The effects of Bacillus spp. use as a dietary probiotic in weaning piglets

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.19135/v1

Abstract

Background: This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of supplementation with Bacillus-based probiotic (Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a, 1.6x109CFU/ml) on the performance of weaned piglets.

Methods: A total of 60 piglets, 30 days±3 days of age, with an initial body weight (BW) of 8.41±0.92 kg were allotted randomly to 3 homogeneous groups (C, E1 and E2, 6 pens/10 piglets, 2 replicates/group) with a supplement of additive (Bs) based on 1% (E1), respectively 3% (E2)/kg feed. The feed was administered ad libitum in the flour form, 2 meals/day. Microbiological analysis and chemical composition of compound feed, the growth performances and diarrhoea incidence were assayed as well.

Results: The addition of Bs didn’t influence significantly the BW or average daily gain (ADG). After 16 testing days, ADG was 1.13 times higher in E1 compared with C and with 1.04 times higher compared with E2. The feed intake (ADFI) increased with 1.08-fold in C diet compared with E1 diet. Feed efficiency diet was 1.22 times higher in E1 than C and with 1.05 higher than E2 diet.

Conclusions: Addition of Bs-1% decreased diarrhoea incidence (P>0.05) by 7.6% vs. C and 3.8% vs. Bs-3%. 23.4% piglets had soft faeces, 43.75% score 2 (mild diarrhoea) and 32.81% score 3 (severe diarrhoea), no significant difference was noticed between the group (P˂0.05).

Background

Probiotics represent a group of non-pathogenic organisms, which were administered in sufficient amounts, are known to involve beneficial effects of the host health [1, 2]. Probiotics are implied in reducing the number of pathogenic bacteria from the animal gastrointestinal tract (GIT), maintaining and stabilizing a healthy microbiota as a preventive measure during the critical period of weaning [3]. Several probiotic products may contain a single strain or multi-strain from bacterial species - Bacillus (B. cereus var. toyoi, B. licheniformis, B. subtilis),, Enterococcus (E. faecium), Lactobacillus (L. acidophilus, L. casei, L. farciminis, L. plantarum, L. rhamnosus), Pediococcus (P. acidilactici), Streptococcus (S. infantarius);; microscopic fungi such yeast - Saccharomyces cerevisiae species and Kluyveromyces [4, 5, 6].

Known as a strict aerobe bacterium, Bacillus subtilis was noticed to be a possible candidate in monogastric nutrition. The high resistance of the vegetative cells due to the spores presence and the severe environmental conditions make the Bacillus species to grow in anaerobe conditions [7]; furthermore, the thermostability is a major property of Bacillus which certificates the long-term storage during the pelleting of animal feed.

Studies with dietary supplementation of Bacillus spp. product used as a direct-fed microbial (DFM) [8] has reported favorable results in swine diet [9, 10]. Specialty literature described the addition of Bacillus spp. as DFM could have some beneficial effects by improving the growth performance and feed efficiency in piglets.

Weaning is a difficult period for piglets due to their incomplete development of the enzymatic system and factors generating stress [11, 34]. Piglets in the weaning crisis must adjust to a solid diet as contrasting to the liquid diet provided by

the sow and their endogenous enzymes will take the same several days to correct it [12]. Early weaning removes piglets from a digestible feed source, and the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) complications are more susceptible to install it [13]. Besides, Bacillus spp. was reported to be a possible antibiotic alternative for animals [14].

The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a probiotic containing Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a on growth performance and diarrhoea in weaning piglets diet feed.

Methods

The animals were provided by the National Research-Development Institute for Animal Nutrition and Biology Balotesti (INCDBNA) Experimental Farm, Romania. Conducting the experiment, managing weaning and samples collection was in accordance with the research topic presented by the Habeanu et al. [11].

The experimental protocol was adopted by the Ethical Committee of the INCDBNA, Romania. The procedures were in agreement with Council Directive 2010/63/EU legislation for the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. No antibiotic treatment was supplied to the animals during the experiment. The experiment was performed on Topigs hybrid (♀ Large White × Hybrid (Large White × Pietrain) × ♂ Talent, mainly Duroc].

