Next Article in Journal
Ultrasonography and Sonoelastography Characteristics of Benign vs. Malignant Mesenteric Lymph Nodes in Cats: An Update
Previous Article in Journal
Supplementation of Freezing Medium with Ginseng Improves Rooster Sperm Quality and Fertility Relative to Free Radicals and Antioxidant Enzymes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 13
Issue 16
10.3390/ani13162662
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Research Progress of Biological Feed in Beef Cattle

by
Longteng Ma
,
Lifen Wang
,
Zixi Zhang
and
Dingfu Xiao
*
Animal Nutritional Genome and Germplasm Innovation Research Center, College of Animal Science and Technology, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2023, 13(16), 2662; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162662
Submission received: 6 July 2023 / Revised: 8 August 2023 / Accepted: 13 August 2023 / Published: 18 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Topic Feeding Livestock for Health Improvement)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Developing new, ecologically healthy feed has always been the focus of sustainable animal husbandry development and has been a research hotspot in academic circles. Currently, the bio-feed industry is developing rapidly and efficiently. The resources of feed raw materials are constantly being enriched and expanded, strain screening research is gradually deepening, production technologies such as enzyme preparations and bacterial preparations are continuously being optimized and upgraded, and the number of professional livestock personnel is constantly increasing. The development of bio-feed has broad application prospects. However, there are increasing problems facing biological feed. Therefore, this paper summarizes the classification, function, application, and existing issues of biological feed in livestock and poultry production to provide a reference for subsequent related research and applications.

Abstract

Biological feed is a feed product developed through bioengineering technologies such as fermentation engineering, enzyme engineering, protein engineering, and genetic engineering. It possesses functional characteristics of high nutritional value and good palatability that can improve feed utilization, replace antibiotics, enhance the health level of livestock and poultry, improve the quality of livestock products, and promote a better breeding environment. A comprehensive review is provided on the types of biological feed, their mechanism of action, fermenting strains, fermenting raw material resources, and their current status in animal production to facilitate in-depth research and development of applications.

1. Introduction

Developing new, ecologically healthy feed has always been the focus of sustainable animal husbandry development, and has been a research hotspot in academic circles [1]. Biological feed research began in the 1980s but truly developed in the 1990s. Research on bioactive feed additives has made rapid progress, particularly in physiological and biochemical studies of these additives. Currently, biological feed has shown a rapid and efficient trend in both research and practical application. Biological feed mainly includes feed enzyme preparations, feed amino acids and vitamins, prebiotics (direct feeding of microorganisms), oligosaccharides for feed, natural plant extracts, bioactive oligopeptides, etc. [2,3,4,5,6]. During the biological treatment process, the crude fiber is broken down into small molecular substances such as monosaccharides, disaccharides, amino acids, and other small molecules that are easily digestible and absorbable by animals. This improves the feed’s digestion and absorption rate [4]. It also produces and accumulates a large number of nutrient-rich microbial body proteins, as well as useful metabolites such as organic acids, alcohols, aldehydes, esters, vitamins, antibiotics and trace elements. These components make the feed soft and fragrant while increasing its nutritional value. Additionally, they contain various digestive enzymes and unknown growth factors that enhance animals’ disease resistance and stimulate their growth and development [5].
Probiotics are bacteria that help maintain the natural balance of microorganisms in the gut and have beneficial health effects for humans and animals. Studies on non-ruminant animals have shown that the probiotic Saccharomyces cerevisiae boulardii (SCB) can reduce diarrhea and promote growth rates in pig and broiler production [3,4,6]. Conflicting findings have been reported regarding the impact of S. cerevisiae on health and performance in young calves [7]. Supplementation of SCB did not show any overall effects on the performance, health, or fecal microbial groups in healthy calves [8]. However, SCB supplementation may have a potential antiviral effect that could enhance animal performance for calves with inadequate passive transfer [9]. Similar results have also been reported in young calves using other probiotics [10]. For example, Oikonomou et al. [11] found that calves with neonatal diarrhea and pneumonia had lower bacterial diversity in their feces compared to healthy calves. One of the mechanisms through which SCB improves gut health, as demonstrated in monogastric experimental models, is by enhancing microbial diversity [12,13]. Since neonatal and preweaning dairy calves function as monogastrics, probiotics such as SCB show strong promise.
Beef has the advantages of high protein, low fat, more phospholipids, less cholesterol, delicate and soft muscle fibers, and a unique flavor. With the improvement of people’s living standards and changes in dietary habits, beef consumption has continued to rise steadily, presenting exceptional opportunities for the development of beef production. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the various types, mechanisms of action, and fermentation cultures utilized in bio-fermented feed. The utilization status of fermentation raw material resources in animal production is discussed, which offers a scientific basis for enhancing beef cattle meat quality and practical guidance for beef cattle production.

2. Classification and Function of Biological Feed

2.1. Classification of Biological Feed

The standard of “Biological Feed Product Classification” categorizes biological feed products into fermented feed, enzymatic hydrolysate feed, bacterial enzyme synergistic feed and biological feed additives. Based on distinct characteristics and production processes, the biological feeds are further classified into 4 main categories, 10 subcategories, 17 sub-subcategories, 50 sub-sub-subcategories, and 112 product categories [1].

2.1.1. Fermented Feed

According to the characteristics of the strain, it is mainly divided into oxygen consumption fermentation, anaerobic fermentation, and facultative anaerobic fermentation. The classification is illustrated below in Figure 1. According to the number of strains, it is mainly divided into single-strain fermentation, multi-strain fermentation, bacterial enzyme collaborative fermentation, and other types. The production of feed enzyme preparations is mainly based on the liquid deep fermentation of single strains, while the production of fermented feed raw materials and mixed feed mainly involves the fermentation of compound strains. The selection of fermented feed raw materials has evolved from fermenting soybean meal, cottonseed meal, and rapeseed meal to provide high-quality protein feed. It now focuses on fermenting unconventional feed raw materials such as fresh residue, pomace, and stale vegetables to provide high-quality and low-cost fermented energy feed and roughage.

2.1.2. Enzymatic Hydrolysis Feed

Enzymatic hydrolysis feed has been extensively used in livestock and poultry breeding, with the process parameters and treatment efficacy of pre-digestion of enzymatic feed having been duly validated. The levels of inorganic phosphorus, acid detergent, and reducing sugar serve as crucial indicators that reflect the pre-digestion efficacy of enzyme-based feed in vitro [14]. Optimizing the reaction conditions for feed enzymes can significantly enhance enzymatic pre-digestion of feed under in vitro conditions, leading to improved feed utilization, reduced formulation costs, and enhanced animal performance [14,15]. The classification is illustrated in the Figure 2 below.

2.1.3. Cooperation of Bacteria and Enzyme

In recent years, research findings have demonstrated that the co-treatment of bacterial enzymes yields superior results compared to the individual actions of bacteria and enzymes; the classification is illustrated below in Figure 3. During the process of fermentation, microorganisms and enzymes work in remarkable synergy, resulting in a more thorough degradation of macromolecular substances and enhancing the efficiency of microbial fermentation. The synergistic effect of microorganisms and enzymes is utilized to gradually increase the preparation of relevant reports on fermented feed [15,16,17,18,19]. The synergy of bacterial enzymes can not only shorten the fermentation cycle, but also utilize bacillus or lactic acid bacteria to resist the influence of other bacteria, improve efficiency, reduce production costs and alter the microecological environment in animal intestines through a large number of live bacteria such as bacillus, lactic acid bacteria, and yeast contained in the product. This enhances animals’ resistance to diseases and reduces their reliance on antibiotics [20,21,22,23].

