Two homogenous Cuban Siboney groups (20 grazing animals each), approximately 180 days old were made up to assess the probiotic effect of  Saccharomyces cerevisiae  on diarrhea prevention and control. The experimental group received sugar cane meal  ad libitum,  and  100 ml  of liquid culture of Saccharomyces cerevisiae,  variety C-40 (1.3 × 108 ufc/g), mixed/kg of Norgold/animal. No yeast was supplied to this group. During the four months of assessment the diarrhea episodes were produced from two to three days on average (18 days total). Twenty -five epi-sodes were observed in the control group, from three to five days (88 days total).  S. cerevisiae  has a probiotic effect on grazing calves, helps reduce the incidence of diarrhea, and lasts less when it occurs

Barreto Argilagos, Guillermo

Delgado Fernández, Rándolph

Vázquez Montes de Oca, Roberto

English

Portal de Revistas - Universidad de Camagüey

Rev. prod. anim., 27 (2): 2015 I S S N  2 2 2 4 - 7 9 2 0  Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Control and Prevention of Diarrhea in Grazing Calves Rándolph Delgado Fernández*; Guillermo Barreto Argilagos** and Roberto Vázquez Montes de Oca*** *University of Medical Sciences, Ciego de Avila, Cuba **Faculty of Industry Applied Sciences, Ignacio Agramonte Loynaz University of Camaguey, Cuba *** Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Ignacio Agramonte Loynaz University of Camaguey, Cuba ABSTRACT Two homogenous Cuban Siboney groups (20 grazing animals each), approximately 180 days old were made up to assess the probiotic effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on diarrhea prevention and control. The experimental group received sugar cane meal ad libitum, and 100 ml of liquid culture of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, variety C-40 (1.3 × 108 ufc/g), mixed/kg of Norgold/animal. No yeast was supplied to this group. During the four months of as-sessment the diarrhea episodes were produced from two to three days on average (18 days total). Twenty-five epi-sodes were observed in the control group, from three to five days (88 days total). S. cerevisiae has a probiotic effect on grazing calves, helps reduce the incidence of diarrhea, and lasts less when it occurs. Key words: probiotic, prevention, control, diarrhea, calves  INTRODUCTION Often enteric disorders can be observed in present-day calf raising systems, caused by mor-bidity and mortality, and also due to growth retar-dation. Diarrhea is the major health problem in neonates, which is associated with dehydration and weight loss (Windeyer et al., 2014); it can be overcome if stable and protective intestinal mi-crobiota is stimulated in these animals with the use of probiotics, which is not very popular in Cuba (Aquilina et al., 2014). In spite increased occurrence of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli and Salmonella (Meganck et al., 2014), diarrhea often comes up as a combined in-fection of different enteropathogens, instead of in-fection from a single agent. In that sense, Lacto-bacillus sp containing probiotics has a remarkable effect in reducing the number of coliforms in calf intestines (Arzuaga, 2005). The protective effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae against Salmonella enterica, serovar Typhimurium and Shiguella flexneri in mice, has been demonstrated (Arribas, 2009). The purpose was to assess the probiotic effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae in the control and pre-vention of diarrhea in grazing Cuban Siboney calves. MATERIALS AND METHODS To assess the probiotic effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on prevention and control of diarrhea, two homogeneous groups of Cuban Siboney calves were chosen (5/8 H x 3/8 C), each made up of 20 animals, approximately 180 days old, and 80 kg mean weight, according to grazing calf classification for industry (ACOPIO, 2007). A completely random experimental design was used: A) experimental group: ad libitum crushed sugar cane and 100 ml of liquid culture of Sac-charomyces cerevisiae var C-40 (1.3 × 108 ufc/g) mixed/kg of Norgold/per