At the end of the study, the piglets were maintained in the Experimental Farm IBNA Balotesti, Romania, until they recorded the weight of 25 ± 3 kg. After that, the animals were sold to the beneficiaries.

Microbiological analysis of feed

Compounds feed were analyzed microbiologically in the biotechnological laboratory of INCBNA Balotesti. Procedures of sample examination were following the protocol described in STAS 6953–81 (total number of fungi, NTF), SR 13178–1 (total number of germs, TNG), SR 13178–2 (total number of coliforms), SR 13178–2 (E. coli),, SR 12824 (Salmonella spp.). The result was expressed as a logarithm (base 10) of colony-forming units per gram of sample (CFU/g).

Source of microbial feed additive

The microbial feed additive used in the current study was based on Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a. The strain’s probiotic properties were analyzed in vitro, in another study [5].

Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a strain was grown in nutritive agar medium (Merck), at 37°C, 24h under shaking agitation (150 rpm) and aerobic conditions. The culture strain was prepared in culture form, every two days and stored in a fridge at 4°C in a sterile bottle. The optical density (OD) of culture was measured and resuspended with physiological saline sterile, for adjusted to 1.6 x 109 CFU/ml/kg feed viable spores. Each day, the supplement was mixed manually with the portion of the basal diet, which was previous calculated for piglets feeding.

Animals and diet

The biological test was conducted on 60 piglets Topigs hybrid [♀ Large White × Hybrid (Large White × Pietrain) × ♂ Talent, mainly Duroc] weaned at 30 days ± 3 days of ages, the average initial body weight of 8.41 ± 0.92 kg. The piglets

were randomly allotted to 3 groups distributed in 6 pens with 10 piglets, two replicates for each group: a control group (C) and 2 experimental groups with a supplement of Bacillus subtilis (Bs) bacterial strain based on 1% (E1, Bs-1%), respectively 3% (E2, Bs–3%). The minimum bacterial concentration of Bs was 1.6 x 109 UFC/ml/kg feed. Pens measured 2.40 m × 1.80 m x 0.800 m, each with slatted plastic flooring. All pens had one self-feeder and a nipple drinker. Ventilation was delivered by a mechanical system with automatic adjustments. The room temperature was approximately 25°C. The experiment lasted 16 days. The feed was administered ad libitum in the flour form, two meals/day with permanent access to water. The intake and refusal of feed were recorded daily. The feed structure is shown in Table 1.

Animals from C group were fed with the classical diet without Bs-feed additive. The groups Bs-1% and Bs-3% were received the same concentration of Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a, but in different levels of feed addition. The animals were supervised daily to identify the piglets with diarrhoea severity (%). The faeces of every animal were examined visually. A subjective scoring system was used to determine the severity of diarrhoea, ranging from 1 to 3: 1 soft faeces; 2 mild diarrhoea, 3: severe diarrhoea. The incidence of diarrhoea was expressed as the average number of days with diarrhoea related to the total monitoring days (seven days) [11].

Throughout the experimental period we supervised the following parameters: body weight (BW), average daily feed intake (g feed/piglet/day, ADFI), average daily gain (g/piglet/day, ADG), feed conversion ratio (g feed/g gain, G: F).

Statistical analysis

The data were analyzed with SPSS Statistics version 20.0 (2011) and were expressed as the mean and standard error of the mean (SEM). A probability value of P≤0.05 was considered to be statistically significant and tendencies were noted under conditions of 0.05<P<0.10.

Results

Raw material microbiology

The results of the bacteriological examination of the raw materials used in piglet diet are presented in Table 2. The number of aerobic bacteria did not reach 107 for TNG, 103 for coliforms, respectively 102 for E. coli. The presence of Salmonella spp. according to EN Regulation, is essential to be excluded in 25 g feed materials. Furthermore, TNG defines how many aerobic, mesophilic microorganism colonies, such as bacteria, yeast, and mold fungi will grow for 24–48 hours on an agar nutritive plate at 37°C. Mycological analyses of raw materials were shown in Table 3 and the contamination rate is in normal value, did not exceed 103 CFU/ml.

Based on the results of microbiological analyses, the raw materials present a low level of contaminationand can be used in piglets’ diet.

