Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 6;10(2):259.
doi: 10.3390/ani10020259.

Targeted-Release Organic Acids and Essential Oils Improve Performance and Digestive Function in Broilers Under a Necrotic Enteritis Challenge

Nedra Abdelli  1 , José Francisco Pérez  1 , Ester Vilarrasa  2 , Irene Cabeza Luna  2 , Diego Melo-Duran  1 , Matilde D'Angelo  1 , David Solà-Oriol  1
Affiliations

Targeted-Release Organic Acids and Essential Oils Improve Performance and Digestive Function in Broilers Under a Necrotic Enteritis Challenge

Nedra Abdelli et al. Animals (Basel). .

Abstract

An experiment was performed to evaluate the effect of four different microencapsulated blends of organic acids (OA) and nature-identical aromatic compounds (AC) on growth performance and gut health of broilers challenged with a recycled NE litter. A total of 600 one-day-old male Ross 308 broilers were randomly assigned to five treatments consisting of a basal diet (as negative control) supplemented with each of the tested microencapsulated blends: OA1 (malic and fumaric acid) + AC; 2.5 g/kg; OA2 (calcium butyrate+fumaric acid) + AC; 1.7 g/kg; MCFA (capric-caprylic; caproic and lauric acid) + AC; 2 g/kg; and MCFA + OA3(calcium butyrate + fumaric and citric acid) + AC; 1.5 g/kg. The AC used was the same for all treatments; including cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol (8:1:1), as major compounds. Three tested blends enhanced growth performance by improving intestinal histomorphology (p < 0.001). The tested blends enhanced the abundance of some beneficial families such as Ruminococcaceae and Lachnospiraceae; while reducing that of harmful ones such as Enterobacteriaceae and Helicobacteraceae. A further dose-response experiment showed that 0.5 g/kg of the blend 2 and 2 g/kg of the blend 4 improved growth performance and intestinal histomorphology of chickens on d 42 and decreased fecal Enterobacteriaceae and C. perfringens counts. Similar effects to the previous experiment were observed for cecum microbiota.

Keywords: broiler; essential oils; gut health; intestinal histomorphology; microbiota; microencapsulation; organic acids; performance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Alpha diversity indices of the ileal microbiota of broiler chickens at d 41 of age. (NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Relative abundance (%) of the main phyla (a), families (b), and genera (c) present in the ileal microbiota of broiler chickens at d 41 of age (Trial 1). NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Relative abundance (%) of the main phyla (a), families (b), and genera (c) present in the ileal microbiota of broiler chickens at d 41 of age (Trial 1). NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Differentially abundant taxa (family) from the ileum (in change and FDR-adjusted, p ≤ 0.05) on d 42 between OA1 + AC vs. NC (a); OA2 + AC vs. NC (b); MCFA + AC vs. NC (c); MCFA + OA3 + AC vs. NC (d). NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Differentially abundant taxa (family) from the ileum (in change and FDR-adjusted, p ≤ 0.05) on d 42 between OA1 + AC vs. NC (a); OA2 + AC vs. NC (b); MCFA + AC vs. NC (c); MCFA + OA3 + AC vs. NC (d). NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Differentially abundant taxa (family) from the ileum (in change and FDR-adjusted, p ≤ 0.05) on d 42 between OA1 + AC vs. NC (a); OA2 + AC vs. NC (b); MCFA + AC vs. NC (c); MCFA + OA3 + AC vs. NC (d). NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Differentially abundant taxa (family) from the ileum (in change and FDR-adjusted, p ≤ 0.05) on d 42 between OA1 + AC vs. NC (a); OA2 + AC vs. NC (b); MCFA + AC vs. NC (c); MCFA + OA3 + AC vs. NC (d). NC: Negative control; OA1: Malic acid + fumaric acid; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Culling (a) and mortality (b) calculated as a percentage from the total of chickens per treatment (90 chickens). a,b Means with different superscripts indicate significant differences (p ≤ 0.05). x,y Means with different superscripts indicate a tendency toward significance (p ≤ 0.1). NC: Negative control; PC: positive control; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid+ citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid+lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Effect of treatments on lactic bacteria (a), Enteribacteriaceae (b), and C.perfringens (c) count (log10 CFU) in feces collected on d 14 and 42 of age. OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds; NC: Negative control; PC: Positive control. a,b,c,d Means with different superscripts for the same day indicate significant difference between treatments (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Effect of different dietary treatments on bacterial beta diversity on cecum of broilers on d 42 (Trial 2). (OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds).
Figure 7
Figure 7
Relative abundance (%) of the main phyla (a), families (b), and genera (c) present in the cecum microbiota of broiler chickens at d42 of age (Trial 2). NC: Negative control; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds; PC: Positive control.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Relative abundance (%) of the main phyla (a), families (b), and genera (c) present in the cecum microbiota of broiler chickens at d42 of age (Trial 2). NC: Negative control; OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds; PC: Positive control.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Differentially abundant taxa (family) from the cecum (in change and FDR-adjusted, p ≤ 0.05) on d 42 between OA3 + MCFA + AC vs. NC (a), OA2 + AC vs. NC (b), and NC vs. PC (c). OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Differentially abundant taxa (family) from the cecum (in change and FDR-adjusted, p ≤ 0.05) on d 42 between OA3 + MCFA + AC vs. NC (a), OA2 + AC vs. NC (b), and NC vs. PC (c). OA2: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid; OA3: Calcium butyrate + fumaric acid + citric acid + MCFA; MCFA: Capric-caprylic acid + caproic acid + lauric acid; AC: Cinnamaldehyde, carvacrol, and thymol as major compounds.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Liu J.D., Lumpkins B., Mathis G., Williams S.M., Fowler J. Evaluation of encapsulated sodium butyrate with varying releasing times on growth performance and necrotic enteritis mitigation in broilers. Poult. Sci. 2019;98:1–6. doi: 10.3382/ps/pez049. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sokale A.O., Menconi A., Mathis G.F., Lumpkins B., Sims M.D., Whelan R.A., Doranalli K. Effect of Bacillus subtilis DSM 32315 on the intestinal structural integrity and growth performance of broiler chickens under necrotic enteritis challenge. Poult. Sci. 2019;98:5392–5400. doi: 10.3382/ps/pez368. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shojadoost B., Vince A.R., Prescott J.F. The successful experimental induction of necrotic enteritis in chickens by Clostridium perfringens: A critical review. Vet. Res. 2012;43:1–12. doi: 10.1186/1297-9716-43-74. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. The True Cost of Necrotic Enteritis. [(accessed on 18 December 2019)]; Available online: https://www.poultryworld.net/Meat/Articles/2015/10/The-true-cost-of-necr...
    1. Latorre J.D., Adhikari B., Park S.H., Teague K.D., Graham L.E., Mahaffey B.D., Baxter M.F.A., Hernandez-Velasco X., Kwon Y.M., Ricke S.C., et al. Evaluation of the Epithelial Barrier Function and Ileal Microbiome in an Established Necrotic Enteritis Challenge Model in Broiler Chickens. Front. Vet. Sci. 2018;5:1–11. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00199. - DOI - PMC - PubMed