প্রোবায়টিক হিসাবে -Microguard

Technical Description

 

MICROGUARD- Right Probiotic combination

 

Composition per Kilogram :

®   Lactic acid bacillus – 2000 billion spores

®   B.subtilis-1000 billion spores

®   B.licheniformis-500 billion spores

®   B.megaterium- 500 billion spores

®   B.mesentricus-500 billion spores

®   B.polymyxa-500 billion spores

Fortified with Saccharomyces .boulardii

       Total viable count:   5000 Billion spores

Bacillus spores colonize in poultry gut, produce lactic acid to acidify the gut to bring down the pathogen load.

S.boulardii is unique among the hundreds of strains of the yeast species. It is non-pathogenic live yeast, which can protect gut invading pathogens that are causative of diarrhea and associated gastro-intestinal disorders. Clinical efficacy of S.boulardii is attributed to its antagonistic action against intestinal pathogens. Prevents clostridia infection. S.boulardii strengthens the integrity of gut wall and facilitates the growth and colonization of friendly bacteria in the gut. Finally, these intestinal beneficial effects offered by MICROGUARD optimize the growth potential of the animal

Probiotic Organisms	Benefits
Bacillus spores	®     Provides vitamins and improves  growth®     Germinate  in upper part of gut and rapidly multiply®     Produce range of enzymes for better digestion and utilization of nutrients®     Suppresses the growth of enterobacteria and enterococci and prevents clostridia infection®     Have bacteriostatic/ bactericidal action®     Provides heat and storage stability®     Does not interfere or get interfered by antibiotics and feed supplement
Saccharomyces boulardii	¨       Its mode of action corresponds to a real “shield effectreinforcing the microbial ecosystem and protecting the animal’s digestive tract”¨       Neutralization of certain bacterial toxins (Clostridia difficile, E.coli,)¨       Secretes protease enzyme which causes lysis of the pathogenic bacteria.¨       Modulation of the immune system by stimulation of IgA response to Pathogens.

 

 When to start MICROGUARD?

It is advised to start MICROGUARD immediately after the chicks reach the farm or even from the hatcheries will enhance the performance of the bird in its future life. The first 24 hrs of chick management is essential for its future performance

Thus continuous provision of MICROGUARD will not only improve the performance of bird and profitability but also reduces the pathogenic bacterial population from the gut as well as environment.

Main action of MICROGUARD

 

• Prevents early chick mortality and reduces incidences of infections
• Prevents diseases like Necrotic Enteritis (caused by Clostridium perfringens),
  Collibacillosis (caused by E.coli), and Salmonellosis etc.
• Protects the gut from pathogens by competitive exclusion
• Reduces wet droppings  and diarrhea
• Acts as anti stress ,rejuvenates birds after vaccination
• Stimulates antibody production and Improves immunity

 

Administration through drinking water

 Chicks                     :  50gm/1000 birds daily for 1^st & 2nd day in 1^st week.

Growers & Pre Breeding, Breeding     :  20gm/1000 birds once a week.

Breeders Chicks    :  20gm/1000 birds follow 10days daily after 2day in 1^st week.

 In Feed:

Broilers/Layers/Breeders   :   100gm/150gm/250gm/tonne of feed.

 Important notes:

 

®         MICROGUARD should be administered in water after 2-3 hrs of treatment with
water sanitizer.

 

®        As per antibiotic therapy is concerned, MICROGUARD is compatible with most
of the major antibiotics commonly used in the feed industry

Trial Report of Microguard

 

Name of the Farm                             :           Vinaya Poultry Farm

Owners Name                                    :           Mr. Manimohan

Address                                               :           Sevitturanganpatty,

                                                                        Neikaranpatty, Namakkal

                                                                        Mobile – 93671 23475

Capacity of the farm                        :           1,50,000

No. of Birds                                        :           35,000

Date of Starting                                  :           21.12.08

Age of the Birds at Starting           :           0 day

Duration of the trial                         :           One Month

History of disease outbreak          :           Nil

History of Medication                      :           Used only sanitizer 2-3 hrs before

administration of MICROGUARD

Parameters

Livability of Chicks

Mortality

MICROGUARD Group                     :           869

Batch without MICROGUARD        :           944

Mortality Difference                           :           7.94%

According to the report there is 7.94% reduction in mortality of chicks when compared to the previous batch that administered without MICROGUARD.

