Immune Response of Piglets Receiving Mixture of Formic and Propionic Acid Alone or with Either Capric Acid or<i> Bacillus Licheniformis</i> after<i> Escherichia coli</i> Challenge

Ren, Chunxiao; Zhou, Qiqi; Guan, Wutai; Lin, Xiaofeng; Wang, Yijiang; Song, Hanqing; Zhang, Yinzhi

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6416187

BioMed Research International

On this page

Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 | Article ID 6416187 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6416187

Immune Response of Piglets Receiving Mixture of Formic and Propionic Acid Alone or with Either Capric Acid or Bacillus Licheniformis after Escherichia coli Challenge

Chunxiao Ren,¹Qiqi Zhou,¹Wutai Guan,^1,2Xiaofeng Lin,¹Yijiang Wang,¹Hanqing Song,¹and Yinzhi Zhang¹

Academic Editor: Pengjun Shi

Received16 Nov 2018

Revised28 Jan 2019

Accepted10 Mar 2019

Published25 Mar 2019

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate whether diets containing mixture of formic and propionic acid alone or supplemented with either capric acid or Bacillus Licheniformis can alleviate immune inflammatory response of piglets challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC). A total of 30 weaning pigs were assigned to 5 diets, without additive (CON), with antibiotics (ATB), with 1% organic acid (OA; 64% formic and 25% propionic acid), with OA plus 0.2% capric acid (OA + CRA), and with OA plus 0.02% probiotic (Bacillus Licheniformis; OA + PB). After oral challenge with ETEC on day 10, the feces and plasma of all pigs were collected at different time points. Four additive treatments all decreased rectal temperature (RT) at 9 h and fecal scores (FS) at 24 h after challenge (P < 0.05), while at 9 h after challenge, inclusion of OA induced a decrease of RT compared with OA + CRA and OA + PB (P < 0.05). In plasma, concentration of interleukin (IL)-1β was reduced with the addition of ATB and OA at 24 h and 48 h after challenge and it is lower in OA group than OA + CRA group at 24 h after challenge (P < 0.05). Diets with ATB, OA, and OA + PB caused a decrease of the concentrations of IL-6 in plasma at 9 h after challenge (P < 0.05). The four additives treated piglets showed decreased concentrations of plasma tumor necrosis factor-α and interferon-γ at 9 h and 24 h after challenge, respectively (P < 0.05). In conclusion, OA supplementation alleviated the inflammatory response and reduced diarrhea incidence in piglets challenged with ETEC. However, no further improvements were observed when OA supplemented with CRA or probiotics.

1. Introduction

Weaning pigs frequently appear postweaning diarrhea, due to the insufficient quantities of gastric acid resulting in a high pH value in stomach and a high risk of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) infection [1], which leads a lasting detrimental effect on performance [2]. Antibiotics growth promoters have been used in the weaning piglets’ diets for many years and have been proved to be an effective way of attenuating post-weaning diarrhea and improving growth performance of piglets [3], while it was reported that the antibiotics used in livestock accounted for a substantial portion of total antibiotics production [4]. However, the long-term use of antibiotics has accelerated the biological evolution of microorganisms, resulting in the emergence of many drug-resistant microorganisms that threaten human health [5]. Therefore, finding alternatives to antibiotics in livestock production to reduce the risk of bacterial resistance to human is urgently needed.

Organic acids, i.e., formic acid and propionic acid, have long been added to weaning pig diets for making up the insufficient quantities of gastric acid to activate pepsin and inhibit the proliferation of pathogens in gastrointestinal tract of piglets [6]. Medium-chain fatty acids (MCFAs), i.e., caproic acid, caprylic acid, capric acid, and lauric acid, exhibit broad-spectrum antibacterial properties [7]. Studies have shown that organic acids and MCFAs have a synergistic effect of killing diarrhea causing pathogens [8, 9]. Probiotics such as Bacillus Licheniformis have also been widely promoted as alternatives to the antibiotics. Bacillus Licheniformis is able to secrete digestive enzymes, tolerate gastric acid, and compete with pathogens for colonization sites and nutrients [10]. However, there was limited information on whether combinations of formic/propionic acid and capric acid or Bacillus Licheniformis could alleviate the intestinal of piglets and whether synergistic action between them exists in vivo. Thus, the effect of dietary supplementation with formic/propionic and its combinations with capric acid or Bacillus Licheniformis on the immune response of weaning pigs challenged with ETEC K88 was determined in present study.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Diets and Feeding Regime

