Open Access
Issue
BIO Web Conf.
Volume 27, 2020
International Scientific-Practical Conference “Agriculture and Food Security: Technology, Innovation, Markets, Human Resources” (FIES 2020)
Article Number 00025
Number of page(s) 5
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20202700025
Published online 25 November 2020

© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2020

Licence Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1 Introduction

Nowadays the development of the livestock industry with the focus on introduction of new technological methods is hardly possible without improving the conditions of feeding and keeping animals. In recent years, it has become apparent that high productivity expected from animals can be only achieved by using bioactive compounds in the diets and exchange energy of high concentration readily available. So far, significant data have been accumulated relative to the probiotic supplementation in pig breeding, not rarely regarded as an alternative to antibiotics treatment [1, 2] The bacteria that make up probiotic composition ingredients normalize the intestinal microflora by regulating pH, inhibiting the growth, development and colonization of pathogenic microorganisms [3, 4], improve the intestinal barrier function [5, 6], synthesize various bioactive compounds (amino acids, enzymes, B vitamins, antioxidants), inactivate toxic substances [7, 8], optimize mineral balance in body, [9] enhance the body’s defense system [1013]. Therefore, they are also used for prevention and treatment of intestinal diseases of both infectious and non-infectious nature [14, 15]. Diets supplemented with probiotic preparations boost metabolism, increase digestibility of dietary nutrients, ensure survival and enhance productivity of animals [1620].

The aim was to study the characteristics of metabolism under probiotic supplementation using different types of microorganisms contained in grain diets intended for lactating sows.

2 Material and research methods

The experiment was conducted at two agricultural enterprises: SPK Agrofirm “Culture” and Betovo subsidiary of Snezhka poultry farm in the Bryansk region. The study was focused on lactating sows of Large White breed, the piglets of which were weaned at 60 and 45 days. The first experiment was allocated in four groups of lactating sows with an average live weight of 180–185 kg at 2 years of age. In the second experiment, four groups of lactating sows with a live weight of 186.9–187.6 kg of the same age were similarly formed. The scheme of scientific and economic experiments is shown in Table 1.

In the first experiment, the trial groups of lactating sows received, according to the experiment design, the probiotic supplement “Citexflor-1”, which included Lactobacillus acidophilus, calcium lactate, chalk, lactic acid, microbial polysaccharides, bacterial protein. In the second experiment, the trial animals were fed adequate amounts of hydrolyzed, lactateenriched serum, with an established probiotic effect and highly rich in dry matter, protein, amino acids, sodium lactate, lactic acid, glucose, lactose, galactose and phosphorus.

Concentrate feed in the diet of lactating sows in the first experiment accounted for 73.7 %, the remainder was distributed between succulents and feed of animal origin. The released amount of exchange energy calculated from 1 kg of dry matter of the diet was 14.4 MJ, crude protein – 170.0 g, digestible protein – 137.3 g, lysine – 7.65 g, methionine+cysteine – 3.95 g, crude fiber – 53.2 g, calcium – 15.5 7 g, phosphorus – 8.25 g. For the second experiment, 5 kg diet ration per head was administered daily to sows. 1 kg of dry matter contained 13.1 MJ of exchange energy, 230 g of crude protein, 116.4 g of digestible protein, 17.4 g of lysine, 6.2 g of methionine + cysteine, 35.7 g of crude fiber, 7.0 g calcium and 7.7 g of phosphorus.

During the experiment, control weightings were carried out and animal blood samples were examined. At the end of the experiments, studies were conducted to analyze the digestibility of nutrients based on the diets formulated. The digestibility coefficients of the main nutrients were calculated on the basis of the analysis of the presence of the indicated nutrients in feces and the diets employing generally accepted methods [21, 22]. Morphological and biochemical blood parameters were determined following the methods described in the reference literature [23]. All digital data obtained in the studies was statistically processed using variation statistics [24]. The results were considered valid at P≤0.05.

Table 1.

Scheme of scientific and economic experiments.

3 Research results

During the lactation period, the nature and intensity of the processes associated with milk production undergo significant changes. Therefore, the need for nutrients varies depending on a number of piglets suckling the sow, physiological condition, live weight, age and other factors. However, the growth performance and survival in piglets in the suckling period depend on the milk production by sows. Some indicators of the productivity of lactating sows under probiotic support are shown in Table 2.

