Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 30458
Comparison of the Effects of Three Different Types of Probiotics on the Sucrase Activities of the Small Intestine Mucosa of Broiler Chicks

Authors: Fazlollah Moosavinasab, Zhila Motamedi


An experiment was conducted to study the effects of different types of probiotic on Sucrase enzyme activity of the small intestine mucosa in male broilers. The experimental design was arranged as randomized completely blocks in 4 × 2 factorial arrangement of treatment. 180 male broilers of Ross 308 commercial hybrid were designated into 4 groups. Three replicates of 15 birds were assigned to each treatment. Control treatments (diet contained no probiotic) were fed according to the NRC as base diet and three treatment groups were fed from the same diet plus three different types of probiotics. Birds were slaughtered after 21 and 42 days and different segments of small intestine (at 1,10,30,50,70 and 90% of total length the small intestine) were taken from each replicates (N=2) Sucrase enzyme activities were measured and recorded. Obtained data were analyzed by Spss (P<0.05). In three treatment groups, probiotic had no significant effect on sucrase activity in different ages and segments of small intestine (P<0.05). These data suggested that probiotics administration had no significant effect on treatments comparing to the control group.

Keywords: Probiotics, broiler, chicks, sucrase, Small Intestine

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 1576


[1] Duke, G.E. 1996. Avian Digestion. In: Dukes" physiology of domestic animals. 11th., edited by M.J. Swenson., and W.O. Reece. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, N Y pp, 428-35.
[2] Cut-tie W.B. (1988). Structure and function of domestic animals. 1st ed., pp: 265-267, Butler worth publishers. MA.
[3] Anderson DB ,McCracken VJ ,Amino RJ(1999)Gut microbiology and growth promoting antibiotics in swine.pig news and information:20:115N-122N
[4] Dibber JJ ,Richards JD,(2005).Antibiotic growth promoters in agriculture History and mode action.poultry.sci.84.634-643.
[5] Fuller, R. 1986. Probiotics in man and animals. Journal of Applied Bacterial, 66: 365-378.
[6] Hansen-s, C. 2002.Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food: Joint FAO/WHO Working Group meeting, London Ontario, Canada, 30 April-1 May.
[7] NRC,1998. Nutrient requirement of broiler,: National of academy press. Washington D.C.
[8] Ghiasi G.J., R. Beheshti, H. Karamouz, H. Ebrahimnazhad, K. Hatefinazhad, and N. Maheri-Sis, 2010. Effect of Different Levels of Perlite on Sucrase Mucosal Enzymes Activity in Small Intestinal of Broiler Chicks. Global veterinarian, 4 (2):103-107.
[9] Hedemann M., S.B.B. Jensen, and H.D. Poulsen, 2006. Influence of dietary zinc and copper on digestive enzyme activity and intestinal morphology in weaned pigs. Journal of Animal Science,84: 3310-3320.
[10] Dahlqvist , A., 1964. Method of assay of intestinal disaccaridases. Anal. Biochem., 7: 18-25.
[11] Hill, H.Z., 1971. Enzyme kinetics in mammalian cells. 3. Regulation of activities of galactokinase, galactose-1 -phosphate uridyl transferase and tiridine diphosphogalactose-4-epimerase in human erythrocytes. Journal Cell. Physiology., 78: 419-30.
[12] Teshfam, M. 1984. Comparison of the effects of the high-acid milk replacer with conventional skim milk replacer. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bristol, UK.
[13] Benajiba, A. and S. Maroux, 1980. Purification and characterization. European Journal of Biochemistry, 107: 381-388.
[14] SPSS Institute, 2002. SPSS state software: Changes and enhancement through release11.5.0, SPSS institute. LEAD technologies. Inc, All right reserved.
[15] Hooper ,L; et al.2001, Molecular analysis of commensal host-microbial interaction ships in the intestine . science , 291:881-8840
[16] Ducluzeau, R. 1993. Development, equilibrium and role of microbial flora in the newborn. Ann. Pediatric. 40:13-22.
[17] Timmerman H.M,Veldman A,Van den Elsen E,(2006). Mortality and Growth Performance of Broilers Given Drinking Water Supplemented with Chicken-Specific Probiotics. Poultry Science , 85(8):1383-1388.
[18] Angel, C.R. 1991.Long segmented filamentous organism observed in poults experimentally infected with stunting syn.
[19] Duke, G.E.1986. Alimentary canal: anatomy. Regulation of feeding, and motility. In: Avian physiology. 4th ed., edited by P.D. Sturkie Springer- Verlag N Y .pp. 269-88.
[20] Hampson, D.J.1986. Alterations in piglet small intestinal structure at weaning. Research Veterinary. Science, 40: 32-40.
[21] Sklan, D., 2001. Development of the digestivetract of poultry. Worlds Poult. Science Journal. 57:415-428.
[22] Award W. A., Ghareeb K and Böhm J.(2009). Effect of addition of a probiotic micro-organism to broiler diet on intestinal mucosal architecture and electrophysiological parameters. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition ; 91 : 175-180.
[23] Semenza G. (1986). Anchoring and biosynthesis of stalked brush broder membrane protein: glyconsidases and peptidases of enterocytes and of renal tubuli. Ann.Rev.Cell Biol., 2:255-313.
[24] Nunez M. C., Bueno J. D., Ayudarte M. V., Almendros A., Rios A., Suarez M. D., and Gol A. (1996). Dietary restriction induces biochemical and morphometric changes in the small intestine of nursing piglets. J. Nutr., 126:933-944.
[25] Jones A., Oren M., Diver-Haber A., Kaplan B., and Passwell J. (1987). Effect of components of breast milk on mucosal enzyme activity of the newborn small intestine. Pediatr. Res., 21:126-130.
[26] Burrin D.G., Dudley M.A., Reeds P.J., Shulman R.J., Perkinson. S., and Rosenberger. J. (1994). Feeding colostrums rapidly alters enzymatic activity and relative isoform abundance of jejuna lactase in neonatal pigs. J. Nutr. , 124:2350-2357.
[27] Traber P.G., Gumucio D.L., and Wang W. (1991). Isolation of intestinal epithelial cells for the study of different gene expression along the cryptvillus axis. American Journal of physiology, 260, 895-903 (quoted by UniZ. Et al., 1998, Poultry Science, 77, No 1, 75-82).
[28] Bueno A.R., Cappet T.G.,Sunvold G.D., and Clemens E.T. (2000). Feline colonic morphology and mucosal tissue as influenced via the source of dietry fiber. , Nutrition Resarch, 26:5.533-542.
[29] Bowen R. (Last updated on April 25,2006). Small Intestine: Brush Border Enzymes, Colorado state university
[30] Buts, J.P., P. Bernasconi, M.P. Van, P. Craynest, and M.R Maldague De, 1986. Response of human and rat small intestinal mucosa to oral administration of Saccharomyces boulardii. Pediatric. Research, 20: 192- 196.
[31] John, H.U., R. Ullrich, T. Schneider, R.M. Liehr, H.L. Schieferdecker, H. Holst, and M. Zeitz, 1996. Immunological and trophical effects of Saccharomyces boulardii on the small intestine in healthy human volunteers. Digestion, 57: 95-104.