Effects of dietary supplementation of Pediococcus pentosaceus strains from kimchi in weaned piglet challenged with Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica

Song, Dongcheol; Lee, Jihwan; Kim, Kangheun; Oh, Hanjin; An, Jaewoo; Chang, Seyeon; Cho, Hyunah; Park, Sehyun; Jeon, Kyeongho; Yoon, Yohan; Yoo, Yoonjeong; Cho, Younghyun; Cho, Jinho

doi:10.5187/jast.2023.e31

J Anim Sci Technol 2023; 65(3):611-626

pISSN: 2672-0191, eISSN: 2055-0391

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2023.e31

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effects of dietary supplementation of Pediococcus pentosaceus strains from kimchi in weaned piglet challenged with Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica

Dongcheol Song¹^,^#

, Jihwan Lee²^,^#

, Kangheun Kim³^,^#

, Hanjin Oh¹

, Jaewoo An¹

, Seyeon Chang¹

, Hyunah Cho¹

, Sehyun Park¹

, Kyeongho Jeon¹

, Yohan Yoon⁴

, Yoonjeong Yoo⁴

, Younghyun Cho⁴

, Jinho Cho¹^,^*

Author Information & Copyright ▼

¹Department of Animal Science, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea

²Department of Poultry Science, University of Georgia (UGA), Athens, GA 30602, United States

³Department of Food Marketing and safety, Kunkuk University, Seoul 05030, Korea

⁴Department of Food and Nutrition, Sookmyung Women’s University, Seoul 04310, Korea

# These authors contributed equally to this work.

^*Corresponding author: Jinho Cho, Department of Animal Science, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea. Tel: +82-43-261-2544, E-mail: jinhcho@chungbuk.ac.kr

© Copyright 2023 Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Jan 04, 2023; Revised: Mar 14, 2023; Accepted: Mar 17, 2023

Published Online: May 31, 2023

Abstract

Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Salmonella enterica (SE) infections in pigs are major source associated with enteric disease such as post weaning diarrhea. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of Pediococcus pentosaceus in weaned piglets challenged with pathogen bacteria. In Experiment.1 90 weaned piglets with initial body weights of 8.53 ± 0.34 kg were assigned to 15 treatments for 2 weeks. The experiments were conducted two trials in a 2 × 5 factorial arrangement of treatments consisting of two levels of challenge (challenge and non-challenge) with E. coli and SE, respectively and five levels of probiotics (Control, Lactobacillus plantarum [LA], Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1 [38W], Pediococcus acidilactici K [PK], Lactobacillus reuteri PF30 [PF30]). In Experiment.2 a total of 30 weaned pigs (initial body weight of 9.84 ± 0.85 kg) were used in 4 weeks experiment. Pigs were allocated to 5 groups in a randomized complete way with 2 pens per group and 3 pigs per pen. Supplementation of LA and 38W improved (p < 0.05) growth performance, intestinal pathogen bacteria count, fecal noxious odor and diarrhea incidence. In conclusion, supplementation of 38W strains isolated from white kimchi can act as probiotics by inhibiting E. coli and SE.

Keywords: Pediococcus pentosaceus; Lactobacillus plantarum; Growth performance; Intestinal pathogen bacteria

INTRODUCTION

Weaning is a crucial and stressful period of pig management and usually linked to serious enteric diseases [1]. In the weaning phase, piglets faced great challenges associated with an immature immune and digestive system such as diminished nutrient digestion and changes in intestinal morphology [2]. Although most Escherichia coli (E. coli) strains are innocuous commensals of the gut microbiome, some types are pathogenic and cause severe intestinal infection such as post weaning diarrhea [3]. Different virulence factors, such as flagella, fimbriae, capsule, lipopolysaccharide and adhesins are involved in their pathogenic mechanisms [4]. Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) and Shigatoxigenic E. coli (STEC) are representative types of pathogenic E. coli.

Salmonella enterica (SE) has a wide host range, including pigs and humans, causes intestinal diseases. In pigs, SE causes fibrino necrotic enterocolitis, diarrhea, and dehydration [5].

Probiotics are defined as living microorganisms with health benefits for their hosts. Their major effects are gut integrity preservation, antagonism to pathogenic bacteria, immunological modulation and overall health enhancement [6]. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB), commonly used as probiotics, can colonize the digestive tract that increase nutritional digestion and maintain stability of the intestinal flora [7]. Feed fermented by LAB has an antimicrobial effect and withstand vitiation by other microorganisms [8]. Especially, several biological activities associated with LAB such as Pediococcus spp. from kimchi, including antioxidative and lipid- lowering properties [9]. According to Wang et al. [10], some species of Lactobacillus and Pediococcus can improve gut health by producing LAB and alleviate pathogen colonization. Especially, Lactobacillus plantarum (LA), Pediococcus acidilactici and L. reuteri strains improved growth performance with antibacterial activities against pathogens [11,12]. Pediococcus pentosaceus K10 isolated from kimchi showed inhibitory effect on the bacterial adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells in vitro [13]. However, studies about effects of P. pentosaceus strains isolated from kimchi in vivo are lacking.

Therefore, this study was conducted to determine effects of P. pentosaceus strains isolated from white kimchi in weaned piglets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The protocol for this study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Korea (approval no. CBNUA-1620-21-02).

Bacterial strains, culture and challenge

STEC F18 and SE was provided in stock form from Dankook University (Cheonan, Korea). The F18 E. coli expressed heat labile toxin and Shiga toxin type 2e. Ten microliter of thawed E. coli and SE stock were inoculated into 10 mL of nutrient broth and cultured at 37°C for 24 h and then subcultured [14]. Thereafter, the subcultured E. coli and SE were smeared on MacConkey agar (Kisan Biotech, Seoul, Korea) and Brilliant Green sulfa agar (Kisan Biotech) to confirm the bacterial enumeration, respectively. A final concentration of 1.2 × 10¹⁰ CFU/mL E. coli and 2.3 × 10⁹ CFU/mL SE were used in this study.

Source of probiotics

The LA was isolated from commercial probiotics supplement (Lactoplan, Genebiotech, Gongju, Korea). P. pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1 (38W) was isolated from White kimchi, P. acidilactici K (PK) was isolated from Korean traditional wine and L. reuteri (PF30) was isolated from feces of piglets. All of probiotics were received from Sookmyung Women’s University (Seoul, Korea). The probiotics were incubated in a stationary state at 37°C for 48 h in de Man, Rogosa and Sharpe (MRS) medium in an anaerobic condition. The viable counts in culture medium were determined by the gradient dilution coating method, stored at 4°C. The final concentration of 2.0 × 10⁹ CFU/kg probiotics were used in this study.

