doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2016.2.213eng

UDC 636.5.033:636.084:636.087.7:[591.1+579.62



E.N. Andrianova1, I.A. Egorov1, L.M. Prisyazhnaya1, L.T. Akhmetova2,
Zh.Zh. Sibgatullin2, N.A. Slesarenko3, G.V. Kondratov3, I.N. Nikonov4, G.Yu. Laptev4

1All-Russian Research and Technological Poultry Institute, Federal Agency of Scientific Organizations,
10, ul. Ptitsegradskaya, Sergiev Posad, Moscow Province, 141311 Russia,
2JSC «Rusoborotexport»,
49a, prosp. Yamasheva, Kazan, 420124 Russia,
3K.I. Skryabin Moscow State Academy of Veterinary Medicine and Biotechnology,
23, ul. K.I. Skryabina, Moscow, 109473 Russia,
4JSC «Biotrof»,
Kolpino, St. Petersburg, 192288 Russia,

Received December 18, 2015


Preservation of national gene pool requires the maintenance of quality standards of life including healthy nutrition. In this relation there is a particular public concern about the use of antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) as an essential part of intensive technologies of animal production, the remnant of the past when it was a commonplace. WHO reported the constant growth of microbial resistance partly due to the transfer of AGPs into animal food products; it could enhance the distribution of bacteria resistant to antibacterial drugs and drug-resistant diseases hazardous for human race. The distribution of these infections among animals (especially breeding flocks) is also hazardous. This hazard is probably underestimated as a result of the lack of knowledge on composition and possible changes in animal and human microbiome including microorganisms undetectable by classic microbiological methods but forming the basis of the microbiota. Another underestimated possibility is the transfer of beneficial biologically active substances to human via animal food products when undesirable ingredients of animal feeds are simply substituted by harmless and biologically active ones, while more costly approaches to production of functional animal foodstuffs are widely discussed. Problem solving must be rapid, economically and biologically effective and safest for human, animals, and environment. In our trials conducted on 3 groups of Cobb-500 broiler chicks (from 1 to 35 days of age) the possibility of substitution of feed additive Vinivet for AGPs in diets for broiler chicks was studied. This additive based on apicultural products, i.e. bee-bread (ambrosia) and slumgum, was produced by no-waste technology (JSC Rusoborotexport, Kazan, Russia) preserving biologically active compounds from these products. It was found that inclusion of Vinivet into broiler diets (5000 ppm) improved live bodyweight in group 3 compared to control group 1 (no Vinivet) by 0.61 and 0.86 % at 28 and 35 days of age, respectively; feed conversion rate (FCR) in group 3 was better by 3.15 % compared to control. AGP Stafac 110 (Phibro Animal Health Corp., USA) fed to group 2 (180 ppm) was found to improve growth rate of broilers compared to groups 1 and 3. Live bodyweight in group 2 was higher than in control at 6, 14, 21, 28 and 35 days of age by 2.63; 1.99; 3.22; 0.51 and 2.04 %, respectively, while FCR in group 2 was better by 3.53 %. The analysis of intestinal microbiota with the use of T-RFLP (Terminal Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism) method showed substantial decline in pathogenic and opportunistic populations in broilers of Vinivet-fed group 3. The counts of Staphylococcaceae, Fusobacterium spp., Pertococcaceae and Pasteurellaceae were significantly lower compared to control (by 0.91; 0.79; 1.85 and 3.37 %, respectively) while total count of cellulolytic bacteria was higher by 7.94 %. Histological study of liver and intestine showed structural changes in small intestine of Vinivet-fed broilers improving its absorbing ability, barrier and motor functions. The height of intestinal villi in group 3 was significantly higher compared to control, density and depth of crypts were higher as well as the total absorbing surface area. To the contrary, in Stafac-fed group 2 the decrease in thickness of mucosa of intestinal wall was found which could mean the decrease in intestinal functionality. The activation of trophic processes in liver was also found in Vinivet-fed broilers. The histological analysis of liver showed the absence of hepatotoxic effect of Vinivet for broilers. The results of our trial proved Vinivet to be a promising and safe feed additive for poultry.

Keywords: broiler chicks, antibiotic growth promoters, productivity, apicultural products.


Full article (Rus)

Full text (Eng)



