Cherevan Y. O., Sidashenko O. I., Tymchyy K. I., Fedota S. V., Volkov R. D.

LITERATURE REVIEWS

Scentific article

In connection with the active development of the poultry industry in the world, the pressing issue is to obtain environmentally friendly livestock products. Such preparations that can provide such products are the newest probiotics, obtained on the basis of representatives of normal comormal microorganisms – lacto- and bifidobacteria. These types of microorganisms have antibacterial and immunomodulating properties. The effectiveness of probiotics has long been proven, but these drugs have not been widely used. Therefore, the purpose of this work was to characterize probiotic drugs and their use in poultry on the basis of existing literary sources. Bacteria that make up probiotics, produce antibodies to protect the body and stimulate the immune response to the pathogen, prevent pathogenic microorganisms from attaching to the intestinal walls, and also inhibit their growth. In addition, probiotics strengthen the intestinal mucous layer, which is a barrier to infection, block the synthesis of toxic compounds by pathogenic flora and contribute to their destruction. Also, the benefit of probiotics is the ability of beneficial bacteria to synthesize vitamins B and K. As a result, the process of splitting substances from food improves, digestion is normalized, toxic elements are neutralized and the growth of pathogenic flora is suppressed. Today, the normal microflora is a qualitative and quantitative ratio of the associations of microorganisms of individual organs and systems that maintain the biochemical, metabolic and immune balance of the host organism, necessary to maintain its health. It is an important factor in the overall homeostasis of the macroorganism. A change in the balance of the intestinal microflora is called dysbacteriosis, which can be caused by the use of antibiotics and other stressful factors. Today, international organizations (FAO/WHO) put forward stringent requirements for the evaluation of probiotic strains and drugs based on them, including: the precise identification of microorganisms using microbiological and genetic methods of investigation, a comprehensive description of biological activity and safety, and obtaining evidence of the clinical efficacy of probiotics. The biological effectiveness of probiotic drugs is determined not only by the properties of the strains used, but also by the technologies of their production, where the main goal is to achieve the maximum yield of viable cells of bacteria and biologically active substances synthesized by them, useful for the macroorganism. Microflora of the digestive tract of birds. Birds differ from other agricultural animals by the structure of the digestive system, high metabolic rate, the important role played by enzymes of microflora of the gastrointestinal tract. Chickens are more susceptible to infections, adverse environmental factors than mammals, since they do not receive immunostimulants and nutrients with maternal milk. The death of the young bird is largely due to the disease and disruption of the gastrointestinal tract, caused by pathogenic and conditionally pathogenic microorganisms. In the conditions of industrial livestock and poultry farming, the most economically advantageous is the use of drugs based on substances of natural origin, have an effective antagonistic effect on pathogens of infectious diseases and the ability to positively influence the immune response, that is, act as immunostimulants. These drugs are the latest probiotics derived from the representatives of normal commensal microflora – lactobacterium and bifidobacteria, as well as bacilli, which are part of a generation of self-limiting antagonists. Preparations based on the above microorganisms exhibit antibacterial and immunomodulating properties. Thus, probiotics are promising drugs for the treatment of various dysbiotic conditions and infectious diseases.

probiotic preparations, poultry farming, dysbacteriosis, infectious diseases, ecological poultry farming

