Yumurtacı Tavuklarda Diyet Probiyotik Takviyesinin Yumurta Ağırlığına Etkisi: Bir Meta Analizi Çalışması

Year 2020, Volume: 13 Issue: 2, 145 - 151, 30.06.2020

İbrahim Kılıç , İhsan Berk , Zehra Bozkurt , Yağmur Nil Doğan

https://doi.org/10.30607/kvj.695761

Cited By: 2

https://izlik.org/JA64RT78EY

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, yumurtacı tavuklarda diyet probiyotik takviyesinin yumurta ağırlığı üzerindeki etkisini meta-analiz kullanarak belirlemektir. Meta analize alınan sekiz çalışmanın sınırlılıkları; SCI-exp endeksinde olması, 18-42 haftalık kahverengi ve beyaz yumurtlayan tavukların kullanılması; probiyotik olarak 10(7)-10(10) CFU / g Bacillus subtilis kullanılması ve doz olarak 400-1000 g / ton arasında değişmesiydi. Meta-analizinde, sürekli veriler için (deneysel-kontrol) ortalamalar kullanılarak etki büyüklüğü hesaplanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, tüm çalışmaların tek bir ortak etkiyi paylaşmadığı belirlendi. Ayrıca, rastgele etki modeli kullanılarak toplam etki büyüklüğü 0.223 olarak hesaplandı ve z ve p değerlerine göre çalışmanın hipotezi kabul edildi (z = 2.90; p <0.05). Başka bir ifadeyle; "yumurtacı tavuklarda diyet probiyotik takviyesinin yumurta ağırlığı üzerinde önemli bir etkisi vardır".

Keywords

Probiyotik , Bacillus subtilis , yumurta ağırlığı , yumurtacı tavuklar , meta-analizi

The Effect of Dietary Probiotic Supplementation on Egg Weight in Laying Hens: A Meta–Analysis Study

https://izlik.org/JA64RT78EY

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of probiotic supplementation on egg weight in laying hens by using meta–analysis. The limitations of the eight studies –indexed in SCI– taken into the meta–analysis were 18 – 42 week old brown and white laying hens; 10(7) – 10(10) CFU/g Bacillus subtilis was used as a probiotic and the dose ranged between 400 – 1000 g/ton. The meta–analysis was carried out using (experimental–control) means for continuous data. As a result of the research, it was determined that all studies did not share a single common effect (heterogeneous). In addition, the overall effect size using the random effect model was calculated as 0.223. Based on z and p values, the hypothesis of the study was accepted (z = 2.90; p < 0.05). In other words, "the probiotic has a significant effect on egg weight in laying hens".