2.1.4. Biological Feed Additives

Bioengineering technology has been applied to develop a range of feed additives that can enhance feed utilization efficiency, improve animal health, and boost production performance. These additives include microbial feed additives, enzyme preparations, and oligosaccharides [14,15]. The classification is illustrated below in Figure 4.

2.2. Biological Feed Function

Biological feed can enhance palatability, reduce anti-nutritional factors, optimize nutrient utilization, facilitate the efficient use of agricultural and agricultural by-products, minimize reliance on pharmaceutical additives such as antibiotics, and ultimately improve livestock and poultry production performance [24,25,26]. There are various types of raw materials for feed production in China, and the selection criteria for biological feed should be based on differences in physical and chemical properties of the raw materials, physiological characteristics of strains, and production purposes.

2.2.1. Improve the Immune Function of Livestock and Poultry

It is found that after feed fermentation, the number of beneficial microorganisms in feed can be effectively increased so that more beneficial microorganisms can enter the intestines of livestock and poultry to form a competitive advantage and quickly colonize and become dominant flora. For instance, lactic acid bacteria can effectively lower the intestinal pH by producing significant amounts of lactic acid and acetic acid. This promotes the growth of intestinal villi, expands the absorption area of the small intestine, and strengthens the intestinal barrier through competitive inhibition and production of adhesion substances. Additionally, it restricts the adhesion and proliferation of pathogenic bacteria on intestinal mucosal epithelial cells, thereby reducing harmful bacterial populations in the intestines and maintaining a balanced microbial environment, as well as decreasing the incidence of diarrhea in livestock and poultry [27,28]. As non-specific immunomodulators, probiotics and metabolic active substances in fermented feed can stimulate the development of intestinal immune organs in livestock and poultry, activate the immune mechanism of the intestine, improve the cellular immunity and humoral immunity of livestock and poultry bodies, increase the content of immunoglobulins in the blood of livestock and poultry, and promptly eliminate them to eradicate pathogenic bacteria that invade the animal, improve the resistance of livestock and poultry to diseases, and reduce the occurrence of diseases [29,30,31,32,33]. Previous research from the preceding period has also demonstrated that certain probiotics exhibit efficacy as immunomodulators by modifying the immune response of T-helper cells 1 and 2, thereby augmenting host immune function [34].

2.2.2. Enhance the Gastrointestinal Microecological Environment and Production Environment of Livestock and Poultry

Although the effect of probiotics on gut microbial composition has been extensively studied in swine and poultry [35], it is still largely unknown how probiotics potentially affect the gut microbiota in calves. Fomenky et al. [36] observed significant changes in gut mucosa/digesta microbial composition in calves supplemented with SCB before and after weaning. Therefore, intestinal mucosa samples should be collected in future studies with a higher number of animals because mucosa-associated bacteria interact more closely with the host gut health [37]. The potential modulation of host immune function, which can be mediated by regulating the gut microbiota, could be consequently highlighted. However, it should be noted that only four calves per treatment were used for microbial analysis in their experimental study and the small sample size might overestimate the treatment effect [38].
Fecalibacterium is recognized as a prominent butyrate producer, and the presence of butyrate has been shown to potentially enhance the integrity of the intestinal epithelial barrier [39]. A greater prevalence of Fecalibacterium spp. In fecal specimens from neonatal calves was linked to increased weight gain and reduced incidence of diarrhea in preweaning dairy calves [11], while the occurrence of Fecalibacterium spp. Was observed to be reduced in canines suffering from acute diarrhea [40]. On the contrary, in vitro studies have shown that Collinsella can decrease the expression of tight junction proteins in intestinal epithelial cells, leading to an increase in gut permeability. Additionally, it has been observed to upregulate the production of pro-inflammatory factors such as IL-17, both of which contribute to the disruption of gut epithelial integrity [41]. Lactobacillus has been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of diarrhea in calves [42], while Escherichia-Shigella comprises several opportunistic pathogens, such as enteropathogenic E. coli and Shiga toxin-producing E. coli [43], which can cause diarrhea in calves. An increase in the abundance of Lactobacillus and a decrease in E. coli could help ensure normal growth performance of calves even when they experience diarrhea [44].

2.2.3. Improve Feed Utilization and Growth Performance

After fermentation, feed can produce a variety of unsaturated fatty acids and aromatic compounds that impart unique flavors and enhance palatability. This leads to a significant increase in feed intake among livestock and poultry. Additionally, biological feed generates proteases, amylases, cellulases, phytases, water-soluble vitamins, amino acids, and various growth-promoting factors upon metabolism within the digestive system of animals. These components promote optimal growth and development in livestock and poultry [45,46,47]. Moreover, bio-fermented feed can establish a dense microbial barrier in the intestines of livestock and poultry, which effectively prevents the absorption of harmful substances and waste [31,46,47,48,49]. The incorporation of probiotic fermented feed into the diets of dairy cows has been shown to enhance milk production, improve apparent nutrient digestibility in lactating cows, and elevate milk quality [50].

3. Biological Feed Strains and Enzyme Preparations

3.1. Classification and Characteristics of Strains

3.1.1. Yeast

Yeast is widely distributed in nature, with a fast reproduction rate, short growth cycle, and strong metabolism. This includes tropical candida, prion-producing candida, brewer’s yeast, red yeast, among others. Yeast is a rich source of B vitamins, proteins, amino acids and other nutrients that can effectively enhance the nutritional value of animal feed, improve its digestibility and utilization by livestock and poultry, boost their immune system function and suppress the growth of harmful microorganisms [51,52,53]. The utilization of live yeast S. cerevisiae as a probiotic supplement in ruminant feed has been shown to enhance the growth performance and feed efficiency of fattening calves [54]. Villot et al. [55] demonstrated the effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SCB) on the growth performance, health status, and fecal microorganisms of Holstein calves aged 6 ± 3 days. However, supplementation with yeast (10 × 109 cfu/d) did not improve the average daily gain, final weight, dry matter intake (DMI), and other performance indicators. On a positive note, it did decrease the incidence of diarrhea in calves. Lee et al. [56] demonstrated that the inclusion of SCB (10 × 109 cfu/d) in the diet resulted in a significant increase in DMI and water intake under thermoneutral conditions, while concurrently reducing the incidence of diarrhea. Crossland et al. [57,58] also discovered that the inclusion of dry yeast in the diet contributed to the maintenance of rumen environment stability.

3.1.2. Lactic Acid Bacteria

In the field of biological feed, the majority of previous research has primarily focused on exploring the application of diverse strains of lactic acid bacteria [20,59]. Lactic acid bacteria, including homotypic lactic acid bacteria, heterotypic lactic acid bacteria, facultative lactic acid bacteria, and bifidobacteria, are the predominant probiotics utilized in silage preservation due to their early discovery and extensive application. Lactic acid bacteria can enhance feed palatability, stimulate the secretion of digestive enzymes, organic acids, vitamins and other bioactive substances in the gastrointestinal tract of livestock and poultry, promote colonization by beneficial bacteria, and inhibit the proliferation of spoilage microorganisms to maintain a balanced intestinal microecology [60], as well as improve the effectiveness of animal feed utilization and maximize the overall growth performance of animals [54].

