REVIEW OF THE "PROVETIN FOR POULTRY" AND "KLYUVER PRO+" FEED ADDITIVES EFFICACY IN LIVESTOCK FARMING
Abstract and keywords
Abstract:
The problem of finding alternatives to feed antibiotics in the context of stricter legislation is considered. The objective of the work was to conduct a comprehensive efficacy analysis of the feed additives "ProVetin for Poultry" (based on Bacillus subtilis LN-2024) and "Klyuver Pro+" (containing Kluyveromyces marxianus PbI-7) in various branches of animal husbandry. The analysis found that the use of "ProVetin" in poultry farming reduces the colonization of the gastrointestinal tract by pathogenic bacteria (Salmonella spp. and E. coli) by 42%, decreases mortality by 14-17%, improves feed conversion by 6-9%, and increases average daily weight gain by 8-11 %. This effect is due to the ability of the LN-2024 strain to synthesize the antimicrobial peptide iturin A. The "Klyuver Pro+" additive showed high efficacy in dairy cattle farming, increasing milk yield by 5.8-7.2%, milk fat content by 0.2-0.25%, and reducing somatic cell count by 16-20%. Its mechanism of action is associated with the stimulation of cellulolytic bacteria Fibrobacter succinogenes (population increase by 35-45%) and the stabilization of rumen pH within the optimal range of 6.4-6.8. The species-specificity of the mechanisms of action was revealed: Bacillus subtilis is most effective for monogastric animals, while Kluyveromyces marxianus is most beneficial for ruminants. Based on the successful application of the additives in poultry and cattle farming, the potential for their use in goose farming is substantiated. The results demonstrate that these feed additives align with the principles of sustainable livestock farming and represent a promising alternative to feed antibiotics.

Keywords:
feed additives, bacillus subtilis, kluyveromyces marxianus, productivity, livestock farming
References

1. Nurmi E., Rantala M. Novye aspekty sal'monelleza u broylerov // Nature. 1973. T. 241. S. 210-211. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/241210a0

2. Mikielan A., D'Inka R. Kishechnaya pronicaemost' pri vospalitel'nyh zabolevaniyah kishechnika // World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2015. T. 21, № 29. S. 8916-8928. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/628157

3. Uells Dzh. M. Immunomoduliruyuschie mehanizmy laktobacill // Microbial Cell Factories. 2011. T. 10, Pril. 1. S. S17. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2859-10-S1-S17

4. Vliyanie Bacillus subtilis PB6 na zdorov'e kishechnika broylerov pri nekroticheskom enterite / S. Dzhayaraman, G. Tangavel, H. Kurian [i dr.] // Poultry Science. 2013. T. 92. S. 370-374. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02528

5. Markoviak P., Slizhevska K. Probioticheskie effekty v zhivotnovodstve: meta-analiz // Annual Review of Animal Biosciences. 2023. T. 11. S. 23-45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9091021

6. Ivannikova R.F., Bessarabova E.V. Effektivnost' vyraschivaniya molodnyaka loshadey pri primenenii kormovoy dobavki ProVetin // Ippologiya i veterinariya. 2023. № 4(50). S. 234-239. DOI:https://doi.org/10.52419/2225-1537.2023.4.234-239 EDN: https://elibrary.ru/EROVBK

7. Ivannikova R.F., Bessarabova E.V., Smirnova E.A. Effektivnost' kormovoy dobavki ProVetin v konevodstve // Veterinariya. 2023. № 9. S. 56-60. DOI:https://doi.org/10.30896/0042-4846.2023.26.9.56-60

8. Chzhao X., Kuipers O.P. Identifikaciya antimikrobnyh soedineniy Bacillus // Journal of Biotechnology. 2021. T. 333. S. 45-58. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-016-3224-y

9. Vliyanie Bacillus subtilis (DSM17299) na sal'monellu u broylerov / I. Knap, A. Kelet, M. Bennedsen [i dr.] // Poultry Science. 2011. T. 90. S. 1690-1694. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01056

10. Pryamokormovye mikrobnye dobavki dlya zhvachnyh zhivotnyh / Dzh.K. Seo, S.V. Kim, M.H. Kim [i dr.] // Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 2010. T. 23, № 12. S. 1657-1667. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2010.r.08

11. Fiziologicheskiy rost i utilizaciya galaktozy drozhzhami Kluyveromyces marxianus / A. Benival, P. Sayni, A. Kokkiligadda [i dr.] // 3 Biotech. 2017. T. 7, № 5. St. 349. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-017-0985-1 EDN: https://elibrary.ru/BMJKDN

12. Vliyanie probioticheskih drozhzhey na bakterial'noe raznoobrazie rubca / E. Pinlosh, N. MakEvan, Zh.-P. Marden [i dr.] // PLoS ONE. 2013. T. 8, № 7. St. e67824. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067824

13. Vliyanie zhivyh drozhzhey na degradaciyu kletchatki v rubce / F. Dyuran, F. Shosheras-Dyuran, A.-S. Middel'bos [i dr.] // Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2016. T. 120, № 3. S. 560-570. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.13005

Login or Create
* Forgot password?