Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-21T10:17:21.914Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cloacal temperature responses of broiler chickens administered with fisetin and probiotic (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and exposed to heat stress

Subject: Life Science and Biomedicine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2021

Victory O. Sumanu Open the ORCID record for Victory O. Sumanu [Opens in a new window] ,
Tagang Aluwong ,
Joseph O. Ayo  and
Ngozi E. Ogbuagu
Victory O. Sumanu*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Physiology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Tagang Aluwong
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Physiology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Joseph O. Ayo
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Physiology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Ngozi E. Ogbuagu
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Physiology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

There is dearth information on the role of fisetin as an antistress agent in ameliorating heat stress in broiler chickens. Here, we experimentally compared probiotic, an antioxidant and antistress agent, with fisetin, an antioxidant agent with little or no report on its antistress effect. Sixty-day-old broiler chickens (Arbo Acre breed) were allotted into 4 groups of 15 birds each as follows; control, fisetin, probiotic, and fisetin + probiotic groups, respectively. All administrations were performed orally through gavage for the treatment groups. The environmental and cloacal temperature (CT) parameters were measured bi-hourly at Days 21, 28, and 35 from 7:00 to 7:00 hr, during the period of study. The environmental parameters exceeded the thermoneutral zone for broiler chickens. The probiotic-supplemented group had the least overall mean CT values all through the experimental period. Based on our findings, fisetin was not a potent antistress agent in mitigating heat stress in birds.

Keywords

ambient temperatureantioxidantsbroiler chickensoxidative stress
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Results , Volume 2 , 2021 , e24
Result type: Negative result
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

1. Introduction

The major factor that negatively affects broiler chickens production in the subtropics and tropics is heat stress (Aluwong et al., Reference Aluwong, Sumanu, Ayo, Ocheja, Zakari and Minka2017; Goel et al., Reference Goel, Ncho and Choi2021; Sugiharto et al., Reference Sugiharto, Yudiarti, Isroli, Widiastuti and Kusumanti2017). The combined effects of high relative humidity (RH) and high ambient temperature (AT) have been reported to induce thermal stress in chickens (Egbuniwe et al., Reference Egbuniwe, Ayo, Mohammed and Aliyu2015; Jiang et al., Reference Jiang, Mohammed, Jacobs, Cramer and Cheng2020; Kim et al., Reference Kim, Lee, Kim and Lee2021; Qaid et al., Reference Qaid, Al-Mufarrej, Azzam, Al-Garadi, Albaadani, Alhidary and Aljumaah2021), therefore, lipid peroxidation resulting from hyperthermia may damage some of their vital organs (Rhoads et al., Reference Rhoads, Baumgard, Suagee and Sanders2013; Al-Zghoul & Saleh, Reference Al-Zghoul and Saleh2020; Aksoy et al., Reference Aksoy, Curek, Narinc and Onenc2021; Gogoi et al., Reference Gogoi, Kolluri, Tyagi, Marappan, Manickam and Narayan2021). Antioxidants are used universally in dietary supplementation, and these supplements are beneficial in ameliorating tissue damages induced by stress (Gouda et al., Reference Gouda, Amer, Gabr and Tolba2020; Sun et al., Reference Sun, Jiang, Xu, Zhang, Xu, Zheng and Qu2015). Fisetin is a flavonoid found in vegetables and fruits, such as grapes, onion, strawberries, and cucumbers (Khan et al., Reference Khan, Syed, Ahmad and Mukhtar2013; Chen et al., Reference Chen, Ho, Wu, Huang, Chen, Tai, Ho and Yen2015; Kikusato et al., Reference Kikusato, Xue, Pastor, Niewold and Toyomizu2021). Fisetin has several pharmacological and physiological activities that are extensive (Qaid et al., Reference Qaid, Al-Mufarrej, Azzam, Al-Garadi, Albaadani, Alhidary and Aljumaah2021). Probiotics are live microorganisms that are beneficial when adequately administered to the host (Aluwong et al., Reference Aluwong, Kawu, Raji, Dzenda, Govwang, Sinkalu and Ayo2013). They function as both antioxidant and antistress agents, and are also gut effective (Sumanu et al., Reference Sumanu, Aluwong, Ayo and Ogbuagu2021).

2. Objectives

Our objective was to determine the cloacal temperature (CT) responses of broiler chickens administered with fisetin and probiotic and exposed to heat stress. We hypothesized that supplementation of fisetin either alone or in combination with probiotic would be beneficial to ameliorate the negative effects of thermal stress in broiler chickens. To test this hypothesis, we assessed broiler chickens CT responses in separate groups of chicks given these supplements alone and in combination.

3. Methods

3.1. Ethics statement

This research was approved by the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria’s Ethical Committee on Animal Use and Care, with the following reference number, ABUCAUC/2018/021.

