role of Preboitic full in broilers and layers

Prebiotic

2. A prebiotic is a nondigestable food
ingredient that beneficially affects the
host by selectively stimulating the growth
or activity of one or a limited number of
bacteria in the colon and thus improves
the host’s health.
Efficient prebiotic-specific fermentation
in colon

4. Arabinoxylan Isomaltose (IM)
Agarooligosaccharides (AOS) Lactosucrose
Cyclodextrins
β Galactooligosaccharides
Raffinose, stachyose
Glucosyl sucrose (GlcS) Sucrose thermal
oligosaccharide
Isomalturose (IMT) caramel (STOC)
Inulin Xylooligosaccharides (XOS)

7. Should be neither hydrolysed nor
absorbed in the upper part of GIT
Selective substrate.
Able to alter colonic flora.
Induce systemic effects.
Should have known structure.
Should be palatable as food ingredient
and large scale processing must be
easy.

8. Non digestable carbohydrates.(oligo
and polysaccharides)
Fructo-oligosaccharides and mannan-
oligosaccharides
Others-Inulin
 GOS
 lactulose
 lactitol

9. Because of chemical nature- not
absorbed in upper GIT.
When enters in to colon or caecum, -
substrate for endogenous bacteria –
energy,metabolic substrate and
essential micronutrients.

10. crop prebiotic precursor
Cultivated rice Arabinoxylan
Hulled barley Arabinoxylan and glucan
Dwarf wheat Arabinoxylan,resistant starch
Ragi millet arabinoxylan
Chick pea Resistant starch
Horse gram Resistant starch
Green gram Resistant starch
Black gram Resistant starch
Cow pea Resistant starch
Onion Oligofructose and inulin
garlic inulin

11. Disaccharide consists of glucose and
galactose, which has prebiotic effect in
chickens
Absence of lactase enzyme
Lactose-polymerisation-lactulose

12. To improve intestinal health and
productivity in livestock including poultry.
Cereal crops and onions.
Consists of β(1-2) or β(1-6) linked frutose
units
The β(1-2)glycosidic linkage of FOS is not
hydrolysed.
FOS- stimulate bifido bacteria
 inhibit enterobacteria,clostridia and
salmonella

13. FOS – resistant to intestinal glycolytic
enzymes
Pass unaltered to LI –fermented by
microflora.
Production of short chain
fattyacid,which act as substrate for
energy metabolism in the colonic
mucosa stimulating epithelial cell
growth.

14. Cellwall of yeast(saccharomyces
cerevisiae).
Mannose,main component of MOS.
Many commercial products of MOS – for
poultry contains yeast cellwall fragments.

15. Polysaccharide prebiotic for chickens.
Guar bean(cyamposis tetragonoloba).
By selectively cleaving mannan back
bone chain – using β-D-mannanase, a
mixture of galactomannans is obtained.

16. Mode of action and
activity

Probiotic
1.Produce acid,
reduce pH and
discourage growth of
pathogenic
microorganisms
2.Possess localized
antimicrobial activity.
3.Proliferate in the
digestive tract and
compete with the
pathogenic bacteria.
Prebiotic
1.It leads to production
of butyrate and other
SCFA which are
quickly absorbed and
can serve as an
energy surce for host
2.Control lower gut
environment,
metabolism and
disease prevention
3.Increase Ca and Mg
level in colon and their
absorption.
Decrease triglyceride
and cholesterol level
4.act as
anticarcinogenic,
antimicrobial,
hypolipidemic and
glucose modulatory
activities improve
mineral absorption
and balance

17. By lowering the gut pH through lactic
acid production.
By inhibiting or preventing colonisation of
pathogens.
Modifying metabolic activity of normal
intestinal flora.
Stimulation of immune system.

18. Effect of FOS – growth performance of
broiler chickens.
0.4%FOS – significant improvement in
avg daily gain and feed efficiency-
control diets.
MOS –palm kernels,-increased muscle
weight gain inchickens -0.3%.
Dietary supplementation of MOS –
improved performance and reduce
mortality of chicken.

19. Oligosaccharide-when fermented-
prouce VFA –stimulate peristalsis and
decrease transit time.
Chitosanoligosaccharides(COS) at 0.01%
significant improvement in weight gain
and feed efficiency in broiler chicks.
Ileal digestabilities of DM, ca, p and cp
was increased significantly.

20. Prebiotic – health status of GIT- indirect
growth promoters.
FOS→their activity against salmonella
and campylobacter.
Broiler chicks fed with FOS –reduced the
colonisation of campylobacter by 72%
compared to control.

21. Addition of 0.4% FOS – significantly
increased the no of bifidobacteria &
lactobacilli & decreased E.coli in
ceacum & SI.
FOS –enhances the length of ileal
microvilli.

22. MOS → 0.05-0.4%
3 day old chicks S.typhimurium
↗

↘
4000 ppm of dietary
MOS
Beneficial effects of MOS –bacteria bind
to MOS and carried out of gut.

23. 0.25% PHGG
When given to young hens – no
S.enteritiditis in 14 day of post infection.
Incidence of S.enteriditidis on surface of
eggshell,in egg white and yolk
decreased.

