Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Abstract. The introduction of synbiotics and phytobiotics into the diet allows us to optimize metabolism, increase the level of use of feed components, and activate immune processes in the body. The purpose of the work is to determine the effect of “GerbaStor” and “ProStor” feed additives, including probiotic, prebiotic and phytobiotic components, on the morphological and biochemical parameters of the blood of broiler chickens of the “Ross-308” cross. Methods. In the course of a scientific and economic experiment at the age of 29 days, blood was taken from 5 medium-sized broilers by decapitation to determine morphological and biochemical parameters. The blood test was carried out at the Clinical and Diagnostic Center in Ekaterinburg. The morphological examination of blood was carried out in the hemostasis laboratory, on an automatic analyzer ADVIA 120, manufactured by BAYER, as well as by manual counting of formed elements in the Goryaev chamber. A biochemical blood test was performed in a clinical diagnostic laboratory using a Vitros 350 analyzer. Results. The inclusion of “GerbaStor” and “ProStor” in the diet did not adversely affect the metabolic processes of the bird. Morpho-biochemical blood parameters were within physiological values. In the experimental groups was observed an improvement in the assimilation of protein nitrogen, it is evidenced by a decrease in uric acid in the blood serum. In addition, the use of the studied feed was accompanied by the activation of lipid metabolism in the body of birds, which was characterized by a tendency to reduce the amount of triglycerides in the blood serum in individuals of the 1st and 2nd experimental groups. The results of the study showed that when “ProStor” is introduced into the feed concentrate, there is a tendency of decreasing in the activity of transaminases in the body of broilers, which demonstrates a higher resistance of their internal organs, in particular the liver and heart, to unfavorable exogenous and endogenous influences. The academic novelty lies in the fact that new data were obtained on the influence of the studied feed factors, including probiotic, prebiotic and phytobiotic components, on the morpho-biochemical parameters of the blood of broiler chickens.
morphological and biochemical parameters of blood, broiler chickens, synbiotics, phytobiotics
1. Akhmedkhanova R. R., Alieva S. M., Gitinov M. M. Tselesoobraznost’ primeneniya vodorosley v ptitsevodstve [Expediency of application of algae in poultry farming] // Nauchnyy faktor intensifikatsii i povysheniya konkurentosposobnosti otrasley APK: materialy Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 80-letiyu fakul’teta biotekhnologii Dagestanskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta imeni M. M. Dzhambulatova. Makhachkala, 2017. Pp. 21-25. (In Russian.)
2. Bagno O. A., Prokhorov O. N., Shevchenko S. A., et al. Fitobiotiki v kormlenii sel’skokhozyaystvennykh zhivotnykh [Phytobiotics in the feeding of agricultural animals] // Sel’skokhozyaystvennaya biologiya. 2018. No. 4. Pp. 687-697. (In Russian.)
3. Bokhan P. D., Karpenko L. Yu., Bakhta A. N. Sravnitel’naya otsenka vliyaniya na gematologicheskiy status u tsyplyat-broylerov primeneniya simbiotikov i antibiotikov [Comparative assessment of the effect of the use of symbiotics and antibiotics on the hematological status of broiler chickens] // Mirovoe i rossiyskoe ptitsevodstvo: sostoyanie, dinamika razvitiya, innovatsionnye perspektivy: materialy XX Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii. Sergiev Posad, 2020. Pp. 173-175. (In Russian.)
4. Buyarov V. S., Metasova S. Yu. Effektivnost’ primeneniya sinbiotika “ProStor” v ptitsevodstve [The effectiveness of the use of synbiotic “ProStor” in poultry farming] // Uchenye zapiski Kazanskogo universiteta. Seriya Estestvennye nauki. 2019. Pp. 408-421. DOI:https://doi.org/10.26907/2542-064X.2019.3.408-421. (In Russian.)
5. Buyarov V. S., Chervonova I. V., Mednova V. V., Il’icheva I. N. Effektivnost’ primeneniya fitobiotikov v ptitsevodstve (obzor) [The effectiveness of antibiotics in poultry farming (review)] // Vestnik agrarnoy nauki. 2020. № 3. S.44-60. (In Russian.)
6. Golikov A.N., Bazanova N.U., Kozhebekov Z.K. [i dr.]. Fiziologiya sel'skokhozyaystvennykh zhivotnykh [Physiology of farm animals]. Moscow: Agropromizdat, 1991. 432 p. (In Russian.)