Experimental design and sample collection

Experiment 1

A total of 90 male (Duroc × Yorkshire × Landrace) weaned pigs (initial body weight [BW] of 8.53 ± 0.34 kg and 28 ± 3 d old) were used in 2 weeks experiment. Pigs were individually placed in 45 × 55 × 45 cm stainless steel metabolism cages in an environmentally controlled room. Pigs were allotted to 1 of 15 treatments (6 replication for each treatment) in a completely randomized block design based on initial BW. Experiments were conducted with two trials in a 2 × 5 factorial arrangement of treatments consisting of two levels of challenge (challenge and non-challenge) with E. coli and SE, respectively and five levels of probiotics (Control, L. plantarum, P. pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1, P. acidilactici K and L. reuteri PF30). Corn and soybean meal basal diets were formulated to meet or exceed the nutrient requirements for the weaned piglets [15]. For probiotic treatments, piglets fed the basal diet supplemented with 0.1% of probiotics, respectively. The pigs were fed daily at 8:30 and 17:30 h and had ad libitum access to water. Feed residues were removed before the next meal and considered in feed intake calculations. In the E. coli and SE challenge treatments, all pigs were orally inoculated with a total of 10 mL of E. coli F18 or SE for 3 consecutive days.

Experiment 2

A total of 30 weaned pigs (initial body weight of 9.84 ± 0.85 kg) were used in 4 weeks experiment. Pigs were allocated to 5 groups in a randomized complete way with 2 pens per group and 3 pigs per pen. Dietary treatments included: 1) Non-supplemented with probiotics (NC), 2) LA (NC + 0.1% L. plantarum), 3) 38W (NC + 0.1% P. pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1), 4) PK (NC + 0.1% P. acidilactici K), 5) PF30 (NC + 0.1% L. reuteri PF30). The basal diet was formulated to exceed the NRC requirement (Table 1) [15]. Pigs had free access to diets and water.

Table 1. Ingredient composition of the experimental diets in Experiment 1 and 2

Items	Content
Ingredients (%)	100.00
Corn	34.43
Extruded corn	15.00
Lactose	10.00
Dehulled soybean meal (51% CP)	13.50
Soy protein concentrate (65% CP)	10.00
Plasma powder	6.00
Whey	5.00
Soy oil	2.20
Monocalcium phosphate	1.26
Limestone	1.40
L-Lysine-HCl (78%)	0.06
DL-Methionine (50%)	0.15
Choline chloride (25%)	0.10
Vitamin premix¹⁾	0.25
Trace mineral premix²⁾	0.25
Salt	0.40
Calculated value
ME (kcal/kg)	3433
CP (%)	20.76
Lysine (%)	1.35
Methionine (%)	0.39
Ca	0.82
P	0.65
Analyzed value
ME (kcal/kg)	3512
CP (%)	20.92

¹⁾ Provided per kg of complete diet: vitamin A, 11,025 IU; vitamin D₃, 1103 IU; vitamin E, 44 IU; vitamin K, 4.4 mg; riboflavin, 8.3 mg; niacin, 50 mg; thiamine, 4 mg; d-pantothenic, 29 mg; choline, 166 mg; and vitamin B₁₂, 33 mg.

²⁾ Provided per kg of complete diet without Zinc: Cu (as CuSO₄·5H₂O), 12 mg; Mn (as MnO₂), 8 mg; I (as KI), 0.28 mg; and Se (as Na₂SeO₃·5H₂O), 0.15 mg.

CP, crude protein; ME, metabolizable energy.

Download Excel Table

Growth performance and chemical analysis

Growth performance

All piglets were weighed every week during the experiment period and feed consumption was recorded to calculate average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), and gain to feed ratio (G:F).

Intestinal microbiota shedding

For intestine E. coli, Salmonella and Lactobacillus population analysis, samples of small intestine and large intestine were taken 6 pigs per treatment at the end of experiment. The samples were immediately packaged in plastic bags and transferred to the laboratory freezer (−20°C) for the duration of the experiment. To count the number of Lactobacillus and E. coli, 1 g of samples from each treatment were diluted with 9 mL of 1% peptone broth (Becton, Dickinson and Co, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA) and homogenized. In 6-fold to 4-fold dilution (1% peptone solution) samples were used to analyze the viability of E. coli on MacConkey agar plates and Lactobacillus on de MRS agar plates (Kisan Biotech), BG sulfa agar for Salmonella, respectively. E. coli and Salmonella were incubated at 37°C for 24 h and Lactobacillus were incubated for 48 h.

Nutrient digestibility

To estimate the digestibility, 0.2% chromium oxide (Cr₂O₃) was supplemented with diets as an indigestible marker. Pigs were fed diets mixed with chromium oxide for 4 consecutive days from d 11 to 14 and d 25 to 28, fresh excreta samples were collected in that period. At the end of the experiment, fecal samples were stored at −20°C and dried at 70°C for 72 h, and then, ground to pass through a 1 mm screen. All analysis items (feed and fecal) were analyzed for dry matter (DM) and crude protein (CP). The procedures utilized for the determination of DM and CP digestibility were conducted with the methods by the [16]. Chromium was analyzed with an ultraviolet absorption spectrophotometer (UV-1201, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). The digestibility was calculated using the following formula: digestibility (%) = [1 – (Nf × Cd) / (Nd × Cf)] × 100, where Nf is the nutrient concentration in feces (% DM), Nd is the nutrient concentration in diet (% DM), Cd is the chromium concentration in diet (% DM), and Cf is the chromium concentration in feces (% DM).

Diarrhea scores

The diarrhea scores were individually recorded at 08:00 and 17:00 by the same person during the entire experimental period. The diarrhea score was scored using a method used by Zhao et al. [17]. The diarrhea scores were as follows: 0, Normal feces; 1, Soft feces; 2, Mild diarrhea; and 3, Severe diarrhea.

Fecal noxious gas emissions

The fecal samples were allowed to ferment for 12 h and 1 day at room temperature (25°C), after which 100 mL of the headspace air was sampled from approximately 2 cm above the fecal sample. Prior to measurement, the fecal samples were manually shaken for approximately 30 s to disrupt any crust formation on the surface of the fecal sample and to homogenize the samples. Ammonia (NH₃) concentrations were determined within the scope of 5.0 - 100.0 ppm (No.3La, detection tube, Gastec, Kanagawa, Japan), hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) concentrations were determined within scope of 2.0 – 20.0 ppm (No.4LK, detection tube, Gastec)

Blood profile

Blood samples were obtained from jugular vein 6 pigs per each treatment at the end of experiment. At the time of collection, blood samples were collected into vacuum tubes containing K₃EDTA for complete blood count (CBC) analysis, and nonheparinized tubes for serum analysis, respectively. After collection, blood samples were centrifuged at 12,000×g for 15 min at 4°C. The white blood cells (WBC), basophils, neutrophils and lymphocyte levels in the whole blood were measured using an automatic blood analyzer (ADVIA 120, Bayer, NY, USA).

