The effect of the microbial preparation Vetom 20.76 on the absorption capacity of the thin intestine and the liver structure geese

Poultry farming is one of the most developed branches of animal husbandry in Russia. Chicken meat is familiar to consumers, but recently there has been an increase in demand for goose meat. Important factors in the breeding of this type of bird is that it is unpretentious and there is a high profitability of cultivation. When breeding poultry in our country, feed antibiotics were actively used, which have many side effects not only for the animal, but also for the person who uses the products of such animal husbandry. They certainly allow you to increase the increase in live weight in animals, but in conditions of high-calorie feeding and the direct influence of antibiotics, there is a serious impact on the liver of poultry, and recently the problem of antibiotic resistance has been acute, which is why it is necessary to find a replacement for them that will be safer and more effective. One of such developments is the microbial preparation Vetom 20.76, which is based on the culture of the predatory fungus Arthrobotrys oligospora. This probiotic drug stimulates metabolic processes in the body of a bird and its body weight gain increases, which is one of the important zootechnical indicators in animal husbandry. The purpose of our research is to study the effect of the microbial preparation Vetom 20.76 on the liver structure and the absorption capacity of the small intestine of the Krasnoozersk geese. In a scientific and production experiment conducted on the principle of pairs and analogues, geese of the experimental groups received additionally with water the drug Vetom 20.76 at a dose of 0.5 mkl / kg, 1 mkl / kg and 2 mkl / kg of body weight for 30 days. It was found that the structure of the liver of poultry of the experimental and control groups did not differ, but there was an increase in the density of intestinal villi, as well as an increase in mucus secretion. When the drug was discontinued, a decrease in these indicators was noted.

1. Dyumin M.S., Pronin V.V., Bulletin of NSAU (Novosibirsk State Agrarian University), 2012, No. 3(24), pp. 74–77, EDN PJTNET. (In Russ.)

2. Egorov I.A., Lenkova T.N., Manukyan V.A. [et al.], Poultry diets without antobiotics. I. intestinal microbiota and performance of broiler (Gallus Gallus L.) breeders fed diets with enterosorbent possessing phytobiotic and probiotic effects, Agricultural Biology, 2019, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 280–290, DOI: 10.15389/agrobiology.2019.2.280rus, EDN ZIGJVR.

3. Koryagina A.O., Bulmakova D.S., Suleymanova A.D. [et al.], Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Ser. Estestvennye nauki, 2019, T. 161, No. 3, pp. 459–471, DOI: 10.26907/2542-064X.2019.3.459-471, EDN YGDUFH. (In Russ.)

4. Egorov I.A., Egorova T.A., Lenkova T.N. [et al.], Sel’skokhozyaystvennaya biologiya, 2019, T. 54, No. 4, pp. 798–809, DOI: 10.15389/agrobiology.2019.4.798rus, EDN RXVDGV. (In Russ.)

5. Soren S., Mandal G.P., Mondal S et al., Efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Fermentation Product and Probiotic Supplementation on Growth Performance, Gut Microflora and Immunity of Broiler Chickens, Animals, 2024, No. 14(6), pp. 866, DOI: 10.3390/ani14060866.

6. Grigorieva Zh.A., Novikova O.B., Osipov A.B., Khomenko R.M., Ptitsevodstvo, 2020, No. 12, pp. 21–25, DOI: 10.33845/0033-3239-2020-69-12-21-25, EDN IIIIBX. (In Russ.)

7. Zyablitseva M.A., Ptitsevodstvo, 2022, No. 4, pp. 51–56, DOI: 10.33845/0033-3239-2022-71-4-51-56, EDN EDIUKA. (In Russ.)

8. Khadieva G.F., Lutfullin M.T., Nikolaeva A.A. [et al.], Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Ser. Estestvennye nauki, 2019, T. 161, No. 3, pp. 472–489, DOI: 10.26907/2542-064X.2019.3.472-489, EDN PKPNRV. (In Russ.)

9. Alayande K.A., Aiyegoro O.A., Ateba C.N., Probiotics in Animal Husbandry: Applicability and Associated Risk Factors, Sustainability, 2020, No. 12(3), pp. 1087, DOI: 10.3390/su12031087.

10. Jha R., Das R., Oak S., Mishra P., Probiotics (Direct-Fed Microbials) in Poultry Nutrition and Their Effects on Nutrient Utilization, Growth and Laying Performance, and Gut Health: A Systematic Review, Animals (Basel), 2020, Oct 13, No. 10(10), pp. 1863, DOI: 10.3390/ani10101863, PMID: 33066185, PMCID: PMC7602066.

11. Zhou H., Guo W., Zhang T. et al., Response of goose intestinal microflora to the source and level of dietary fiber, Poult Sci., 2018, Jun 1, No. 97(6), pp. 2086–2094, DOI: 10.3382/ps/pey045, PMID: 29452399.

12. Lin Y.Y., Chang P.E., Shen S.Y., Wang S.D., Effects of indoor and outdoor rearing system on geological biochemical parameters and cecal microbial composition, Poult Sci., 2023, Aug, No. 102(8), pp. 102731, DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2023.102731, PMID: 37276705, PMCID: PMC10276145.

13. Yakovleva N.S., Nozdrin G.A., Yakovleva M.S., Tishkov S.N., Shevchenko A.I., Bulletin of NSAU (Novosibirsk State Agrarian University), 2019, No. 4, pp. 103–108, DOI: 10.31677/2072-6724-2019-53-4-103-108. (In Russ.)

14. Utkina R.G., Nozdrin G.A., Bulletin of NSAU (Novosibirsk State Agrarian University), 2023, No. 1(66), pp. 225–231, DOI: 10.31677/2072-6724-2023-66-1-225-231, EDN LOAXKZ. (In Russ.)

15. Utkina R.G., Nozdrin G.A., Fateev A.O., Gladkovich T.S., Osnovy i perspektivy organicheskikh biotekhnologiy, 2020, No. 3, pp. 40–47, EDN OQCEQR. (In Russ.)

16. Skovorodin E.N., Vestnik Bashkirskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta, 2010, No. 3, pp. 23–29, EDN NUSWWT. (In Russ.)

17. Sokolov V.G., Izvestiya sel’skohozyajstvennoj nauki Tavridy, 2020, No. 23(186), pp. 141–145, EDN SBTAHP. (In Russ.)