1. Gusev BC, Svetoch EK, Glazkov NI. Monitoring vozbuditeley bakterial’nykh infektsiy. Ptitsevodstvo. 2003;2:8-10. [in Russian].
2. Malik NI, Panin AN. Veterinarnyye probioticheskiye preparaty. Veterinariya. 2001;1:46-51. [in Russian].
3. Panin AN, Malik NI. Probiotiki – neot»yemlimyy komponent ratsional’nogo kormleniya zhivotnykh. Veterinariya. 2006;7:3-6. [in Russian].
4. Shenderov BA. Funktsional’noye pitaniye i yego rol’ v profilaktike metabolicheskogo sindroma. M.: DeLiprint; 2008. 319 s. [in Russian].
5. Koshchayev AG. Ekologizatsiya produktsii ptitsevodstva putem ispol’zovaniya probiotikov kak al’ternativy antibiotikam. Izvestiya vuzov. Severo-kavkazskiy region. 2006;10:53-9. [in Russian].
6. Vengrenyuk DG. Vliyaniye probioticheskikh kormovykh dobavok prolam i batsell na faktory nespetsificheskoy rezistentnosti organizma porosyat. Uchenyye zapiski Kazanskoy gosudarstvennoy akademii veterinarnoy meditsiny im. N. E. Baumana. 2012;209:78-82. [in Russian].
7. Drozdova LI, Kundryukova UI. Pechen’ ptitsy – zhivaya laboratoriya otsenki kachestva kormleniya i soderzhaniya. Agrarnyy vestnik Urala. 2010;5(71):68-70. [in Russian].
8. Spivak MYa, Mokrozub VV, Lazarenko LM. Еffect of probiotic strains of lacto- and bifidobacteria on the activity of macrophages and other parameters of immunity in cases of Staphylococcosis. Mikrobiolohichnyy zhurnal. 2012;74(6):90-8.
9. Spivak MYa, Pidgorskyi VS, Lazarenko LM. Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium influence the indices of immune response of the organism showed on experimental model. Mikrobiolohiya ta biotekhnolohiya. 2009;1(5):39-46.
10. Spier MR. Host-microbe interactions that facilitate gut colonization by commensal bifidobacteria. Biotechnol. 2012;20(10):467-76.
11. Kushnir IM, Semen IS, Mayba UZ. Vyvchennya biolohichnykh vlastyvostey probiotychnykh shtamiv mikroorhanizmiv. Nauk.-tekhn. byul. DNDKI vetpreparativ ta kormovykh dobavok ta Instytutu biolohiyi tvaryn. 2015;16(2):207-12. [in Ukrainian].
12. Kozlovsʹka HV. Sanitarna mikrobiolohiya: konspekt lektsiy do vyvchennya dystsypliny dlya OKR «Spetsialist», «Mahistr» za spetsialʹnistyu 7.130501, 8.130501 – «Veterynarna medytsyna»; Kharkivsʹka nats. akad. misʹkohohospodarstva. Kharkiv: KHNAMH; 2010. 57 s. [in Ukrainian].
13. Shirina AA, Petenko AI, Lysenko YuA. Farmakologicheskoye obosnovaniye primeneniya probiotika «Promomiks S». Ptitsevodstvo. 2013;9:35-9. [in Russian].
14. Kaminsʹka MV. Mikroflora travnoho traktu silʹsʹkohospodarsʹkoyi ptytsi: sklad, osnovni funktsiyi, prychyny ta naslidky porushenʹ. Mizhvidomchyy naukovyy tematychnyy zbirnyk «Ptakhivnytstvo». 2010;64:14-25. [in Ukrainian].
15. Gaziumarova LD, Titov LP, Klyuyko NL. Bakteriologicheskaya diagnostika disbakterioza kishechnika − instruktsiya po primeneniyu. Minsk; 2010. 17 s. [in Russian].
16. Gracheva NM, Bondarenko VM. Probioticheskiye preparaty v terapii i profilaktike disbakterioza kishechnika. Infektsionnyye bolezni. 2004;2:538. [in Russian].
17. Makarenko OM, Petrov PI. Suchasnyy pohlyad na problemu profilaktyky ta likuvannya dysbakteriozu. VISNYK VDNZU «Ukrayinsʹka medychna stomatolohichna akademiya». 2016;16(2):294-300. [in Ukrainian].
18. Ardakhsʹka MD, Dubynin AV, Mynushkyn ON. Dysbakterioz kyshechnyka: suchasni aspekty vyvchennya problem, pryntsypy diahnostyky ta likuvannya. Terapevticheskiy arkhiv. 2001;2:67-72. [in Russian].
19. Barsukova MV, Demyn VF, Ilʹenko LI, Sultanova AA, Tayishcheva NB, Kholodova IN. Novi mozhlyvosti diahnostyky ta likuvannya dysbiotychnykh porushenʹ u ditey. Russkiy meditsinskiy zhurnal. 2003;11(20):1124-6. [in Russian]. 20.
20. Watkinson PJ. The use of pre- pro- and synbiotics in adult intensive care unit patients: Systematic review. Clinical Nutrition. 2007;26(2): 182-92.
21. Starovoytova SO, Skrotsʹka OI, Penchuk YuM, Doroshko YuM. Tekhnolohichni aspekty oderzhannya probiotykiv. Naukovi pratsi Natsionalʹnoho universytetu kharchovykh tekhnolohiy [Internet] 2014 [tsytovano 2018 Lystop 10];20(4):69-77. Dostupno: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/ Npnukht_2014_20_4_9 [in Ukrainian].
22. Duca FA, Lam TK. Gut microbiota, nutrient sensing and energy balance. Diabetes Obes. Metab. 2014;16:68-76.