Growth performance

The growth performance may be linked to diarrhoea incidence, and the diarrhoea appearance of piglets was noted daily in this study. The piglets were weighed individually at the beginning of the experiment (30d ± 3) and on day 16. The feed offered and refused was weighed daily.

In this study, we noticed some differences between groups caused by treatment. At the beginning of testing the animal had not any sign of illness and were kept in similar environmental conditions.

Table 4 shows the bio-productive performances obtained by supplemented feed with a bacterial preparation-based Bacillus subtilis.

The addition of Bs did not influence significantly the body weight (BW) or average daily gain (ADG). After 16 testing days, the ADG was 1.13 times higher in the Bs-1% group compared to the C group and 1.04 times higher vs. Bs–3% group respectively. The feed intake (ADFI) increased

1.08-fold in C diet than the Bs-1% diet. Feed efficiency was 1.22 times higher when the diet was supplemented with Bs-1% compared to C diet and 1.05 times vs. Bs-3%. The values of BW, ADG, G/F are similar with the literature results [15] at the addition of Bacillus-based probiotic when a concentration of 2 x 109 CFU/kg feed was used, but no significant results were found between treatments.

Addition of Bs-1% vs. Bs-3% improved BW of piglets weaning in the 1st and 3rd week, but the values were insignificant (P>0.05).

Diarrhoea incidence

In our study, we did not notice a serious digestive disorder. Higher effectiveness had 1% dietary supplement of Bs (Figure 1). Addition of Bs-1% decreased diarrhoea incidence by 7.6% compared to the C group (P>0.05) and by 3.8% vs. Bs-3% group. 23.4% piglets had soft faeces, 43.75% had score 2 (mild diarrhoea) and 32.81% had score 3 severe diarrhoea; however, no significant difference was noticed between groups.

In the current study, some piglets in all treatment’s groups were affected by diarrhoea, the mild score being predominantly. Piglets fed diets supplemented with Bs–1% had lower diarrhoea frequency than C and Bs-3% group, but no differences were noted (P>0.05). The addition of B. subtillis ATCC 6051a in piglets feed did not result in any improvement in the diarrhoea frequency.

Discussion

Weaning is a worrying period in the life cycle of pigs, which is associated with changes in diet, gut environment and gut morphology, and thus may result in low growth percentage, high diarrhoea incidence and imbalanced intestinal microecology [16]. The weaning period is a critical time in whole piglet’s life, because the young pigs are separated by the sow, resulting in an abrupt change in diet, a move to a new environment and mixing with unfamiliar animals, generally younger [17, 18]. All raw materials used in the diet must to be safe and suitable for their utilization in animal nutrition. Generally, raw materials are recognized as safe (GRAS) or otherwise deemed acceptable for use in feed [18]. The composition of feedstuff and feeding management are critical issues that influence the health state of piglets after weaning [19]. The animal feed can be exposed to numerous factors (biological, chemical, physical and other agents), which can affect the animal status health and, indirectly, human [18]. Previous studies with supplementation of Bacillus-based probiotic had a significant effect on ADG and ADFI of weaned piglets, reducing the F: G [19, 20].

In our study, soybean meal was included 13% (w/w) as main protein resource for animal production [21] and the addition of Bacillus subtilis can ferment it, as affirmed Kiers et al. [24], due to the hydrolysis of protein to amino acids and peptides [22]. Bacillus subtilis strain concentration is in concordance with EFSA Guide,,Panel on Additives and products or substances used in Animal Feed” which affirms that the minimum inclusion level in piglets feeding stuffs is 1 x 109 CFU/kg feed [23].

The effect of a probiotic could be affected by strain composition and inclusion levels, but rendering to the results of previous reports, it should be noted that the positive effects of probiotics on growth performance were always observed in the early period after weaning [24].

The dramatic fluctuations in GIT after weaning and the gut needs time to adapt to the new feed, may cause a gastrointestinal infection, mostly colibacillosis diarrhoea, which producing an extensive morbidity and/or mortality (around 17% of piglets born in Europe) in the most serious of affected cases [25].

