Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2026 , Vol. 38 >Issue 4: 2941 - 2951

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2026.236

RESEARCH PAPER

Effects of Compound Acidifiers and Yeast Combination on Growth Performance, Nutrient Apparent Digestibility, Slaughter Performance and Intestinal Morphology of Meat Rabbits

  • WU Xiuju , 1, 2 ,
  • LI Yuying 1 ,
  • ZHANG Xiangyu 1 ,
  • KUANG Liangde 1 ,
  • LI Congyan 1 ,
  • ZHENG Jie 1 ,
  • LEI Min 1 ,
  • LYU Jingzhi , 2, * ,
  • GUO Zhiqiang , 1, *
Expand
  • 1 Sichuan Key Laboratory of Animal Genetics and Breeding, Sichuan Academy of Animal Husbandry Science, Chengdu 610066, China
  • 2 College of Animal Science and Technology, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China
*LYU Jingzhi, associate professor, E-mail: ;
GUO Zhiqiang, professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2025-09-09

  Online published: 2026-04-14

Fold

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effects of compound acidifiers and yeast combination on growth performance, nutrient apparent digestibility, slaughter performance and intestinal morphology of meat rabbits. Six hundred 28-day-old weaned meat rabbits with similar body weight were randomly divided into 5 groups with 6 replicates per group and 20 meat rabbits per replicate. The control group (CON group) was fed a basal diet+500 g/t enramycin (4%)+1 000 g/t chlortetracycline (15%), the group A was fed a basal diet+2 g/kg compound acidifiers+0.5 g/kg yeast, the group B was fed a basal diet+3 g/kg compound acidifiers+1.0 g/kg yeast, the group C was fed a basal diet+4 g/kg compound acidifiers+1.5 g/kg yeast, and the group D was fed a basal diet+5 g/kg compound acidifiers+2.0 g/kg yeast. The pre-test period lasted for 7 days, and the formal test period lasted for 35 days. The results showed as follows: 1) compared with the CON group, the final body weight (FBW) and average daily gain (ADG) of group A were significantly decreased (P<0.05), and those of groups B, C and D were no significant difference (P>0.05); the feed-to-gain ratio (F/G) of group A was significantly increased (P<0.05), and that of groups B, C and D was no significant difference (P>0.05). The FBW and ADG of groups C and D were significantly higher than those of group A (P<0.05), and the F/G of group C was significantly lower than that of group A (P<0.05). 2) Compared with the CON group, the dry matter (DM) apparent digestibility of groups A and B was significantly decreased (P<0.05), and that of groups C and D was no significant difference (P>0.05). The DM apparent digestibility of group D was significantly higher than that of groups A and B (P<0.05). 3) Compared with the CON group, the pre-slaughter live weight, eviscerated weight and semi-eviscerated weight of group A were significantly decreased (P<0.05), and those of groups B, C and D were no significant difference (P>0.05); the semi-eviscerated ratio of groups A and B was significantly decreased (P<0.05), and that of groups C and D was no significant difference (P>0.05). The pre-slaughter live weight, eviscerated weight and semi-eviscerated weight of groups B, C and D were significantly higher than those of group A (P<0.05), and the semi-eviscerated ratio of group D was significantly higher than that of groups A and B (P<0.05). 4) Compared with the CON group, the crypt depth (CD) in duodenum and jejunum of group A was significantly increased (P<0.05), and that of groups B, C and D was no significant difference (P>0.05); the villus height to crypt depth ratio (V/C) in duodenum and jejunum of group A was significantly decreased (P<0.05), and that of groups B, C and D was no significant difference (P>0.05). The CD in duodenum and jejunum of groups B, C and D significantly lower than that of group A (P<0.05), and the V/C in duodenum and jejunum of groups B, C and D significantly higher than that of group A (P<0.05). In conclusion, the appropriate addition amount of compound acidifiers and yeast combination to the diet have no adverse effects on the growth performance, nutrient apparent digestibility, slaughter performance and intestinal morphology of meat rabbits, its effect is comparable to the antibiotic, and the effect is better when the addition amounts are 4 g/kg compound acidifiers+1.5 g/kg yeast and 5 g/kg compound acidifiers+2.0 g/kg yeast.

Key words： compound acidifiers; yeast; meat rabbits; growth performance; nutrient apparent digestibility; intestinal morphology

Cite this article

WU Xiuju , LI Yuying , ZHANG Xiangyu , KUANG Liangde , LI Congyan , ZHENG Jie , LEI Min , LYU Jingzhi , GUO Zhiqiang . Effects of Compound Acidifiers and Yeast Combination on Growth Performance, Nutrient Apparent Digestibility, Slaughter Performance and Intestinal Morphology of Meat Rabbits[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2026 , 38(4) : 2941 -2951 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2026.236

