. 2020 Mar 9;10:4281. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-61256-z

Table 2.

Strains applied in the tested synbiotic preparations and commercial probiotic preparations.

Type of preparation	Name of preparation	Probiotic microorganisms	Beneficial activities of preparation (reported in vivo)
Synbiotics	A	Lb. plantarum ŁOCK 0860 Lb. reuteri ŁOCK 1092 Lb. pentosus ŁOCK 1094 S. cerevisiae ŁOCK 0119	∙ Beneficial effect of the synbiotics on the gastrointestinal tract of animals. Synbiotics composed of four and five probiotic strains decreased FW genotoxicity of chicks, after exposure to OTA, to the level seen in the control group and were more effective than synbiotics composed of three probiotic strains²¹.
	B	Lb. plantarum ŁOCK 0860 Lb. reuteri ŁOCK 1092 Lb. pentosus ŁOCK 1094 Lb. rhamnosus ŁOCK 1087 S. cerevisiae ŁOCK 0119
	C	Lb. plantarum ŁOCK 0860 Lb. reuteri ŁOCK 1092 Lb. pentosus ŁOCK 1094 Lb. rhamnosus ŁOCK 1087 Lb. paracasei ŁOCK 1091 S. cerevisiae ŁOCK 0119
	C		∙ Synbiotics met the basic requirements for this type of formula regarding the safety of use and had a positive effect on the health of chickens²².
Probiotics	BioPlus YC	B. licheniformis DSM 5749 B. subtilis DSM 5750	∙ Safety and efficacy of B. licheniformis DSM 5749 and B. subtilis DSM 5750 has been confirmed in many studies in vivo^25–27.
Probiotics	Cylactin	E. faecium NCIMB 10415 (SF68)	∙ Safety and efficacy of E. faecium NCIMB 10415 (SF68) has been confirmed in many studies in vivo^24,28–31.