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

Table 6.

Effect of additives and NE challenge on caecal SCFA profiles on d 21 (μmol/g)¹.

Item	UCC	NE challenged²					SEM	P-value
Item	UCC	CHC	BAC	SMP	SMF	SHM	SEM	P-value
Formate	6.12	4.17	3.89	3.67	4.17	6.52	1.22	0.417
Acetate	169^a	149^c	159^abc	155^bc	154^bc	163^ab	4	0.017
Propionate	4.72	3.66	4.27	4.45	3.82	4.59	0.31	0.098
Isobutyrate	1.17^c	1.57^ab	1.37^bc	1.56^ab	1.67^ab	1.78^a	0.13	0.019
Butyrate	51.1^a	35.4^c	42.8^bc	37.8^c	39.3^bc	46.9^ab	2.90	0.002
Isovalerate	1.84	2.61	2.59	2.88	2.01	2.02	0.74	0.897
Valerate	1.27	1.15	1.13	1.24	1.21	1.33	0.10	0.680
Lactate	2.40	2.73	3.05	3.50	3.42	3.07	0.29	0.076
Succinate	33.5	37.9	36.2	37.3	38.5	37.9	5	0.990
Total SCFA	272	238	254	247	248	267	9	0.066

NE = necrotic enteritis; SCFA = short-chain fatty acids.

^{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 13 replicates per treatment.

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.

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