3.1.3. Mold

Mold is a broad term encompassing filamentous fungi, and mold fermentation yields functional enzyme fungi with a wider range of enzymes than bacteria, including cellulase, protease, phytase, among others. Approximately 90% of the enzyme preparations listed in the Feed Additives Catalogue are derived from mold sources. However, mycotoxins produced by molds pose serious threats to feed quality and livestock safety; examples include zearalenone, vomitoxin, aflatoxin B1 [29,61,62].

3.1.4. Bacillus

Bacillus, including Bacillus cereus, Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus macrosporidus, and Bacillus licheniformis, is present in the intestines of animals. It can tolerate gastric acid and has strong resistance to feed processing engineering. Additionally, it exhibits high stability and possesses high levels of protease, amylase, and lipase activities. Furthermore, it can degrade some complex compounds found in plant feed [63,64]. Bacillus strains, such as Bacillus licheniformis and Bacillus subtilis, are commonly used in the feed industry due to their ability to effectively increase soluble protein content while reducing sugar levels, amino acid concentrations, and cellulose degradation rates [65].
Bacillus species are not typically indigenous to the gastrointestinal tract. Nevertheless, it has been reported that the oral administration of adequate amounts of Bacillus subtilis can favorably modulate the microflora balance in the gastrointestinal tract and enhance animal performance [25,66]. Moreover, numerous publications have suggested that B. subtilis possesses remarkable immunostimulatory properties [67] and may effectively facilitate the secretion of certain beneficial vitamins, such as vitamin K [34,68]. Various probiotic supplements can also shorten the duration of bovine diarrhea, albeit without any impact on daily weight gain [69]. Khaziahmetov et al. [70] also acknowledged the remarkable potential of “Stimix Zoostim” probiotics in reducing feed costs, enhancing average daily gain and protein digestibility, as well as elevating erythrocyte, hemoglobin, and gammaglobulin levels. Mousa et al. [71] demonstrated that the inclusion of Bacillus subtilis in the diet of calves resulted in increased dry matter intake, digestibility, final weight gain, and feed conversion efficiency. Additionally, there was an increase in total volatile fatty acids and ammonia nitrogen concentration within the rumen while protozoal populations were reduced. Blood levels of total protein, albumin, triglycerides, aspartate aminotransferase and glutamic-pyruvic aminotransferase were also significantly elevated along with lower levels of urea and creatinine.

3.2. Enzyme Preparations

The enzyme preparations belong to a group of proteins possessing biocatalytic capabilities that can be derived from animals, plants, and microorganisms. They include single enzyme preparations (such as amylase, phytase, protease, cellulase) and complex enzyme preparations (which are mixtures of multiple single enzyme preparations) [72]. Enzyme preparations possess the characteristics of being environmentally friendly, safe, and efficient. They can effectively break down complex structural substances in feed, improve protein content, soluble carbohydrate content, and other nutrients to enhance feed utilization. Additionally, they promote intestinal microflora balance, endocrine regulation, and metabolism while also facilitating nutrient absorption [73]. Meschiatti et al. [2] discovered that the addition of exogenous α-amylase has a synergistic effect with essential oils and their blends, leading to enhanced performance and ketone weight in beef cattle when compared to Monensin. The research conducted by Vigne et al. [74] on fattening animals suggests that the inclusion of enzyme complexes in feed can improve the feed conversion rate by 0.17% per gram, reduce stool dry matter content by 0.47% on the first day, and decrease drinking time by 0.0068 h. Marwan et al. [75] investigated the impact of exogenous plasminase on the digestibility and performance of buffalo calves. The inclusion of enzyme preparation significantly enhanced DMI, nutrient digestibility, average daily gain (ADG), final weight, and feed conversion rate in the calves. Additionally, there was a notable increase in rumen total volatile fatty acid (TVFA), ammonia concentration, protozoan number, total protein (TP), and albumin (ALB) levels. However, no significant effects were observed on urea levels or indicators such as muscle crispness, triglyceride content, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine transaminase (ALT) enzymes. In their study on Bacillus subtilis (DSM 28343), Bampidis et al. [76] concluded that the addition of this bacterium to calf feed had a positive impact on the structure of intestinal flora.

4. Application of Biological Feed in Cattle Breeding

The application of biological feed in ruminants primarily helps the rumen establish a dominant flora, regulates rumen function and microflora, promotes rumen metabolism, increases antioxidant capacity and immunity [57,58], and subsequently promotes ruminant growth and improves production performance [71].
Stressful environmental factors, such as warmer temperatures and high humidity, can cause heat stress in calves. Exposure to heat stress results in poor growth performance due to reduced feed intake [77,78], impaired homeostatic mechanisms, and altered physiological status of the endocrine and immune systems [77,79,80]. Reduced feed intake is a major concern for farmers and livestock owners because it can lead to a host of negative consequences. When coupled with lower physiological responses, such as decreased metabolic rate and weakened immune system, the effects can be even more devastating.
One of the most common outcomes of reduced feed intake and lowered physiological responses in calves is poor growth. Without adequate nutrition, young animals are unable to develop properly and may suffer from stunted growth or malnourishment.
Another serious consequence is the outbreak of calf diarrhea. This condition can be caused by a variety of factors, including changes in diet or stress on the animal’s digestive system. However, when combined with reduced feed intake and weakened immunity, it becomes much more likely to occur—leading to dehydration, weight loss, and potentially fatal complications.
In extreme cases where these conditions go untreated or unaddressed for too long, death may unfortunately become an outcome. It is crucial that farmers take steps to ensure their livestock receive proper nutrition and care at all times in order to prevent these negative outcomes from occurring.
By supplementing 0.5 g of a product containing Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-1077 (2 × 1010 cfu/g) to grain, the intake and growth rate of immature animals can be significantly enhanced prior to weaning [9]. However, the incorporation of 1.0 g of a product containing Saccharomyces boulardii (SB) CNCM I-1079 (2 × 1010 cfu/g) into milk replacer fails to enhance the dry matter intake or promote growth in immature calves [81]. Intriguingly, calves experience reduced incidences of diarrhea or pneumonia when administered yeasts, irrespective of dosages or strains [9,81], without considering the influence of ambient temperature and humidity. Calves experiencing heat stress exhibit an elevated body temperature, which may lead to increased intestinal permeability of enteric Pathogens [82,83,84]. Calves exposed to lipopolysaccharide (E. coli O55:B5) exhibit an elevation in body temperature [85]. Meanwhile, yeast has been shown to mitigate the impact of heat stress on undesirable enteric microbial populations [85] and acute inflammatory responses in swine [86]. However, insufficient data is available on calf response to SB coupled to thermal stress in controlled environments.
Previous studies have demonstrated that the supplementation of SCB did not result in any growth or performance improvement in calves, both during the pre-weaning period [8] and post-weaning [36]. In Villot et al.’s research [55], the mortality rate (9.5%) was higher than previously reported in Ontario veal farms [87]. The occurrence of early mortality was significantly correlated with factors such as weight, season, barn, and supplier; late mortality showed significant associations with season of arrival, barn conditions, and supplier [87]. It has been established that early mortality is linked to a failure in passive transfer [88]. When Villot et al. analyzed the data by comparing calves who experienced diarrhea with those who did not within each dietary treatment, they discovered that the diarrheic calves supplemented with SCB maintained similar ADG, matter intake, and final weight compared to their non-diarrheic counterparts. In contrast, the control diarrheic calves had significantly lower growth parameters than the control non-diarrheic calves [55]. Clinical trials have reported reduced weight gain in sick calves treated with antibiotics compared to healthy ones [89].
Roughage, though containing relatively minor nutrients other than neutral detergent fiber and being poorly palatable, is an indispensable component of ruminant feed. By means of microbial fermentation technology, the nutritional characteristics of roughage can be effectively improved [90], and can improve animal production performance [91]. Silage serves as a vital source of energy, nutrients, and easily digestible fiber for ruminants. Incorporating an appropriate amount of corn silage into cow roughage can significantly enhance feed intake, milk production, and milk protein content [9,90,92,93,94]. Biological feed has the ability to regulate the microflora of ruminant rumen, boost immunity and antioxidant capacity, optimize growth performance, and enhance meat quality; the results are shown in Table 1 [54,56,71,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105]. Other research has demonstrated that the inclusion of silage in dairy cow diets can enhance their immune function and antioxidant capacity, as well as elevate the levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids present in milk [106].

