ABSTRACT
The use of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics in poultry diets beneficially stimulates the gut microbiome thus promoting the health and welfare of the animals. In this study, we analyzed 7 poultry probiotics (Lactobacillus plantarum - B1 and B4, Lactobacillus rhamnosus - B3, Bifidobacterium lactis - B2, Carnobacterium divergens - B5, Propionibacterium thoenii - B6, Clostridium butyricum - B7) and 12 prebiotics, differing in chemical composition and source of origin (fungi, algae, animal, etc.). The main goal of our research was to select the most promising candidates to develop synbiotic combinations. We determined the growth kinetics of all probiotics in the presence of prebiotics in a series of in vitro studies to select optimal combinations. Five out of seven investigated probiotics were significantly stimulated by astragalus polysaccharide, and this prebiotic was characterized in our work as the most effective. Moreover, in the case of three probiotics, B2, B3 and B4, significant growth stimulation has been found when beta-glucan, vegetable protein hydrolysate and liquid seaweed extract were supplied. Strain B1 (L. plantarum) was stimulated by 6 out of 12 prebiotics. The growth of B4 (L. plantarum) and B2 (B. lactis) was enhanced by prebiotics after 2 h of incubation. A high growth rate of 3.13% was observed in the case of L. plantarum (B4) and a 3.37% higher rate for B. lactis (B3), compared to the growth of probiotics in the control medium with glucose but no prebiotics. The best candidates for synbiotic combinations based on this in vitro work are the strains belonging to L. plantarum (B4), L. rhamnosus (B3) and B. lactis (B2), consistent with prebiotics such as astragalus polysaccharides and vegetable protein hydrolysate. These combinations will be subject to future in vivo poultry trials involving the in ovo microbiome modulation.
ABSTRACT
Natural biostimulants, such as seaweed extracts, can stimulate plant growth and development in both model and crop plants. Due to the increasing demands for their use in agriculture, it is crucial to ensure the sustainability of the sources from which they are produced. Furthermore, some seaweed extracts were recently shown to prime and protect from adverse environmental factors such as drought, salinity and extreme temperatures, as well as from oxidative stress. The molecular mode of action of these biostimulants has still not been fully elucidated, but there has been significant progress in this direction in the last years. Firstly, this review examines the sustainability aspects of harvesting seaweed resources as raw materials for manufacturing biostimulants and provides an overview of the regulatory landscape pertaining to seaweed-based biostimulants. The review then summarises the recent advances in determining the genetic and molecular mechanisms activated by seaweed-based biostimulants, their influence on transcriptome reconfiguration, metabolite adjustment, and ultimately stress protection, improved nutrient uptake, and plant growth and performance. This knowledge is important for deciphering the intricate stress signalling network modulated by seaweed-based biostimulants and can aid in designing molecular priming technologies for crop improvement.
Subject(s)
Seaweed , Agriculture , Droughts , Plant Development , Salinity , VegetablesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In experiment 1, 30 boars were assigned to one of five treatments (n = 6): T1, 0 g kg(-1) seaweed extract (SWE); T2, 0.7 g kg(-1) SWE; T3, 1.4 g kg(-1) SWE; T4, 2.8 g kg(-1) SWE and T5, 5.6 g kg(-1) SWE. The extract contained laminarin and fucoidan only and was extracted from Laminaria spp. In experiment 2, 28 boars were assigned, in a 2 x 2 factorial to one of four treatments (n = 7): T1, control; T2, control plus 300 mg laminarin; T3, control plus 240 mg fucoidan; T4, control plus 300 mg laminarin and 240 mg fucoidan kg(-1) diet. RESULTS: In experiment 1 there was a response to SWE on colonic Bifidobacterium spp. (P < 0.01 quadratic), Enterobacterium spp. (quadratic P < 0.05) and on caecal Enterobacterium spp. (quadratic P < 0.05). In experiment 2 there was an interaction (P < 0.05) between laminarin and fucoidan supplementation on Enterobacterium spp. in the proximal and distal colon. Pigs offered laminarin had reduced Enterobacterium spp. compared with pigs offered the control diet. However, the combination of laminarin and fucoidan had increased Enterobacterium spp. compared with alone. Pigs offered diets containing fucoidan had increased Lactobacilli spp. in the proximal colon (P < 0.05) and distal colon (P < 0.001) compared with non-fucoidan diets. CONCLUSION: Overall, the reductions in intestinal Enterobacterium spp. and increases in Lactobacilli spp. obtained suggest that laminarin and fucoidan may provide a dietary means to improve gut health in pigs.