animal; B) control group: the same procedure as for group A, ex-cluding the yeast. Both groups grazed in six en-closures, 1 h each. Animals had access to water and mineral salts through a strip of land. Grass-land management was the same during all the ex-perimental stage: the grazing times were between 7:00 a. m. and 6:00 p. m. Then the animals re-mained in stables, indoors, with free access to the above mentioned feeds. Along the experiment (four months), diarrhea episodes and duration were quantified, regardless of the etiology. The normality test was made to the data and re-sults; the non-parametric Mann–Whitney U test was made to compare the means, with a P < 0.05 significance (Machado Sampaio, 2002). SSPS 15.0, 2006, for Windows® was used. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION S. cerevisiae used as nutritional additive contri-buted to reduce the incidence of diarrhea, or shortened diarrhea duration in the cases it oc-curred (see Table). In the four months of the study, the experimen-tal group had eight episodes of diarrhea, with a Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Control and Prevention of Diarrhea in Grazing Calves Rev. prod. anim., 27 (2): 2015 mean duration between two or three days, which totaled 18 days. The control group underwent 25 episodes, lasting longer (three to five days), which totaled 88 days. On assessing the probiotic effect of Saccharo-myces cerevisiae on weight gain and health of grazing calves, Delgado (2014) noted that the cost of a conventional five-day treatment of diarrheal calves is about $91.48 CUP, and added that fewer animals suffering this enteric disorder accounted for $ 1 555.16 CUP less. On the international level , Jatkauskas and Vrotniakiene (2014) agreed with the previous conclusion. For over more than 20 years scientists from different  countries have demonstrated the bene-fits of yeast administration to ruminant health and productivity. The most frequent therapeutical doses are 109-1012 UFC per animal a day, or 106-107 UFC per feed kilogram. Providing enough microorganisms in the dose in relation to the na-tive flora, or reaching this level by growing in the digestive tract to cause a beneficial response in the host (Corcionivoschi et al., 2010) is essential. Jatkauskas and Vrotniakiene (2010) reported that probiotics mixed in the feed can improve production and inhibit the growth of Salmonella, and due to that fact they prevent diarrhea in calves. According to Hooper et al., (2012), these results owe to an immunomodulating effect of these products, which confer greater efficiency to gastrointestinal defense mechanisms. The protec-tive effect may not be related to a reduction in the bacterial population of pathogen germs in the in-testine (Arribas, 2009), but rather to the reduction of toxins secreted by those pathogens. Usually, enterotoxins bind to specific epithelial receptors of the intestine, and induce changes that lead to water and electrolyte losses, causing diarrhea. The probiotic effects to control and prevent di-arrhea are varied, but their role in blocking ente-ropathogen adhesion must be highlighted. It is a vital step so further colonization and production of enterotoxins responsible for those syndromes take place (Shiba et al., 2003; Corcionivoschi et al., 2010). Morrison et al. (2006) assumed that a pH change in the intestinal lumen (pH < 4) is a key element that cannot be tolerated by certain en-teropathogens, mainly because of the production of organic acids, especially lactate and short chain fatty acids (acetate, propionate and butyrate), as a consequence of their fermentative capacity in the diet fiber. These beneficial microorganisms are able to produce antimicrobials or antimetabolites. Liévin et al. (2000) also included nisin, lactalin, and toxin destroyers. Some authors (Corr, 2007), referred to the participation of other mechanisms, like the release of bacteriocins, or the production of hydrogen peroxide. CONCLUSIONS The application of S. cerevisiae as a nutritional additive has a probiotic effect that contributes to reduce the incidence of diarrhea, and shorten