5. Conclusions

Biological feed has the ability to regulate the microflora of ruminant rumen, boost immunity and antioxidant capacity, optimize growth performance, and enhance meat quality.
The swift advancement of biological feed holds immense significance in mitigating the dearth of feed resources. The development of biological feed enhances the nutritional value of fodder, curbs resource wastage and environmental pollution, and facilitates cost-effective breeding with high returns, thereby presenting vast prospects for growth.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.M.; Investigation, L.M., L.W. and Z.Z; Methodology, L.M. and L.W.; Writing—original draft, L.M. and Z.Z.; Writing—review and editing, L.M. and D.X. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the earmarked Fund for China Agriculture Research System (CARS-37).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data openly available in a public repository.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. China Standardization Commission. T/CSWSL 001—2018 Biological Feed Product Classification; Standards Press of China: Beijing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  2. Meschiatti, M.A.; Gouvêa, V.N.; Pellarin, L.A.; Batalha, C.D.; Biehl, M.V.; Acedo, T.S.; Dórea, J.R.; Tamassia, L.F.; Owens, F.N.; Santos, F.A. Feeding the combination of essential oils and exogenous alpha amylase increases performance and carcass production of finishing beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 97, 456–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bontempo, V.; Di Giancamillo, A.; Savoini, G.; Dell’Orto, V.; Domeneghini, C. Live yeast dietary supplementation acts upon intestinal morpho-functional aspects and growth in weanling piglets. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2006, 129, 224–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hancox, L.R.; Le Bon, M.; Richards, P.J.; Guillou, D.; Dodd, C.E.R.; Mellits, K.H. Effect of a single dose of Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. boulardii on the occurrence of porcine neonatal diarrhoea. Animal 2015, 9, 1756–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cheng, W.; Lv, Y. Application and development trend of fermentation engineering in feed industry. Hubei Anim. Husb. Vet. Med. 2008, 5, 34–35. [Google Scholar]
  6. Rajput, I.; Li, L.; Xin, X.; Wu, B.; Juan, Z.; Cui, Z.; Yu, D.; Li, W. Effect of Saccharomyces boulardii and Bacillus subtilis B10 on intestinal ultrastructure modulation and mucosal immunity development mechanism in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 2013, 92, 956–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Alugongo, G.M.; Xiao, J.; Wu, Z.; Li, S.; Wang, Y.; Cao, Z. Review: Utilization of yeast of Saccharomyces cerevisiae origin in artificially raised calves. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2017, 8, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. He, Z.; Ferlisi, B.; Eckert, E.; Brown, H.; Aguilar, A.; Steele, M. Supplementing a yeast probiotic to pre-weaning Holstein calves: Feed intake, growth and fecal biomarkers of gut health. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2017, 226, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Galvão, K.N.; Santos, J.E.; Coscioni, A.; Villaseñor, M.; Sischo, W.M.; Berge, A.C.B. Effect of feeding live yeast products to calves with failure of passive transfer on performance and patterns of antibiotic resistance in fecal Escherichia coli. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 2005, 45, 427–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Timmerman, H.; Mulder, L.; Everts, H.; van Espen, D.; van der Wal, E.; Klaassen, G.; Rouwers, S.; Hartemink, R.; Rombouts, F.; Beynen, A. Health and Growth of Veal Calves Fed Milk Replacers with or without Probiotics. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 88, 2154–2165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Oikonomou, G.; Teixeira, A.G.V.; Foditsch, C.; Bicalho, M.L.; Machado, V.S.; Bicalho, R.C. Fecal Microbial Diversity in Pre-Weaned Dairy Calves as Described by Pyrosequencing of Metagenomic 16S rDNA. Associations of Faecalibacterium Species with Health and Growth. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e63157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. McFarland, L.V. Systematic review and meta-analysis of Saccharomyces boulardii in adult patients. World J. Gastroenterol. 2010, 16, 2202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Brousseau, J.-P.; Talbot, G.; Beaudoin, F.; Lauzon, K.; Roy, D.; Lessard, M. Effects of probiotics Pediococcus acidilactici strain MA18/5M and Saccharomyces cerevisiae ssp. boulardii strain SB-CNCM I-1079 on fecal and intestinal microbiota of nursing and weanling piglets. J. Anim. Sci. 2015, 93, 5313–5326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chen, Y.; Wang, J.; Feng, D.; Bahl, A. Application of biological feed in livestock and poultry breeding. Guangdong Feed 2017, 26, 36–39. [Google Scholar]
  15. Fang, L.; Ge, X.; Tang, J.; Yao, X.; Wu, Y.; Sun, H. Preparation of small peptides by soybean meal co-processing with microbe and protease. China Feed 2011, 5, 17–20,27. [Google Scholar]
  16. Yang, J.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Yuan, W. Study on fermentation conditions of the soybean peptides by cooperation of bacteria and enzymeand its antioxidant activity. Sci. Technol. Food Ind. 2013, 34, 245–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Sun, H. The Nutritional Value of Cottonseed Meal Produced by Fermentation with Enzyme Addition and the Antioxidant Activity of Its Peptide Fractions; Zhejiang University: Hangzhou, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zhang, K. Research on Production of Protein Feedstuff from Miscellaneous Meal by Cooperation of Bacteria and Enzyme; Wuhan Institute of Technology: Wuhan, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhang, Q.; An, X.; Wang, Y.; Wang, R.; Qi, J. Study on preparation of xylan by enzymatic fermentation of corncob. Chin. Feed 2017, 22, 23–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Holzapfel, W.H.; Haberer, P.; Geisen, R.; Björkroth, J.; Schillinger, U. Taxonomy and important features of probiotic microorganisms in food and nutrition. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2001, 73, 365s–373s. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Scharek, L.; Guth, J.; Reiter, K.; Weyrauch, K.; Taras, D.; Schwerk, P.; Schierack, P.; Schmidt, M.; Wieler, L.; Tedin, K. Influence of a probiotic Enterococcus faecium strain on development of the immune system of sows and piglets. Veter. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2005, 105, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Guo, X.; Li, D.; Lu, W.; Piao, X.; Chen, X. Screening of Bacillus strains as potential probiotics and subsequent confirmation of the in vivo effectiveness of Bacillus subtilis MA139 in pigs. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 2006, 90, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Fujiwara, K.-I.; Yamazaki, M.; Abe, H.; Nakashima, K.; Yakabe, Y.; Otsuka, M.; Ohbayashi, Y.; Kato, Y.; Namai, K.; Toyoda, A.; et al. Effect of Bacillus subtilis var. natto Fermented Soybean on Growth Performance, Microbial Activity in the Caeca and Cytokine Gene Expression of Domestic Meat Type Chickens. J. Poult. Sci. 2009, 46, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Jenny, B.; Vandijk, H.; Collins, J. Performance and Fecal Flora of Calves Fed a Bacillus subtilis Concentrate. J. Dairy Sci. 1991, 74, 1968–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kritas, S.K.; Morrison, R.B. Evaluation of probiotics as a substitute for antibiotics in a large pig nursery. Veter. Rec. 2005, 156, 447–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Jian, Z.; Liu, J.; Zhang, X.; Xia, L. Research and Application Progress of Biological Feed. Guizhou Anim. Husb. Vet. Med. 2021, 45, 4–8. [Google Scholar]
