Use of probiotics as an alternative to formaldehyde fumigation in commercial broiler chicken hatch cabinets


Por: Graham, L. E., Teague, K. D., Latorre, J. D., Yang, Y., Baxter, M. F. A., Mahaffey, B. D., Hernandez-Velasco, X., Bielke, L. R., Hargis, B. M., Tellez, G.

Publicada: 1 sep 2018
Categoría: Animal science and zoology

Resumen:
Two experiments were conducted in a commercial broiler hatchery to evaluate the use of a spray probiotic formulation as an alternative method to control the bacterial bloom within a broiler hatch cabinet vs. formaldehyde fumigation. In Exp 1, 2 independent trials were conducted to compare hatchery sanitation between the current formaldehyde drip method vs. spray application of the probiotic. Hatchery sanitation was evaluated using the open-plate method at approximately 20% pip; 30% hatch; and 85% hatch for enumeration of total recovered non-selective aerobic bacteria (TAB); presumptive lactic acid bacteria (LAB); and total recovered Gram-negative bacteria (TGB). In Exp 2, 3 independent trials were conducted to evaluate the gastrointestinal (GIT) microbiota of neonatal chicks from hatch cabinets treated as in Exp 1. In Exp 1, in both trials, the application of the probiotic increased the number TAB and LAB present in the hatching environment (P < 0.05). Additionally, at 20% pip and 30% hatch, in both trials, there was no significant difference in TGB levels between the probiotic treatment and the formaldehyde treatment. In Exp. 2, chicks from probiotic treated hatch cabinets also showed a reduction of TGB in the GIT compared to the formaldehyde group (P < 0.05). In trial 3, the reduction in TGB persisted 24 h after hatch. The results of the present study suggest that spray application of a probiotic in commercial hatcheries can yield similar TGB levels when compared to formaldehyde early on in the hatch period. More importantly, it decreased the numbers of these bacteria within the GIT at hatch and 24 h after hatch. © 2018 Poultry Science Association Inc.

Filiaciones:
Graham, L. E.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Teague, K. D.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Latorre, J. D.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Yang, Y.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Baxter, M. F. A.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Mahaffey, B. D.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Hernandez-Velasco, X.:
 Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Coll Vet Med, Mexico City 04510, DF, Mexico

Bielke, L. R.:
 Ohio State Univ, Dept Anim Sci, OARDC, Wooster, OH 44691 USA

Hargis, B. M.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA

Tellez, G.:
 Univ Arkansas, Dept Poultry Sci, Fayetteville, AR 72703 USA
ISSN: 10566171
Editorial
POULTRY SCIENCE ASSOC INC, 1111 N DUNLAP AVE, SAVOY, IL 61874-9604 USA, Estados Unidos America
Tipo de documento: Article
Volumen: 27 Número: 3
Páginas: 371-379
WOS Id: 000452563700011

MÉTRICAS