MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315650914 · doi:10.1016/j.psj.2022.102473

The effect of Bacillus subtilis and its delivery route on hatch and growth performance, blood biochemistry, immune status, gut morphology, and microbiota of broiler chickens

2023· article· en· W4315650914 on OpenAlexafffund
Samson Oladokun, Deborah Adewole

Bibliographic record

VenuePoultry Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie UniversityGenome Canada
KeywordsIn ovoBacillus subtilisBroilerBiologyFeed conversion ratioAnimal scienceHatchingWeight gainSalineFood scienceBacteriaMicrobiologyBody weightEndocrinologyEmbryo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the effect of probiotics (Bacillus subtilis fermentation extract) and its delivery route (in-feed or in ovo) on hatch and growth performance, blood biochemistry, immune status, gut morphology, and microbiota of broiler chickens. Hatching eggs were incubated for 21 d. On d 12, viable eggs were randomly allotted to 4 groups: the noninjected, in ovo saline (S), in ovo Bacillus subtilis 1 (P1), and in ovo Bacillus subtilis 2 (P2). On d 18, S, P1, and P2 groups received 0.2 mL saline diluent, 10 × 106, and 20 × 106 CFU of the bacterium via the amnion, respectively. At hatch, chicks were re-allotted to 5 new treatment groups: P1, P2, 0.005% in-feed Bacillus subtilis extract (P3), 0.05% in-feed bacitracin methylene disalicylate (BMD,), and corn-wheat-soybean diet negative control (NC) in 9 replicate pens (22 birds/pen) and raised for 35 d. Hatch parameters were assessed on d 0, and growth performance indices measured weekly. On d 25, 1 bird/cage was euthanized, and samples collected for further analysis. Data were analyzed by generalized linear model. Treatments S and P2 recorded higher (P = 0.01) chick BW/ Egg Weight values compared to the non-injected eggs. P3 and P2 reduced (P = 0.02) FI at week 5 compared to the NC treatment. However, no change in average body weight gain (ABG) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) were observed during the same period. At d 35, while BMD treatment showed a tendency (P = 0.09) to increase FI compared to the NC treatment, ABG and FCR were similar for all treatments. Blood sodium and chloride levels were increased (P < 0.05) by the BMD treatment compared to the NC treatment. Compared to other treatments, BMD and P3 treatments increased (P < 0.001) jejunal and ileal villus height to crypt depth ratios, respectively. However, P1 and P2 increased (P < 0.001) villus height to crypt depth ratio in the duodenum compared to NC treatment. Treatments did not affect gut microbial diversity; however, BMD treatment increased (P < 0.05) the proportion of bacteria in the genus Enterococcus in the ileum and reduced (P < 0.05) the proportion of bacteria in the genus Streptococcus in the ceca. All probiotics treatments (irrespective of route and dose) reduced (P < 0.001) the levels of serum IgG compared to the NC treatment. However, P1 and P2 had the lowest numerical decrease in serum IgG concentrations, suggesting that Bacillus subtilis (especially in ovo delivered) might provide broiler chickens with better immunological protection by neutralizing pathogenic organisms that could result in the production of natural antibodies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoultry ScienceSame topicAnimal Nutrition and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207