  27. Canibe, N.; Jensen, B.B. Fermented and nonfermented liquid feed to growing pigs: Effect on aspects of gastrointestinal ecology and growth performance. J. Anim. Sci. 2003, 81, 2019–2031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Kiers, J.; Meijer, J.; Nout, M.; Rombouts, F.; Nabuurs, M.; Van Der Meulen, J. Effect of fermented soya beans on diarrhoea and feed efficiency in weaned piglets. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2003, 95, 545–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mukherjee, R.; Chakraborty, R.; Dutta, A. Role of fermentation in improving nutritional quality of soybean meal—A review. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 29, 1523–1529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Van Winsen, R.L.; Urlings, B.A.P.; Lipman, L.J.A.; Snijders, J.M.A.; Keuzenkamp, D.; Verheijden, J.H.M.; van Knapen, F. Effect of fermented feed on the microbial population of the gastrointestinal tracts of pigs. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2001, 67, 3071–3076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Wang, J.; Han, Y.; Zhao, J.Z.; Zhou, Z.J.; Fan, H. Consuming fermented distillers’ dried grains with solubles (DDGS) feed reveals a shift in the faecal microbiota of growing and fattening pigs using 454 pyrosequencing. J. Integr. Agric. 2017, 16, 900–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Koh, H.-W.; Kim, M.S.; Lee, J.-S.; Kim, H.; Park, S.-J. Changes in the Swine Gut Microbiota in Response to Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Infection. Microbes Environ. 2015, 30, 284–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Valeriano, V.D.V.; Balolong, M.P.; Kang, D.K. Probiotic roles of Lactobacillus sp. in swine: Insights from gut microbiota. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 122, 554–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Barnes, A.G.C.; Cerovic, V.; Hobson, P.S.; Klavinskis, L.S. Bacillus subtilis spores: A novel microparticle adjuvant which can instruct a balanced Th1 and Th2 immune response to specific antigen. Eur. J. Immunol. 2007, 37, 1538–1547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Ma, T.; Suzuki, Y.; Guan, L.L. Dissect the mode of action of probiotics in affecting host-microbial interactions and immunity in food producing animals. Veter. Immunol. Immunopathol. 2018, 205, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Fomenky, B.E.; Do, D.N.; Talbot, G.; Chiquette, J.; Bissonnette, N.; Chouinard, Y.P.; Lessard, M.; Ibeagha-Awemu, E.M. Direct-fed microbial supplementation influences the bacteria community composition of the gastrointestinal tract of pre- and post-weaned calves. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 14147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Abbeele, P.V.D.; Van de Wiele, T.; Verstraete, W.; Possemiers, S. The host selects mucosal and luminal associations of coevolved gut microorganisms: A novel concept. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 2011, 35, 681–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Sterne, J.A.; Gavaghan, D.; Egger, M. Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: Power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2000, 53, 1119–1129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Schwiertz, A.; Jacobi, M.; Frick, J.-S.; Richter, M.; Rusch, K.; Köhler, H. Microbiota in Pediatric Inflammatory Bowel Disease. J. Pediatr. 2010, 157, 240–244.e1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Suchodolski, J.S.; Dowd, S.E.; Wilke, V.; Steiner, J.M.; Jergens, A.E. 16S rRNA Gene Pyrosequencing Reveals Bacterial Dysbiosis in the Duodenum of Dogs with Idiopathic Inflammatory Bowel Disease. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e39333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Chen, J.; Wright, K.; Davis, J.M.; Jeraldo, P.; Marietta, E.V.; Murray, J.; Nelson, H.; Matteson, E.L.; Taneja, V. An expansion of rare lineage intestinal microbes characterizes rheumatoid arthritis. Genome Med. 2016, 8, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Nagashima, K.; Yasokawa, D.; Abe, K.; Nakagawa, R.; Kitamura, T.; Miura, T.; Kogawa, S. Effect of a Lactobacillus Species on Incidence of Diarrhea in Calves and Change of the Microflora Associated with Growth. Biosci. Microflora 2010, 29, 97–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Escobar-Páramo, P.; Grenet, K.; Le Menac’H, A.; Rode, L.; Salgado, E.; Amorin, C.; Gouriou, S.; Picard, B.; Rahimy, M.C.; Andremont, A.; et al. Large-Scale Population Structure of Human Commensal Escherichia coli Isolates. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 5698–5700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Abu-Tarboush, H.M.; Al-Saiady, M.Y.; El-Din, A.H.K. Evaluation of diet containing Lactobacilli on performance, Fecal Coliform, and Lactobacilli of young dairy calves. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 1996, 57, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gilbert, E.R.; Wong, E.A.; Webb, K.E. Board-Invited Review: Peptide absorption and utilization: Implications for animal nutrition and health. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 86, 2135–2155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Tajima, K.; Ohmori, H.; Aminov, R.I.; Kobashi, Y.; Kawashima, T. Fermented liquid feed enhances bacterial diversity in piglet intestine. Anaerobe 2010, 16, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Shi, C.Y.; Zhang, Y.; Lu, Z.Q.; Wang, Y.Z. Solid-state fermentation of corn-soybean meal mixed feed with Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecium for degrading antinutritional factors and enhancing nutritional value. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2017, 8, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Urlings, H.; Mug, A.; Klooster, A.v.; Bijker, P.; van Logtestijn, J.; van Gils, L. Microbial and nutritional aspects of feeding fermented feed (poultry by-products) to pigs. Veter. Q. 1993, 15, 146–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Demecková, V.; Kelly, D.; Coutts, A.G.P.; Brooks, P.H.; Campbell, A. The effect of fermented liquid feeding on the faecal microbiology and colostrum quality of farrowing sows. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2002, 79, 85–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wu, X.; Guo, C.; Wang, Z.; Peng, Z.; Bai, X.; Li, Y.; Zou, H. Microbiology Fermented Feed: Effects on Performance and Nutrient Apparent Digestibility of Lactating Dairy Cows. Chin. J. Anim. Nutr. 2014, 26, 2296–2302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Song, D.; Wang, F.; Lu, Z.; Wang, Y. 385 Effects of supplementing sow diets with Saccharomyces cerevisiae refermented sorghum dried distiller’s grains with solubles from late gestation to weaning on the performance of sows and progeny. J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 95, 190–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Arevalo-Villena, M.; Briones-Perez, A.; Corbo, M.; Sinigaglia, M.; Bevilacqua, A. Biotechnological application of yeasts in food science: Starter cultures, probiotics and enzyme production. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 123, 1360–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chaudhary, L.C.; Sahoo, A.; Agrawal, N.; Kamra, D.N.; Pathak, N.N. Effect of direct fed microbials on nutrient utilization, rumen fermentation, immune and growth response in crossbred cattle calves. Indian J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 78, 515–521. [Google Scholar]
