Investigation of the effects of probiotic, Bacillus subtilis on stress reactions in laying hens using infrared thermography
Maria Soroko , Daniel Zaborski
AbstractThe goal of the study was to assess whether tonic immobility (TI)-induced stress reactions in laying hens can be reduced by probiotic supplementation and if the changes in body surface temperature, as a stress indicator, are genetically dependent and can be detected using infrared thermography (IRT). Seventy-one white and 70 brown hens were used. Hens were randomly assigned to three treatments at 1-day-old: beak trimmed and fed a regular diet; non-beak trimmed and fed a regular diet; and non-beak trimmed and fed a diet supplemented with probiotics, Bacillus subtilis. At 40 weeks of age, hens were tested for TI reactions. Eye and face temperatures were measured with IRT immediately before and after TI testing. Results revealed that the probiotic supplementation did not affect hens’ stress responses to TI testing; the left and right eye temperatures increased by 0.26s˚C and 0.15˚C, respectively, while right face temperature tended to increase following TI testing. However, the right eye (32.60˚C for white, and 32.35˚C for brown) and face (39.51˚C for white, and 39.36˚C for brown) temperatures differed significantly among genetic lines. There was a positive correlation between TI duration and the changes of the left and right eye temperatures after TI testing in white hens. Based on these results, hens experienced TI-induced surface temperature changes that were detectable using IRT. White hens experienced greater stress reactions in response to TI than brown hens. However, supplementation with Bacillus subtilis did not attenuate hens’ reaction to TI testing.
|Journal series||PLoS ONE, ISSN 1932-6203, (N/A 100 pkt)|
|Publication size in sheets||0.55|
|ASJC Classification||; ;|
|License||Journal (articles only); published final; ; with publication|
|Score||= 100.0, 20-04-2021, ArticleFromJournal|
|Publication indicators||= 0; = 2; : 2017 = 1.111; : 2019 = 2.74 (2) - 2019=3.226 (5)|
|Citation count*||2 (2021-05-02)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.