Bacillus spp. is not a principal member of the normal animal microbiota and could not colonize the intestine for long periods; it consumes oxygen rapidly and reduces the pH value, which this parameter favors Lactobacilli number and inhibits pathogens like E. coli and Salmonella spp. [27]. As a Gram-positive bacterium and the ability to form endospores, Bacillus subtilis can endure the high temperatures of animal feed pelleting and also, to be stable for long time storage [26].

Post-weaning diarrhoea (PWD) is a condition in weaned piglets characterized by the frequent ejection of soggy faces during the first 2 weeks after weaning and continues to represent one of the major economic problems for the pig industry worldwide [27]. Several studies with the addition of B. subtilis as DFM products may be a means for GIT health by beneficial bacteria stability, reducing diarrhoea incidence and enhancing the growth performance [28, 29].

The results from previous studies [30, 31] found that Bacillus supplementation reduced the incidence and severity of diarrhoea in weaning piglets.

Conclusions

The results of this study indicate that dietary supplementation with Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a (1.6 x 109UFC/kg feed), did not influence significantly the body weight gain, feed intake while feed conversion ratio in the weaned piglets.

The results suggest that the addition of Bacillus-as DFM did not ameliorate the incidence of diarrhoea of piglets during experimental design.

Further experiment will be performed with different concentrations of analyzed strain, until it will establish if it can be considerate a possible probiotic for piglets weaning.

Abbreviations

BW: body weight; Bs: Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a; ADG: average daily gain; ADFI: feed intake; vs.:: vis-à-vis; DFM: direct-fed microbial; OD: optical density; GIT: gastrointestinal tract; PWD: post-weaning diarrhea; TNG: total numbers of germs; TNF: total numbers of fungi.

Declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate

The experimental protocol was carried out in accordance with the ethical guideline for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and approved by the Research Committee of INCDBNA Balotesti, Romania (No. 5183).

Consent for publication

,,Not applicable”.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the Romanian Ministry of Research and Innovation through Sub-program 1.2 - Institutional Performance, Program 1 - Developing national R & D, National Research and Development and Innovation Contract no.17 PFE/17.10.2018 and Project 8PCCDI/2018 pc2.

Authors’ contributions

MD* was responsible for conducting and monitoring of the experiment, in vitro testing of probiotic properties which are presented in another study [2], preparing of bacterial culture based on Bs. MH involved the feeding trial and performed statistical analysis. IS and CT conducted sample collection and laboratory analysis. The all authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors’ information

,,Not applicable.”

Author details

1National Research Development Institute for Biology and Animal Nutrition (IBNA), Bucharest, No. 1, Balotesti, Ilfov, 077015, Romania.

2University of Agronomic Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Bucharest, 59, Marasti Blvd, District 1, Bucharest, Romania.

Acknowledgements

We thank to the technicians Dana Bulgaru and Trifu Ioana for their excellent technical assistance.

The abstract was presented at the European Biotechnology Congress (April 11–13, 2019, Valencia-Spain), and can be accessed to https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168165619304134?via%3Dihub.

