4.7 Article

Investigation of the Efficacy of a Postbiotic Yeast Cell Wall-Based Blend on Newly-Weaned Pigs under a Dietary Challenge of Multiple Mycotoxins with Emphasis on Deoxynivalenol

期刊

TOXINS
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins12080504

关键词

aflatoxin; deoxynivalenol; pig; yeast

资金

  1. North Carolina Agricultural Foundation
  2. Alltech Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pigs are highly susceptible to mycotoxins. This study investigated the effects of a postbiotic yeast cell wall-based blend (PYCW; Nicholasville, KY, USA) on growth and health of newly-weaned pigs under dietary challenge of multiple mycotoxins. Forty-eight newly-weaned pigs (21 d old) were individually allotted to four dietary treatments, based on a three phase-feeding, in a randomized complete block design (sex; initial BW) with two factors for 36 d. Two factors were dietary mycotoxins (deoxynivalenol: 2000 mu g/kg supplemented in three phases; and aflatoxin: 200 mu g/kg supplemented only in phase 3) and PYCW (0.2%). Growth performance (weekly), blood serum (d 34), and jejunal mucosa immune and oxidative stress markers (d 36) data were analyzed using MIXED procedure of SAS. Mycotoxins reduced (p< 0.05) average daily feed intake (ADFI) and average daily gain (ADG) during the entire period whereas PYCW did not affect growth performance. Mycotoxins reduced (p< 0.05) serum protein, albumin, creatinine, and alanine aminotransferase whereas PYCW decreased (p< 0.05) serum creatine phosphokinase. Neither mycotoxins nor PYCW affected pro-inflammatory cytokines and oxidative damage markers in the jejunal mucosa. No interaction was observed indicating that PYCW improved hepatic enzymes regardless of mycotoxin challenge. In conclusion, deoxynivalenol (2000 mu g/kg, for 7 to 25 kg body weight) and aflatoxin B1 (200 mu g/kg, for 16 to 25 kg body weight) impaired growth performance and nutrient digestibility of newly-weaned pigs, whereas PYCW could partially improve health of pigs regardless of mycotoxin challenge.

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