长期以来,抗生素作为生长促进剂,一直在肉兔饲粮中应用,以改善因断奶应激导致的肠道发育受阻和生长性能下降,但耐药性和残留效应等问题的出现导致了抗生素被限制甚至禁止添加。酸化剂被认为是替代抗生素的一种可能性添加剂,通常会对肉兔的肠道形态和生长性能产生有益影响[1]。酸化剂具有抗菌[2]、降低胃肠道pH[3]和促进胰腺分泌[4]等重要作用。研究表明,甲酸与β-葡聚糖和枯草芽孢杆菌PB6组合饲喂能提高断奶仔猪平均日增重(ADG)[5]。饲粮中补充二甲酸钾可降低肉鸡平均日采食量(ADFI)和料重比(F/G),提高ADG和腿肌率,增强肠道脂肪酶和胰蛋白酶等消化酶活性[6]。饲粮中复合补充甲酸和丙酸可改善断奶仔猪空肠绒毛高度/隐窝深度比值(V/C)[7]。此外,复合酸化剂还有利于增加肉鸡肠道绒毛的数量,降低十二指肠和回肠的pH[8],并通过减少肠道菌群和最大限度减少营养竞争及抑制饲料中霉菌的生长来提高饲料转化效率,促进肉鸡生长和整体健康[9]。
酵母作为一种益生菌,主要依靠其细胞壁内层的β-葡聚糖和细胞壁外层的甘露聚糖发挥作用,具有刺激非特异性免疫和获得性免疫、促进伤口愈合、预防癌症、抗氧化、降血糖和降血脂等作用[10-11]。酵母代谢产生的有机酸、酶、维生素、多糖和生物活性次生代谢物可改善肠道微生物环境,提高机体免疫力[12-13]。Correia等[14]研究表明,饲粮中补充酿酒酵母可提高断奶仔猪的ADG和饲料转化率,增加空肠中营养转运蛋白、紧密连接蛋白、谷胱甘肽过氧化物酶和白细胞介素-1β的mRNA表达,从而达到促进生长的效果。布拉酵母、经灭活的酿酒酵母和赛博林氏酵母与水解酵母混合饲喂仔猪,可提高其ADG和饲料转化率,降低腹泻率[15]。此外,灭活酵母及其与硒组合替代抗生素可提高肉兔的饲料转化率,增强免疫功能,改善肠道形态[16]。因此,本试验旨在研究饲粮中补充复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔生长性能、营养物质表观消化率、屠宰性能和肠道形态的影响,探究二者联合使用的效果,为复合酸化剂和酵母在肉兔养殖中的应用提供理论依据。

1 材料与方法

1.1 试验材料

复合酸化剂有效成分为甲酸(铵)(≥41%)、丙酸(≥7%)、乳酸(≥1%)和柠檬酸(≥5%)。酵母为耐高温活性酵母,活菌数>1010 CFU/g。

1.2 试验设计

本研究的动物试验方案经四川省畜牧科学研究院动物保护与利用委员会批准(批准编号:2024022)。选取600只体重相近的28日龄断奶肉兔,随机分为5个组,每组6个重复,每个重复20只肉兔(公母各占1/2)。对照组(CON组)饲喂基础饲粮+500 g/t恩拉霉素(4%)+1 000 g/t金霉素(15%),A组饲喂基础饲粮+2 g/kg复合酸化剂+0.5 g/kg酵母,B组饲喂基础饲粮+3 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.0 g/kg酵母,C组饲喂基础饲粮+4 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.5 g/kg酵母,D组饲喂基础饲粮+5 g/kg复合酸化剂+2.0 g/kg酵母。复合酸化剂和酵母添加剂量参照前人研究结果[15,17-19]。基础饲粮组成及营养水平见表1。预试期7 d,正试期35 d,所有肉兔在试验期间自由饮水和采食。
表1 基础饲粮组成及营养水平(风干基础)

Table 1 Composition and nutrient levels of the basal diet (air-dry basis) %

项目Items 含量Content
原料Ingredients
玉米Corn 14.80
豆粕Soybean meal 12.00
葵花粕Sunflower meal 6.00
麦麸Wheat bran 18.00
苜蓿Alfalfa 30.00
统糠Grain chaff 7.50
米糠Rice chaff 9.00
磷酸氢钙CaHPO4 1.20
食盐NaCl 0.50
预混料Premix1) 1.00
合计Total 100.00
营养水平Nutrient levels2)
消化能DE/(MJ/kg) 10.35
粗蛋白质CP 16.05
粗脂肪EE 2.85
粗纤维CF 17.12
赖氨酸Lys 0.75
蛋氨酸Met 0.09
钙Ca 1.12
磷P 0.58

1)预混料为每千克饲粮提供 The premix provided the following per kilogram of the diet:Fe 50 mg,Zn 30 mg,Cu 6 mg,I 1 mg,Mn 8 mg,Se 1 mg,VA 10 000 IU,VD 1 000 IU,VE 30 mg,VK3 1 mg,VB1 1 mg,VB2 3.5 mg。
2)消化能为计算值,参照肉兔营养需要量(NY/T 4049—2021);其余营养水平均为实测值。DE was a calculated value, which was reference to the Nutritional Requirements of Meat Rabbits (NY/T 4049—2021); while the other nutrient levels were measured values.

