4.7 Article

Phytobiotics from Oregano Extracts Enhance the Intestinal Health and Growth Performance of Pigs

期刊

ANTIOXIDANTS
卷 11, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antiox11102066

关键词

growth performance; oxidative stress; phytobiotics; pigs

资金

  1. Advanced Ag Products (Canton, SD, USA)
  2. North Carolina Agricultural Foundation (Raleigh, NC, USA)
  3. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [02893]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to investigate the effects of phytobiotics on the intestinal health and growth performance of pigs. The results showed that phytobiotics improved growth performance by reducing oxidative stress and enhancing immune status and jejunal morphology in pigs. However, the combinational use of phytobiotics with antibiotics suppressed their effect.
This study aimed to investigate the effects of phytobiotics on the intestinal health and growth performance of pigs. Totals of 40 newly-weaned pigs with 6.4 +/- 0.3 kg BW (Exp. 1) and 120 growing pigs with 27.9 +/- 2.3 kg BW (Exp. 2) were allotted in RCBD in a 2 x 2 factorial arrangement. The factors were: antibiotics as growth promoter (AGP) and phytobiotics (PHY). Pigs were fed experimental diets during 21 d (Exp. 1) and 42 d (Exp. 2). Growth performance, health parameters, and nutrient digestibility were evaluated. In Exp. 1, AGP diet increased (p < 0.05) ADG and G:F compared with a diet without AGP or PHY and a diet with AGP combined with PHY. PHY decreased (p < 0.05) TNF-alpha and IgG in the jejunum and protein carbonyl in plasma, whereas it increased (p < 0.05) the villus height. In Exp. 2, AGP or PHY diets increased (p < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, and G:F compared with a diet without AGP or PHY and a diet with AGP combined with PHY. PHY decreased (p < 0.05) IgG and PC in plasma. Collectively, AGP and PHY improved growth performance by reducing oxidative stress and enhancing immune status and jejunal morphology. However, the combinational use of phytobiotics with antibiotics suppressed their effect.

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