  54. Maamouri, O.; Ben Salem, M. The effect of live yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae as probiotic supply on growth performance, feed intake, ruminal pH and fermentation in fattening calves. Veter. Med. Sci. 2021, 8, 398–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Villot, C.; Ma, T.; Renaud, D.; Ghaffari, M.; Gibson, D.; Skidmore, A.; Chevaux, E.; Guan, L.; Steele, M. Saccharomyces cerevisiae boulardii CNCM I-1079 affects health, growth, and fecal microbiota in milk-fed veal calves. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 7011–7025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Lee, J.-S.; Kacem, N.; Kim, W.-S.; Peng, D.Q.; Kim, Y.-J.; Joung, Y.-G.; Lee, C.; Lee, H.-G. Effect of Saccharomyces boulardii Supplementation on Performance and Physiological Traits of Holstein Calves under Heat Stress Conditions. Animals 2019, 9, 510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Crossland, W.L.; Jobe, J.T.; Ribeiro, F.R.B.; Sawyer, J.E.; Callaway, T.R.; O Tedeschi, L. Evaluation of active dried yeast in the diets of feedlot steers—I: Effects on feeding performance traits, the composition of growth, and carcass characteristics. J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 97, 1335–1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Crossland, W.L.; Cagle, C.M.; Sawyer, J.E.; Callaway, T.R.; Tedeschi, L.O. Evaluation of active dried yeast in the diets of feedlot steers. II. Effects on rumen pH and liver health of feedlot steers. J. Anim. Sci. 2019, 97, 1347–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Miettinen, M.; Vuopio-Varkila, J.; Varkila, K. Production of human tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-6, and interleukin-10 is induced by lactic acid bacteria. Infect. Immun. 1996, 64, 5403–5405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Missotten, J.A.; Michiels, J.; Degroote, J.; De Smet, S. Fermented liquid feed for pigs: An ancient technique for the future. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2015, 6, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Shi, C.; He, J.; Yu, J.; Yu, B.; Mao, X.; Zheng, P.; Huang, Z.; Chen, D. Physicochemical Properties Analysis and Secretome of Aspergillus Niger in Fermented Rapeseed Meal. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0153230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Shi, C.Y.; He, J.; Wang, J.P.; Yu, J.; Yu, B.; Mao, X.B.; Zheng, P.; Huang, Z.Q.; Chen, D.W. Effects of Aspergillus niger fermented rapeseed meal on nutrient digestibility, growth performance and serum parameters in growing pigs. Anim. Sci. J. 2016, 87, 557–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Han, B.Z.; Rombouts, F.M.; Nout, M.J.R. A Chinese fermented soybean food. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2001, 65, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Chi, C.-H.; Cho, S.-J. Improvement of bioactivity of soybean meal by solid-state fermentation with Bacillus amyloliquefaciens versus Lactobacillus spp. and Saccharomyces cerevisiae. LWT 2016, 68, 619–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zhu, J.; Gao, M.; Zhang, R.; Sun, Z.; Wang, C.; Yang, F.; Huang, T.; Qu, S.; Zhao, L.; Li, Y.; et al. Effects of soybean meal fermented by L. plantarum, B. subtilis and S. cerevisieae on growth, immune function and intestinal morphology in weaned piglets. Microb. Cell Factories 2017, 16, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Alexopoulos, C.; Georgoulakis, I.E.; Tzivara, A.; Kyriakis, C.S.; Govaris, A.; Kyriakis, S.C. Field evaluation of the effect of a probiotic-containing Bacillus licheniformis and Bacillus subtilis spores on the health status, performance, and carcass quality of grower and finisher pigs. J. Vet. Med. A Physiol. Pathol. Clin. Med. 2004, 51, 306–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Fiorini, G.; Cimminiello, C.; Chianese, R.; Visconti, G.P.; Cova, D.; Uberti, T.; Gibelli, A. Bacillus subtilis selectively stimulates the synthesis of membrane bound and secreted IgA. Chemioterapia 1985, 4, 310–312. [Google Scholar]
  68. Yanagisawa, Y.; Sumi, H. Natto bacillus contains a large amount of water-soluble vitamin k (menaquinone-7). J. Food Biochem. 2005, 29, 267–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Renaud, D.; Kelton, D.; Weese, J.; Noble, C.; Duffield, T. Evaluation of a multispecies probiotic as a supportive treatment for diarrhea in dairy calves: A randomized clinical trial. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 4498–4505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Andreeva, F.M.; Gafarova, F.A. Application of probiotic “Stimix Zoostim” in calves management. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2018, 3, 55–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Mousa, S.A.; Marwan, A.A. Growth performance, rumen fermentation and selected biochemical indices in buffalo calves fed on Basillis subtilus supplemented diet. Int. J. Vet Sci. 2019, 8, 151–156. [Google Scholar]
  72. Kim, E.-Y.; Kim, Y.-H.; Rhee, M.-H.; Song, J.-C.; Lee, K.-W.; Kim, K.-S.; Lee, S.-P.; Lee, I.-S.; Park, S.-C. Selection of Lactobacillus sp. PSC101 that produces active dietary enzymes such as amylase, lipase, phytase and protease in pigs. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol. 2007, 53, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Liu, S.; Xiong, Y.; Sun, L.; Wang, L. Research Progress of Application of Bacillus subtilis as Feed Additive in Pigs Production. Chin. J. Anim. Nutr. 2022, 34, 2105–2113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Vigne, G.L.D.; Neumann, M.; Santos, L.C.; Stadler Júnior, E.S.; Pontarolo, G.B.; Petkowicz, K.; Cristo, F.B. Digestibility of starch and ingestive behavior of feedlot steers by effect of enzymatic complex doses in high-energy diets. Arq. Bras. Med. Veterinária Zootec. 2019, 71, 1015–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Marwan, A.A.; Mousa, S.A.; Singer, A.M. Impact of Feeding Exogenous Fibrolytic Enzymes (EFE) on Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, Haemobiochemical Profile and Productive Performance in Buffalo Calves. Int. J. Vet Sci. 2019, 8, 127–133. [Google Scholar]
  76. EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP); Bampidis, V.; Azimonti, G.; Bastos, M.d.L.; Christensen, H.; Dusemund, B.; Kouba, M.; Durjava, M.K.; López-Alonso, M.; Puente, S.L.; et al. Efficacy of Bacillus subtilis DSM 28343 as a zootechnical additive (gut flora stabiliser) for calves for rearing. EFSA J. 2019, 17, e05793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Broucek, J.; Kisac, P.; Uhrincat, M. Effect of hot temperature on the hematological parameters, health and performance of calves. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2009, 53, 201–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Chaudhary, S.S.; Singh, V.K.; Upadhyay, R.C.; Puri, G.; Odedara, A.B.; Patel, P.A. Evaluation of physiological and biochemical responses in different seasons in Surti buffaloes. Veter. World 2015, 8, 727–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Mohr, E.; Langbein, J.; Nurnberg, G. Heart rate variability: A non-invasive approach to measure stress in calves and cows. Physiol. Behav. 2002, 75, 251–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Haque, N.; Ludri, A.; Hossain, S.; Ashutosh, M. Impact on hematological parameters in young and adult Murrah buffaloes exposed to acute heat stress. Buffalo Bull. 2013, 32, 321–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Pinos-Rodríguez, J.; Robinson, P.; Ortega, M.; Berry, S.; Mendoza, G.; Bárcena, R. Performance and rumen fermentation of dairy calves supplemented with Saccharomyces cerevisiae 1077 or Saccharomyces boulardii 1079. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2008, 140, 223–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Neuwirth, J.G.; Norton, J.K.; Rawlings, C.A.; Thompson, F.N.; Ware, G.O. Physiologic responses of dairy calves to environmental heat stress. Int. J. Biometeorol. 