Table 5.
Effect of treatment on ileal gene mRNA abundance in weaned pigs challenged with F18 ETEC
| Treatment1 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gene | NC | PC | DFM1 | DFM2 | SEM | P-value |
| CLDN1 | 1.15 | 0.59 | 0.75 | 1.12 | 0.21 | 0.145 |
| CLDN3 | 0.98 | 0.64 | 0.65 | 0.95 | 0.34 | 0.332 |
| OCLN | 1.15a | 0.48b | 0.54b | 0.69ab | 0.38 | 0.045 |
| ZO-1 | 1.05a | 0.56b | 0.67b | 1.05a | 0.10 | 0.001 |
| TNFα | 1.01 | 1.84 | 1.56 | 2.30 | 0.37 | 0.087 |
| CD14 | 1.09b | 1.52b | 1.89ab | 2.60a | 0.34 | 0.019 |
| TLR4 | 0.88 | 0.59 | 0.68 | 0.95 | 0.14 | 0.145 |
1NC (n = 10); PC (n = 9); DFM1 = PC + direct-fed microbial 1 (n = 8; three strains of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens; 7.5 × 105 cfu/g of feed); DFM2 = PC + direct-fed microbial 2 (n = 7; two strains of B. amyloliquefaciens and one strain of Bacillus subtilis; 1.5 × 105 cfu/g of feed). Supplementation rates were based on manufacturer’s recommendations (Danisco Animal Nutrition).
a,bMeans with differing superscripts indicate a significant (P < 0.05) difference.