Statistical analysis

Data for effects of different levels of probiotics added with challenge or not. Data were subjected to two-way ANOVA in Experiment 1 and one-way ANOVA in Experiment 2. Parametric data were statistically analyzed with PROC General Linear Models (GLM) of SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Differences between treatment groups were measured using Duncan’s multiple range test with a p-value of less than 0.05 designating statistical significance. Non-parametric data (diarrhea score) were analysed using contingency analysis with graphpad prism 8 software (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA) to test the relationship between categorical variables (scores) and the different combinations tested in this study. A Chi-square test was performed to determine if the different combinations had an effect on the categorical variables repartition with significance accepted at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Experiment 1

Growth performance

Escherichia coli challenge

Table 2 shows the results of growth performance of piglets challenged with E. coli. E. coli challenge decreased (p = 0.009) BW on d 14 compared to non-challenge group. Also, E. coli challenge decreased (p < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, G:F in whole experimental period compared to non-challenge group. Piglets supplemented with LA increased (p < 0.05) BW on d 14, ADG and G:F on d 0 to 14 compared to supplementation of CON, PK and PF30. However, supplementation of 38W had no difference on BW, ADG and G:F compared to supplementation of LA except ADG 0 to 14. There was no interaction between supplementation of probiotics and E. coli challenge.

Table 2. Effects of dietary probiotics on growth performance of piglets challenged with E. coli in Experiment 1

Items		BW (kg)			d 0 to 7			d 7 to 14			d 0 to 14
CHAL	PRO	d 0	d 7	d14	ADG (g)	ADFI (g)	G:F	ADG (g)	ADFI (g)	G:F	ADG (g)	ADFI (g)	G:F
-	NC	8.53	11.33	14.50^ab	400.43	591.67	0.68	452.38	745.33	0.61	426.40	668.50	0.64
-	LA	8.47	11.93	16.23^a	494.76	618.33	0.80	614.29	803.33	0.76	554.52	710.83	0.78
-	38W	8.58	11.73	15.17^ab	450.48	583.33	0.77	490.48	745.00	0.66	470.48	664.17	0.71
-	PK	8.52	11.70	14.97^ab	454.29	600.00	0.76	466.67	755.00	0.62	460.48	677.50	0.68
-	PF30	8.48	11.20	14.40^ab	388.10	540.00	0.72	457.14	690.00	0.66	422.62	615.00	0.69
+	NC	8.51	10.67	13.50^b	308.57	566.67	0.54	404.76	825.00	0.49	356.67	695.83	0.51
+	LA	8.50	11.83	15.47^ab	476.19	665.00	0.72	519.05	791.67	0.66	497.62	728.33	0.68
+	38W	8.50	11.47	14.53^ab	424.29	678.33	0.63	438.10	795.00	0.55	431.19	736.67	0.59
+	PK	8.59	11.20	14.03^b	373.33	635.00	0.59	404.76	765.00	0.53	389.05	700.00	0.56
+	PF30	8.58	11.10	14.00^b	360.48	595.00	0.61	414.29	780.00	0.53	387.38	687.50	0.56
-		8.52	11.58	15.05	437.61	586.67	0.75	496.19	747.73	0.66	466.90	667.20	0.70
+		8.53	11.25	14.31	388.57	628.00	0.62	436.19	791.33	0.55	412.38	709.67	0.58
	NC	8.52	11.00	14.00^b	354.50^d	579.17	0.61^b	428.57^b	785.17	0.55	391.54^b	682.17	0.57^b
	LA	8.49	11.88	15.85^a	485.48^a	641.67	0.76^a	566.67^a	797.50	0.71	526.07^a	719.58	0.73^a
	38W	8.54	11.60	14.85^ab	437.38^ab	630.83	0.69^ab	464.29^ab	770.00	0.60	450.83^b	700.42	0.64^ab
	PK	8.55	11.45	14.50^b	413.81^bc	617.50	0.67^ab	435.71^b	760.00	0.57	424.76^b	688.75	0.62^b
	PF30	8.53	11.15	14.20^b	374.29^cd	567.50	0.66^ab	435.71^b	735.00	0.59	405.00^b	651.25	0.62^b
p-value	CHAL	0.939	0.178	0.009	< 0.001	0.034	< 0.001	0.044	0.048	0.021	< 0.001	0.035	< 0.001
	PRO	1.000	0.156	0.001	< 0.001	0.068	0.002	0.021	0.418	0.183	< 0.001	0.275	0.003
	CHAL ⨯ PRO	0.999	0.926	0.961	0.165	0.394	0.876	0.981	0.513	1.000	0.877	0.809	0.998
SE		0.341	0.378	0.435	18.724	30.037	0.037	45.902	34.033	0.064	21.669	30.988	0.038

^a-d Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

E. coli, Escherichia coli; BW, body weight; CHAL, challenge; PRO, probiotics; ADG, average daily gain; ADFI, average daily feed intake; G:F, feed efficiency; -, non-challenged with Escherichia coli; NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, Lactobacillus plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri; +, challenged with E. coli.

Download Excel Table

Salmonella enterica challenge

Table 3 shows the results of growth performance of piglets challenged with SE. The SE challenge decreased (p < 0.05) BW on d 7 and 14 compared to non-challenged group. Also, SE challenge decreased (p < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, G:F compared to non-challenge group. Supplementation of LA increased (p < 0.05) the BW on d 14, ADG and G:F compared to supplementation of CON, PK and PF30. However, supplementation of 38W had no difference on BW, ADG on d 0 to 7 and G:F compared to supplementation of LA. There was no interaction between supplementation of probiotics and SE challenge.