References

  1. FAO, WHO. Evaluation of health and nutritional properties of probiotics in food including powder milk with live lactic acid bacteria. Córdoba, Argentina Oct. 2001.
  2. Dumitru M, Sorescu I, Habeanu M, Tabuc C, Idriceanu L, Jurcoane S. Preliminary characterisation of Bacillus subtilis strain use as a dietary probiotic bio-additive in weaning piglet. Food Feed Res [Internet]. 2018;45:203–11. Available from: https://scindeks.ceon.rs/Article.aspx?artid = 2217–53691807203D
  3. Corcionivoschi N, Drinceanu D, Pop IM, Stack D, Ştef L, Julean C, et al. The effect of probiotics on animal health review. Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2010; 43(1):35–40.
  4. Sorescu I, Dumitru M, Ciurescu G. Lactobacillus spp. and Enterococcus faecium strains isolation, identification, preservation and quantitative determinations from turkey gut content. Rom Biotechnol Lett. 2019;24:41–9.
  5. Dumitru M, Tabuc C, Jurcoane Ș. Obtaining a feed additive based of Lactobacillus plantarum strain. Scientific Papers. Series A. Agronomy. 2018; LXI(2):115–22.
  6. FAO. Probiotics in animal nutrition—Production, impact and regulation. FAO. 2016.
  7. Hu Y, Dun Y, Li S, Zhang D, Peng N, Zhao S, et al. Dietary Enterococcus faecalis lab31 improves growth performance, reduces diarrhea, and increases fecal lactobacillus number of weaned piglets e0116635. PLoS One. 2015;10:1–16.
  8. Leser TD, Knarreborg A, Worm J. Germination and outgrowth of Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus licheniformis spores in the gastrointestinal tract of pigs. J Appl Microbiol. 2008;104:1025–33.
  9. Link R, Reichel P, Kyzeková P. The Influence of probiotics on reproductive parameters of sows and health of their sucklings. Folia Vet. 2016;60:43–6.
  10. Wang SP, Yang L, Tang XS, Cai LC, Liu G, Kong XF, et al. Dietary supplementation with high-dose Bacillus subtilis or Lactobacillus reuteri modulates cellular and humoral immunities and improves performance in weaned piglets. J Food, Agric Environ. 2011;9(2):181–187.
  11. Habeanu M, Lefter NA, Gheorghe A, Tabuc C, Untea A, Surdu I, et al. Changes in certain serum and faeces parameters in weaned piglets as a response to nutritional stress. South African J Anim Sci. 2015;45:164–72.
  12. Guevarra RB, Lee JH, Lee SH, Seok MJ, Kim DW, Kang BN, et al. Piglet gut microbial shifts early in life: Causes and effects. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology; 2019;10:1–10.
  13. Taylor G, Roese G. Basic Pig Husbandry - The Weaner. NSW Dep Prim Ind [Internet]. 2006; February. Available from: http://www.thepigsite.com/articles/1616/basic-pig-husbandry-the-weaner/
  14. Bedford A, Huynh E, Fu M, Zhu C, Wey D, de Lange C, et al. Growth performance of early-weaned pigs is enhanced by feeding epidermal growth factor-expressing Lactococcus lactis fermentation product. J Biotechnol [Internet]. Elsevier B. V.; 2014;173:47–52. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2014.01.012
  15. Upadhaya SD, Kim SC, Valientes RA, Kim IH. The effect of Bacillus-based feed additive on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, fecal gas emission, and pen cleanup characteristics of growing-finishing pigs. Asian-Australasian J Anim Sci. 2015;28:999–1005.
  16. Giang HH, Viet TQ, Ogle B, Lindberg JE. Growth performance, digestibility, gut environment and health status in weaned piglets fed a diet supplemented with a complex of lactic acid bacteria alone or in combination with Bacillus subtilis and Saccharomyces boulardii. Livest Sci [Internet]. Elsevier B. V.; 2012;143:132–41. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2011.09.003
  17. Giang HH, Viet TQ, Ogle B, Lindberg JE. Growth performance, digestibility, gut environment and health status in weaned piglets fed a diet supplemented with a complex of lactic acid bacteria alone or in combination with Bacillus subtilis and Saccharomyces boulardii. Livest Sci. 2012;143:132–41.
