTGTC | AACGGGTGTGAAAGGGTCAT |
| TJAP1 | AGGAAGCGATGAATCCCTGTT | TCACTCAGATGCCAGATCCAA |
| MUC6 | TTCAACATTCAGTTCCGCCG | TTGATGACACCGACACTCCT |
| AvBD1 | AAACCATTGTCAGCCCTGTG | TTCCTAGAGCCTGGGAGGAT |
| CATHL2 | AGGAGAATGGGGTCATCAGG | GGATCTTTCTCAGGAAGCGG |
| IL1B | GGAGGTTTTTGAGCCCGTC | TCGAAGATGTCGAAGGACTG |
| IL4 | GCTCTCAGTGCCGCTGATG | GGAAACCTCTCCCTGGATGTC |
| IL6 | AGGACGAGATGTGCAAGAAGTTC | TTGGGCAGGTTGAGGTTGTT |
| IL10 | CATGCTGCTGGGCCTGAA | CGTCTCCTTGATCTGCTTGATG |
| IL12B | TTGCCGAAGAGCACCAGCCG | CGGTGTGCTCCAGGTCTTGGG |
| IFNB | ACCAGATCCAGCATTACATCCA | CGCGTGCCTTGGTTTACG |
| IFNG | ACACTGACAAGTCAAAGCCGC | AGTCGTTCATCGGGAGCTTG |
Table 2.
Primer sequences for the identification of bacteria
| Bacteria | Forward primer | Reverse primer | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Universal bacteria | ACTCCTACGGGAGGCAGCAGT | GTATTACCGCGGCTGCTGGCAC | (27) |
| Clostridium difficile | TTGAGCGATTTACTTCGGTAAAGA | TGTACTGGCTCACCTTTGATATTCA | (23) |
| Faecalibacterium prausnitzii | ACCATGAGAGCCGGGGGG | GGTTACCTTGTTACGACTT | (18) |
| Bifidobacterium spp. | GCGTGCTTAACACATGCAAGTC | CACCCGTTTCCAGGAGCTATT | (23) |
| Lactobacillus spp. | AGCAGTAGGGAATCTTCCA | CACCGCTACACATGGAG | (13) |
| Escherichia coli | CATGCCGCGTGTATGAAGAA | CGGGTAACGTCAATGAGCAAA | (23) |
| Streptococcus spp. | AGATGGACCTGCGTTGT | GCTGCCTCCCGTAGGAGTCT | (29) |
Fig. 1.
Relative analysis of expression of a panel of genes related to intestinal immune response and organism defence against pathogens in the caecal mucosa of broiler chickens bedded on litter with different proportions of coffee husks and wheat straw. CH10 – broilers with litter of 10% coffee husks and 90% wheat straw; CH25 – broilers with litter of 25% coffee husks and 75% wheat straw; CH50 – broilers with litter of 50% coffee husks and 50% wheat straw; * – P ≤ 0.05 (n = 8/group)
Fig. 2.
Relative abundance of indicator bacteria in caecal content of broiler chickens. C – broilers in the control group with litter of 100% wheat straw; CH10 – broilers with litter of 10% coffee husks and 90% wheat straw; CH25 – broilers with litter of 25% coffee husks and 75% wheat straw; CH50 – broilers with litter of 50% coffee husks and 50% wheat straw; * – P ≤ 0.05 (n = 8/group)