1.3 样品采集及指标测定

1.3.1 生长性能

于正试期第1天和第35天对肉兔进行称重,记为初始体重(IBW)和终末体重(FBW)。试验期间记录各组肉兔的投料量和剩料量。试验结束后,计算各试验组的ADG、ADFI和F/G。计算公式如下:
ADG(g/d)=(FBW-IBW)/试验天数;
ADFI(g/d)=(总投料量-总剩料量)/试验天数;
F/G=ADFI/ADG。

1.3.2 营养物质表观消化率

随机采集各组饲粮样本(300±5) g,经粉碎并过40目筛后密封保存于-20 ℃冰箱待测。试验第16~20天,以重复为单位收集以二氧化钛(TiO2)为指示剂饲喂后肉兔排出的全部粪样,去除粪便上的兔毛和其他杂物后混匀并分为2份:一份加入10%硫酸溶液进行固氮处理,另一份用以测定常规营养物质含量。饲粮及粪样中营养物质含量严格参照国家标准或行业标准方法进行测定:干物质(DM,GB/T 6435—2014)、粗蛋白质(CP,GB/T 6432—2018)、粗脂肪(EE,GB/T 6433—2006)、粗纤维(CF,GB/T 6434—2022)、粗灰分(Ash,GB/T 6438—2007)、中性洗涤纤维(NDF,GB/T 20806—2022)、酸性洗涤纤维(ADF,NT/T 1459—2022),钙(Ca,GB/T 6436—2018)、磷(P,GB/T 6437—2018)、氨基酸(GB/T 18246—2000)。营养物质表观消化率计算公式如下:
某营养物质消化率(%)=100×[1-(粪中该营养物质含量/粪中TiO2含量)]/(饲粮中该营养物质含量/饲粮中TiO2含量)。

1.3.3 屠宰性能

试验结束时,每组选取接近平均体重的6只健康肉兔称重(宰前活重)后进行屠宰,屠宰前禁食12 h(自由饮水)。采用颈椎移位法屠宰肉兔并放血。去除胴体的头、尾、皮、前肢(腕关节以下)和后肢(跗关节以下)后称重,记为半净膛重。全净膛重为在半净膛重的基础上,去除心脏、肝脏、肾脏和腹部脂肪后的胴体重。半净膛率和全净膛率计算公式如下:
半净膛率=(半净膛重/宰前活重)×100;
全净膛率=(全净膛重/宰前活重)×100。

1.3.4 肠道形态

取十二指肠和空肠中段2~3 cm肠道样品,经生理盐水冲洗干净后置于装有4%多聚甲醛溶液的EP管中固定保存待测。固定样本经梯度乙醇脱水、二甲苯透明、石蜡包埋后,使用切片机制备5 μm厚度连续切片。切片经苏木精-伊红(HE)染色,中性树胶封片后用Leica DM1000显微成像系统对十二指肠和空肠组织拍照,采用Image-Pro Plus 6.0软件测量10个完整绒毛和隐窝单元的形态学参数,测量绒毛高度(VH)和隐窝深度(CD),并计算V/C。

1.4 数据处理与分析

试验数据经Excel 2016完成基础预处理后,采用SPSS 27.0统计平台进行单因素方差分析(one-way ANOVA),并采用Duncan氏多重比较法进行组间差异分析。试验结果用平均值±标准差表示,P<0.05为差异显著。

2 结果

2.1 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔生长性能的影响

由表2可知,与CON组相比,A组的FBW和ADG显著降低(P<0.05),B组、C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且C组和D组的FBW和ADG显著高于A组(P<0.05)。复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔的ADFI无显著影响(P>0.05)。与CON组相比,A组的F/G显著升高(P<0.05),B组、C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且C组的F/G显著低于A组(P<0.05)。
表2 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔生长性能的影响

Table 2 Effects of compound acidifiers and yeast combination on growth performance of meat rabbits

项目
Items		 组别Groups P值
P-value
CON A B C D
初始体重
IBW/g		 815.20
±27.20		 818.60
±26.50		 819.40
±24.30		 814.30
±28.30		 821.10
±27.20		 0.126
终末体重
FBW/g		 2 476.70
±55.50a		 2 298.70
±50.20b		 2 409.10
±56.70a		 2 453.10
±53.40a		 2 461.20
±57.10a		 0.035
平均日增重
ADG/(g/d)		 39.56
±2.02a		 35.24
±2.42b		 37.85
±2.32ab		 39.02
±2.28a		 39.05
±2.24a		 0.028
平均日采食量
ADFI/(g/d)		 125.60
±3.20		 120.30
±4.60		 123.80
±4.30		 124.60
±3.90		 126.30
±3.60		 0.223
料重比
F/G		 3.17
±0.13b		 3.41
±0.22a		 3.27
±0.19ab		 3.19
±0.16b		 3.23
±0.14ab		 0.040

同行数据肩标不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05),相同或无字母表示差异不显著(P>0.05)。下表同。

In the same row, values with different small letter superscripts mean significant difference (P<0.05), while with the same or no letter superscripts mean no significant difference (P>0.05). The same as below.

2.2 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔营养物质表观消化率的影响

由表3可知,复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔的CP、EE、Ash、NDF和ADF表观消化率无显著影响(P>0.05)。与CON组相比,A组和B组的DM表观消化率显著降低(P<0.05),C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且D组的DM表观消化率显著高于A组和B组(P<0.05)。
表3 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔营养物质表观消化率的影响

Table 3 Effects of compound acidifiers and yeast combination on nutrient apparent digestibility of meat rabbits %