                            Daily reports

Date	Mortality
	MICROGUARD	Control
21.12.2008	43	14
22.12.2008	15	56
23.12.2008	246	200
24.12.2008	156	157
25.12.2008	154	146
26.12.2008	70	129
27.12.2008	55	80
28.12.2008	21	23
29.12.2008	30	42
30.12.2008	25	11
31.12.2008	9	9
1.1.2009	3	2
2.1.2009	5	5
3.1.2009	4	1
4.1.2009	4	5
5.1.2009	3	4
6.1.2009	4	6
7.1.2009	3	1
8.1.2009	5	5
9.1.2009	–	7
10.1.2009	3	2
11.1.2009	–	4
12.1.2009	–	15
13.1.2009	5	1
14.1.2009	–	5
15.1.2009	–	2
16.1.2009	1	1
17.1.2209	–	2
18.1.2009	1	7
19.1.2009	4	2
Total	869	944

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 THE EFFECT OF MICROGUARD ON THE PERFORMANCE OF BROILER

 A Trial conducted by Dr. Maxmillan Anderson

at Larrybeth Farm located at Pililia, Rizal, Philippines

 

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

  To determine the efficacy of MICROGUARD on the performance of broiler.

 DATE AND PLACE OF ST

   Trial was conducted at Larrybeth Farm located at Pililia, Rizal last January 17, 2011 until February 21, 2011.

TRIAL DESIGN:

Two houses of broiler were selected as control and treatment. Building 2 was assigned as the Treatment (with Microguard) and building 3 was assigned as control ( without Microguard ). The following parameters were observed:

1.)    The same age, breed and source of chicks were placed for the two buildings.

2.)    A total of 7,135 chicks were placed for each building.

3.)    The same medication and vaccination program was observed during the duration of the trial.

4.)    The same type of feed rations was given ad libitum for the two buildings.

5.)    The addition of MICROGUARD was given to building 2 ( Trial building ) via drinking water following the recommended dosage:

 

• 20 grams per 1,000 birds from day 1 to day 5.
• 10 grams per 1,000 birds from day 6 to day 35.

 

 TRIAL RESULT:

After the experiment, the following trial results were obtained from the farm.

PARAMETERS	MICROGUARD		CONTROL
Population	7,135	heads	7,135	heads
Mortality	440	heads	502	heads
% Mortality	6.17	%	7.04	%
Feed Consumption	23,250	kgs	22,900	Kgs
Harvest	6,695	heads	6,633	Heads
Total Weight Harvested	13,090.25	kgs	12,593.05	Kgs
ALW	1.96	kgs	1.90	Kgs
FCR	1.776		1.818
Cost of feeds per kg	22.00	per kg	22.00	per kg
Feed Cost/KG Live	39.07	per kg	40.00	per kg
Feed Cost Per Bird	76.58	per bird	76.00	per bird
Chick Cost	22.00	per bird	22.00	per bird
Price/Kg Live	74.00	per kg	74.00	per kg
Gross Sales/bird	145.04	per bird	140.60	per bird
Input Cost ( Feed Cost + Chick Cost )	98.58	per bird	98.00	per bird
Gross Profit per bird	46.46	per bird	42.60	per bird
GROSS INCOME FROM MICROGUARD	3.86	per bird

CONCLUSION:

With the following result obtained from the clinical trial conducted from the broiler farm of LARRYBETH, a member of URARCO, it can be concluded that MICROGUARD is:

1.)    An effective probiotic to enhance the performance of broiler ( FCR and ALW ).

2.)    An effective probiotic to maximize profit.

3.)    An effective probiotic even in the presence of antibiotics.

 

 

THE EFFECT OF MICROGUARD ON INTESTINAL HISTOPATHOLOGY AND VILLI SIZE OF CHICKEN

 

A Trial conducted by Dr. Maxmillan Anderson

at Larrybeth Farm located at Pililia, Rizal, Philippines

 

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY:

To determine the efficacy of MICROGUARD on intestinal histopathology and villi size of an 18 day old chicken.