Table 3. Effects of dietary probiotics on growth performance of piglets challenged with Salmonella in Experiment 1

Items		BW (kg)			d 0 to 7			d 7 to 14			d 0 to 14
CHAL	PRO	d 0	d 7	d14	ADG (g)	ADFI (g)	G:F	ADG (g)	ADFI (g)	G:F	ADG (g)	ADFI (g)	G:F
-	NC	8.53	11.33	14.50	400.43	591.67	0.68	452.38	745.33	0.61	426.40	668.50	0.64
-	LA	8.47	11.93	16.23	494.76	618.33	0.80	614.29	803.33	0.76	554.52	710.83	0.78
-	38W	8.58	11.73	15.17	450.48	583.33	0.77	490.48	745.00	0.66	470.48	664.17	0.71
-	PK	8.52	11.70	14.97	454.29	600.00	0.76	466.67	755.00	0.62	460.48	677.50	0.68
-	PF30	8.48	11.20	14.40	388.10	540.00	0.72	457.14	690.00	0.66	422.62	615.00	0.69
+	NC	8.58	10.73	13.57	308.10	565.00	0.55	404.76	810.00	0.50	356.43	687.50	0.52
+	LA	8.58	11.67	15.23	440.48	665.00	0.66	509.52	825.00	0.62	475.00	745.00	0.64
+	38W	8.48	11.27	14.47	397.62	645.00	0.62	457.14	830.00	0.55	427.38	737.50	0.58
+	PK	8.50	10.97	14.03	351.90	615.00	0.57	438.10	835.00	0.52	395.00	725.00	0.54
+	PF30	8.51	10.97	13.93	350.33	625.00	0.56	423.81	815.00	0.52	387.07	720.00	0.54
-		8.52	11.58	15.05	437.61	586.67	0.75	496.19	747.73	0.66	466.90	667.20	0.70
+		8.53	11.12	14.25	369.69	623.00	0.59	446.67	823.00	0.54	408.18	723.00	0.56
	NC	8.55	11.03	14.03^b	354.26^d	578.33	0.61	428.57^b	777.67	0.55^b	391.42^c	678.00	0.58^b
	LA	8.53	11.80	15.73^a	467.62^a	641.67	0.73	561.90^a	814.17	0.69^a	514.76^a	727.92	0.71^a
	38W	8.53	11.50	14.82^ab	424.05^ab	614.17	0.69	473.81^b	787.50	0.60^ab	448.93^b	700.83	0.64^ab
	PK	8.51	11.33	14.50^b	403.10^bc	607.50	0.66	452.38^b	795.00	0.57^b	427.74^bc	701.25	0.61^b
	PF30	8.50	11.08	14.17^b	369.21^cd	582.50	0.63	440.48^b	752.50	0.59^ab	404.85^bc	667.50	0.61^b
p-value	CHAL	0.941	0.047	0.001	< 0.001	0.089	< 0.001	0.015	0.001	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.010	< 0.001
	PRO	1.000	0.201	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.319	0.107	0.001	0.496	0.014	< 0.001	0.414	0.002
	CHAL ⨯ PRO	0.998	0.948	0.948	0.270	0.495	0.983	0.719	0.679	0.977	0.688	0.717	0.997
SE		0.330	0.357	0.370	17.047	33.126	0.046	30.963	34.705	0.040	17.489	33.105	0.032

^a-d Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

BW, body weight; ADG, average daily gain; ADFI, average daily feed intake; G:F, feed efficiency; CHAL, challenge; PRO, probiotics; -, non-challenged with Escherichia coli; NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, Lactobacillus plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri; +, challenged with E. coli.

Download Excel Table

Intestinal microbiota

Escherichia coli challenge

Table 4 shows the results of intestinal pathogen bacteria counts of piglets challenged with E. coli. E. coli challenge increased (p < 0.05) the counts of E. coli in small intestine and large intestine compared to non-challenge groups. Supplementation of probiotic groups showed lower (p < 0.05) counts of E. coli in small intestine than NC group. Also, supplementation of LA, 38W and PK showed lower (p < 0.05) Salmonella counts in small intestine. In large intestine, supplementation of LA and 38W showed lower (p < 0.05) counts of E. coli and Salmonella than other groups. There was an interaction between supplementation of LA, 38W and E. coli challenge. Piglets supplemented with LA and 38W with E. coli challenge decreased (p < 0.05) the counts of E. coli compared with piglets supplemented no probiotics with E. coli challenge.

Table 4. Effects of dietary probiotics on intestinal microbiota of piglets challenged with E. coli in Experiment 1

Items (Log₁₀CFU/g)		Small intestine		Large intestine
CHAL	PRO	Escherichia coli	Salmonella	Escherichia coli	Salmonella
-	NC	4.71^c	2.68	5.54^d	2.91
-	LA	4.59^c	2.53	5.49^d	2.79
-	38W	4.58^c	2.50	5.55^d	2.75
-	PK	4.66^c	2.48	5.59^d	2.92
-	PF30	4.67^c	2.51	5.51^d	2.97
+	NC	6.95^a	2.59	7.55^a	2.98
+	LA	6.33^b	2.41	6.83^c	2.78
+	38W	6.34^b	2.49	7.02^bc	2.79
+	PK	6.58^ab	2.55	7.46^c	2.92
+	PF30	6.49^b	2.60	7.39^ab	2.96
-		4.64	2.54	5.54	2.87
+		6.54	2.53	7.25	2.89
	NC	5.83^a	2.63^a	6.55^a	2.95^a
	LA	5.46^b	2.47^b	6.16^c	2.79^b
	38W	5.46^b	2.50^b	6.29^bc	2.77^b
	PK	5.62^b	2.52^b	6.53^a	2.92^a
	PF30	5.58^b	2.56^ab	6.45^ab	2.97^a
p-value	CHAL	< 0.001	0.710	< 0.001	0.651
	PRO	0.002	0.035	0.001	0.013
	CHAL ⨯ PRO	0.048	0.178	0.004	0.954
SE		0.085	0.050	0.087	0.064

^a-d Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

Abbreviation: CHAL, challenge; PRO, probiotics; -, non-challenged with Escherichia coli; +, challenged with E. coli; NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, Lactobacillus plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri.

Download Excel Table

Salmonella enterica challenge

Table 5 shows the results of intestinal pathogen bacteria counts of piglets challenged with SE. The SE challenge increased (p < 0.05) the counts of Salmonella compared to non-challenge groups. Supplementation of probiotic groups showed lower (p < 0.05) counts of Salmonella in small intestine. Supplementation of LA and 38W groups showed lower (p < 0.05) counts Salmonella than other groups in large intestine and counts of E. coli in small intestine. There was an interaction between supplementation of LA, 38W and SE challenge. Piglets supplemented with LA and 38W with SE challenge decreased (p < 0.05) the counts of Salmonella compared to piglets supplemented with no probiotics with SE challenge.