1979, 23, 243–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Magdub, A.; Johnson, H.; Belyea, R. Effect of Environmental Heat and Dietary Fiber on Thyroid Physiology of Lactating Cows. J. Dairy Sci. 1982, 65, 2323–2331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Lemerle, C.; Goddard, M.E. Assessment of heat stress in dairy cattle in papua new guinea. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 1986, 18, 232–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Zhao, T.; Doyle, M.P.; Harmon, B.G.; Brown, C.A.; Mueller, P.O.E.; Parks, A.H. Reduction of Carriage of Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Cattle by Inoculation with Probiotic Bacteria. J. Clin. Microbiol. 1998, 36, 641–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Collier, C.T.; Carroll, J.A.; Ballou, M.A.; Starkey, J.D.; Sparks, J.C. Oral administration of Saccharomyces cerevisiae boulardii reduces mortality associated with immune and cortisol responses to Escherichia coli endotoxin in pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 2011, 89, 52–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Winder, C.B.; Kelton, D.F.; Duffield, T.F. Mortality risk factors for calves entering a multi-location white veal farm in Ontario, Canada. J. Dairy Sci. 2016, 99, 10174–10181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Renaud, D.; Duffield, T.; LeBlanc, S.; Haley, D.; Kelton, D. Clinical and metabolic indicators associated with early mortality at a milk-fed veal facility: A prospective case-control study. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 2669–2678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Berge, A.; Lindeque, P.; Moore, D.; Sischo, W. A Clinical Trial Evaluating Prophylactic and Therapeutic Antibiotic Use on Health and Performance of Preweaned Calves. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 88, 2166–2177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Li, S.; Hui, X.; Li, H.; Wang, Q.; Zhu, B. Effects of Multifunctional Complex Microbial Agent Fermented Corn Straw on Energy Metabolism of Fattening Sheep. Chin. J. Anim. Nutr. 2015, 27, 2231–2240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Phipps, R.H.; Sutton, J.D.; Beever, D.E.; Jones, A.K. The effect of crop maturity on the nutritional value of maize silage for lactating dairy cows. 3. Food intake and milk production. Anim. Sci. 2000, 71, 401–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Keady, T.; Kilpatrick, D.; Mayne, C.; Gordon, F. Effects of replacing grass silage with maize silages, differing in maturity, on performance and potential concentrate sparing effect of dairy cows offered two feed value grass silages. Livest. Sci. 2008, 119, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Angulo, J.; Mahecha, L.; Yepes, S.A.; Yepes, A.M.; Bustamante, G.; Jaramillo, H.; Valencia, E.; Villamil, T.; Gallo, J. Nutritional evaluation of fruit and vegetable waste as feedstuff for diets of lactating Holstein cows. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 95, S210–S214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Zhang, G.; Li, Y.; Fang, X.; Cai, Y.; Zhang, Y. Lactation performance, nitrogen utilization, and profitability in dairy cows fed fermented total mixed ration containing wet corn gluten feed and corn stover in combination replacing a portion of alfalfa hay. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2020, 269, 114687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Kim, M.; Yun, C.; Lee, C.; Ha, J. The effects of fermented soybean meal on immunophysiological and stress-related parameters in Holstein calves after weaning. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 5203–5212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Pilajun, R.; Wanapat, M. Growth performance and carcass characteristics of feedlot Thai native × Lowline Angus crossbred steer fed with fermented cassava starch residue. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2016, 48, 719–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Harris, T.; Liang, Y.; Sharon, K.; Sellers; Yoon, I.; Scott, M.; Carroll, J.; Ballou, M. Influence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products, SmartCare in milk replacer and Original XPC in calf starter, on the performance and health of preweaned Holstein calves challenged with Salmonella enterica serotype Typhimurium. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 7154–7164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Kazemi-Bonchenari, M.; Khodaei-Motlagh, M.; Ghasemi, H.A.; Hajkhodadadi, I. Performance, growth status, rumen fermentation and some blood metabolites in blood of Holstein bull calves fed starch or fermented fiber based diets. J. Livest. Sci. Technol. 2017, 5, 19–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Teixeira, A.; Ribeiro, B.; Junior, P.; Korzec, H.; Bicalho, R. Prophylactic use of a standardized botanical extract for the prevention of naturally occurring diarrhea in newborn Holstein calves. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 3019–3030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Iannaccone, M.; Elgendy, R.; Giantin, M.; Martino, C.; Giansante, D.; Ianni, A.; Dacasto, M.; Martino, G. RNA Sequencing-Based Whole-Transcriptome Analysis of Friesian Cattle Fed with Grape Pomace-Supplemented Diet. Animals 2018, 8, 188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Kargar, S.; Kanani, M. Reconstituted versus dry alfalfa hay in starter feed diets of Holstein dairy calves: Effects on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and metabolic indications of rumen development. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 4051–4060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Jiang, X.; Liu, X.; Liu, S.; Li, Y.; Zhao, H.; Zhang, Y. Growth, rumen fermentation and plasma metabolites of Holstein male calves fed fermented corn gluten meal during the postweaning stage. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2019, 249, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Jiang, X.; Ma, G.; Cui, Z.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y. Effects of fermented corn gluten meal on growth performance, plasma metabolites, rumen fermentation and bacterial community of Holstein calves during the pre-weaning period. Livest. Sci. 2019, 231, 103866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Deng, B.; Chen, Y.; Gong, X.; Dai, Y.; Zhan, K.; Lin, M.; Wang, L.; Zhao, G. Effects of Bacillus megatherium 1259 on Growth Performance, Nutrient Digestibility, Rumen Fermentation, and Blood Biochemical Parameters in Holstein Bull Calves. Animals 2021, 11, 2379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Li, Y.; Wang, Y.; Lv, J.; Dou, X.; Zhang, Y. Effects of Dietary Supplementation with Clostridium butyricum on the Amelioration of Growth Performance, Rumen Fermentation, and Rumen Microbiota of Holstein Heifers. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 763700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Hao, Y.; Huang, S.; Si, J.; Zhang, J.; Gaowa, N.; Sun, X.; Lv, J.; Liu, G.; He, Y.; Wang, W.; et al. Effects of Paper Mulberry Silage on the Milk Production, Apparent Digestibility, Antioxidant Capacity, and Fecal Bacteria Composition in Holstein Dairy Cows. Animals 2020, 10, 1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Animals 13 02662 g001
Figure 1. Classification diagram of fermented feed products.
Figure 1. Classification diagram of fermented feed products.
Animals 13 02662 g001
Animals 13 02662 g002
Figure 2. Classification diagram of products from enzymatic hydrolysis feed.
Figure 2. Classification diagram of products from enzymatic hydrolysis feed.
Animals 13 02662 g002
Animals 13 02662 g003
Figure 3. Classification diagram illustrating the symbiotic relationship between bacteria and enzyme products.