项目
Items		 组别Groups P值
P-value
CON A B C D
干物质DM 64.15±2.51a 60.32±2.79c 62.18±1.85bc 63.61±1.75ab 64.02±1.78a 0.011
粗蛋白质CP 70.53±4.56 68.14±3.96 68.43±3.69 69.78±2.97 70.62±2.12 0.664
粗脂肪EE 88.54±2.73 87.39±1.56 87.31±1.87 88.56±2.48 88.79±1.97 0.238
粗灰分Ash 36.53±2.31 37.02±3.69 35.76±2.18 36.57±2.95 36.67±2.68 0.154
中性洗涤纤维NDF 38.09±2.24 37.75±2.80 38.09±2.20 39.27±2.19 40.24±2.54 0.327
酸性洗涤纤维ADF 14.86±2.16 13.46±2.11 14.40±2.61 15.77±2.52 15.98±2.35 0.354

2.3 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔屠宰性能的影响

由表4可知,与CON组相比,A组的宰前活重、全净膛重和半净膛重均显著降低(P<0.05),B组、C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且B组、C组和D组的宰前活重、全净膛重和半净膛重均显著高于A组(P<0.05)。复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔的全净膛率无显著影响(P>0.05)。与CON组相比,A组和B组的半净膛率显著降低(P<0.05),C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且D组的半净膛率显著高于A组和B组(P<0.05)。
表4 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔屠宰性能的影响

Table 4 Effects of compound acidifiers and yeast combination on slaughter performance of meat rabbits

项目
Items		 组别Groups P值
P-value
CON A B C D
宰前活重
Pre-slaughter live weight/g		 2 477.90
±88.70a		 2 231.20
±91.20b		 2 415.80
±79.80a		 2 450.60
±91.40a		 2 467.50
±85.20a		 <0.001
全净膛重
Eviscerated weight/g		 1 292.20
±50.30a		 1 138.80
±48.20b		 1 242.90
±52.30a		 1 271.60
±53.10a		 1 284.10
±50.40a		 <0.001
半净膛重
Semi-eviscerated weight/g		 1 401.30
±55.20a		 1 230.30
±54.60b		 1 340.50
±56.70a		 1 371.10
±58.90a		 1 392.90
±55.70a		 <0.001
全净膛率
Eviscerated ratio/%		 52.15
±0.62		 51.04
±0.58		 51.45
±0.64		 51.89
±0.67		 52.04
±0.64		 0.083
半净膛率
Semi-eviscerated ratio/%		 56.55
±0.65a		 55.14
±0.62b		 55.49
±0.68b		 55.95
±0.70ab		 56.45
±0.68a		 0.007

2.4 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔肠道形态的影响

由表5可知,复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔的十二指肠和空肠VH无显著影响(P>0.05)。与CON组相比,A组的十二指肠和空肠CD显著升高(P<0.05),B组、C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且B组、C组和D组的十二指肠和空肠CD显著低于A组(P<0.05)。与CON组相比,A组的十二指肠和空肠V/C显著降低(P<0.05),B组、C组和D组无显著差异(P>0.05);且B组、C组和D组的十二指肠和空肠V/C显著高于A组(P<0.05)。
表5 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔肠道形态的影响

Table 5 Effects of compound acidifiers and yeast combination on intestinal morphology of meat rabbits

项目
Items		 组别Groups P值
P-value
CON A B C D
绒毛高度VH/μm
十二指肠Duodenum 685.20
±44.60		 635.30
±47.20		 668.30
±48.20		 678.40
±49.30		 682.80
±47.30		 0.389
空肠Jejunum 548.30
±33.50		 502.40
±32.10		 526.20
±35.10		 545.50
±33.30		 549.50
±35.60		 0.108
隐窝深度CD/μm
十二指肠Duodenum 172.20
±10.50b		 205.40
±12.30a		 182.40
±12.00b		 178.60
±12.50b		 176.50
±11.70b		 <0.001
空肠Jejunum 110.30
±12.40b		 130.2
±12.10a		 118.50
±11.60b		 112.50
±10.10b		 108.60
±9.40b		 0.014
绒毛高度/隐窝深度比值V/C
十二指肠Duodenum 3.98
±0.28a		 3.09
±0.32b		 3.66
±0.19a		 3.80
±0.21a		 3.87
±0.27a		 <0.001
空肠Jejunum 4.97
±0.19a		 3.86
±0.29b		 4.44
±0.23a		 4.85
±0.27a		 5.06
±0.24a		 <0.001

3 讨论

3.1 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔生长性能的影响

生长性能是衡量动物生长发育情况的重要指标,与经济效益成正比。研究表明,饲粮中补充苯甲酸与二甲酸钾混合可提高獭兔ADG,降低F/G[20]。詹海杰等[21]报道,饲粮中补充1.0%二甲酸钾、2.0 kg/t三丁酸甘油酯和400 g/t植物精油复合制剂能显著提高断奶伊拉肉兔的FBW和ADG,降低F/G。Correia等[14]研究表明,补充酿酒酵母和丁酸钠可提高仔猪ADG和饲料转化率,酵母通过增加空肠中营养转运蛋白的mRNA表达来改善肠道屏障完整性和促进营养物质消化吸收。樊佳奇等[22]研究表明,补充100 mg/kg酵母肽的伊拉肉兔拥有最佳的ADG和F/G。本研究结果显示,在饲粮中补充4 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.5 g/kg酵母和5 g/kg复合酸化剂+2.0 g/kg酵母的肉兔较补充2 g/kg复合酸化剂+0.5 g/kg酵母拥有更高的FBW、ADG和更低的F/G,效果与补充抗生素相似,与先前报道的研究结果一致。这可能是由于复合酸化剂降低了胃肠道pH,从而竞争性地抑制致病菌生长,同时刺激消化酶活性和促进营养物质消化吸收,最终改善了肉兔的生长性能[23-24]。此外,酵母中含有的甘露聚糖、β-葡聚糖以及核苷酸、蛋白质等可增强机体免疫反应,有效减少沙门氏菌等病原体在肠道中定植,降低肠道通透性并增强肠道屏障功能[24]。补充复合酸化剂和酵母对肉兔生长性能的改善结果可归因于复合酸化剂和酵母的协同作用,通过改善肠道健康和增加消化酶分泌,进而促进营养物质的消化吸收,提高生长性能[25]。