Table 5. Effects of dietary probiotics on intestinal microbiota of piglets challenged with Salmonella in Experiment 1

Items (Log₁₀CFU/g)		Small intestine		Large intestine
CHAL	PRO	Escherichia coli	Salmonella	Escherichia coli	Salmonella
-	NC	4.71	2.68^c	5.54	2.91^c
-	LA	4.59	2.53^c	5.49	2.79^c
-	38W	4.58	2.50^c	5.55	2.75^c
-	PK	4.66	2.48^c	5.59	2.92^c
-	PF30	4.67	2.51^c	5.51	2.97^c
+	NC	4.80	3.98^a	5.49	4.46^a
+	LA	4.54	3.66^b	5.56	4.12^b
+	38W	4.53	3.65^b	5.60	4.07^b
+	PK	4.71	3.91^a	5.62	4.65^a
+	PF30	4.77	3.81^ab	5.57	4.61^a
-		4.64	2.54	5.54	2.87
+		4.67	3.80	5.57	4.38
	NC	4.76^a	3.33^a	5.52	3.69^a
	LA	4.57^b	3.10^bc	5.53	3.46^b
	38W	4.56^b	3.08^c	5.58	3.41^b
	PK	4.69^a	3.20^b	5.61	3.79^a
	PF30	4.72^a	3.16^bc	5.54	3.79
p-value	CHAL	0.402	< 0.001	0.627	< 0.001
	PRO	0.002	< 0.001	0.896	< 0.001
	CHAL ⨯ PRO	0.423	0.031	0.977	0.007
SE		0.052	0.048	0.102	0.060

^a-c Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

CHAL, challenged; PRO, probiotics; -, non-challenged with Salmonella; NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, Lactobacillus plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri; +, challenged with Salmonella.

Download Excel Table

Experiment 2

Growth performance

Table 6 shows the results of growth performance of piglets supplemented with probiotics. Supplementation of LA and 38W showed higher (p < 0.05) BW than CON group and supplementation of PF30 group on d 28. Also, supplementation of LA and 38W showed higher (p < 0.05) ADG and G:F than CON group on d 14 to 28 and d 0 to 28. There was no difference between supplementation of 38W and supplementation of PK group.

Table 6. Effects of dietary probiotics on growth performance of weaned piglets in Experiment 2

Items	NC	LA	38W	PK	PF30	SE	p-value
BW (kg)
D 0	9.80	9.77	9.92	9.82	9.88	0.379	0.999
D 14	14.38^ab	15.30^a	14.75^ab	15.23^ab	14.23^b	0.246	0.014
D 28	21.18^c	24.75^a	23.45^ab	22.03^bc	20.92^c	0.514	< 0.001
ADG (g)
D 0 to 14	327.33	394.17	345.33	386.83	310.67	22.834	0.063
D 14 to 28	485.00^b	676.33^a	621.50^a	485.67^b	477.33^b	25.318	< 0.001
D 0 to 28	406.17^c	535.00^a	483.33^ab	436.33^bc	394.00^c	14.273	< 0.001
ADFI (g)
D 0 to 14	545.00	545.67	486.67	606.67	558.00	34.085	0.212
D 14 to 28	1,120.00	1,125.00	1,040.00	1,010.00	1,030.00	33.342	0.061
D 0 to 28	832.50	835.33	763.33	808.83	794.33	25.318	0.271
G:F
D 0 to 14	0.60^b	0.73^a	0.72^a	0.64^ab	0.56^b	0.026	< 0.001
D 14 to 28	0.44^b	0.60^a	0.60^a	0.48^b	0.46^b	0.025	< 0.001
D 0 to 28	0.49^b	0.64^a	0.63^a	0.54^b	0.50^b	0.016	< 0.001

^a-c Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, L. plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri; BW, body weight; ADG, average daily gain; ADFI, average daily feed intake; G:F, feed efficiency.

Download Excel Table

Nutrient digestibility

Table 7 shows the results of nutrient digestibility of piglets supplemented with probiotics. Supplementation of LA and 38W increased (p < 0.05) DM and CP digestibility compared to CON group on 2 w. Also, supplementation of LA increased (p < 0.05) gross energy (GE) digestibility compared to CON group on 2 w. In addition, piglets supplemented with 38W increased (p < 0.05) CP digestibility compared to CON group on 4 w.

Table 7. Effects of dietary probiotics on nutrient digestibility of weaned piglets in Experiment 2

Items (%)	NC	LA	38W	PK	PF30	SE	p-value
2 w
DM	79.15^b	80.62^a	80.58^a	79.13^b	79.09^b	0.344	0.002
CP	72.16^c	75.70^a	74.71^ab	73.52^abc	73.14^bc	0.538	0.001
GE	74.40^b	76.51^a	75.74^ab	74.44^b	74.62^b	0.410	0.003
4 w
DM	77.14	77.24	77.58	76.61	77.12	0.264	0.173
CP	71.38^b	73.63^ab	74.17^a	72.36^ab	72.66^ab	0.584	0.021
GE	71.84	72.25	72.61	71.48	72.13	0.302	0.130

^a-c Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, L. plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri; DM, dry matter; CP, crude protein; GE, gross energy.

Download Excel Table

Diarrhea scores

Table 8 and Fig. 1 show the results of diarrhea score and diarrhea incidence of piglets supplemented with probiotics. Piglets supplemented with probiotic decreased (p < 0.05) diarrhea scores compared to CON group in whole experimental period. Among these probiotics, supplementation of LA and 38W showed lower (p < 0.05) diarrhea score than supplementation of PK and PF30 groups.

Table 8. Effects of dietary probiotics on diarrhea score of weaned piglets in Experiment 2

Items	NC	LA	38W	PK	PF30	SE	p-value
Diarrhea score
D 1 to 14	1.190^a	0.917^b	0.917^b	1.214^a	1.178^a	0.049	< 0.001
D 15 to 28	0.893^a	0.440^c	0.464^c	0.655^b	0.631^b	0.016	< 0.001
D 1 to 28	1.042^a	0.679^c	0.690^c	0.935^b	0.905^b	0.024	< 0.001

^a-c Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, L. plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri.

Download Excel Table

Fig. 1. Effects of dietary probiotics on diarrhea incidence of weaned piglets in Experiment 2.

Download Original Figure

Fecal noxious gas emissions

Table 9 shows the results of fecal noxious odor of piglets supplemented with probiotics. Supplementation of LA and PK groups showed lower (p < 0.05) NH₃ concentration than NC group on 2 w fermented for 12 and 24 h. Also, supplementation of LA and 38W groups showed lower (p < 0.05) NHM₃ concentration than NC group. supplementation of LA decreased (p < 0.05) H₂S compared with other groups on 4 w fermented for 12 h.