3.2. Site of the experiment and experimental animal management

We conducted this experiment at the Department of Veterinary Physiology, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria (11°10′ N, 07°38′ E). The chickens were exposed naturally to the fluctuating RH and AT conditions (Dzenda et al., Reference Dzenda, Ayo, Lakpini and Adelaiye2013). Sixty newly hatched broiler chicks that were apparently healthy served as the subjects. They were raised in an intensive management system, feed and water were provided to the broiler chicks ad libitum. On Days 1–28, broiler starter were fed to the chicks, whereas broiler finisher was given from Days 29 to 42. The poultry pen was made of concrete floor littered with wood shavings, cement block with aluminum roofing and cardboard ceiling. The dimension of the pen was 8.4 × 5.6 × 1.91 m and the birds were stocked at the density of 15 birds/m2. Protective clothing was made available to ensure optimum biosecurity measures.

3.3. The study area meteorological data and experimental design

The dry-bulb temperature (DBT) and wet-bulb temperature (WBT) (Brannan® Sapphire Instruments, New Delhi, India) were recorded every 2 hr for 3 days, 1 week apart, on Days 21, 28, and 35 of the experiment. RH was calculated using Osmon’s hygrometric table (Narinda Scientific Industries, Haryana, India). The temperature-humidity index (THI) is a measure of the degree of discomfort that the chickens experienced during the stressful season. The index is importantly an efficient temperature based on air temperature and humidity. THI was determined using the formula of Tao and Xin (Reference Tao and Xin2003): THI = 0.85(Tdb) + 0.15Twb, where THI = THI for broiler chickens, Tdb = DBT, and Twb = WBT. The parameters were recorded inside the poultry house on each day of the experiment.

Sixty chicks were divided into four groups of 15 each by simple randomization. Group I control; Group II, fisetin (Sigma Inc., New Orleans, LA) at a dose of 5 mg/kg; Group III, probiotic (Montajat Pharmaceuticals, Bioscience Division, Dammam, Saudi Arabia) at a dose of 4.125 × 106 cfu/100 ml; and Group IV, fisetin and probiotic (same doses as stated above). All administrations were performed orally for the first 7 days of life via gavage.

3.4. CT and AT measurement

CT values, which is an index of the core body temperature of the broiler chickens, were recorded (Sinkalu et al., Reference Sinkalu, Ayo, Adelaiye and Hambolu2015), using a digital clinical thermometer (Krusser Thermometer®, Amazon). CT measurements were taken using procedures of good standard (Minka & Ayo, Reference Minka and Ayo2013) over a period of 24 hr, from 07:00 to 07:00 hr of the next day, on Days 21, 28, and 35 of the study. The AT was recorded simultaneously with CT values using a WBT and DBT (BrannanSapphire Instruments, New Delhi, India). RH and THI were calculated as described by Tao and Xin (Reference Tao and Xin2003).

For data analysis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was utilized, Tukey’s multiple comparison post-hoc test was used to compare disparateness between the treatments and control groups means. Data obtained were expressed as mean ± standard error of the mean (SEM). GraphPad Prism 5.03 for windows was used (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA). Significant values were considered to be p < .05.

4. Results

The mean DBT at Day 28 (28.85 ± 0.45°C) of the study was higher compared to those of Days 21 (26.85 ± 0.25°C) and 35 (28.54 ± 0.39°C). Day 21 (77.92 ± 2.56%) had the least RH compared to Days 28 (81.46 ± 3.11%) and 35 (79.00 ± 2.62%). The THI was highest on Day 28 (28.47 ± 0.38) as compared to Days 21 (26.40 ± 0.23) and 35 (28.05 ± 0.33; Table 1). At Day 21 of the study period, overall mean values of the CT in the fisetin group (41.20 ± 0.03°C) showed no difference significantly (p > .05) when compared with that of the control group (41.39 ± 0.03°C). Values recorded in the probiotic (40.32 ± 1.90°C) and fisetin + probiotic groups (40.49 ± 0.03°C) were lower significantly (p < .05) when compared with the control group (41.39 ± 0.03°C; Table 2). The overall mean CT values recorded at Day 28 of the study was evident that fisetin group showed no difference (41.36 ± 0.04°C), whereas the co-administered group had a significant (41.23 ± 0.03°C, p < .05) decrease when compared with the values obtained from the control group. Also, the CT values were different significantly (p < .05) in the chickens supplemented with probiotic (41.10 ± 0.06°C), when compared with the corresponding values of the controls (41.58 ± 0.03°C; Table 3). At Day 35 of the study, the overall mean CT values in the fisetin group (41.68 ± 0.03°C) did not differ when compared with that of the control group (41.78 ± 0.03°C). The overall CT values of fisetin + probiotic-administered group differed significantly (p < .05) from the control group. Nevertheless, probiotic-administered group had the least CT values which differed significantly (40.10 ± 0.11°C; p < .05) as compared to the controls (41.78 ± 0.03°C; Table 4).

Table 1. Variations in thermal environmental parameters on selected days of the study period

Values in parenthesis are minimum–maximum. n = 15.

Abbreviations: DBT, dry-bulb temperature; RH, relative humidity; THI, temperature-humidity index.