3.2 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔营养物质表观消化率的影响

营养物质表观消化率是饲粮利用效率的集中体现,其高低反映了机体的消化吸收水平和动物的生长情况。酸化剂可降低前消化道pH,增加营养物质的溶解度,提高饲粮中营养物质的吸收效率[26]。Nguyen等[27]研究表明,饲粮中补充有机酸提高了肉鸡对DM的代谢系数。Elmasry等[28]研究发现,饲粮中补充12.8×109 CFU/kg酿酒酵母可显著增加肉兔对饲粮中DM、NDF和ADF的表观消化率。卢俊言等[29]研究表明,饲粮中补充酿酒酵母和丁酸梭菌组合可显著提高西门塔尔育肥牛饲粮中DM、NDF的表观消化率,其原因可能是酿酒酵母促进了乳酸利用菌和纤维素分解菌的生长。本研究结果表明,饲粮中补充4 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.5 g/kg酵母和5 g/kg复合酸化剂+2.0 g/kg酵母可提高肉兔饲粮中DM表观消化率,这与前人研究结果一致。这可能是由于复合酸化剂增强了胃蛋白酶和肠道消化酶的活性,并刺激胰液合成[30]。胰液中的胰蛋白酶原、胰凝乳蛋白酶原A、胰凝乳蛋白酶原B、促羧基肽酶A和促羧基肽酶B有助于DM消化[31]。复合酸化剂对致病菌的抑制作用也有利于肠道维持微生物菌群结构,改善肠道黏膜完整性,促进肠道对营养物质的消化和吸收。此外,酵母中含有甘露聚糖等生物活性物质可以有效阻断有害细菌的附着和定植,促进有益细菌生长并产生大量短链脂肪酸来降低肠道pH,增强消化酶活性,提高营养物质表观消化率[32]。

3.3 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔屠宰性能的影响

屠宰性能是衡量畜禽生产性能的重要指标,受生长速度、饲料转化率等不同因素的影响。研究表明,饲粮中补充有机酸的母猪后代表现出更高的胴体重量和屠宰率[33]。Liu等[34]研究表明,饲粮中补充4 g/(d·头)活性干酵母可显著增加肉牛的宰前活重、胴体重量和净肉率。在日本鹌鹑饲粮中补充酵母自溶物(酿酒酵母)可显著增加胴体产量,当添加量为1%和2%时效果较佳[35]。本研究结果显示,饲粮中补充2 g/kg复合酸化剂+0.5 g/kg酵母组肉兔的宰前活重、全净膛重和半净膛重显著低于其他各组,各试验组肉兔的半净膛率有所降低,其中4 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.5 g/kg酵母组和5 g/kg复合酸化剂+2.0 g/kg酵母组肉兔的半净膛率与对照组无显著差异,这与复合酸化剂和酵母提高了肉兔终末体重有关。然而,谭子璇等[36]和Chen等[37]研究发现,饲粮中补充酵母培养物对牦牛和羔羊的屠宰性能均无显著影响。王燕等[38]研究结果也表明,酵母多糖的添加不影响牦牛的屠宰性能,这与本研究结果相悖,可能是由于试验动物、甲酸和酵母的补充类型以及添加量的不同带来的试验结果差异。

3.4 复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔肠道形态的影响

肠道的微结构显著影响着机体对营养物质的吸收。肠道表面的褶皱和绒毛可增加营养吸收表面积,较长的VH和较高的V/C对营养的吸收更为有利。Dai等[39]研究表明,饲粮中补充0.3%有机酸(甲酸、乙酸、丙酸和甲酸铵)可显著增加第42天肉鸡空肠杯状细胞密度和回肠VH。研究发现,饲粮中补充3 000 mg/kg有机酸(甲酸、醋酸和丙酸)的仔猪拥有较高的空肠CD和V/C[40];饲粮中补充甲酸、苯甲酸和精油混合物的仔猪也表现出空肠VH增加和CD降低[41];饲粮中补充Duan-Nai-An酵母益生菌可使仔猪肠道发育出完整的柱状上皮细胞,且顶端表面覆盖着紧密堆积的微绒毛,同时伴有明显的浆细胞增生、淋巴结节数量增加、发育良好的Peyer’s斑块和生发中心[42]。Soren等[43]研究发现,饲粮中补充1.25 g/kg酿酒酵母发酵产物可增加肉鸡十二指肠、空肠和回肠的VH和V/C。饲粮中补充2.0 g/kg酿酒酵母(干酵母)可显著改善巴基斯坦本地雄性断奶兔空肠VH和CD[44]。Qiu等[45]研究表明,饲粮中补充1.0和2.0 g/kg酵母培养物的蛋鸡十二指肠V/C分别显著提高了17.91%和22.48%。此外,饲粮中补充甲酸和酿酒酵母组合可使印度尼西亚本土杂交鸡十二指肠拥有较高的绒毛和更深的隐窝[46],这与本研究结果一致,即饲粮中补充复合酸化剂和酵母组和可改善肉兔肠道形态,其中补充4 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.5 g/kg酵母和5 g/kg复合酸化剂+2.0 g/kg酵母的肉兔拥有最低的十二指肠和空肠CD和最高的V/C,二者对肠道的改善效果随着添加量的增加而更加明显,这可能是由于酵母中的氨基酸和核苷酸促进了绒毛膜表面杯状细胞的增殖[47],并为肠道细胞分裂提供DNA、RNA和ATP等原料,通过增强免疫和肠黏膜的发育以改善肠道健康[48]。此外,复合酸化剂可通过降低肠黏膜中白细胞介素-1β的mRNA表达、增加黏蛋白2的mRNA的表达来增强肠道免疫[49],其对肠道的酸化作用也有助于减少致病菌对肠道结构的损害和改善肠道健康。