Table 9. Effects of dietary probiotics on fecal noxious odor of weaned piglets in Experiment 2

Items (ppm)		NC	LA	38W	PK	PF30	SE	p-value
2 W
12 h	NH₃	27.43^a	18.37^c	22.87^b	23.43^b	23.50^b	0.379	< 0.001
12 h	H₂S	6.73	3.97	5.67	5.13	6.57	0.785	0.115
24 h	NH₃	34.63^a	31.13^bc	34.53^ab	30.60^c	32.27^abc	0.826	0.004
24 h	H₂S	10.33	8.57	8.87	9.57	8.83	0.612	0.271
4 W
12 h	NH₃	22.80^a	15.43^c	19.43^b	20.97^ab	20.60^ab	0.581	< 0.001
12 h	H₂S	4.80^a	3.20^b	4.50^a	4.03^a	4.30^a	0.195	< 0.001
24 h	NH₃	32.87^a	28.23^b	28.57^b	28.40^b	29.47^ab	0.907	0.007
24 h	H₂S	9.17	7.73	8.30	8.67	8.40	0.466	0.311

^a-c Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, L. plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri.

Download Excel Table

Intestinal microbiota

Table 10 shows the results of intestinal pathogen bacteria of piglets supplemented with probiotics. Piglets supplemented with LA showed higher (p < 0.05) counts of Lactobacillus than other groups on 2 w and 4 w. There was no difference between supplementation of probiotic groups.

Table 10. Effects of dietary probiotics on intestinal microbiota of weaned piglets in Experiment 2

Items (Log₁₀CFU/g)	NC	LA	38W	PK	PF30	SE	p-value
2 w
Escherichia coli	5.35	5.25	5.29	5.40	5.37	0.068	0.551
Lactobacillus	7.00^c	7.59^a	7.22^b	7.16^bc	7.18^bc	0.045	< 0.001
4 w
Escherichia coli	4.54	4.44	4.44	4.48	4.50	0.064	0.748
Lactobacillus	7.11^c	7.68^a	7.43^b	7.25^bc	7.30^bc	0.055	< 0.001

^a-c Values within a row with different superscripts are significantly different.

NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, L. plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri.

Download Excel Table

Blood profile

Table 11 shows the results of blood profile of piglets supplemented with probiotics. The WBC including neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils and basophils were not affected (p > 0.05) by supplementation of probiotics.

Table 11. Effects of dietary probiotics on blood profile of weaned piglets in Experiment 2

Items	NC	LA	38W	PK	PF30	SE	p-value
WBC (10³/μL)	16.90	18.10	18.21	18.01	18.35	1.463	0.958
Neutrophil (%)	44.35	44.08	45.58	44.83	45.62	1.242	0.865
Lymphocyte (%)	43.95	44.58	43.90	43.87	43.40	1.039	0.954
Monocyte (%)	9.48	8.90	8.37	8.96	8.78	1.096	0.969
Eosinophil (%)	1.15	1.32	1.08	1.11	1.07	0.212	0.917
Basophil (%)	1.07	1.12	1.08	1.23	1.13	0.241	0.990

NC, non-supplemented with probiotics; LA, L. plantarum; 38W, Pediococcus pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1; PK, Pediococcus acidilactici K; PF30, Lactobacillus reuteri; WBC, white blood cell.

Download Excel Table

DISCUSSION

Weaning stress can cause poor growth performance, with diarrhea being a common issue in weaned piglets [18,19]. In our experiment, inoculation with E. coli and SE to induce weaning stress resulted in poor growth performance and diarrhea, respectively. These results are similar to those of a previous study using a harmful bacterial pathogen to inoculate pigs [20]. Intestinal epithelium functions as a barrier of defense and promotes in nutrition absorption [18]. However, stresses associated with early weaning commonly impair the intestinal barrier and have a negative impact on the growth performance and feed efficiency [21]. Bacterial pathogens can interrupt the release of fluid and electrolytes in the intestine, leading to diarrhea [22].

In the present study, challenged with E. coli and SE increased pathogen shedding, respectively. Previous studies reported that E. coli and SE challenge had higher shedding compared than non-challenge group [23,24]. These results confirmed that the challenge model was successful in the present study.

Probiotics are defined as “live microorganism that, when given in sufficient quantities, improve the host’s health” [25]. To colonize and cause illness, pathogenic bacteria adhere to the intestinal epithelial membrane [23]. It is hypothesized that probiotics will promote colonization of beneficial microbes, thus preventing harmful bacteria from adhering to the gut epithelium [26]. Production of bacteriocins, proteins with antibacterial characteristics that can limit the function of harmful bacteria, by members of the Bacillus, Lactobacillus and Pediococcus species also has been frequently demonstrated [27,28].

While E. coli and SE challenge exacerbated poor growth performance and pathogen bacteria shedding of challenged pigs, supplementation of probiotics alleviated such poor growth performance and pathogen bacteria shedding in the current metabolic trial. A variety of strains of L. plantarum have been shown to be resistant acid and bile and they can be found in gastrointestinal tracts as a useful probiotics [29]. P. pentosaceus is the main species used in probiotic supplements for animals [30]. Lactobacillus spp. and Pediococcus spp. produce antibacterial substances such as organic acid and hydrogen peroxide to inhibit the growth of pathogenic bacteria [31]. In the current experiment, supplementation of LP and 38W improved growth performance and pathogen bacteria shedding in weaned piglets challenged with E. coli and SE. Previous studies showed that the L. plantarum and P. pentosaceus can be used as growth stimulators [32,33]. Yang et al. [34] have also reported that supplementation of L. plantarum could decreased E. coli counts. Some strains of P. pentosaceus showed antibacterial activity and lower the pH in the intestine by releasing organic acid [35]. In addition, Lan et al. [36] reported that supplementation of P. pentosaceus alleviated counts of SE in the cecum of broiler infected with SE. These results of growth performance and pathogen bacteria shedding indicate that supplementation of LA and 38W could enhance intestinal microflora and growth of piglets infected with pathogenic bacteria.

In feeding trial, supplementation of LA and 38W improved growth performance, diarrhea incidence, nutrient digestibility, fecal noxious odor and intestinal microbiome in weaned piglets. In our study, supplementation of LA and 38W increased the BW, ADG and G:F compared to non-supplementation group. These results are consistent with previous studies showing that supplementation of Lactobacillus species improved growth performance of pigs [37]. This result might be a link between growth performance and increased nutrient digestibility. Our results showed that supplementation of LA and 38W increased the digestibility of CP, DM and GE on 2 w and CP digestibility on 4 w.

Furthermore, supplementation of LA and 38W decreased the diarrhea incidence compared with non-supplementation group. Consistent with results of diarrhea incidence, the intestinal microbiome such as E. coli and SE was decreased in piglets supplemented with LA and 38W. These results are also in agreement with previous study showing anti-diarrheal activity and anti-pathogenic activity of L. plantarum and L. reuteri in weaned piglets [38]. Lactobacillus species generally reduce pH in the presence of carbohydrate fermentation by producing lactic acid, suppressing pathogenic bacteria as a result [39]. In addition, fecal noxious gases are affected by the nutrient digestibility and intestinal microbiota [40]. Consistent with our results of digestibility and counts of intestinal pathogen bacteria, supplementation of LA and 38W decreased the concentration of NH₃ and H₂S. Lactobacillus based probiotics feed for weaned piglets reduce the emission of total mercaptans, NH₃ and H₂S, because more nutrients are digestible and less substrate for microbial fermentation in the colon [37].

Experiments have been conducted for a long time on of Lactobacillus spp. and P. acidilactici, but there is lack of study about P. pentosaceus. Various LAB, including Pediococcus spp. and Lactobacillus spp., participate in the fermentation of kimchi and produce an antimicrobial bacteriocin called pediocin, which is produced by P. pentosaceus derived from kimchi [41]. Thus, we conducted an experiment about effects of P. pentosaceus strains isolated from white kimchi, which is Korean traditional fermented food, as a potential probiotics. In our study, supplementation of 38W enhanced the microbial community and improved the growth performance. As mentioned above, our current study showed that supplementation of 38W had similar effects to LA, used as commercial probiotics. In conclusion, P. pentosaceus isolated from white kimchi should be viewed as a candidate medication with antibacterial effects.

CONCLUSION

Weaning pigs supplemented with P. pentosaceus isolated from kimchi had improved the growth performance and enhanced the microbial community. Supplementation of P. pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1 have achieved similar effects as L. plantarum, which is being used as a commercial probiotics. Therefore, we considered that P. pentosaceus SMFM2016-WK1 could be used as a growth stimulator and medication with antibacterial effects in pigs.

Competing interests

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Funding sources

This work was supported by a grant from the Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency, Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Republic of Korea [Z-1543081-2020-22-01].

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Availability of data and material

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article.

Authors’ contributions

Conceptualization: Cho J.

Data curation: Oh H, Yoon Y, Yoo Y.

Formal analysis: Chang S, Park S, Jeon K.

Methodology: Oh H, An J.

Software: Chang S, Cho H, Cho Y.

Validation: Oh H.

Investigation: Cho J.

Writing - original draft: Song D, Lee J, Kim K, Cho J.

Writing - review & editing: Song D, Lee J, Kim K, Oh H, An J, Chang S, Cho H, Park S, Jeon K, Yoon Y, Yoo Y, Cho Y, Cho J.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The protocol for this study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Korea (approval no. CBNUA-1620-21-02).

REFERENCES

Wang T, Teng K, Liu Y, Shi W, Zhang J, Dong E, et al. Lactobacillus plantarum PFM 105 promotes intestinal development through modulation of gut microbiota in weaning piglets. Front Microbiol. 2019; 10:90

Lin KH, Yu YH. Evaluation of Bacillus licheniformis-fermented feed additive as an antibiotic substitute: effect on the growth performance, diarrhea incidence, and cecal microbiota in weaning piglets. Animals. 2020; 10:1649

Tran THT, Everaert N, Bindelle J. Review on the effects of potential prebiotics on controlling intestinal enteropathogens Salmonella and Escherichia coli in pig production. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr. 2018; 102:17-32

Borriello G, Lucibelli MG, De Carlo E, Auriemma C, Cozza D, Ascione G, et al. Characterization of enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), Shiga-toxin producing E. coli (STEC) and necrotoxigenic E. coli (NTEC) isolated from diarrhoeic Mediterranean water buffalo calves (Bubalus bubalis). Res Vet Sci. 2012; 93:18-22

Costa MO, Fouhse J, Silva APP, Willing B, Harding JCS. Putting the microbiota to work: epigenetic effects of early life antibiotic treatment are associated with immune-related pathways and reduced epithelial necrosis following Salmonella Typhimurium challenge in vitro. PLOS ONE. 2020; 15e0231942

Pupa P, Apiwatsiri P, Sirichokchatchawan W, Pirarat N, Nedumpun T, Hampson DJ, et al. Microencapsulated probiotic Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and/or Pediococcus acidilactici strains ameliorate diarrhoea in piglets challenged with enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli. Sci Rep. 2022; 12:7210

Chen J, Pang H, Wang L, Ma C, Wu G, Liu Y, et al. Bacteriocin-producing lactic acid bacteria strains with antimicrobial activity screened from Bamei pig feces. Foods. 2022; 11:709

Beal JD, Niven SJ, Campbell A, Brooks PH. The effect of temperature on the growth and persistence of Salmonella in fermented liquid pig feed. Int J Food Microbiol. 2002; 79:99-104

Jang S, Lee J, Jung U, Choi HS, Suh HJ. Identification of an anti-listerial domain from Pediococcus pentosaceus T1 derived from Kimchi, a traditional fermented vegetable. Food Control. 2014; 43:42-8

10.

Wang S, Yao B, Gao H, Zang J, Tao S, Zhang S, et al. Combined supplementation of Lactobacillus fermentum and Pediococcus acidilactici promoted growth performance, alleviated inflammation, and modulated intestinal microbiota in weaned pigs. BMC Vet Res. 2019; 15:239

11.

Apiwatsiri P, Pupa P, Yindee J, Niyomtham W, Sirichokchatchawan W, Lugsomya K, et al. Anticonjugation and antibiofilm evaluation of probiotic strains Lactobacillus plantarum 22F, 25F, and Pediococcus acidilactici 72N against Escherichia coli harboring mcr-1 gene. Front Vet Sci. 2021; 8:614439

12.

Tian Z, Cui Y, Lu H, Ma X. Effects of long-term feeding diets supplemented with Lactobacillus reuteri 1 on growth performance, digestive and absorptive function of the small intestine in pigs. J Funct Foods. 2020; 71:104010

13.

Kim SH, Kim WJ, Kang SS. Inhibitory effect of bacteriocin-producing Lactobacillus brevis DF01 and Pediococcus acidilactici K10 isolated from kimchi on enteropathogenic bacterial adhesion. Food Biosci. 2019; 30:100425

14.

Park JH, Sureshkumar S, Kim IH. Effects of dietary lysozyme supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, intestinal microbiota, and blood profiles of weanling pigs challenged with Escherichia coli. J Anim Sci Technol. 2021; 63:501-9

15.

NRC [National Research Council]. Nutrient requirements of swine. 11th rev. ed Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 2012

16.

AOAC [Association of Official Analytical Chemists] International. Official methods of analysis of AOAC International. 18th ed Washington, DC: AOAC International. 2007

17.