  18. Pluske JR, Turpin DL, Kim JC. Gastrointestinal tract (gut) health in the young pig. Anim Nutr [Internet]. Elsevier Taiwan LLC; 2018;4:187–96. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2017.12.004
  19. Nuntapaitoon M, Muns R, Tummaruk P. Newborn traits associated with pre-weaning growth and survival in piglets. Asian-Australasian J Anim Sci. 2018;31:237–44.
  20. Liao SF, Nyachoti M. Using probiotics to improve swine gut health and nutrient utilization. Anim Nutr [Internet]. Elsevier Taiwan LLC; 2017;3:331–43. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2017.06.007
  21. Lallès J, Lalles J. Nutrition and gut health of the young pig around weaning: what news. Arch Zootech. 2008;
  22. Dong X, Zhang N, Zhou M, Tu Y, Deng K, Diao Q. Effects of dietary probiotics on growth performance, faecal microbiota and serum profiles in weaned piglets. Anim Prod Sci. 2014;54:616–21.
  23. Yuan L, Chang J, Yin Q, Lu M, Di Y, Wang P, et al. Fermented soybean meal improves the growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and microbial flora in piglets. Anim Nutr [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2017;3:19–24. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2016.11.003
  24. Kiers JL, Meijer JC, Nout MJR, Rombouts FM, Nabuurs MJA, Van Der Meulen J. Effect of fermented soya beans on diarrhoea and feed efficiency in weaned piglets. J Appl Microbiol. 2003;95:545–52.
  25. Nam H, Jung H, Karuppasamy S, Park YS, Cho YS, Lee JY, et al. Anti-diabetic effect of the soybean extract fermented by Bacillus subtilis MORI in db/db mice. Food Sci Biotechnol. 2012;21:1669–76.
  26. Rychen G, Aquilina G, Azimonti G, Bampidis V, Bastos MDL, Bories G, et al. Safety and efficacy of Bacillus subtilis DSM 28343 as a feed additive for piglets. EFSA J. 2018;16.
  27. Cai L, Indrakumar S, Kiarie E, Kim IH. Effects of a multi-strain Bacillus species–based direct-fed microbial on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood profile, and gut health in nursery pigs fed corn–soybean meal–based diets. J Anim Sci. 2015;
  28. Sun Y, Kim SW. Intestinal challenge with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli in pigs, and nutritional intervention to prevent postweaning diarrhea. Anim. Nutr. 2017.
  29. Wu T, Zhang Y, Lv Y, Li P, Yi D, Wang L, et al. Beneficial impact and molecular mechanism of Bacillus coagulans on piglets’ intestine. Int J Mol Sci. 2018;19:1–17.
  30. Baker AA, Davis E, Spencer JD, Moser R, Rehberger T. The effect of a Bacillus-based direct-fed microbial supplemented to sows on the gastrointestinal microbiota of their neonatal piglets. 2013;91(7):3390–3399.
  31. Pluske JR. Feed- and feed additives-related aspects of gut health and development in weanling pigs. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2013.
  32. Hu Y, Dun Y, Li S, Zhao S, Peng N, Liang Y. Effects of Bacillus subtilis kn–42 on growth performance, diarrhea and faecal bacterial flora of weaned piglets. Asian-Australasian J Anim Sci. 2014;27:1131–40.
  33. Kritas SK, Tzivara A, Kyriakis SC, Alexopoulos C, Siochu A, Georgoulakis IE. Field evaluation of the efficacy of a probiotic containing Bacillus licheniformis and Bacillus subtilis spores, on the health status and performance of sows and their litters. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl). 2004;88:381–92.
  34. Lee SH, Ingale SL, Kim JS, Kim KH, Lokhande A, Kim EK, et al. Effects of dietary supplementation with Bacillus subtilis LS 1–2 fermentation biomass on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, cecal microbiota and intestinal morphology of weanling pig. Anim Feed Sci Technol [Internet]. Elsevier B. V.; 2014;188:102–10. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2013.12.001.