23. Starovoytova SO, Skrotsʹka OI, Pyroh TP. Tekhnolohiya probiotykiv. Kyyiv: NUKHT; 2012. 318 s. [in Ukrainian].
24. Chralampopoulos DC, Rastall RA. Prebitics and probiotics science and technology. UK: Springer; 2009. 1265 p.
25. Harda SO, Danylenko SH, Lytvynov HS. Biotekhnolohichni aspekty analizu mikroflory silʹsʹkohospodarsʹkoyi ptytsi. Biotechnologia acta. 2014;7(46):25-34. [in Ukrainian].
26. Safronova LA. Probiotychni vlastyvosti bakteriy rodu Bacillus i vzayemodiya preparativ na yikh osnovi z makroorhanizmom [dysertatsiya]. Kyyiv: Instytut mikrobiolohiyi i virusolohiyi im. D. K. Zabolotnoho NAN Ukrayiny; 2015. 24 s. [in Ukrainian].
27. Shirina AA, Petenko AI, Lysenko YuA. Farmakologicheskoye obosnovaniye primeneniya probiotika «Promomiks S». Ptitsevodstvo. 2013;9:35-9. [in Russian].
28. Avdyeyeva LV, Lazarenko LM, Melʹnychenko YuO. Imunomodulyuyuchi vlastyvosti synbiotychnykh kompozytsiy probyotychnykh shtami Bacillus subtilis, laktytu chy laktulozy. Mikrobiolohichnyy zhurnal. 2015;77(1):20-5. [in Ukrainian].
29. Kabir S. The role of probiotics in the poultry industry. Int J Mol Sci. 2009;10:3531-46.
30. Mansoub NH. Effect of Probiotic Bacteria Utilization on Serum Cholesterol and Triglycrides Contents and Performance of Broiler Chickens. Global Veterinaria. 2010;5:184-6.
31. Gokce I, Lakey JH. Production of an E. coli toxin protein; colicin A in E. coli using an inducible system. Turk. J. Chem. 2003;27:323-32.
32. Aamer Alaqaby, Glaskovich RA, Kapitonova AA, Losev EA. Study the effect of using probiotic (vetlactoflorum) on some of biochemical and immunological parameters of broiler chickens. Bas. J. Vet. Res. 2014;1(1):58-62.
33. Zhang ZF, Kim IH. Effects of multistrain probiotics on growth performance, apparent ileal nutrient digestibility, blood characteristics, cecal microbial shedding, and excreta odor contents in broilers. Poultry science. 2014;93(2):364-70.
34. Stoyanovsʹkyy VH, Kolomiyetsʹ IA, Kamratsʹka OI. Sklad mikroflory tonkykh kyshok broyleriv ta sposoby yoho korektsiyi u krytychni periody rostu i rozvytku. Veterynariya. 2012;6(115):6-9. [in Ukrainian].
35. Ahmad I. Effect of probiotics on broilers performance. J. Poult. Sci. 2006;5:593-7.
36. Chralampopoulos DC, Rastall RA. Prebitics and probiotics science and technology. UK: Springer; 2009. 1265 p.
37. Tymoshok NO, Melnichenko YA, Spivak MYa. New aspects the regulation of immune response through balance Th1/Th2 cytokines. Proceedings of EPMA-World Congress 2013; 2013 Sep 20-21; Brussels, Belgium. Brussels: EPMA Journal; 2014. 5:134.
38. Galdeano C. Maldonado, de Moreno de LeBlanc A, Perdigon G. Proposed model: mechanisms of immunomodulation induced by probiotic bacteria. Clinical and Vaccine Immunology. 2007;14(5):485-92.
39. S. de Kivit, Tobin MC, Forsyth CB. Regulation of Intestinal Immune Responses through TLR Activation: Implications for Pro- and Prebiotics. Front. Immunol. 2014;5:61-7.
40. Spivak MYa, Mokrozub VV, Lazarenko LM. Еffect of probiotic strains of lacto- and bifidobacteria on the activity of macrophages and other parameters of immunity in cases of Staphylococcosis. Mikrobiolohichnyy zhurnal. 2012;74(6):90-8.
41. Alyamkyn Yu. Probiotyky zamistʹ antybiotykiv − tse realʹno. Ptitsevodstvo. 2005;2:17-8. [in Ukrainian].
42. Md. Mahbubul Haque, Md. Matiar Rahman Howlader, Shahana Begum. Effects of Probiotics on Live Weight and Hematobiochemical Parameters in Broiler. International Journal of Scientific Research in Agricultural Sciences. 2015;2:126-32.
43. Drozdova LI, Cherkashina NV, Makhortov VL, Vasil’yev PG, Shcherbakov MG, Demina LV, et al. Analiz sovremennogo sostoyaniya problemy ispol’zovaniya antibiotikov v kachestve kormovoy dobavki. Agrarnyy vestnik Urala. 2011;3(82):39-42. [in Russian].
44. Lebedeva IA, Novikova MV. Vliyaniye probioticheskikh preparatov na pechen’ sel’skokhozyaystvennoy ptitsy. Materialy Vserossiyskoy nauchnoprakticheskoy konferentsii «Vklad molodykh uchenykh v otraslevuyu nauku s uchetom sovremennykh tendentsiy razvitiya APK»; 2008 Dekab 22-24; Moskva. Moskva: Gos. Universitet po zemleustroystvu; 2008. s. 78-9. [in Russian].

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 4 Part 2 (147), 2018 year, 77-84 pages, index UDK 579.62

10.29254/2077-4214-2018-4-2-147-77-84