Administration of amounts of the probiotic supplement “Citexflor-1” in the first experiment had a beneficial effect on the sows’ milk production and survival rate of piglets. The milk production by sows in the second trial group was found to be higher by 2.03 %, in the third by 6.6 % and in the fourth by 3.9 % compared to the control. It should be noted that the intake of the probiotic supplement equal to 30 ml per head daily did not tend to increase milk production compared to the third trial group, although the survival in piglets was greater and reached 89–92 %, which resulted in increase in the weight of the nest during weaning.

In the second experiment, lactating sows were fed “Sgol-1-40” probiotic supplement and milk production was recorded in the range of 5.8 kg gain in the second group, 16.3kg (P≤0.05) in the third and 20.7 kg in the fourth groups in relation to the control. The survival in piglets in the trial groups was also better at 6.0; 8.0; 9.0 %, respectively.

Thus, the use of the probiotic supplements in the diets formulated with different ingredient compositions for lactating sows with almost the same amount of exchange energy released from 1 kg of dry matter made it possible to increase milk production by sows and keep piglets alive.

The data obtained suggest that once balanced feeding is supplemented with probiotic preparations and biological indicators are given due attention to, high productivity is achieved and favorable conditions for digestion and assimilation of nutrients in the intestinal tract are created. The ingredients contained in probiotic supplements are involved in all biochemical processes in the body, affecting the digestibility, assimilation and ending up in products. To study the digestibility of nutrients in lactating sows under feeding adequate amounts of probiotic supplements, balance based experiments were carried out. For both experiments, three sows in each group were selected. Feeding and maintenance conditions were established in accordance with the daily diets requirements. The digestibility of nutrients is given in Table 3.

The study results showed that administration of probiotic supplements to lactating sows in the first and second experiments had a positive effect on the digestibility of the main nutrients. Respectively, in the first experiment, “Citexflor-1” was included in the diets for sows in the third and fourth trial groups, the sows were fed diets with 20 and 30 ml of probiotic supplements per head daily, the digestibility coefficients of crude protein were determined higher by 3.1 % (P≤0,05) and 3.9 % (P≤0.05), crude fat – by 2.4 % (P≤0.05) and 2.8 % (P≤0.05), crude fiber – by 3.8 % (P≤0.05) and 4.3 % (P≤0.05) compared to the control. In the second experiment, lactating sows were fed “Sgol-140” included with the grain diet in portion rationing of 1.5, 2.5 and 3.5 % calculated from dry matter, the digestibility of organic matter in the second trial group improved by 1.17 %, in the third group by 2.20 % and in the fourth one by 2.66 %, respectively, relative to the control. In the third group, the animals received a 2.5 % probiotic supplement, the digestibility of crude protein was determined higher by 2.29 % (P≤0.05), fat by 6.21 % (P≤0.05) and fiber by 6.27 % (P≤0.05) compared to the control. In the fourth trial group, the sows received a 3.5 % probiotic supplement in the diet, crude fat and fiber were significantly better digested, but these indicators were found to be lower than in the third trial group.

Addition of adequate amounts of probiotic supplements in the diets of lactating sows resulted in improved digestibility of nutrients, which is probably due to an increased activity of beneficial microorganisms in the intestine and inhibition of undesirable microflora caused by pH adjustment by lactates contained in the supplements.

Changes in the blood of lactating sows that occur in probiotic supplementation are given Table 4.

During the study period in both experiments, the morphological and biochemical parameters of blood in sows varied within the designated physiological range, which gives proof of a good health condition and high productive qualities.

The administration of the probiotic supplement “Citexflor-1”was found to have increased number of red blood cells in the third trial group by 6.2 % (P≤0.05), and in the fourth by 4.7 % compared to the control, the level of hemoglobin was determined to be higher by 7.2 % (P≤0.05) and 5.0 %, respectively. The total protein content was significantly higher in the blood serum of sows in the third group by 10.8 % (P≤0.05) and in the fourth group by 11.3 % (P≤0.05).