7. Gudin V. A., Lysov V. F., Maksimov V. I. Fiziologiya i etologiya sel’skokhozyaystvennykh ptits [Physiology and ethology of farm birds]. Saint Petersbourg: Lan’, 2021. 333 p. (In Russian.)
8. Kazaryan R. V., Luk’yanenko M. V., Borodikhin A. S., Semenenko M. P., Miroshnichenko P. V. Issledovanie biokhimicheskikh pokazateley syvorotki krovi tsyplyat-broylerov, vyrashchennykh s primeneniem kompleksnoy kormovoy dobavki [Study of biochemical parameters of blood serum of broiler chickens raised with the use of a complex feed additive] // New technologies. 2018. No. 4. Pp. 209-215. (In Russian.)
9. Kishnyaykina E. A. Produktivnyy i fiziologicheskiy effekt biologicheski aktivnykh veshchestv v sistemakh vyrashchivaniya tsyplyat-broylerov: dis. … kand. s.-kh. nauk [Productive and physiological effect of biologically active substances in broiler chicken rearing systems: dissertation … candidate of agricultural sciences]. Novosibirsk, 2019. 145 p. (In Russian.)
10. Kozyrev S. G., Gusova B. G., Urtaeva A. A., Seidov I. S., Dzhagaev A. A. Ispol’zovanie fitobiotikov pri vyrashchivanii broylerov [The use of antibiotics in broiler farming] // Achievements of Science and Technology of AIC. 2018. Vol. 32. No. 7. Pp. 56-58. DOI:https://doi.org/10.24411/0235-2451-2018-10713. (In Russian.)
11. Ovchinnikov A. A., Ovchinnikova L. Yu., Konovalov D. A. Immunnyy status organizma myasnykh kur pri ispol’zovanii probiotikov v ratsione [Immune status of the body of meat chickens when using probiotics in the diet] // Ptitsevodstvo. 2019. No. 5. Pp. 43-47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.33845/0033-3239-2019-68-5-43-48. (In Russian.)
12. Strel’nikova I. I., Kislitsyna N. A. Effektivnost’ primeneniya fitobiotikov v ptitsevodstve [Effectiveness of antibiotics in poultry farming] // Vestnik Mariyskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: sel’skokhozyaystvennye nauki. Ekonomicheskie nauki. 2020. Vol. 6. No. 4 (24). Pp. 433-445. DOI:https://doi.org/10.30914/2411-9687-2020-6-4-433-444. (In Russian.)
13. Suray P. F., Fisinin V. I., Kochish I. I. Ot regulyatsii vitagenov v optimizatsii immunnogo otveta: novye podkhody k immunnoregulyatsii v ptitsevodstve [From vitamin regulation to immune response optimization: new approaches to immunoregulation in poultry farming] // Mirovoe i rossiyskoe ptitsevodstvo: sostoyanie, dinamika razvitiya, innovatsionnye perspektivy: materialy XX Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii. Sergiev Posad, 2020. Pp. 56-67. (In Russian.)
14. Shmakova S. V., Lantseva N. N. Perspektiva ispol'zovaniya fitobiotika v ratsionakh tsyplyat-broylerov [The prospect of using phytobiotics in the diets of broiler chickens] // Osnovy i perspektivy organicheskikh biotekhnologiy. 2020. No. 1. Pp. 48-51. (In Russian.)
15. Fisinin V. I., Ushakov A. S., Duskaev G. K., Kazachkova N. M., Nurzhanov B. S., et al. Izmenenie immunologicheskikh i produktivnykh pokazateley u tsyplyat-broylerov pod vliyaniem biologicheski aktivnykh veshchestv iz ekstrakta kory duba [Changes in immunological and productive parameters in broiler chickens under the influence of biologically active substances from oak bark extract] // Sel’skokhozyaystvennaya biologiya. 2018. Vol. 53. No. 2. Pp. 385-392. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15389/agrobiology.2018.2.385rus. (In Russian.)
16. Collins D. M., Gibson G. R. Probiotics, prebiotics and synbiot-ics: Approaches for modulating the microbial ecology of the gut // American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1999. Vol. 69. Pp. 1052S-1057S.