28. • Salmonella and Campylobacter are
important food bornehuman pathogens
• Pigs are an important reservoir of these
bacteria
(zoonoses)
• Improve food safety related to consumption
of pork !
• Reduce the pathogen load before the time
of slaughter

29. To investigate the effect of feeding pigs
with prebiotics
for 1 or 2 weeks just before slaughter (~100
kg)
? Reducing the Campylobacter excretion
level
? Stimulating the growth of Bifidobacteria
? Changing the composition of the intestinal
microbiota

30. Control 16 pigs 8 pigs
Chicory 10% 16 pigs 8 pigs
Lupine 25% 16 pigs
1 week of slaughter
8 pigs
2 week of slaughter

31. Live animals:
• Rectal faecal samples (0, 1, 2 weeks)
• Campylobacter excretion (CFU/g)
Slaugther:
• Lumen content ileum, caecum & colon
• Campylobacter (CFU/g)
• Lumen content ileum & caecum
• Bifidobacteria (PCR detection)
• Composition of intestinal microbiota (T-RFLP)

34. Campylobacter
sps(cfu/g)
week
Diet 0 1 2
Control 4.37 4.08 4.44
Chicory 4.23 4.09 3.93
lupine 4.74 2.94 3.99

35. • Lupine (25%) reduced the
Campylobacter excretion level after 1
week
• There was an bifidogenic effect in
caecum
• Induced changes in the composition of
the intestinal microbiota

36. Source – chicory root(chicorium intybus)
Acts as fat and sugar replacer

37. Upper GIT → ingestion of inulin,oligofructose
& FOS
Colon → intact inulin, OF& FOS

 proximal colon-OF&FOS
 distal colon -inulin


carbondioxide,hydrogen,lactate,SCFA
 ↓
 increased bifidobacteria sps.

38. prebiotic Body weight FCR Gut marphology
FOS Slight
improvement
Slight
improvement
Larger crypts
BIO-MOS Slight
improvement
Slight
improvement
Increased villi
length
Decreased crypt
depth& thinner
muscularis
mucosa

39. Health target prebiotic
Mammary tumor suppression Inulin; oligofructose
Colon tumor suppression FOS
Increased bone mineral density Inulin;oligofructose
Improve measles vaccine response FOS
Increased egg production FOS
Decreased adipose tissue
deposition in broilers
FOS+MOS
Treat chronic liver damage Lactic acid bacteria+FOS

40. Variable
parameter
control inulin oligofructose
Body weight(g) 1972.81 1986.53 2176.22
Carcass
weight(g)
1310.8 1337.82 1482.13
Carcass% 66.36 66.92 68.05
Feed:gain 1.93 1.95 1.78
Gut length(cm) 172.04 180.43 185.63

41. Variable
parameter
control inulin oligofructose
Serum
cholestrol(g/dl)
128.5 107 103
Abdominal
fat(%carcass)
3.35 2.34 2.34
Abdominal
fat(%live weight)
2.2 1.55 1.76

42. Adding inulin or oligofructose reduced
serum cholestrol for male and female
broilers.
Cholestrol assimilation by lactobacilli.
Coprecipitation of cholestrol with
deconjugated bile salts.

43. Inulin, oligofructose, and
galactooligosaccharides are the most
intensively investigated prebiotics with
regard to mineral absorption and retention.
In addition, resistant starches and sugar
alcohols have been shown to significantly
increase mineral absorption and BMC .
Recently it was shown that difructose
anhydride prevented parameters of iron
deficiency more effectively than FOS .

44. Most of the studies on the effects of
prebiotics, especially those with respect
to bone development, have been
performed in rats. It was shown that
prebiotics stimulated the absorption of
iron and of bone-relevant minerals such
as calcium, magnesium, and zinc in
short-term experiments and improved
BMC in the long-term perspective ..

45. The stimulation of calcium and
magnesium absorption by oligofructose
was also confirmed for dogs . Although
phosphorus accretion in the femur might
be higher with FOS feeding under special
conditions , phosphorus balance or
retention was not affected in rats or dogs

46. Combination of probiotics and
prebiotics(collins and gibson)
Food supplement-both live cells of
beneficial bacteria and selective
substrate.
Selective substrate – beneficial bacterial
cells establish their predominance
Synbiotic food more efficient compared
to probiotic or prebiotic alone.

47. Bifidobacteria + FOS
Lactobacilli + lactitol
Bifidobacteria + GOS
lactobacilli+inulin
Lactobacilli+FOS or inulin

49. Combined use of FOS and competitive
exclusion flora reduced salmonella
colonization in intestine of chickens.
In a study with commercial broiler
chickens,found significant improvement
in weight gain due to dietary
supplementation of synbiotic(MOS
&Bacillus subtilis)

50. Chronic addition of lactose or
lactobacilli to the diet of young turkey-
S.tytphimurium
Recent study –layer chickens –dietary
supplementation of Lactobacillus casei
subsp.casei with dextran shown
immunomodulation of humoral immune
response.

51. It has been suggested that a
combination of a probiotic and a
prebiotic, termed synbiotics, might be
more active than either a probiotic or
prebiotic alone in preventing CRC.

52. In a human intervention study, several
CRC biomarkers were shown to be
altered favourably by a synbiotic
intervention . There are also several
reports in experimental animals whereby
a synbiotic combination showed
biological and anticancer effects
beyond those of the individual
components

53.  combination of the prebiotic ‘resistant
starch’ (RS) and the probiotic
‘Bifidobacterium lactis’, a probiotic that
specifically utilizes RS as a substrate for
fermentation , can significantly stimulate
the acute apoptotic response to a
genotoxic carcinogen (AARGC) in the
rat colon, measured 6 h after
carcinogen exposure .

54. AARGC might regulate mutational load
in the colon and eliminate DNA-
damaged cells that might otherwise
progress to malignancy, thereby exerting
a protective effect at the early stages in
the onset of cancer