Table I
The growth of probiotics in artificial gastric juice and intestinal juice.
| Gastric juice | Intestinal juice | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 h (CFU/ml) | 3 h (CFU/ml) | Survival rate (%) | 7 h (CFU/ml) | Survival rate (%) | 11 h (CFU/ml) | Survival rate (%) | |
| BM7-6 | 3.0 ± 0.5 × 108 | 7.8 ± 0.8 × 107 | 26.11 | 9.6 ± 1.0 × 106 | 3.2 | 8.7 ± 0.7 × 106 | 2.9 |
| DM-10 | 2.8 ± 0.4 × 108 | 1.8 ± 0.3 × 107 | 6.55 | < 105 | < 1 | < 105 | < 1 |
| DM6-2 | 1.7 ± 0.2 × 109 | 1.4 ± 0.4 × 108 | 7.92 | < 105 | < 1 | < 105 | < 1 |
| DM7-6 | 3.1 ± 0.4 × 109 | 2.5 ± 0.6 × 109 | 79.79 | 1.5 ± 0.3 × 109 | 48.39 | 1.9 ± 0.7 × 109 | 61.29 |
| DM9-7 | 5.8 ± 0.9 × 109 | 3.7 ± 0.8 × 109 | 63.22 | 2.5 ± 0.6 × 109 | 43.10 | 2.6 ± 0.5 × 109 | 44.82 |
| YF9-4 | 7.6 ± 1.0 × 109 | 5.4 ± 0.7 × 109 | 71.05 | 4.2 ± 0.5 × 109 | 55.26 | 4.2 ± 1.4 × 109 | 55.26 |
| YM7-6 | 2.3 ± 0.5 × 108 | 8.7 ± 0.8 × 107 | 37.14 | 2.7 ± 0.3 × 107 | 11.74 | 2.3 ± 0.6 × 107 | 10.00 |
Fig. 1.
The antioxidant capacity of strains in vitro.
A) Evaluation the scavenging ability of different probiotics on superoxide; B) evaluation the scavenging ability of different probiotics on DPPH; C) evaluation the scavenging capacity of different probiotics on hydroxyl radical; D) evaluation the scavenging capacity of different probiotics on total reduction.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Significance was marked as different letters above the bars (p < 0.05) between the groups.
Table II
The susceptibility of candidate lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strains to different antibiotics.
| Antibiotics | Dose (μg/disc) | Susceptibility | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BM7-6 | DM-10 | DM6-2 | DM7-6 | DM9-7 | YF9-4 | YM7-6 | ||
| Erythromycin | 15 | S | R | I | S | I | R | S |
| Amikacin | 30 | S | N | S | N | N | R | R |
| Ampicillin | 10 | I | I | I | S | S | S | I |
| Penicillin | 10 | S | N | S | S | N | S | N |
| Chloramphenicol | 30 | S | S | S | S | S | I | S |
| Ceftazidime | 30 | S | R | R | I | I | S | S |
| Tetracycline | 30 | S | N | I | S | N | S | R |
| Ciprofloxacin | 5 | S | N | N | N | N | I | S |
| Clindamycin | 2 | S | R | R | I | N | S | R |
| Azithromycin | 10 | S | S | S | S | S | I | S |
Fig. 2.
Analysis of antimicrobial ability of the probiotics.
A) Evaluation of antagonistic ability of different probiotics against Escherichia coli; B) evaluation of antagonistic ability of different probiotics against Salmonella spp.; C) evaluation of antagonistic ability of different probiotics against Staphylococcus aureus; D) evaluation of antagonistic ability of different probiotics against Enterobacter sakazakii.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3). Significance was marked as different letters above the bars (p < 0.05) between the groups.
Fig. 3.
Serum immune indexes of broilers in serum.
A) Levels of IgA in different groups; B) levels of IgG in different groups; C) levels of IgM in different groups; D) levels of TNF-α in different groups; E) levels of IL-2 in different groups; F) levels of IL-6 in different groups.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 5). * – p < 0.05, ** – p < 0.01, *** – p < 0.001, ns – non-significance
Fig. 4.
Oxidative stress indexes of broilers in serum.
A) Levels of SOD in different groups; B) levels of CAT in different groups; C) levels of GSH-Px in different groups; D) levels of T-AOC in different groups; E) levels of MDA in different groups; F) levels of TC in different groups.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 5). * – p < 0.05, ** – p < 0.01, *** – p < 0.001, ns – non-significance
Fig. 5.
Histopathological sections and biochemical indexes of broilers liver.
The liver tissue observed under the following conditions: the eyepiece × objective = 10 × 40, and the scale is 100 μm. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 5). * – p < 0.05, ns – non-significance
Fig. 6.
Histopathological sections and biochemical indexes of broilers kidney.
The kidney tissue observed under the following conditions: the eyepiece × objective =10 × 40, and the scale is 100μm. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 5). * – p < 0.05, ns – non-significance
Fig. 7.
Histopathological sections and biochemical indexes of broilers of the intestinal tissue.
The intestinal tissue observed under the following conditions: the eyepiece × objective = 10 × 10, and the scale is 100 μm.
Fig. 8.
Effects of daily use of antibiotics and probiotics on gut microbiota of broilers.
A) Shannon index in different groups; B) PCA of overall diversity. C) comparison of phylum relative abundance in different groups; D) comparison of family relative abundance in different groups.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 5). * – p < 0.05, ** – p < 0.01, *** – p < 0.001, **** – p < 0.0001
Fig. 9.
Family relative abundance in different groups.
A) Lactobacillaceae relative abundance in different groups;
B) Ruminococcaceae relative abundance in different groups;
C) Desulfovibrionaceae relative abundance in different groups; D) Christensenellaceae relative abundance in different groups;
E) Alistipes relative abundance in different groups.
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (n = 5). * – p < 0.05, ** – p < 0.01, *** – p < 0.001, **** – p < 0.0001