Tables

Table 1. Compound feed formula and chemical composition used for hybrid Topigs piglets during weaning crisis

Items %*/

Control

E1 Bs-1%

E2 Bs- 3%

Maize

33.48

33.48

33.48

Sorghum

25

25

25

Peas

17

17

17

Soybean meal

13

13

13

Maize gluten

3

3

3

Milk replacer

5

5

5

DL methionine

0.1

0.1

0.1

L- Lysine

0.21

0.21

0.21

Calcium carbonate

1.6

1.6

1.6

Phytase

0.01

0.01

0.01

Monocalcium phosphate

0.4

0.4

0.4

Salt

0.1

0.1

0.1

Premix choline

0.1

0.1

0.1

Vitamin-mineral premix

1

1

1

Bacterial additive (Bs)**

-

1

3

Chemical composition % (g/kg feed)

Metabolizable energy (EM, Kcal/ Kg)

3237.31

3237.31

3237.31

Crude protein (CP)

18.23

18.23

18.23

Lysine

1.2

1.2

1.2

Methionine + Cystine

0.59

0.59

0.59

Ether extract

2.2

2.2

2.2

Ca

0.9

0.9

0.9

P

0.7

0.7

0.7

Cellulose

4.11

4.11

4.11

*ME was calculated based on feed composition and theoretical coefficients. The vitamin-mineral premix contained (/kg feed): 10 000 IU vitamin A; 2 000 IU vitamin D3; 30 IU vitamin E; 3 mg vitamin K3; 2 mg vitamin B1; 6 mg vitamin B2; 20 mg vitamin B3; 13.5 mg vitamin B5; 3 mg vitamin B6; 0.06 mg vitamin B7; 0.8 mg vitamin B9; 0.05 mg vitamin B12; 10 mg vitamin C; 30 mg Mn; 110 mg Fe; 25 mg Cu; 100 mg Zn; 0.38 mg I; 0.36 mg Se; 0.3 mg Co; 60 mg antioxidant. **Bs-Bacillus subtilis

Source: compound feed formula calculated, Mihaela Habeanu, INCDBNA Balotesti

 

Table 2. Bacteriological analysis of the compound feeds

Raw materials

TNG

SR 13178-1

Total Coliforms

SR 13178-2

Escherichia coli

SR 13178-2

Salmonella spp.

SR EN 12824

Maize

6.95 x 103

2.5

2.5

N

Sorghum

3.4 x 103

0

0

N

Peas

3.6 x 103

0

0

N

Soybean meal

3.6 x 103

0

0

N

Gluten

8.5 x 104

0

0

N

Milk replacer

6.6 x 103

0

0

N

Feed 01 B

Batch 1

9.0 x 103

0.5

0

N

Batch 2

4.2 x 104

16.5

9.5

N

Allowed maximal limits: (MO 362 bis/2003): TNG: maximum 1.5 x 107 CFU/g; Total coliforms: maximum 3 x 103 CFU/g; E. coli: maximum 1 x 102 CFU/g; Salmonella spp.: 0 CFU/g (N = negative). Where: SR= Romanian standard; SR EN= European standards

 

Table 3. Mycological analysis of raw materials

Raw materials

TNF(CFU/g): STAS 6953-81

Colonies identification

Maize

3.5 x 103

Aspergillus flavus (5 x 102 UFC/g); Fusarium graminearum (1 x 103 UFC/g); Fusarium culmorum (7.5 x 102 CFU/g); Penicillium sp.; Yeasts

Sorghum

Sterile

-

Peas

Sterile

-

Soybean meal

2.5 x 10

Aspergillus flavus (2.5 x 10 CFU/g)

Gluten

Sterile

-

Milk replacer

Sterile

-

Feed

01 B

Batch 1

1.1 x 104

Aspergillus flavus (2.75 x 102 CFU/g); Aspergillus niger; Fusarium graminearum (2.5 x 102 CFU/g); Rhizopus nigricans; Yeasts

Batch 2

6.5 x 103

Fusarium graminearum (2.5 x 102 CFU/g); Rhizopus nigricans; Absidia spp.; Yeasts

Allowed maximal limits: (MO 362 bis/2003): TNF – total numbers of fungi; Raw materials: 5 x 103 CFU/g; Feed 5 x 104 CFU/g. Fungal species known to produce mycotoxins 5 x 102 CFU/g. Where: STAS = State standards

 

Table 4. Effects of Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a on BW, ADG, ADFI and G: F

on piglets weaning

Item*

Control

Bs-1%

Bs-3%

SEM

P- value**

BW at weaning (30d ± 3)

8.44

8.42

8.38

0.14

NS

BW -1st w

9.80

9.76

9.70

0.15

NS

BW- w 3

12.72

13.02

12.63

0.23

NS

ADG 16 d

0.260

0.293

0.282

0.23

NS

ADG 1st w

0.20

0.18

0.22

0.01

NS

ADFI (Kg/head/ day)

0.520

0.481

0.452

 

 

G: F

0.50

0.61

0.58

 

 

*BW = body weight; ADG = average daily gain; ADFI = average daily feed intake; G: F (Gain: feed) = feed conversion ratio; **NS = insignificant; T = a tendency to be influence by the treatment; Bs-1%: basal

diet + Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a 1%, 1.6 x 109 UFC/ml/kg feed; Bs-3%: basal diet + Bacillus subtilis ATCC 6051a 3%, 1.6 x 109 UFC/ml/kg feed.