• This record comes from PubMed

Benefits of combinative application of probiotic, enterocin M-producing strain Enterococcus faecium AL41 and Eleutherococcus senticosus in rabbits

. 2016 Mar ; 61 (2) : 169-77. [epub] 20150909

Language English Country United States Media print-electronic

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Links

PubMed 26354790
DOI 10.1007/s12223-015-0423-x
PII: 10.1007/s12223-015-0423-x
Knihovny.cz E-resources

This study presents the effects of the probiotic and enterocin M-producing strain Enterococcus faecium AL41 on microbiota, phagocytic activity (PA), oxidative stress, performance and biochemical parameters when applied individually or in combination with Eleutherococcus senticosus in rabbits. The novelty of the study lies in the use of our non-rabbit-derived strain (AL41 = CCM8558) which produces new enterocin M. Ninety-six post-weaned rabbits (Hyplus breed) aged 5 weeks were divided into three experimental groups, 24 in each: E. senticosus (ES, 30 g/100 kg) in feed, E. faecium AL41 (10(9) CFU/mL marked by rifampicin to differentiate it from other enterococci) in water, and ES + AL. AL41 colonized sufficiently in rabbits to reduce coliforms, staphylococci, pseudomonads and clostridia. Slight decrease in bacteria was also found in the caecum and appendix. Phagocytic activity was significantly increased in the experimental groups compared to the control group (CG) (p < 0.001; p < 0.05). Applications did not evoke oxidative stress. Biochemical parameters in blood and caecal organic acids were slightly influenced. Average daily weight gain was slightly higher in ES and AL + ES. Combinative application of E. faecium with E. senticosus can be beneficial in rabbits. AL41 strain alone and in combination with ES produced reduction in spoilage bacteria; the highest stimulation of PA was in the AL41 + ES group.

See more in PubMed

Phytother Res. 2001 May;15(3):268-70 PubMed

Phytother Res. 2000 Feb;14(1):30-5 PubMed

Acta Pol Pharm. 2002 Sep-Oct;59(5):395-401 PubMed

Food Microbiol. 2014 Apr;38:228-39 PubMed

J Lab Clin Med. 1967 Jul;70(1):158-69 PubMed

Pol J Vet Sci. 2013;16(4):619-27 PubMed

FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2002 Jun;26(2):163-71 PubMed

Immunol Lett. 1982 Aug;5(2):97-100 PubMed

Int J Food Microbiol. 2006 Jan 15;106(1):1-24 PubMed

Lett Appl Microbiol. 1998 Sep;27(3):178-82 PubMed

Lett Appl Microbiol. 2015 Jun;60(6):531-5 PubMed

J Appl Microbiol. 2001 Aug;91(2):268-78 PubMed

Cell. 2006 Feb 24;124(4):783-801 PubMed

Arzneimittelforschung. 1985;35(7):1069-75 PubMed

Vet Res Commun. 2004 Nov;28(8):647-55 PubMed

Res Vet Sci. 2015 Jun;100:75-9 PubMed

Arzneimittelforschung. 2001 Jan;51(1):76-83 PubMed

Res Vet Sci. 2010 Oct;89(2):257-61 PubMed

Pol J Vet Sci. 2003;6(3 Suppl):37-9 PubMed

Res Vet Sci. 2012 Aug;93(1):195-201 PubMed

J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2007 Aug;34(8):533-7 PubMed

Microbiol Res. 2007;162(3):257-63 PubMed

Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2012 Dec;4(4):243-9 PubMed

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...