4.7 Article

Assay considerations for fluorescein isothiocyanate-dextran (FITC-d): an indicator of intestinal permeability in broiler chickens

期刊

POULTRY SCIENCE
卷 100, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2021.101202

关键词

FITC-d; marker; intestinal permeability; broiler

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Protocol consistency is crucial for accurate and consistent results when using FITC-d in broiler research. Attention to details and consideration of factors such as bird differences and experimental design are important for comparing results between different animal trials.
Fluorescein isothiocyanate-dextran (FITC-d) is being used as an indicator of intestinal paracellular permeability in poultry research. Especially with the industry moving toward antibiotic-free production, intestinal function and integrity issues have been a research focus. An increasing number of scientific conference abstracts and peer-reviewed journal publications have shown that 4-kDa FITC-d is an efficient marker candidate for measurement of intestinal permeability and can be applied in broiler research. However, experimental protocols vary by personnel, instruments used, and research institution, and potential concerns related to this assay have yet to receive the same amount of attention. Understanding protocol consistency within and across laboratories is vital for obtaining accurate, consistent, and comparable experimental results. This review is aimed to 1) summarize different FITC-d assays in broiler research from peer-reviewed publications during the past 6 yr and 2) discuss factors that can potentially affect intestinal permeability results when conducting the FITC-d assay. In summary, it is essential to pay attention to details, including gavage dose, fasting period, sample handling and lab analysis details when conducting the assay in broiler research. Differences in birds (breed/strain, age, and gender) and experimental design (diet, health status/challenge model, and sampling age) need to be considered when comparing serum FITC-d concentration results between different in vivo animal trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据