When feeding the probiotic supplement “Sgol-1-40” included in the diet of lactating sows, the number of red blood cells increased by 18.1 % and 32.1 %, white blood cells by 24.5 and 35.5 %, hemoglobin by 15.3 % and 24.1 %, respectively, relative to similar indicators in the control group of animals. Administration of hydrolyzed serum to sows in doses of 2.5 % and 3.5 %, caused a significant increase (P≤0.05) in almost all studied biochemical blood parameters, in particular, total protein by 42.9 and 52.9 %, glucose by 48.5 and 68.5 %, inorganic phosphorus by 30.4 and 40.1 % compared to the control group

The research data are consistent with the results of other studies [2528]. In particular, the supplementation of the probiotic preparation “Intestevit” to sows in the prenatal period and after farrowing has a positive effect on erythropoiesis, morphological and functional state of the liver and biochemical status, which was demonstrated by an increased number of red blood cells by 10.9 %, hemoglobin – by 9.2 %, total protein – by 2.3 %, albumin – by 3.2 %, globulin – by 7.8 %, glucose – by 7.1 %, total calcium – by 3.8 %, and tends to have a beneficial effect on productivity, which is noticeable in increased milk production – by 5.3 %, the average daily gain by piglets by 7.8 % and their survival rate by 5.6 % [28]. Research carried out by Ovchinnikova A.A. concludes that the probiotic supplements “Sinbilite” and “Sporotermin” increase the digestibility of dry matter by 3.51 and 2.57 %, organic matter by 2.46 % and 2.24 %, crude fiber by 14.88 % and 10, 97 % and crude fat – by 5.03 % and 0.95 %, [27] when given to farrowing sows. The use of the probiotic supplements “Monosporin”, “Prolam” and “Bacell” improves the reproduction of sows [25].

Table 2.

Sow productivity indicators

Table 3.

Digestibility of nutrients

Table 4.

Morphological and biochemical parameters of blood in lactating sows

4 Conclusion

Probiotic supplementation provided in different types and doses to lactating sows had a proven positive effect in term of increased milk production, survival in piglets and gaining a live weight at different days during weaning. We made a conclusion that administration of adequately increased amounts of the probiotic supplements “Citexflor-1” and “Sgol-1-40” resulted in better digestibility coefficients of crude protein, fat and especially crude fiber, morphological and biochemical parameters in the blood of trial animals were improved. It serves as a proof of increasing metabolism in the body due to the effects caused by the probiotic supplements use.

References

  • P.A. Thacker, Alternatives to antibiotics as growth promoters for use in swine production, A review, J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol., 4, 35 (2013) [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • H. Vondruskova, R. Slamova, M. Trckova, Z. Zraly, I. Pavli, Alternatives to antibiotic growth promotors in prevention of diarrhea in weaned piglets, A review, Vet. Med., 55(5), 199–224 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • B.V. Tarakanov, The mechanism of action of probiotics on the microflora of the digestive tract and animal organism, Vet. Med., 1, 47–54 (2000) [Google Scholar]
  • C.H. Hansen, D.S. Nielsen, M. Kverka et al., Patterns of early gut colonization shape future immune responses of the host, PLoS One, 7, 340–343 (2012) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • H. Liu, J. Zhang, S.H. Zhang, F.J. Yang et al., Oral administration of Lactobacillus fermentum I5007 favors intestinal development and alters the intestinal microbiota in formula-fed piglets, J. Agric. Food Chem., 62, 860–866 (2014) [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • I. Kaji, Y. Akiba, J.D. Kaunitz, Digestive physiology of the pig symposium: Involvement of gut chemosensing in the regulation of mucosal barrier function and defense mechanisms, J. of Animal Sci., 91(5), 1957–1962 (2013) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • M.P. Babin, I.M. Karput, Probiotics in the prevention of gastrointestinal diseases and hypovitaminosis of animals and birds, in: Anal. Rev.: Belnauchtsentr informmarketing APK, pp. 12–15 (Minsk, 2001) [Google Scholar]
  • V.M. Bondarenko, Molecular-cellular mechanisms of the therapeutic effect of probiotic drugs, J. Farmateka, 2, 26–32 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  • L.N. Gamko, T.L. Talyzina, V.V. Talyzin, Probiotic additives in the rings of young pigs under the conditions of technogenous environmental pollution, Res. J. of Pharmac., Biolog. and Chem. Sci., 10(1), 1853–1859 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  • R.T. Mannapova, S.I. Kalyuzhny, Z.Z. Ilyasova, Probiotic therapy and immunostimulation for the correction of immunity in pig cryptosporidiosis, Sci. notes of the Kazan State Acad. of Veter. Med. named after N.E. Bauman, 202, 123–127 (2010) [Google Scholar]
  • C. Pagnini, R. Saeed, G. Bamias, K.O. Arseneau et al., Probiotics promote gut health through stimulation of epithelial innate immunity, PNAS USA, 107, 454–459 (2010) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • W.l. Zhang, M.S. Azevedo, K. Wen, A. Gonzalez et al., Probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus enhances the immunogenicity of an oral rotavirus vaccine in gnotobiotic pigs, Vaccine, 4(26), 29–30 (2008) [Google Scholar]
  • M. Roselli, R. Pieper, C. Rogel-Gaillard, H. Smidt, C. Lauridsen, Immunomodulating effects of probiotics for microbiota modulation, gut health and disease resistance in pigs, Animal Feed Sci. and Technol., 233, 104–119 (2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • T.N. Gryazneva, S.F. Vasilevich, Efficacy of the use of the probiotic Sorbolin in animal infectious diseases, Appl. Microbiol., 3, 28–31 (2014) [Google Scholar]
  • V.D. Valeriano, M.P. Balolong, D.K. Kang, Probiotic roles of Lactobacillus sp. in swine: insights from gut microbiota, J. Appl. Microbiol., 122(3), 554–567 (2017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • O.S. Voitenko, L.G. Voitenko, Yu.S. Gnidina, Growth, preservation, reproduction of pigs and products of pig production using probiotic preparations, Sci. Life, 2, 86–92 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  • I.M. Magomedaliev, R.V. Nekrasov, M.G. Chabaev et al., Influence of the probiotic complex on productive qualities and metabolic processes in growing fattening young pigs, Agrar. Sci., 1, 22–26 (2020) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • A.A. Ovchinnikov, E.A. Graph, Effect of probiotic additives on the digestibility of nutrients in the diet of sows, Feed. livestock and fodder product., 5, 32–39 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  • T.L. Talyzina, L.N. Gamko, V.E. Podolnikov, V.V. Talyzin, M.B. Badyrkhanov, Meat productivity of young pigs for fattening when feeding mineral and probiotic additives, Zootehniya, 5, 20–21 (2016) [Google Scholar]
  • Q.W. Meng, L. Yan, X. Ao et al., Influence of probiotics in different energy and nutrient density diets on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, meat quality, and blood characteristics in growingfinishing pigs, J. Anim. Sci., 88(10), 3320–3326 (2010) [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • P.T. Lebedev, A.T. Usovich, Methods for the study of feed, organs and animal tissues (Rosselkhozizdat, Moscow, 1976), 389 p. [Google Scholar]
  • E.A. Petukhova, R.F. Bessarabova, L.D. Khaleneva, O.A. Antonova, Zootechnical analysis of feed (Agropromizdat, Moscow, 1989), 239 p. [Google Scholar]
  • I.P. Kondrakhin, A.V. Arkhipov, V.I. Levchenko, G.A. Talanov, V.E. Novikov, Methods of veterinary clinical laboratory diagnostics: Handbook (KolosS, Moscow, 2004), 520 p. [Google Scholar]
  • N.A. Plokhinsky, Biometrics Guide for Livestock (Kolos, Moscow, 1969), 256 pp. [Google Scholar]
  • A.I. Baranikov, A.F. Kaydalov, V.Ya. Kavardakov, S.V. Burov et al., Efficiency of using probiotics Prolam, Bacell and Monosporin in pig diets, Agrar. Bull. of the Urals, 8(114), 12–14 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  • E.V. Krapivina, A.A. Kashcheev, D.V. Ivanov et al., The morphological composition of blood and the dynamics of live weight of pigs with different patterns of use of “EM-VITA”, Veter. Med. and feed., 3, 7–10 (2019) [Google Scholar]
  • A.A. Ovchinnikov, The productivity of sows when used in the diet of probiotics, Herald of beef cattle breed., 1(97), 119–123 (2017) [Google Scholar]
  • D.S. Uchasov, N.I. Yavrov, D.S. Ashikhmin, The effect of the probiotic “Provagen” on the metabolic status and productive indicators of sows, Pig product., 2, 14–15 (2011) [Google Scholar]

All Tables

Table 1.

Scheme of scientific and economic experiments.

Table 2.

Sow productivity indicators

Table 3.

Digestibility of nutrients

Table 4.

Morphological and biochemical parameters of blood in lactating sows

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.