Figure 3. Classification diagram illustrating the symbiotic relationship between bacteria and enzyme products.
Animals 13 02662 g003
Animals 13 02662 g004
Figure 4. Classification diagram of products for biological feed additives.
Figure 4. Classification diagram of products for biological feed additives.
Animals 13 02662 g004
Table 1. The utilization of biological feed in cattle breeding.
Table 1. The utilization of biological feed in cattle breeding.
ItemsLevelsRuminantsMain InfluencesReferences
S. cerevisiae (SC),
spp. Boulardii (SCSB)		0.5 g/dHolstein calvesCalves on SC had higher grain intake, weight gain pre-weaning, and plasma glucose levels than controls. Feeding live yeast to calves reduced diarrhea days, but antibiotic resistance in fecal E. coli was highest in 3-day-old calves and not affected by other treatments except for SCSB, which increased resistance levels compared to controls. Improvements in calf performance with failed passive transfer were observed by adding live yeast only to the grain.Klibs et al., 2005 [9]
Fermented soybean meal5%Holstein calvesCalves fed fermented soybean meal (FSBM) exhibited enhanced feed intake, growth performance, and health during the preweaning period, as well as reduced levels of stress-related serum variables (proinflammatory cytokines, acute-phase proteins [APP], and cortisol) following weaning. The incorporation of FSBM in their diet may prove advantageous in mitigating stress responses experienced by calves during the weaning process.Kim et al., 2014 [95]
Cassava chips or
fermented
cassava starch residue (FCSR)		100%Thai native x Lowline
Angus crossbred steers		The substitution of FCSR for cassava chips in the concentrate resulted in a decrease in feed digestibility; however, it had no detrimental effects on growth performance and carcass characteristics.Pilajun et al., 2016 [96]
SmartCare (SC),
Saccharomyces cerevisiae (XPC)		1 g/d SC;
1 g/d SC + 0.5 g/d XPC		Holstein calvesSupplementing pre-weaned Holstein calves with both SC in milk replacer and XPC in calf starter not only improved starter intake, but also enhanced fecal consistency immediately after a mild Salmonella enterica challenge. However, further data are required to fully comprehend the impact of these yeast fermentation products on immune responses to Salmonella enterica.Harris et al., 2017 [97]
Saccharomyces cerevisiae var
boulardii (SCB)		10 × 109 cfu/dHolstein calvesSupplementation of SCB did not yield any discernible effects on the performance, health, or fecal microbial groups in healthy calves.He et al., 2017 [8]
Fermented
fiber (FFS)		 Holstein bull calvesThe findings revealed that despite the reduction in feed intake and increased water content in feces, the high starch diet exhibited a remarkable enhancement in the energy status of the calves by reducing BHB levels, elevating propionate concentration, and optimizing glucose concentrations. Notably, when compared to FFS, the SS-based diet demonstrated superior efficiency in bull calves.Kazemi-Bonchenari et al., 2017 [98]
SB-300
(Croton
lechleri
standardized
botanical
extract)		1000 mg/dHolstein calvesThe inclusion of 500 mg SB-300 in milk for a duration of 15 days can effectively mitigate the incidence of diarrhea and alleviate severe dehydration in calves that are fed with milk.Teixeira et al., 2017 [99]
Grape pomace10%CattleReflects antioxidant activity.Iannaccone et al., 2018 [100]
Saccharomyces cerevisiae
boulardii
CNCM I-1079 (SCB)		10 × 109 cfu/dHolstein calvesSCB has beneficial effects on health parameters of milk-fed calves raised in a commercial veal farm environment.Villot et al., 2019 [55]
Saccharomyces boulardii
CNCM I-1079 (SB)		10 × 109 cfu/dHolstein calvesSupplementation of SB in milk replacer can mitigate the effects of heat stress on Holstein dairy calves, as evidenced by lowered rectal temperature, heart rate, and potential incidence of diarrhea.Lee et al., 2019
[56]
10% dry (AH) or
reconstituted alfalfa hay (RAH)		91.2 and 83.8% dry matter for AH and RAH, respectivelyHolstein dairy calvesReconstitution of alfalfa hay did not have an impact on dry matter intake, growth performance, and metabolic indications of rumen development during the calf phase. However, it did lead to improvement.Kargar et al., 2019 [101]
B. subtilis0.3 gm/1 kgBuffalo calvesThe findings of this study suggest that B. subtilis has the potential to serve as a beneficial probiotic for buffalo calves, enhancing their dry matter intake, digestibility, average weight gain, and feed conversion ratio when administered at an effective daily dose of 0.3 gm/1 kg in their diet.Sa et al., 2019 [71]
Fermented
corn
gluten meal (FCGM)		5%Holstein male calvesThe inclusion of FCGM in the diet resulted in increased growth rate and feed efficiency, enhanced rumen fermentation, diversified bacterial community composition within the rumen, as well as improved antioxidant and immune functions of postweaning calves.Jiang et al., 2019 [102]
Fermented
corn gluten meal (FCGM)		6%Holstein calvesThe findings suggest that pre-weaning feeding of FCGM in calves resulted in enhanced growth performance, reduced incidence of diarrhea, increased antioxidant and immune capacity, improved rumen function, as well as altered bacterial community composition in both rumen fluids and feces.Jiang et al., 2020 [103]
Bacillus
Megaterium (BM)		1259 powder (1 × 1010 cfu/g)Holstein bull calvesThis study demonstrates that BM1259 has the potential to serve as a microecological agent for enhancing growth performance, nutrient digestibility, rumen fermentation, and nitrogen utilization in Holstein bull calves.Deng et al., 2021 [104]
Live yeast S. cerevisiae28 g/dHolstein calvesThis supplementation significantly improves the mean daily gain during the trial (ADG) by 400 g/calf (p < 0.003). A notable increase in final body weight gain (FWG) of 39.1 kg/calf was observed (p < 0.004). The live yeast supplementation reduces feed intake and significantly lowers the average feed conversion rate (FCR) (p < 0.05). The use of S. cerevisiae as a probiotic supplement in ruminant feed enhances growth performance and feed efficiency in fattening calves.Maamouri et al., 2021 [54]
Clostridium butyricum (CB)2 × 108 cfuHolstein heifersSupplementation with CB resulted in a significant decrease in the proportion of acetate and the ratio of acetate to propionate, while increasing the proportion of butyrate and propionate. Compared to the control group, the CB group had higher levels of Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens, Ruminococcus albus, Ruminobacter amylophilus, Ruminococcus flavefaciens, and Streptococcus bovis during the trial period. However, CB failed to elicit a significant impact on blood parameters in Holstein heifers. In conclusion, these findings evince that the administration of CB can augment growth performance and rumen fermentation without any deleterious effects on blood parameters in Holstein heifers.Yang et al., 2021 [105]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ma, L.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Z.; Xiao, D. Research Progress of Biological Feed in Beef Cattle. Animals 2023, 13, 2662. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162662

AMA Style

Ma L, Wang L, Zhang Z, Xiao D. Research Progress of Biological Feed in Beef Cattle. Animals. 2023; 13(16):2662. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162662

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ma, Longteng, Lifen Wang, Zixi Zhang, and Dingfu Xiao. 2023. "Research Progress of Biological Feed in Beef Cattle" Animals 13, no. 16: 2662. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162662

APA Style

Ma, L., Wang, L., Zhang, Z., & Xiao, D. (2023). Research Progress of Biological Feed in Beef Cattle. Animals, 13(16), 2662. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162662

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop