Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer

The influence of probiotic on the biochemical status of young pigs

  • Sergey Yu. Smolentsev et al. ,
  • Lyudmila V. Holodova ,
  • Ivan N. Polikarpov ,
  • Lilia E. Matrosova ,
  • Elena L. Matveeva ,
  • Alla E. Ivanova ,
  • Valentina P. Korosteleva ,

Abstract

Abstract. Nowadays the fact of positive effects of new environmentally friendly and at the same time highly effective probiotic, antibacterial drugs on the body of young pigs attract particular attention of scientists. One of such drugs is sporobacterin. The aim of this study is to determine the influence of this drug on the physiological, morphological, and biochemical status of young pigs. The research was carried out on a pig farm «Ozerny» in the Republic of Tatarstan, Russia. The objects of the research were 75 one-day-old large white piglets, each weighing 1.1–1.2 kg. The young pigs were divided into three groups. Every day for 30 days the piglets of the first experimental group were given sporobacterin liquid at a dose of 0.2 ml/h, and a dose of 0.5 ml/h was administered to the second experimental group. The animals of the control group were on a basic diet. The study has shown that the administration of sporobacterin liquid at a dose of 0.2 and 0.5 ml/h induced high physiological activity. Morphological and biochemical blood composition in piglets of the experimental groups had improved by the age of 60 days. The total protein level in the serum of piglets increased by 8.95% and 8.98%; albumin, 6.13% and 7.37%; globulin, 10.79% and 11.43%; and gamma globulin, 27.74%, and 28.05%. The dose of 0.5 ml/h was more effective on average by 0.75%.

How to Cite

Smolentsev et al., S. Y., Holodova, L. V., Polikarpov, I. N., Matrosova, L. E., Matveeva, E. L., Ivanova, A. E., & Korosteleva, V. P. (2017). The influence of probiotic on the biochemical status of young pigs. Bali Medical Journal, 6(2), 327–330. https://doi.org/10.15562/bmj.v6i2.525

HTML
0

Total
1

Share

Search Panel

Sergey Yu. Smolentsev et al.
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal


Lyudmila V. Holodova
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal


Ivan N. Polikarpov
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal


Lilia E. Matrosova
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal


Elena L. Matveeva
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal


Alla E. Ivanova
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal


Valentina P. Korosteleva
Google Scholar
Pubmed
BMJ Journal