4 结论

饲粮中补充适量复合酸化剂和酵母组合对肉兔生长性能、营养物质表观消化率、屠宰性能和肠道形态无不利影响,当添加量为4 g/kg复合酸化剂+1.5 g/kg酵母和5 g/kg复合酸化剂+2.0 g/kg酵母时效果较好,具有较大的替抗潜力。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
ALIVERDI-NASAB K, ZHANDI M, YOUSEFI A R, et al. The effect of acidifier supplementation on egg production performance and intestinal histology of Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica)[J]. Veterinary Medicine and Science, 2023, 9(1):263-271.

DOI

[2]
ALZAHRANI O M, ELUMALAI P, NADA H S, et al. Pseudomonas putida:sensitivity to various antibiotics,genetic diversity,virulence,and role of formic acid to modulate the immune-antioxidant status of the challenged Nile tilapia compared to carvacrol oil[J]. Fishes, 2023, 8(1):6.

DOI

[3]
POURREZA A, JAVANDEL F, SEIDAVI A, et al. The effect of dietary organic acids on performance,carcass characteristics,immunity,blood constitutes and ileal microflora of broiler chickens[J]. Animal Science Papers and Reports, 2023, 41(1):39-48.

[4]
LIU Y L, YANG X, XIN H L, et al. Effects of a protected inclusion of organic acids and essential oils as antibiotic growth promoter alternative on growth performance,intestinal morphology and gut microflora in broilers[J]. Animal Science Journal, 2017, 88(9):1414-1424.

DOI

[5]
HANDS R, SARGEANT E, VAN VEGGEL N, et al. Effects of replacing zinc oxide with a combination of β-glucan,Bacillus subtilis PB6 and formic acid on the performance of weaner pigs[J]. Animal-Science Proceedings, 2023, 14(2):365.

[6]
陈星, 郑爱娟, 陈志敏, 等. 二甲酸钾对肉仔鸡生长性能、屠宰性能、养分表观代谢率和肠道环境的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(7):4293-4303.

DOI

CHEN X, ZHENG A J, CHEN Z M, et al. Effects of potassium diformate on growth performance,slaughter performance,nutrient apparent metabolism rate and intestinal environment of broiler chickens[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(7):4293-4303. (in Chinese)

DOI

[7]
LEE J, KIM J W, HALL H, et al. Effect of dietary organic acids supplementation on growth performance,nutrient digestibility,and gut morphology in weaned pigs[J]. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 2022, 102(2):255-265.

DOI

[8]
SERRANO-GAMBOA M Y, ARCE-MENOCAL J, ÁVILA-GONZÁLEZ E, et al. Organic acids for broilers:effects on intestinal morphology and growth performance[J]. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias, 2022, 36(2):55-65.

DOI

[9]
ABD EL-HACK M E, ALDHALMI A K, ASHOUR E A, et al. The effects of formic acid or herbal mixture on growth performance,carcass quality,blood chemistry,and gut microbial load in broiler chickens:formic acid & herbal mixture in broiler diets[J]. Poultry Science, 2025, 104(6):105085.

DOI

[10]
LUO Y, WANG J G, LIU B, et al. Effect of yeast cell morphology,cell wall physical structure and chemical composition on patulin adsorption[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10(8):e0136045.

DOI

[11]
KOROLENKO T A, BGATOVA N P, OVSYUKOVA M V, et al. Hypolipidemic effects of β-glucans,mannans,and fucoidans:mechanism of action and their prospects for clinical application[J]. Molecules, 2020, 25(8):1819.

DOI

[12]
KESHMIRSHEKAN A, DE SOUZA MESQUITA L M, VENTURA S P M. Biocontrol manufacturing and agricultural applications of Bacillus velezensis[J]. Trends in Biotechnology, 2024, 42(8):986-1001.

DOI

[13]
HUANG W Q, MA T, LIU Y Q, et al. Spraying compound probiotics improves growth performance and immunity and modulates gut microbiota and blood metabolites of suckling piglets[J]. Science China Life Sciences, 2023, 66(5):1092-1107.

DOI

[14]
CORREIA A M, GENOVA J L, KIM S W, et al. Autolyzed yeast and sodium butyrate supplemented alone to diets promoted improvements in performance,intestinal health and nutrient transporter in weaned piglets[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14(1):11885.