The experimental basal diet was formulated to meet the nutrients requirements for a 6 to 10 kg pig (NRC, 2012) and its compositions and nutrient profile were shown in Table 1. Experimental diets are as follows: (1) basal diet without other supplements as a negative control (CON); (2) basal diet with antibiotics (50 mg/kg quinocetone, 75 mg/kg chlortetracycline, 50 mg/kg kitasamycin; ATB); (3) basal diet plus 1% mixture of 64% formic and 25% propionic acid (Lupro-Cid; BASF, Germany; OA); (4) basal diet plus 1% OA and 0.2% capric acid (obtained from sigma-aldrich; OA + CRA); (5) basal diet plus 1% OA and 0.02% probiotic (Bacillus Licheniformis, 1.65 × 10¹⁰ viable spores per gram, 3.3 × 10⁶ viable spores of Bacillus Licheniformis per gram of feed; OA + PB). During the whole period of the experiment, the piglets were ad libitum to the feed and water and diets were offered to pigs as mash.

2.2. Animals and Housing

A total of 30 male piglets (Duroc × Landrace × Yorkshire, initial weight 7.9 ± 0.5 kg) were weighed and randomly allocated to dietary 5 treatments with 6 replicate pens per treatment and 1 pig per pen. The animal use and care protocol were approved by the South China Agricultural University Animal Care and Use Committee.

The temperature of the room was maintained at 30 ± 1°C. After placement, pigs were allowed a 6-d adaptation period to acclimate to their new surroundings and feed. During the adaptation period, the piglets showed no signs of diarrhea, skin wounds, or obvious inflammation, which suggested that pigs were healthy and fit for the experiment.

2.3. Bacteria Preparation, Oral Challenge, and Fecal Microbial Analysis

Escherichia coli K88 (CVCC225) was purchased from the Chinese Veterinary Medicine Collection Center. The Escherichia coli K88 was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) genotyping as possessing the genes necessary for heat labile enterotoxin (LT), heat stable enterotoxin (ST), and F4 fimbrial antigen using published primers [11, 12]. After an adaption period of 6 days, the piglets were fed corresponding experimental diets for 9 days and orally challenged with 10 mL of 5 × 10⁹ CFU/mL ETEC K88 via a syringe on the 10th day. Fresh faeces were collected and weighed at 0, 24, and 48 h after ETEC K88 challenge and the fecal pH values were determined using pH meter (Testo 205). Total coliforms were quantified by 10-fold gradient dilution method using eosin methyl blue agar and the plates were incubated aerobically at 37°C for 24 to 48 h [13]. For Lactobacillus spp. counts, the serially diluted samples were quantified with Man, Rogosa, and Sharpe agar and incubated for 48 h at 37°C under anaerobic condition [14].

2.4. Rectal Temperature and Diarrhea Assessment

Diarrhea assessment was determined according to fecal scores (FS) system reported by Marquardt et al. [15]. Occurrence and severity of diarrhea were monitored at 0, 9, 24, 48, 96, and 168 h after challenge and assessed as follows: 0; normal; 1; soft feces; 2: mild diarrhea; 3: severe diarrhea by 1 trained personnel with no prior knowledge of the dietary treatment allocation. The rectal temperature (RT) of the piglets was measured by rectal thermometer (Omron MC-347) at 0, 9, 24, 33, 48, 96, and 168 h after ETEC K88 challenge.

2.5. Plasma Parameter Analysis

Blood samples were collected via anterior vena cava puncture at 0, 9, 24, 48, 96, and 168 h after challenge into tubes containing EDTA. To obtain the plasma samples, blood samples were centrifuged at 1000 × g for 10 min and then stored at −20°C and analyzed within one month. Plasma concentrations of interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, interferon-γ (IFN-γ), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were determined using a porcine-specific multiplex assay (Millipore Multiplex; Billerica, MA, #PCYTMAG-23K-05) according to Vieira‐Potter et al. [16]. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) in the plasma was determined using a commercially available porcine IgG Elisa kit (Huamei, Wuhan). All assays were run in duplicate.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed as a completely randomized design by using GLM procedures with SPSS (SPSS Software Release 22, IBM Inc., USA). For every assay analysis, a generalized randomized design with repeated measures over time on each experimental unit (individual pig) was followed. Comparisons between dietary treatments and sampling times were made when a significance was found using LSD procedure. All data were presented as least squares means ± SEM.

3. Results

3.1. Rectal Temperature and Fecal Scores

Overall, after challenge, the FS increased in all groups (P < 0.05) and the control pigs had higher FS than pigs in other four treatment groups at 24 h after challenge (P < 0.05) (Figure 1). The ETEC challenge caused an increased RT of piglets in CON and OA + CRA groups (P < 0.05) with higher RT at 24 h than 0 h after challenge in these two groups (P < 0.05) (Figure 2). The piglets showed lower RT when they fed diets with additives, and OA treated piglets had lower RT compared with OA + CRA or OA + PB at 9 h after challenge (P < 0.05).

Figure 1

Effects of organic acid or organic acid supplemented with either capric acid or Bacillus Licheniformis on fecal scores of pigs challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC). CON = basal diet; ATB = basal diet plus antibiotics; OA = basal diet plus 1% organic acid; OA + CRA = basal diet plus 1% organic acid + 0.2% capric; OA + PB = basal diet plus 1% organic acid + 0.02% probiotic (3.3 × 10⁶ viable spores of Bacillus Licheniformis per gram of feed). Values are least squares means ± SEM. Within per treatment, value at different time points without a common superscript differs (P < 0.05); within per time point, value with different treatments without a common superscript differs (P < 0.05).

Figure 2

Effects of organic acid or organic acid supplemented with either capric acid or Bacillus Licheniformis on rectal temperature of pigs challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC). CON = basal diet; ATB = basal diet plus antibiotics; OA = basal diet plus 1% organic acid; OA + CRA = basal diet plus 1% organic acid + 0.2% capric; OA + PB = basal diet plus 1% organic acid + 0.02% probiotic (3.3 × 10⁶ viable spores of Bacillus Licheniformis per gram of feed). Values are least squares means ± SEM. Within per treatment, value at different time points without a common superscript differs (P < 0.05); within per time point, value with different treatments without a common superscript differs (P < 0.05).

3.2. Inflammatory Cytokines and Immunoglobulin G in Plasma

After challenge, higher plasma IL-1β concentration was appeared at 9, 24, and 48 h than 0 h in CON group (P < 0.05), and higher plasma IL-6 concentrations were appeared at 9 h than 0 h in CON group (P < 0.05) (Tables 2 and 3). With the addition of ATB and OA, plasma IL-1β concentration was decreased at 24 and 48 h after challenge (P < 0.05), while at 24 h after challenge OA supplementation decreased plasma IL-1β concentration compared with OA + CRA (P < 0.05). Pigs receiving ATB, OA, and OA + PB diets decreased IL-6 concentration in plasma at 9 h after challenge compared with CON group (P < 0.05).

After challenge, plasma TNF-α concentrations significantly increased in CON, OA, and OA + CRA groups (P < 0.05) and plasma IFN-γ concentrations significantly increased in CON and OA + CRA groups (P < 0.05) (Tables 4 and 5). The higher plasma TNF-α and IFN-γ concentrations were observed in the pigs of CON groups than the pigs of other four treatment groups at 9 and 24 h after challenge, respectively (P < 0.05). Plasma IgG concentration was significantly increased in OA + CRA group after challenge (P < 0.05) and did not differ significantly among the five treatment groups (P > 0.05) (Table 6).

3.3. Microbial Populations in Feces

There was no effect of treatment on fecal pH values and total coliforms and Lactobacillus counts observed at 0, 24, and 48 h after challenge (P > 0.05) (Table 7).

4. Discussion

Oral challenge with ETEC has been widely used as model to screen out effective antibiotic substitutes that protect piglets from suffering postweaning diarrhea [17], which causes impaired growth performance and high mortality [18]. The lipopolysaccharide of ETEC can activate the nuclear factor-κB pathway through toll like receptor 4, leading to the occurrence of intestinal epithelial cell inflammation [19], while the LT and ST produced by ETEC K88 can cause diarrhea in piglets through the cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator of intestinal epithelial cells [20]. In this study, fecal scores were used to evaluate intensity of diarrhea in piglets according to methods previously reported [15, 21]. After challenge, the fecal scores of piglets increased in each treatment group, and piglets receiving ATB, OA, OA + CRA, and OA + PB diets all exhibited lower fecal scores compared with CON group at 24 h after challenge. Short chain fatty acids have a broad-spectrum bactericidal capacity against gram negative bacteria and can kill pathogens at low pH [22, 23]. Therefore, adding short chain fatty acid in the diet can form a line of defense in the low pH condition of stomach to kill pathogens, thereby, weakening the pathogen’s damage to the small intestine of piglets. Additionally, expression of virulence gene was suppressed when pathogens were grown in medium supplemented with subminimal inhibition concentration of short and medium chain fatty acids [24–26]. Dietary inclusion of formic/propionic mixture may reduce the harm of ETEC to the intestines and then decrease the incidence of piglet diarrhea.

In the present study, no additional effects on the fecal scores of piglets were observed when organic acids combined with medium-chain fatty acids. It has been reported that short and medium-chain fatty acids have a synergistic bactericidal effect in vitro [8, 9]; nevertheless, the antimicrobial ability of capric acid was not only to Escherichia coli but also to Lactobacillus (conformed in vitro in our lab, but data has not been publicly reported); when they used together, they may influence the Lactobacillus counts in the gut of the piglets. However, some researches showed that inclusion of OAs and MCFAs in the piglets’ diets enriched lactobacillus in ileal and rectal content [27], MCFAs at low dietary levels increased lactobacillus johnsonii and lactobacillus amylovorus counts in gastric contents [28], and dietary 0.15% MCFAs induced minor changes in the gastrointestinal microbiota [29]. The different gastrointestinal microbiota response to MCFAs may be due to the dosage and species of MCFAs in the diets, in which the lower dosage MCFAs performed beneficial gut flora modifier, and the optimal dosage of MCFAs in the piglets’ diet needs further exploration. Bacillus Licheniformis was also reported to control postweaning diarrhea syndrome of piglets [30]. However, no additional effects on the fecal scores of piglets were observed when organic acids combined with Bacillus Licheniformis. The reports about the combination of probiotic and organic acids in the piglets’ diets were limited, and Wolfenden et al. [31] reported combination treatment with organic acid and lactobacillus was more effective than individual treatment for Salmonella reduction in chicks. No better improvements when organic acid was supplemented with probiotic in the present study may be due to the different probiotic strains, and the combined effects of organic acids and different probiotics may vary.

Inflammation of intestinal epithelial cells was induced by activating the nuclear factor-κB pathway by lipopolysaccharide, LT, and ST of ETEC, which increased the animal body temperature [21]. Rectal temperature is a sensitive indicator of intestinal inflammation in oral ETEC challenge model, and short-term temperature rises after challenge had been appeared in other ETEC challenge reports [18]. Our results also implied that RT of piglets were increased after challenge with ETEC, after reaching the peak value, and the RT of piglets in all treatment groups began to gradually decrease to normal physiological value within 168 hours. At 9 h after challenge, piglets fed OA and ATB diets decreased RT relative to CON diet, which was observed in other trials of some effective antibiotic substitutes [21, 32, 33]. In the present study, 1% of formic/propionic acid mixture mitigated fever of piglets induced by ETEC challenge to a similar extent as the antibiotic treatment.

During the process of inflammation, IL-1β and IL-6 in blood can produce heat and cause an increase in body temperature. Compared with CON pigs, those fed OA decreased plasma IL-6 concentration at 9 h after challenge, which was consistent with the RT displayed in CON and OA groups. Addition of 1% of an organic acid blend to feeds of ETEC challenged piglets suppressed inflammation therefore decreasing RT after challenge to a level on par with the antibiotic treatment group. Similarly, Zhang et al. [34] reported that IL-1β level in serum was decreased at 6 h after ETEC K88 challenge in piglets orally inoculated with Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, while Kiarie et al. [35] reported that piglets fed diets containing either egg yolk antibodies or nonstarch polysaccharide hydrolysis products decreased serum IL-6 concentration at 6 h after ETEC K88 challenge. In these studies, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and egg yolk appeared to alleviate the pronounced acute inflammatory response induced by ETEC K88 in piglets. These studies demonstrated that this formic/propionic acid mixture can also be used as an effective antibiotic substitute to relieve inflammation induced by ETEC K88.

Plasma TNF-α was measured as indicators of systemic pro-inflammation response and primarily secreted by activated phagocytic cells during the period of an acute enteric disease. The depression of circulating TNF-α in OA, OA + CRA, and OA + PB group compared to CON group was observed at 9 h after challenge, and this reduction was observed in the ETEC challenge pigs of other reports [34]. Consistent decline in circulating IFN-γ was also observed at 24 h after challenge. Interferon-γ contributes to T helper cell 1 differentiation and bridges the innate and specific immune response. It was possible that piglets receiving OA, OA + CRA, and OA + PB not only relieved initial immune response but also alleviated cellular immune responses after ETEC challenge. The changes of TNF-α and IFN-γ also reflected that no additional mitigation was observed when OA plus either CRA or PB. Although marked synergistic bactericidal effect of organic acids in combination with MCFAs was reported in vitro [8, 9] and organic acids and MCFAs had an interaction in reducing counts of Enterobacteria in the stomach [29]. Nevertheless, pigs fed diets containing 1% of a formic/propionic acid mixture performed well and the overall level of infection challenge was most likely low. Therefore, testing the capric or Bacillus Licheniformis under lower doses of organic acid or under greater disease challenge may be warranted.

After challenge, IgG in plasma of piglets increased with time, indicating that IgG mediated humoral immunity and exerted antibacterial effects in the body of piglets. However, no significant difference was found between each treatment group. Before and after the challenge, no significant difference was found in the fecal pH values and total E. coli and Lactobacillus counts. This may be due to the fact that liquid organic acids would prevent the passage of pathogens and regulate the microbes in the stomach and proximal segments of intestine [36]. It is possible that organic acids were absorbed in mid and posterior segment of the small intestine [37], and they had little effects on the number of microbes in posterior segment of intestinal and feces.

5. Conclusion

Overall, administrating 1% of a formic/propionic acid mixture alleviated the inflammatory response of weaning pigs challenged with ETEC K88 and then reduced febrile and diarrhea. This was comparable to the reference group supplemented with antibiotics commonly used by pig producers in weaning feed to improve performance and to prevent enteric diseases. Therefore, this study suggests that the use of this formic/propionic acid mixture at 1% in weaning pig diets can be considered a valid alternative to antibiotics, at least with regard to ETEC challenge. However, no further improvements were observed when the organic acid blend was supplemented in conjunction with either capric or Bacillus Licheniformis.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Lily Li and Dr. Joshua Jendza for technical and language assistance.