  1. Egorov I.A., Ponomarev D.A., Fisinin V.I. Korma, biologicheskiaktivnyeveshchestva, bezopasnost': prakticheskoeposobie[Feeds, bioactive substances, and safety - a guideline (in Russ.)]. Minsk, 2013.
  2. Pozdnyakovskii V.M. Ekspertiza myasa i myasoproduktov. Kachestvo i bezopasnost' безопасность [Control of meat and meat products. Quality and safety (in Russ.)]. Novosibirsk, 2010.
  3. Gorlov I.F., Mosolova N.I., Zlobina E.Yu. Vestnik RASKHN, 2013, 1: 54-56 (in Russ.).
  4. Akhmetova N.K. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii «Tekhnologiya i produkty zdorovogo pitaniya» [Proc. Int. Conf. «health food products and technologies» (in Russ.)]. Saratov, 2007: 4-6.  
  5. Rogov I.A., Dunchenko N.I., Pozdnyakovskii V.M. Bezopasnost' prodovol'stvennogo syr'ya i pishchevykh produktov [Safety of food raw materials and food products (in Russ.)]. Novosibirsk, 2007.
  6. Joint FAO/OIE/WHO Expert Workshop on Non-Human Antimicrobial Usage and Antimicrobial Resistance: scientific assessment (Geneva, 1-5 December 2003). Geneva, World Health Organisation, 2004 (http://www.who/int/foodsafety/publications/micro/en/amr.pdf, accessed 20 January 2011).
  7. Laxminarayan R., Duse A., Wattal C., Zaidi A.K.M., Wertheim H.F.L., Sumpradit N., Vlieghe E., Hara G.L., Gould I.M., Goossens H., Greko C.,
    So A.D., Bigdeli M., Tomson G., Woodhouse W., Ombaka E., Peralta A.Q., Qamar F.N., Mir F., Kariuki S., Bhutta Z.A., Coates A., Bergstrom R., Wright G.D., Brown E.D., Cars O. Antibiotic resistance — the need for global solutions. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2013, 13(12): 1057-1098 CrossRef
  8. Artem’evaO.A.,PereselkovaD.A.,FomichevYu.P.Dihydroquercetin, the bioactive substance, to be used against pathogenic microorganisms as an alternative to antibiotics. Agricultural Biology, 2015, 50(4): 513-519 CrossRef
  9. Timoshko M.A. Mikroflora pishchevaritel'nogo trakta sel'skokhozyaistvennykh zhivotnykh [Microflora of farm animal digestive tract (in Russ.)]. Kishinev, 1990.
  10. van der Wielen P.W.J.J., Keuzenkamp D.A., Lipman L.J.A., van Knapen F., Biesterveld S. Spatial and temporal variation of the intestinal bacterial community in commercially raised broiler chickens during growth. Microbiol. Ecol., 2002, 44: 286-293 CrossRef
  11. Maiorka A., Dahlke F., de Azevedo Morgulis M.S.F. Broiler adaptation to post-hatching period. Ciência Rural., 2006, 36: 701-708.
  12. Mead G.C. Microbes of the avian cecum: types present and substrates utilized. J. Exp. Zool., 1989, 3(Suppl.): 48-54 CrossRef
  13. Amit-Romach E., Sklan D., Uni Z. Microflora ecology of the chicken intestine using 16S ribosomal DNA primers. Poultry Sci., 2004, 83(7): 1093-1098 CrossRef
  14. Dibner J.J., Richards J.D., Knight C.D. Microbial imprinting in gut development and health. J. Appl. Poult. Res., 2008, 17: 174-188 CrossRef
  15. Kizerwetter-Swid M., Binek M. Bacterial microflora of the chicken embryos and newly hatched chicken. J. Anim. Feed Sci., 2008, 17: 224-232.
  16. Babaca Z. Isolation of bacterial pathogens from dead-in-shell chicken embryos from local hatcheries. J. Vet. Sci. Technol., 2014, 5(2): 170-171.
  17. Rossi D.A., Fonseca B.B., de Melo R.T., da Silva Felipe G., da Silva P.L., Mendonça E.P., Filgueiras A.L.L., Beletti M.E. Transmission of Campylobacter coli in chicken embryos. Braz. J. Microbiol., 2012, 43(2): 535-543 CrossRef
  18. Fuliang H.U., Hepburn H.R., Xuan H., Chen M., Daya S., Radloff S.E. Effects of propolis on blood glucose, blood lipid and free radicals in rats with diabetes mellitus. Pharmacol. Res., 2005, 51(2): 147-152 CrossRef
  19. Golder W. Propolis. The bee glue as presented by Graeco-Roman literature. Wurzbg Medizinhist Mitt., 2004, 23: 133-145.
  20. Food and nutritional supplements /J.K. Ramsley, J.K. Donnely, N.W. Read (eds.). Springer Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 2001: 12.
  21. Akhmetova L.T., Garmonov S.Yu., Sibgatullin Zh.Zh., Akhmetova R.T., Sopin V.F., Zevakov  I.V. Vestnik KGTU, 2011, 14(5): 154-160 (in Russ.).
  22. Fisinin V.I., Egorov I.A., Lenkova T.N., Okolelova T.M., Ignato-
    va G.V., Panin I.G. Metodicheskie ukazaniya po optimizatsii retseptov kombikormov dlya sel'skokhozyaistvennoi ptitsy /Pod redaktsiei V.I. Fisinina [Methods of mixed feed optimization in poultry - a guideline. V.I. Fisinin (ed.) (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 2014.
  23. Egorov I.A., Manukyan V.A., Okolelova T.M. et al. Metodicheskoe rukovodstvo po kormleniyu sel'skokhozyaistvennoi ptitsy /Pod redaktsiei V.I. Fisinina [Poultry feeding - a guideline. V.I. Fisinin (ed.) (in Russ.)]. Sergiev Posad, 2015.
  24. Laptev G.Yu., Novikova N.I., Il'ina L.A., Iyldyrym E.A., Filippo-
    va V.A., Gorfunkel' E.P., Nikonov I.N., Fisinin V.I., Egorov I.A., Lenkova T.N., Manukyan V.A., Egorova T.V., Grozina A.A., Tishenkov D.I. Molekulyarno-geneticheskie metody opredeleniya mikroflory kishechnika i ustanovlenie normy ee soderzhaniya v zheludochno-kishechnom trakte tsyplyat-broilerov [Molecular analysis of gastrointestinal tract microbiota in broiler chicks (in Russ.)]. Sergiev Posad, 2015.
  25. Lakin G.F. Biometriya [Biometry (in Russ.)]. Moscow, 1990.
  26. Fisinin V.I., Egorov I.A., Okolelova T.M., Imangulov Sh.A. Kormlenie sel'skokhozyaistvennoi ptitsy [Poultry feeding (in Russ.)]. Sergiev Posad, 2004.