DOI

[15]
DANG D X, CHOI S Y, CHOI Y J, et al. Probiotic,paraprobiotic,and hydrolyzed yeast mixture supplementation has comparable effects to zinc oxide in improving growth performance and ameliorating post-weaning diarrhea in weaned piglets[J]. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 2024, 16(1):249-258.

DOI

[16]
AL-SAGHEER A A, ALAGAWANY M, BASSIONY S S, et al. Inactivated Saccharomyces cerevisiae and selenium as alternatives to antibiotic in rabbits reared under summer conditions:effects on growth,nutrient utilization,cecal fermentation,blood components,and intestinal architecture[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2023, 302:115688.

DOI

[17]
AL-GHAMDI E S. Growth performance,carcass characteristics,and blood biochemical indices of broilers affected by dietary organic acids blend’s supplementation[J]. Animal Biotechnology, 2023, 34(7):2059-2064.

DOI

[18]
CAO Y, XUN M Y, REN S M, et al. Effects of dietary organic acids and probiotics on laying performance,egg quality,serum antioxidants and expressions of reproductive genes of laying ducks in the late phase of production[J]. Poultry Science, 2022, 101(12):102189.

DOI

[19]
BOONTIAM W, WACHIRAPAKORN C, PHAENGPHAIREE P. Effects of hydrolyzed yeast supplementation on growth performance,immunity,antioxidant capacity,and microbial shedding in weaning pigs[J]. Veterinary World, 2020, 13(9):1902-1909.

DOI

[20]
上官明军, 李燕平, 党文庆, 等. 苯甲酸与二甲酸钾对獭兔生长性能、胃肠内容物pH和养分表观消化率的影响[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2024, 60(1):314-318.

SHANGGUAN M J, LI Y P, DANG W Q, et al. Effects of benzoic acid and potassium dicarboxylate on growth performance,pH of gastrointestinal contents and apparent digestibility of nutrients in Rex rabbit[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Science, 2024, 60(1):314-318. (in Chinese)

[21]
詹海杰, 张元庆, 党文庆, 等. “三丁酸甘油酯+二甲酸钾+植物精油”复合制剂对商品肉兔生产性能、养分表观消化率及血清生化和免疫指标的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(9):5924-5934.

DOI

ZHAN H J, ZHANG Y Q, DANG W Q, et al. Effects of “tributyl glyceride+potassium dicarbonate+essential oil” combined additives on performance,nutrient apparent digestibility,serum biochemical and immune indexes of commercial meat rabbits[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(9):5924-5934. (in Chinese)

[22]
樊佳奇, 韩雯笑, 范慧敏, 等. 酵母肽对肉兔生长性能以及脂多糖应激肉兔血清细胞因子和肝脏抗氧化能力的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(8):5308-5318.

DOI

FAN J Q, HAN W X, FAN H M, et al. Effects of yeast peptides on growth performance of meat rabbits,and serum cytokines and liver antioxidant capacity of lipopolysaccharide-stressed meat rabbits[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(8):5308-5318. (in Chinese)

[23]
TOSCHI A, YU L E, BIALKOWSKI S, et al. Dietary supplementation of microencapsulated botanicals and organic acids enhances the expression and function of intestine epithelial digestive enzymes and nutrient transporters in broiler chickens[J]. Poultry Science, 2024, 103(11):104237.

DOI

[24]
HOFACRE C L, BAXTER J, BERGHAUS R, et al. Yeast cell wall supplementation affects the Salmonella enteretidis load in the ceca and ovaries of layer pullets[J]. Poultry Science, 2024, 103(11):104187.

DOI

[25]
CHAMPATI A, BHANJA S K, ROKADE J J, et al. Evaluation of in-feed supplementation of formic acid and thymol as non-antibiotic growth promoters and assessing their effect on antimicrobial resistant E.coli isolated in turkey[J]. Veterinary Research Communications, 2024, 48(3):1741-1754.

DOI

[26]
LETERME P, DUSEL G, SCHUH-VONGRAEVENITZ K, et al. Influence of a combination of phytase and formic acid on the performance of piglets and growing pigs and on phosphorus use[J]. Animal-Science Proceedings, 2024, 15(4):283.

[27]
NGUYEN D H, KIM I H. Protected organic acids improved growth performance,nutrient digestibility,and decreased gas emission in broilers[J]. Animals, 2020, 10(3):416.

DOI

[28]
ELMASRY A M A, MIRANDA L A, MENDOZA G, et al. Effect of yeast type and dose on growth performance and nutrient digestibility of growing rabbits fed maize or barley[J]. Indian Journal of Animal Research, 2021,doi:10.18805/IJAR.B-1331.

[29]
卢俊言, 徐领, 董佳豪, 等. 丁酸梭菌与不同添加剂组合对育肥牛生长性能、营养物质表观消化率及血清生化、抗氧化、免疫指标的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(12):7829-7839.

DOI

LU J Y, XU L, DONG J H, et al. Effects of combination of Clostridium butyricum and different additives on growth performance,nutrient apparent digestibility and serum biochemical,antioxidant and immune indices of fattening cattle[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(12):7829-7839. (in Chinese)

[30]
SIDIQ M J, JAYARAJ E G, RATHORE S S, et al. Ameliorative role of dietary acidifier potassium formate on growth metrics,blood chemistry,gut health and well-being indices of rohu,Labeo rohita fingerlings[J]. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry, 2023, 49(1):19-37.