References

N. Canibe, S. H. Steien, M. Øverland, and B. B. Jensen, “Effect of K-diformate in starter diets on acidity, microbiota, and the amount of organic acids in the digestive tract of piglets, and on gastric alterations,” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 79, no. 8, pp. 2123–2133, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Stensl, J. C. Kim, B. Bowring, A. M. Collins, J. P. Mansfield, and J. R. Pluske, “A comparison of diets supplemented with a feed additive containing organic acids, cinnamaldehyde and a permeabilizing complex, or zinc oxide, on post-weaning diarrhoea, selected bacterial populations, blood measures and performance in weaned pigs experimentally infected with enterotoxigenic E. coli,” Animals, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1147–1168, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. J. Dibner and J. D. Richards, “Antibiotic growth promoters in agriculture: history and mode of action,” Poultry Science, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 634–643, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. L. Smith, A. D. Harris, J. A. Johnson, E. K. Silbergeld, and J. G. Morris Jr., “Animal antibiotic use has an early but important impact on the emergence of antibiotic resistance in human commensal bacteria,” Proceedings of the National Acadamy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 99, no. 9, pp. 6434–6439, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Zhang, Z. Shen, C. Zhang et al., “Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance among Escherichia coli from chicken and swine, China, 2008–2015,” Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 203, pp. 49–55, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. V. Suiryanrayna and J. V. Ramana, “A review of the effects of dietary organic acids fed to swine,” Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 45, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Bergsson, J. Arnfinnsson, Ó. Steingrímsson, and H. Thormar, “Killing of Gram-positive cocci by fatty acids and monoglycerides,” APMIS-Acta Pathologica, Microbiologica et Immunologica Scandinavica, vol. 109, no. 10, pp. 670–678, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. A. Kim and M. S. Rhee, “Marked synergistic bactericidal effects and mode of action of medium-chain fatty acids in combination with organic acids against Escherichia coli O157: H7,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, vol. 79, no. 21, pp. 6552–6560, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. A. Kim and M. S. Rhee, “Highly enhanced bactericidal effects of medium chain fatty acids (caprylic, capric, and lauric acid) combined with edible plant essential oils (carvacrol, eugenol, β-resorcylic acid, trans-cinnamaldehyde, thymol, and vanillin) against Escherichia coli O157: H7,” Food Control, vol. 60, pp. 447–454, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Lee, I. Park, Y. Choi, and J. Cho, “Bacillus strains as feed additives: In vitro evaluation of its potential probiotic properties,” Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 577–585, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Kotlowski, C. N. Bernstein, S. Sepehri, and D. O. Krause, “High prevalence of Escherichia coli belonging to the B2+D phylogenetic group in inflammatory bowel disease,” Gut, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 669–675, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Setia, S. K. Bhandari, J. D. House, C. M. Nyachoti, and D. O. Krause, “Development and in vitro evaluation of an Escherichia coli probiotic able to inhibit the growth of pathogenic Escherichia coli K88,” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 2005–2012, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Kiarie, S. Bhandari, M. Scott, D. O. Krause, and C. M. Nyachoti, “Growth performance and gastrointestinal microbial ecology responses of piglets receiving Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products after an oral challenge with Escherichia coli (K88),” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 89, no. 4, pp. 1062–1078, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. G. Manzanilla, J. F. Perez, M. Martin, C. Kamel, F. Baucells, and J. Gasa, “Effect of plant extracts and formic acid on the intestinal equilibrium of early-weaned pigs,” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 82, no. 11, pp. 3210–3218, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. R. Marquardt, L. Z. Jin, J.-W. Kim, L. Fang, A. A. Frohlich, and S. K. Baidoo, “Passive protective effect of egg-yolk antibodies against enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli K88+ infection in neonatal and early-weaned piglets,” FEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 283–288, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. J. Vieira-Potter, S. Lee, D. S. Bayless et al., “Disconnect between adipose tissue inflammation and cardiometabolic dysfunction in Ossabaw pigs,” Obesity, vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 2421–2429, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. I. Adewole, I. H. Kim, and C. M. Nyachoti, “Gut health of pigs: Challenge models and response criteria with a critical analysis of the effectiveness of selected feed additives - a review,” Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 909–924, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. J. Van Dijk, P. M. M. Enthoven, S. G. C. Van den Hoven et al., “The effect of dietary spray-dried porcine plasma on clinical response in weaned piglets challenged with a pathogenic Escherichia coli,” Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 207–218, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Shimazu, J. Villena, M. Tohno et al., “Immunobiotic Lactobacillus jensenii elicits anti-inflammatory activity in porcine intestinal epithelial cells by modulating negative regulators of the toll-like receptor signaling