Zhao PY, Jung JH, Kim IH. Effect of mannan oligosaccharides and fructan on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood profile, and diarrhea score in weanling pigs. J Anim Sci. 2012; 90:833-9

18.

Cao G, Tao F, Hu Y, Li Z, Zhang Y, Deng B, et al. Positive effects of a Clostridium butyricum-based compound probiotic on growth performance, immune responses, intestinal morphology, hypothalamic neurotransmitters, and colonic microbiota in weaned piglets. Food Funct. 2019; 10:2926-34

19.

Ji P, Li X, Liu Y. Dietary intervention to reduce E. coli infectious diarrhea in young pigs.In In: Rodrigo L, editor.editor E. coli infections: importance of early diagnosis and efficient treatment. London: IntechOpen. 2020; p p. 15-42

20.

Song D, Lee J, Kwak W, Song M, Oh H, Kim Y, et al. Stimbiotic supplementation alleviates poor performance and gut integrity in weaned piglets induced by challenge with E. coli. Animals. 2022; 12:1799

21.

Hu R, He Z, Liu M, Tan J, Zhang H, Hou DX, et al. Dietary protocatechuic acid ameliorates inflammation and up-regulates intestinal tight junction proteins by modulating gut microbiota in LPS-challenged piglets. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2020; 11:92

22.

Choi J, Wang L, Liu S, Lu P, Zhao X, Liu H, et al. Effects of a microencapsulated formula of organic acids and essential oils on nutrient absorption, immunity, gut barrier function, and abundance of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli F4 in weaned piglets challenged with E. coli F4. J Anim Sci. 2020; 98:skaa259

23.

Becker SL, Li Q, Burrough ER, Kenne D, Sahin O, Gould SA, et al. Effects of an F18 enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli challenge on growth performance, immunological status, and gastrointestinal structure of weaned pigs and the potential protective effect of direct-fed microbial blends. J Anim Sci. 2020; 98:skaa113

24.

Rodrigues LA, Panisson JC, Kpogo LA, González-Vega JC, Htoo JK, Van Kessel AG, et al. Functional amino acid supplementation postweaning mitigates the response of normal birth weight more than for low birth weight pigs to a subsequent Salmonella challenge. Animal. 2022; 16:100566

25.

Mun D, Kyoung H, Kong M, Ryu S, Jang KB, Baek J, et al. Effects of Bacillus-based probiotics on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and intestinal health of weaned pigs. J Anim Sci Technol. 2021; 63:1314-27

26.

Yirga H. The use of probiotics in animal nutrition. J Probiotics Health. 2015; 3:1000132

27.

Kaewchomphunuch T, Charoenpichitnunt T, Thongbaiyai V, Ngamwongsatit N, Kaeoket K. Cell-free culture supernatants of Lactobacillus spp. and Pediococcus spp. inhibit growth of pathogenic Escherichia coli isolated from pigs in Thailand. BMC Vet Res. 2022; 18:60

28.

Luise D, Bertocchi M, Motta V, Salvarani C, Bosi P, Luppi A, et al. Bacillus sp. probiotic supplementation diminish the Escherichia coli F4ac infection in susceptible weaned pigs by influencing the intestinal immune response, intestinal microbiota and blood metabolomics. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2019; 10:74

29.

Wang H, Kim IH. Evaluation of dietary probiotic (Lactobacillus plantarum BG0001) supplementation on the growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood profile, fecal gas emission, and fecal microbiota in weaning pigs. Animals. 2021; 11:2232

30.

Porto MCW, Kuniyoshi TM, Azevedo POS, Vitolo M, Oliveira RPS. Pediococcus spp.: an important genus of lactic acid bacteria and pediocin producers. Biotechnol Adv. 2017; 35:361-74

31.

Shin HJ, Choi HJ, Kim DW, Ahn CS, Lee YG, Jeong YK, et al. Probiotic potential of Pediococcus pentosaceus BCNU 9070. J Life Sci. 2012; 22:1194-200

32.

He T, Zhu YH, Yu J, Xia B, Liu X, Yang GY, et al. Lactobacillus johnsonii L531 reduces pathogen load and helps maintain short-chain fatty acid levels in the intestines of pigs challenged with Salmonella enterica Infantis. Vet Microbiol. 2019; 230:187-94

33.

Jiang S, Cai L, Lv L, Li L. Pediococcus pentosaceus, a future additive or probiotic candidate. Microb Cell Fact. 2021; 20:45

34.

Yang Y, Park JH, Kim IH. Effects of probiotics containing (Lactobacillus planetarium) and chlortetracycline on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, fecal microflora, diarrhea score and fecal gas emission in weanling pigs. Livest Sci. 2020; 241:104186

35.

Ghosh B, Sukumar G, Ghosh AR. Purification and characterization of pediocin from probiotic Pediococcus pentosaceus GS4, MTCC 12683. Folia Microbiol. 2019; 64:765-78

36.

Lan D, Xun X, Hu Y, Li N, Yang C, Jiang X, et al. Research on the effect of Pediococcus pentosaceus on Salmonella enteritidis-infected chicken. BioMed Res Int. 2020; 2020:6416451

37.

Jeong YD, Ko HS, Hosseindoust A, Choi YH, Chae BJ, Yu DJ, et al. Lactobacillus-based fermentation product and lactose level in the feed for weanling pigs: effects on intestinal morphology, microbiota, gas emission, and targeted intestinal coliforms. Livest Sci. 2019; 227:90-6

38.

Dell’Anno M, Callegari ML, Reggi S, Caprarulo V, Giromini C, Spalletta A, et al. Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus reuteri as functional feed additives to prevent diarrhoea in weaned piglets. Animals. 2021; 11:1766

39.

Pringsulaka O, Rueangyotchanthana K, Suwannasai N, Watanapokasin R, Amnueysit P, Sunthornthummas S, et al. In vitro screening of lactic acid bacteria for multi-strain probiotics. Livest Sci. 2015; 174:66-73

40.

Liu X, Kim SH, Kim IH. Effects of the combination of multistrain probiotics and Castanea crenata shell extract on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, fecal microbial shedding, meat quality, noxious gas emissions, and blood parameters in finishing pigs. Livest Sci. 2020; 240:104185

41.

Yoon JY, Kim D, Kim EB, Lee SK, Lee M, Jang A. Quality and lactic acid bacteria diversity of pork salami containing kimchi powder. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour. 2018; 38:912-26

Related Articles

Effects of dietary supplementation of Pediococcus pentosaceus strains from kimchi in weaned piglet challenged with Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RESULTS

DISCUSSION

CONCLUSION

Competing interests

Funding sources

Acknowledgements

Availability of data and material

Authors’ contributions

Ethics approval and consent to participate

REFERENCES