DOI

[31]
SALEM F M, ABD EL-DAYEM A A. Formic and propionic acids’ effectiveness on laying hens’ productivity and egg quality,utilization of nutrients and some blood profiles during the early production phase[J]. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2025, 57(2):63.

DOI

[32]
LIU N, WANG J Q, LIU Z Y, et al. Effect of supplemental yeast cell walls on growth performance,gut mucosal glutathione pathway,proteolytic enzymes and transporters in growing broiler chickens[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2018, 96(4):1330-1337.

DOI

[33]
MAHER S, SWEENEY T, VIGORS S, et al. Maternal and/or direct feeding of organic acid-preserved cereal grains improves performance and digestive health of pigs from birth to slaughter[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2025, 323:116295.

DOI

[34]
LIU S Q, SHAH A M, YUAN M, et al. Effects of dry yeast supplementation on growth performance,rumen fermentation characteristics,slaughter performance and microbial communities in beef cattle[J]. Animal Biotechnology, 2022, 33(6):1150-1160.

DOI

[35]
BOLACALI M, IRAK K. Effect of dietary yeast autolysate on performance,slaughter,and carcass characteristics,as well as blood parameters,in quail of both genders[J]. South African Journal of Animal Science, 2017, 47(4):460-470.

DOI

[36]
谭子璇, 柏雪, 郭春华, 等. 饲粮中添加酵母培养物对牦牛生长性能、屠宰性能、肉品质及瘤胃微生物多样性的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2024, 36(9):5761-5775.

DOI

TAN Z X, BAI X, GUO C H, et al. Effects of dietary yeast culture on growth performance,slaughter performance,meat quality and rumen microbial diversity of yaks[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2024, 36(9):5761-5775. (in Chinese)

[37]
CHEN X, XIAO J, ZHAO W Z, et al. Mechanistic insights into rumen function promotion through yeast culture (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) metabolites using in vitro and in vivo models[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2024, 15:1407024.

DOI

[38]
王燕, 侯鹏霞, 李丹, 等. 酵母多糖对育肥牛屠宰性能和肉质风味的影响[J]. 动物营养学报, 2023, 35(10):6452-6461.

DOI

WANG Y, HOU P X, LI D, et al. Effects of yeast polysaccharide on slaughter performance and meat flavor of finishing cattle[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2023, 35(10):6452-6461. (in Chinese)

DOI

[39]
DAI D, QIU K, ZHANG H J, et al. Organic acids as alternatives for antibiotic growth promoters alter the intestinal structure and microbiota and improve the growth performance in broilers[J]. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2020, 11:618144.

DOI

[40]
LONG S F, XU Y T, PAN L, et al. Mixed organic acids as antibiotic substitutes improve performance,serum immunity,intestinal morphology and microbiota for weaned piglets[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2018, 235:23-32.

DOI

[41]
WANG X Y, DENG T Y, ZHOU X M, et al. A mixture of formic acid,benzoic acid,and essential oils enhanced growth performance via modulating nutrient uptake,mitochondrion metabolism,and immunomodulation in weaned piglets[J]. Antioxidants, 2024, 13(2):246.

DOI

[42]
ZHAXI Y P, MENG X Q, WANG W H, et al. Duan-Nai-An,a yeast probiotic,improves intestinal mucosa integrity and immune function in weaned piglets[J]. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10(1):4556.

DOI

[43]
SOREN S, MANDAL G P, MONDAL S, et al. Efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product and probiotic supplementation on growth performance,gut microbiome and immunity of broiler chickens[J]. Animals, 2024, 14(6):866.

DOI

[44]
KHAN K, AZIZ K, KHAN N A, et al. Effect of enzyme and yeast-based feed additives on growth,nutrient digestibility,meat quality and intestinal morphology of fattening rabbits[J]. Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society, 2021, 72(4):3511-3518.

DOI

[45]
QIU Q, ZHAN Z C, ZHOU Y, et al. Effects of yeast culture on laying performance,antioxidant properties,intestinal morphology,and intestinal flora of laying hens[J]. Antioxidants, 2024, 13(7):779.

DOI

[46]
ERYA S N, WAHYUNI H I, YUDIARTI T, et al. Intestinal morphology and growth performance of the Indonesian indigenous crossbred chickens supplemented with formic acid and Saccharomyces cerevisiae[J]. Journal of the Indonesian Tropical Animal Agriculture, 2020, 45(4):348-355.

DOI

[47]
SANDRINI S, PERRICONE V, CREMONESI P, et al. Yeast mixture supplementation modulates faecal microbiota and ileum morphology of weaning pigs[J]. Animal, 2024, 18(9):101275.

DOI

[48]
WAITITU S M, HEO J M, PATTERSON R, et al. Dose-response effects of in-feed antibiotics on growth performance and nutrient utilization in weaned pigs fed diets supplemented with yeast-based nucleotides[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2015, 1(3):166-169.

DOI PMID

[49]
HUANG J, XU T T, GUO F S, et al. Effects of drinking water supplemented with essential oils and organic acids mixtures on growth performance and intestinal health of broilers challenged with necrotic enteritis[J]. Poultry Science, 2025, 104(2):104712.

DOI

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉

京ICP备17050989号-2
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 010－62817823　E-mail: cjan@vip.163.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co., Ltd.