pathway,” Infection and Immunity, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 276–288, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Clements, J. C. Young, N. Constantinou, and G. Frankel, “Infection strategies of enteric pathogenic Escherichia coli,” Gut Microbes, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 71–87, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. F. Yi, J. A. Carroll, G. L. Allee et al., “Effect of glutamine and spray-dried plasma on growth performance, small intestinal morphology, and immune responses of Escherichia coli K88 +-challenged weaned pigs,” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 634–643, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. P. Desbois and V. J. Smith, “Antibacterial free fatty acids: activities, mechanisms of action and biotechnological potential,” Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 1629–1642, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Mani-López, H. S. García, and A. López-Malo, “Organic acids as antimicrobials to control Salmonella in meat and poultry products,” Food Research International, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 713–721, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Gantois, R. Ducatelle, F. Pasmans et al., “Butyrate specifically down-regulates Salmonella pathogenicity island 1 gene expression,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 946–949, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Boyen, F. Haesebrouck, A. Vanparys et al., “Coated fatty acids alter virulence properties of Salmonella Typhimurium and decrease intestinal colonization of pigs,” Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 132, no. 3-4, pp. 319–327, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. van Immerseel, J. de Buck, F. Boyen et al., “Medium-chain fatty acids decrease colonization and invasion through hilA suppression shortly after infection of chickens with Salmonella enterica serovar Enteritidis,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, vol. 70, no. 6, pp. 3582–3587, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Kuang, Y. Wang, Y. Zhang et al., “Effects of dietary combinations of organic acids and medium chain fatty acids as a replacement of zinc oxide on growth, digestibility and immunity of weaned pigs,” Animal Feed Science and Technology, vol. 208, pp. 145–157, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Zentek, S. Buchheit-Renko, K. Männer, R. Pieper, and W. Vahjen, “Intestinal concentrations of free and encapsulated dietary medium-chain fatty acids and effects on gastric microbial ecology and bacterial metabolic products in the digestive tract of piglets,” Archives of Animal Nutrition, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 14–26, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Zentek, F. Ferrara, R. Pieper, L. Tedin, W. Meyer, and W. Vahjen, “Effects of dietary combinations of organic acids and medium chain fatty acids on the gastrointestinal microbial ecology and bacterial metabolites in the digestive tract of weaning piglets,” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 91, no. 7, pp. 3200–3210, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. C. Kyriakis, V. K. Tsiloyiannis, J. Vlemmas et al., “The effect of probiotic LSP 122 on the control of post-weaning diarrhoea syndrome of piglets,” Research in Veterinary Science, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 223–228, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. D. Wolfenden, J. L. Vicente, J. P. Higgins et al., “Effect of organic acids and probiotics on Salmonella enteritidis infection in broiler chickens,” International Journal of Poultry Science, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 403–405, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. C. Walsh, M. H. Rostagno, G. E. Gardiner, A. L. Sutton, B. T. Richert, and J. S. Radcliffe, “Controlling salmonella infection in weanling pigs through water delivery of direct-fed microbials or organic acids. part I: effects on growth performance, microbial populations, and immune status,” Journal of Animal Science, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 261–271, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Jayaraman, A. Regassa, J. K. Htoo, and C. M. Nyachoti, “Effects of dietary standardized ileal digestible tryptophan:lysine ratio on performance, plasma urea nitrogen, ileal histomorphology and immune responses in weaned pigs challenged with Escherichia coli K88,” Livestock Science, vol. 203, pp. 114–119, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Zhang, Y.-Q. Xu, H.-Y. Liu et al., “Evaluation of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG using an Escherichia coli K88 model of piglet diarrhoea: Effects on diarrhoea incidence, faecal microflora and immune responses,” Veterinary Microbiology, vol. 141, no. 1-2, pp. 142–148, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Kiarie, B. A. Slominski, D. O. Krause, and C. M. Nyachoti, “Acute phase response of piglets diets containing non-starch polysaccharide hydrolysis products and egg yolk antibodies following an oral challenge with Escherichia coli (K88),” Canadian Journal of Animal Science, vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 353–360, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Roth and M. Kirchgessner, “Organic acids as feed additives for young pigs: nutritional and gastrointestinal effects,” Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences, vol. 7, Suppl. 1, pp. 25–33, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. J. Dibner and P. Buttin, “Use of organic acids as a model to study the impact of gut microflora on nutrition and metabolism,” Journal of Applied Poultry Research, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 453–463, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2019 Chunxiao Ren et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

1484

Downloads

1544

Citations