their duration when they occur. REFERENCES ACOPIO (2007). Resolución No. 153. Cuba: ACOPIO. AQUILINA, G.; BAMPIDIS, V.; BASTOS, M.; GUIDO, L.; FLACHOWSKY, G.; GRALAK, M. et al. (2014). Scientific Opinion on the Safety and Efficacy of Yea-Sacc® (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) as a Feed Additive for Cattle for Fattening, Goats for Fatten-ing, Dairy Cows, Dairy Sheep, Dairy Goats and Buffaloes. EFSA Journal, 12 (5), 3666-3681. ARRIBAS, MARÍA BELÉN (2009). Probióticos: una nue-va estrategia de modulación de la respuesta inmu-ne. PhD Thesis on Pharmaceutical Sciences, Facul-ty of Pharmacy, University of Granada, Spain.  ARZUAGA, A. (2005). La cepa del yogur como probió-tico, una alternativa en la salud y mejora del terne-ro. Revista Electrónica de Veterinaria REDVET, 6 (9). Retrieved on August 15, 2013, from http://www.veterinaria.org/revistas/redvet. CORCIONIVOSCHI, N.; DRINCEANU, D.; STEF, L.; LUCA, I.; JULEAN, C. y MINGYART, O. (2010). Pro-biotics-Identification and Ways of Action. Innova-tive Romanian Food Biotechnology, 6, 1-11. CORR, S. C. (2007). Bacteriocin Production as a Me-chanism for the Antinfective Activity of Lactoba-cillus salivarius UCC118. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci, 104, 7617-7621. DELGADO, RÁNDOLPH (2014). Efecto probiótico de Saccharomyces cerevisiae en la ganancia de peso y salud de terneros en pastoreo. Master´s Thesis on Sustainable Animal Production. University of Ca-maguey, Cuba. HOOPER, L. V.; LITTMAN, D. R. y MACPHERSON, A. J. (2012). Interactions between the Microbiota and the Immune System. Science, 336, 1268-1273. JATKAUSKAS, J. y VROTNIAKIENE, V. (2010). Effects of Probiotic Dietary Supplementation on Diarrhoea Patterns, Faecal Microbiota and Performance of Early Weaned Calves. Veterinarni Medicina, 55, (10), 494-503. JATKAUSKAS, J. y VROTNIAKIENE, V. (2014). Effects of Encapsulated Probiotic Enterococcus faecium R. Delgado; G. Barreto and R. Vázquez Rev. prod. anim., 27 (2): 2015 Strain on Diarrhoea Patterns and Performance of Early Weaned Calves. Vet Med Zoot., 67, (89), 47-52. LIÉVIN, V; PEIFFER, I.; HUDAULT, S.; ROCHAT, F.; BRASSART, D.; NEESER, J. R. et al. (2000). Bifido-bacterium Strains from Resident Infant Human Ga-strointestinal Microflora Exert Antimicrobial Ac-tivity. Gut., 47, 646-652. MACHADO, I. B. (2002). Estadística aplica à experi-mentação animal. Minas Gerais, Brasil: FEPMVZ. Meganck, V.; Hoflack, G. y Opsomer, G. (2014). Ad-vances in Prevention and Therapy of Neonatal Dairy Calf Diarrhoea: a Systematical Review with Emphasis on Colostrum Management and Fluid Therapy. Acta Vet Scand., 56 (1), 75. MORRISON, D. J.; MACKAY, W. G.; EDWARDS, C. A.; PRESTON, T.; DODSON, B. y WEAVER, L. T. (2006). Butyrate Production from Oligofructose Fermenta-tion by the Human Faecal Flora: What is The Con-tribution of Extracellular Acetate and Lactate? Br. J. Nutr., 96, 570-577. SHIBA, T.; AIBA, Y.; ISHIKAWA, H.; USHIYAMA, A.; TAKAGI, A.; MINE, T. et al. (2003). The Suppres-sive Effect of Bifidobacteria on Bacteroides vulga-tus, a Putative Pathogenic Microbe in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Microbiol Immunol, 47, 371-378. WINDEYER, M. C.; LESLIE, K. E.; GODDEN, S. M.; HODGINS, D. C.; LISSEMORE, K. D. y LEBLANC, S. J. (2014). Factors Associated with Morbidity, Mor-tality, and Growth of Dairy Heifer Calves up to 3 Months of Age. Prev Vet Med., 113, 231-240. . Received: 23-6-2015 Accepted: 25-7-2015   Table. U-Mann-Whitney test results for diarrheal episodes, and duration in days  Indicators Group Number of animals Mean range Asymptomatic signs (bilateral) Diarrheal episodes experimental 20 72.90 .002 control 20 88.10 Days in which diarr-hea ceased experimental 20 71.94 .001 control 20 89.06   

Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Control and Prevention of Diarrhea in  Grazing Calves.

https://revistas.reduc.edu.cu/index.php/rpa/article/download/1329/1312

Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Control and Prevention of Diarrhea in Grazing Calves.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Portal de Revistas - Universidad de Camagüey