Keywords

Probiotic , Bacillus subtilis , egg weight , laying hens , meta-analysis

References

• Abdelqader A, Irshaid R, Al-Fataftah AR. Effects of dietary probiotic inclusion on performance, eggshell quality, cecal microflora composition, and tibia traits of laying hens in the late phase of production. Trop Anim Health Pro. 2013; 45: 1017 – 1024. doi.org/10.1007/s11250-012-0326-7
• Amani W, Youssef HMA, Hassan HM, Mohamed MA. Effect of probiotics, prebiotics and organic acids on layer performance and egg quality. Asian J Poult Sci. 2013; 7: 65 – 74. doi.org/10.3923/ajpsaj.2013.65.74
• Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994; 50:1088-1101.
• Boissel JP, Blanchard J, Panak E. Considerations for the Meta – Analysis of randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1989; 10: 254 – 281.
• Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR. Introduction to Meta-Analysis. UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., Publication; 2009.
• Cochran WG. The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics. 1954; 10: 101 – 129. doi.org/10.2307/3001666
• Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York, USA: Academic Press; 1988.
• Cohen L, Manion L. Research Mehhods in Education. New York, USA: Rotledge Falmer; 2001.
• Dawson B, Saunders B, Trapp G. Basic and Clinical Biostatistics. ABD: Appleton and Lange, Norwalk; 1994.
• Egger M, Smith GD, Phillips AN. Principles and Procedures. BMJ. 1997; 315: 1533 – 1537. doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7121.1533
• Fathi M, Al-Homida I, Al-Dokhail A, Ebeid T, Abou-Emera O, Alsagan A. Effects of dietary probiotic (Bacillus subtilis) supplementation on productive performance, immune response and egg quality characteristics in laying hens under high ambient temperature. Ital J Anim Sci. 2018; 17: 804–814. doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2018.1425104
• Fitz-Gibbon CT. The implications of meta analysis for educational research. Brit Educ Res J. 1985; 11: 45 - 49. doi.org/10.1080/0141192850110105
• Forte C, Acuti G, Manuali E, Casagrande Proietti P, Pavone S, Trabalza-Marinucci M, Moscati L, Onofri A, Lorenzetti C, Franciosini MP. Effects of two different probiotics on microflora, morphology, and morphometry of gut in organic laying hens. Poultry Sci. 2016a; 95: 2528–2535. doi.org/10.3382/ps/pew164
• Forte C, Moscati L, Acuti G, Mugnai C, Franciosini MP, Costarelli S, Cobellis G, Trabalza-Marinucci M. Effects of dietary Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bacillus subtilis on laying performance, egg quality, blood biochemistry and immune response of organic laying hens. J Anim Physiol An N. 2016b; 100: 977 – 987. doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12408
• Fuller R. Probiotics in man and animals. J Appl Bacteriol. 1989; 66: 365 – 378.
• Hedges L. Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. J Educ Stat. 1981; 6: 107 – 128. doi.org/10.3102/10769986006002107
• Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21: 1539 – 1558. doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186
• Hosseindoust A, Mohammadi M, Yao ZP, Jung M, Kim IH. Dietary Bacillus subtilis B2A strain in laying hens challenged with Salmonella gallinarum: effects on egg production, egg quality, blood haptoglobin and targeted intestinal Salmonella shedding. J Appl Anim Res. 2018; 46: 512 – 517. doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2017.1351369
• Kalavathy R, Abdullah N, Jalaludin S, Wong M, Ho YW. Effect of Lactobacillus cultures on performance of laying hens and total cholesterol, lipids and fatty acid composition of egg yolk. J Sci Food Agr. 2009; 89: 482 – 486. doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.3477
• Kopp-Hollihan L. Prophylactic and therapeutic uses of probiotics: A review. J Am Diet Assoc. 2001; 10: 229–238. doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00060-8
• Lee KW, Kim DK, Lillehoj HS, Jang SI, Lee SH. Immune modulation by Bacillus subtilis-based direct-fed microbials in commercial broiler chickens. Anim Feed Sci Tech. 2015; 200: 76 –85. doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.12.-006
• Mahdavi AH, Rahmani HR, Pourr J. Effect of probiotic supplements on egg quality and laying hen's performance. International Journal of Poultry Science. 2005; 4: 488 – 492.
• Mazanko MS, Gorlov IF, Prazdnova EV, Makarenko MS, Usatov AV, Bren AB, Chistyakov VA, Tutelyan AV, Komarova ZB, Mosolova NI, Pilipenko DN, Krotova OE, Struk AN, Lin A, Chikindas ML. Bacillus probiotic supplementations ımprove laying performance, egg quality, hatching of laying hens, and sperm quality of roosters. Probiot Antimicrobiol Proteins. 2017; 10: 367 – 373. doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-9369-4.
• Mosteller F, Colditz GA. Understanding research synthesis (Meta Analysis). Annu Rev Publ Health. 1996; 17:1-23. doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pu.17.050196.000245
• Panda AK, Reddy MR, Rama RA, Praharah NK. Production performance, serum/yolk cholesterol and immune competence of white leghorn layers as influenced by dietary supplementation with probiotic. Trop Anim Health Pro. 2003; 35: 85 – 94.
• Sheoran N, Maan S, Kumar A, Batra K, Chaudhary D, Sihag S, Kumar V, Maan NS. Probiotic and prebiotic supplementation improving the production performance and immune characteristics of laying hens. Indian J Anim Res. 2018; 52:1433 – 1439. doi.org/10.18805/ijar.B-3394
• Simon O, Jadamus A, Vahjen W. Probiotic feed additives—Effectiveness and expected modes of action. J Anim Feed Sci. 2001; 10: 51 – 67. doi.org/10.22358/jafs/70012/2001
• Sobczak A, Kozłowski K. The effect of a probiotic preparation containing Bacillus subtilis ATCC PTA-6737 on egg production and physiological parameters of laying hens. Ann Anim Sci. 2015; 15: 711 – 723. doi.org/10.1515/aoas-2015-0040
• Xu CL, Ji C, Ma Q, Hao K, Jin ZY, Li K. Effects of a dried Bacillus subtilis culture on egg quality. Poultry Sci. 2006; 85: 364 – 368. doi.org/10.1093/ps/85. 2.364.
• Yach D. Meta-analysis in epidemiology. S Afr Med J. 1990; 78: 94 – 97.
• Youssef AW, Hassan IM, Ali IM, Mohamed MA. Effect of probiotics, prebiotic and organic acids on layer performance and egg quality. Asian J Poult Sci. 2013; 7: 65 – 74. doi.org/10.3923/ajpsaj.2013.65.74
• Zarei M, Ehsani M, Torki M. Dietary inclusion of probiotics, probiotics and symbiotic and evaluating performance of laying hens. Am J Agric Biol Sci. 2011; 6: 249 – 255.
• Zhang JL, Xie QM, Ji J, Yang WH, Wu YB, Li C, Ma JY, Bi YZ. Different combinations of probiotics improve the production performance, egg quality, and immune response of layer hens. Poultry Sci. 2012; 91: 2755 – 2760. doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02339.