Abstract:Abstract BackgroundMucosal and systemic immune responses are different strategies to cope with environmental stimuli. In ovo delivery of prebiotic, probiotic, or synbiotic into the avian embryo allows for indigenous microbiota stimulation. Intestinal microbiota in animals is responsible for immune system maturation. The genetic component is critical in host-microbiota crosstalk and immune system development. The goal of this study was to compare mucosal and systemic immune responses in two distinct chicken genotypes stimulated in ovo . ResultsThe experiment was constructed in full-factorial design and was aimed to study the effects of two chicken genotypes (chicken broilers or native chickens), four in ovo -delivered compounds (GOS/galactooligosaccharides/prebiotic, Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris /probiotic, or GOS+ L.lactis /synbiotic, vs. physiological saline) and three different stimuli (LPS or LTA vs. physiological saline) on a panel of cytokine genes ( IL-1B , IL-2 , IL-4 , IL-6 , IL-10 , IL-12p40 , and IL-17 ) expressed in caecal tonsils and spleen. We tested significance of the main effects and their interactions. Genotype had the most significant influence on all gene expression signatures in both tissues ( P < 0.001 for all genes, except P < 0.05 for IL-10 in spleen). Immune challenge was the second most significant main effect, and influenced IL-1β , IL-6 IL-10 ( P < 0.001), and IL-17 genes ( P < 0.05) in caecal tonsils, and all genes in spleen ( P < 0.001), except IL-4 ( P > 0.05). In ovo stimulation influenced IL-2 , IL-4 , and IL-10 in caecal tonsils ( P < 0.05), as well as IL-2 and IL-12p40 in spleen ( P < 0.05). ConclusionsThe mucosal and systemic immune responses of chicken broilers and native chickens showed distinct patterns. Genotype influenced gene expression signatures of all immune-related genes, but chicken broilers developed stronger immune responses than native chickens. LPS triggered both mucosal (caecal tonsils) and systemic (spleen) immune responses in chicken broilers, but only systemic (spleen) in native chickens. In ovo stimulation with bioactive compounds (especially prebiotic) modulated innate immune responses to LPS. GOS delivered in ovo induced the most pronounced responses to LPS, which validated its further application as a potent immunomodulator for in ovo applications.

Modulation of gene expression in immune-related organs by in ovo stimulation with probiotics and prophybiotics in broiler chickens

Effects of <i>Clostridium butyricum</i>- and <i>Bacillus</i> spp.-Based Potential Probiotics on the Growth Performance, Intestinal Morphology, Immune Responses, and Caecal Microbiota in Broilers

Molecular Response in Intestinal and Immune Tissues to in Ovo Administration of Inulin and the Combination of Inulin and Lactobacillus lactis Subsp. cremoris

Mucosal and Systemic Immune Responses Modulated by in Ovo-Delivered Bioactive Compounds in Distinct Chicken Genotypes

In ovo and Dietary Supplementation of Probiotics Affects Post-Hatch Expression of Immune-Related Genes in Broiler Chicks

Effect of Saccharomyces boulardii and Bacillus subtilis B10 on intestinal ultrastructure modulation and mucosal immunity development mechanism in broiler chickens

Probiotics compatibility of herbal preparations on effects of growth performance and immune organs in broilers

Immune-Related Gene Expression Responses to In Ovo Stimulation and LPS Challenge in Two Distinct Chicken Genotypes

Impact of in ovo administration of xylo- and mannooligosaccharides on broiler chicken gut health

In ovo feeding of probiotic lactobacilli differentially alters expression of genes involved in the development and immunological maturation of bursa of Fabricius in pre-hatched chicks

Modulation of broilers' caecal microflora and metabolites in response to a potential probiotic Bacillus amyloliquefaciens.

Synbiotics for Broiler Chickens—In Vitro Design and Evaluation of the Influence on Host and Selected Microbiota Populations following In Ovo Delivery

Evaluation of probiotic growth stimulation using prebiotic ingredients to optimize compounds for in ovo delivery

Ileal MUC2 gene expression and microbial population, but not growth performance and immune response, are influenced by in ovo injection of probiotics in broiler chickens

The synergistic effect of probiotic and phytobiotic for improving growth performance and biological indices in broiler chickens

In vitro assessment of the immunomodulatory effects of probiotic Bacillus strains on chicken PBMCs

Effects of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and Galactooligosaccharide Administered In Ovo on Hatchability, Chick Quality, Performance, Caecal Histomorphology and Meat Quality Traits of Broiler Chickens

The impact of synbiotic administration through in ovo technology on the microstructure of a broiler chicken small intestine tissue on the 1st and 42nd day of rearing

Influence of postbiotic RG14 and inulin combination on cecal microbiota, organic acid concentration, and cytokine expression in broiler chickens

Identification of Differentially Expressed Genes and Metabolism Signaling Pathway in the Spleen of Broilers Supplemented with Probiotic Bacillus spp.

In-ovo injection of Bacillus subtilis, raffinose, and their combinations enhances hatchability, gut health, nutrient transport- and intestinal function-related genes, and early development of broiler chicks