Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 14;8:82–90. doi: 10.1016/j.aninu.2021.04.003

Table 5.

Effect of additives and NE challenge on caecal bacterial genomic DNA copies (expressed as log10 copies/g digesta) on d 16.1

Item UCC NE challenged2
SEM P-value
CHC BAC SMP SMF SHM
Lactobacillus spp. 9.31 9.36 9.50 9.82 9.57 9.38 0.12 0.058
Bifidobacteria spp. 8.68 8.66 8.70 8.75 8.52 8.67 0.11 0.741
Bacteroides spp. 5.03b 5.65a 5.05b 5.18b 5.11b 5.08b 0.13 0.013
Bacillus spp. 7.85 7.04 6.94 7.34 7.16 7.02 0.24 0.114
Ruminococcus spp. 9.64a 9.31b 9.23b 9.26b 9.26b 9.24b 0.09 0.025
Enterobacteriaceae 7.36b 8.72a 9.69a 9.52a 9.15a 8.97a 0.35 <0.001
Clostridium pefringens 0.84c 9.31a 5.96b 8.96a 8.48ab 8.04ab 0.61 <0.001
Total bacteria 11.40 11.16 11.21 11.36 11.23 11.12 0.08 0.120

NE = necrotic enteritis.

a – c Values in a row with no common superscripts differ significantly (P < 0.05). Mean values are based on 2 birds per replicate and 7 replicates per treatment.

1

UCC, unchallenged control; CHC, challenged control; BAC, zinc bacitracin; SMP, a blend of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), medium-chain fatty acids (MCFA) and phenolic compound; SMF, a blend of buffered SCFA with MCFA; SHM, a blend of buffered SCFA with a high concentration of MCFA.

2

NE challenged birds were gavaged with Eimeria spp. at d 9 and C. perfringens at d 14.