 DATE AND PLACE OF STUDY:

  Trial was conducted at Larrybeth Farm located at Pililia, Rizal last January 17, 2011 until February 21, 2011. Samples for histopathologic examination was collected last February 4, 2011 and the said samples were processed at University of the Philippines at Los Baňos, College of Veterinary Medicine last February 7, 2011

Processed samples of histopatholgy were examined and interpreted by Dr. Joseph Masangkay, Professor from the U.P. College of Veterinary Medicine.

Villi sizes were measured by Dr. Lou-Anne E. Dumalag, Technical Services Manager of ANIMEDICA INC under the supervision from personnels from U.P. College of Veterinary Medicine.

 

TRIAL DESIGN:

Two houses of broiler were selected as control and treatment. Building 2 was assigned as the Treatment ( with Microguard ) and building 3 was assigned as control ( without Microguard ). The following parameters were observed:

 

1.)    The same age, breed and source of chicks were placed for the two buildings.

2.)    A total of 7,135 chicks were placed for each building.

3.)    The same medication and vaccination program was observed during the duration of the trial.

4.)    The same type of feed rations was given ad libitum for the two buildings.

5.)    The addition of MICROGUARD was given to building 2 ( Trial building ) via drinking water following the recommended dosage:

 

• 20 grams per 1,000 birds from day 1 to day 5.
• 10 grams per 1,000 birds from day 6 to day 35.

6.)    Representative samples from each building were sacrificed, necropsied and at least 2 inches of duodenum was collected and stored at 37% formalin solution for histopatholgic purposes.

For the villi length, ten samples were measured from each slides to have an average length for the control and trial specimen.  It was observed under the 4x objective and measured thru an eyepiece with scale.  A formula was used to have the measurements in millimeter:

0.9   =                                                     X                                  .                                                                  

70eps                  measured value under the microscope scale

 

 

TRIAL RESULT:

 

 

Table 1: Histopathology Results of Intestines of Chicken with and without Microguard

 

	Treatment	Control
Replicate 1	No apparent Lesion (NAL)	No apparent Lesion (NAL)
Replicate 2	No apparent Lesion (NAL)	Relatively short villi
Replicate 3	No apparent Lesion (NAL)	Relatively thin villi with coalescence in some portions of the duodenal mucosa infiltrated by the mononuclear cells.

 

* Interpretation and reading of slides was conducted by Dr. Joseph Masangkay, Professor, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of the Philippines, Los Banos, Laguna, last February 22, 2011.

 

Table 2.  Average Length of Villi of Treatment and Control.

 

	T1	T2	T3	C1	C2	C3
1st	1.35	1.16	1.10	1.03	0.51	1.16
2nd	1.16	1.16	1.28	1.00	1.03	1.22
3rd	1.48	1.54	1.41	1.22	1.03	1.41
4th	1.60	1.72	1.47	1.35	1.28	1.51
5th	1.60	1.73	1.54	1.41	1.28	1.67
6th	1.67	1.80	1.73	1.48	1.28	1.67
7th	1.74	1.86	1.80	1.48	1.32	1.67
8th	1.93	1.86	1.80	1.67	1.35	1.71
9th	2.19	2.25	1.86	1.93	1.38	1.84
10th	2.28	2.34	1.90	2.37	1.41	2.06
TOTAL	17.00	17.42	15.89	14.94	11.87	15.92
AVERAGE	1.700	1.742	1.589	1.494	1.187	1.592

 

 Total average                      1.68µm                              1.42µm

 

• Villi size was measured by Dr. Lou-Anne E. Dumalag, Technical Services Manager of ANIMEDICA INC at the College of Veterinary Medicine, University of the Philippines, Los Banos, Laguna. last February 22, 2011

 

WITH MICROGUARD                                             WITHOUT MICROGUARD

   1.68µm                                                                            1.42µm

 

 CONCLUSION:

From the histopathologic reading and the values of sizes of villi from representative samples above, it can be concluded that the birds given with Microguard have no apparent lesion (NAL) and have longer villi thus absorption of nutrients is better compared to those that were not given.