Table 2. Circadian variation in cloacal temperature of broiler chickens during Day 21 of study

Values in parenthesis are minimum–maximum.

Abbreviations: F + P, fisetin + probiotic; SEM, standard error of the mean.

a,b,cMeans with different superscript letters across rows are significantly different (p < .05).

Table 3. Circadian variation in cloacal temperature of broiler chickens during Day 28 of study

Values in parenthesis are minimum–maximum.

Abbreviations: F + P, fisetin + probiotic; SEM, standard error of the mean.

a,bMeans with different superscript letters across rows are significantly different (p < .05).

Table 4. Circadian variation in cloacal temperature of broiler chickens during Day 35 of study

Values in parenthesis are minimum–maximum.

Abbreviations: F + P, fisetin + probiotic; SEM, standard error of the mean.

a,bMeans with different superscript letters across rows are significantly different (p < .05).

5. Discussions

From the present study, it was evident that the values of DBT (26.00–36.00°C), RH (49.00–93.00%), and the THI (28.47 ± 0.38) obtained exceeded the thermoneutral zone stipulated for broiler chickens above 3 weeks of age, which are 18–24°C, 65–70%, and 20.8, respectively in the tropics. This further support the fact that the experimental period was thermally stressful to the birds. The values of THI higher than 20.8 which elicited heat stress in broiler chickens agrees with previous findings (Sinkalu et al., Reference Sinkalu, Ayo, Adelaiye and Hambolu2015). Broiler chickens’ energy balance and fitness might be affected negatively during the prevailing thermally stressful season as recorded by previous research (Tao & Xin, Reference Tao and Xin2003; Yin et al., Reference Yin, Tang, Liu, Cao, Xie and Zhang2021). This might subsequently lead to low immunity, decrease performance, suppression, high morbidity, and death; hence, antioxidants, such as fisetin and probiotic could be helpful during the season when administered adequately. Oxidative stress is a resultant of heat stress which consequently, enhances reactive oxygen species (ROS) production (Ogbuagu et al., Reference Ogbuagu, Aluwong, Ayo and Sumanu2018; Shakeri et al., Reference Shakeri, Oskoueian, Le and Shakeri2020; Sumanu et al., Reference Sumanu, Aluwong, Ayo and Ogbuagu2019), therefore, the findings of this study serves as the basis for modulating the detrimental effects of heat stress in animals via fisetin and/or probiotic administration.

Little or no information have been published to the best of our knowledge, on the use of fisetin or its combination with probiotic in modulating the detrimental effects of thermal stress in poultry, using CT as a potent biomarker, during the cause of this study. It is very difficult for the chickens to maintain core body temperature amidst high AT, as they are void of sweat glands and rely more on evaporative cooling (panting) to keep their body cool. Several workers have reported CT increase in older chickens during heat stress (Robinson et al., Reference Robinson, Lida, Jairo, Luciano, Keller and Lina2016; Sahebi-Ala et al., Reference Sahebi-Ala, Hassanabadi and Golian2021). Fluctuations in body temperature depicts the stressful nature of RH and AT, the mechanism of thermoregulation is furthermore required for the maintenance of homeothermy (Makeri et al., Reference Makeri, Ayo, Aluwong and Minka2017; Yin et al., Reference Yin, Tang, Liu, Cao, Xie and Zhang2021). The greater the fluctuation of environmental parameters, the more prominent the thermal stress, and the higher the negative effects upon health and optimal growth (Lee et al., Reference Lee, Park, Heo, Choi and Seo2021).

At Days 21, 28, and 35 of the study, the CT values recorded in the control group were higher than the values recorded within the treatment groups. This may be attributed to the fact that the birds were naturally exposed to heat stress and their endogenous antioxidants were not potent enough to mitigate its adverse effects. These findings are in agreement with previous studies in the tropic (Egbuniwe et al., Reference Egbuniwe, Ayo, Mohammed and Aliyu2015). The CT values recorded in the fisetin-administered group were higher than the values recorded in the probiotic and the co-administered groups, respectively. It may be deduced that fisetin is devoid of antistress effect in mitigating heat stress in broiler chickens as evident in this study. This further rejects the hypothesis which was earlier stated that fisetin administration would be advantageous in ameliorating the detrimental effect of heat stress in broiler chickens. Values of CT recorded in the probiotic group during the period of study were lower as compared to all other groups. It could be speculated that probiotic was able to function not only as an antioxidant, but also as an antistress agent in mitigating heat stress, hence it could be potent in enhancing thermoregulation which reduces the metabolic heat production of the chickens, vis a vis increasing their productivity. Previous studies on broiler chickens demonstrated similar findings (Aluwong et al., Reference Aluwong, Sumanu, Ayo, Ocheja, Zakari and Minka2017; Sugiharto et al., Reference Sugiharto, Yudiarti, Isroli, Widiastuti and Kusumanti2017). The co-administered group had CT values that were lower than that of the control and fisetin groups, respectively during the study period. This may be attributed to the thermoregulatory effect of the probiotic and not the fisetin. Nevertheless, this is the first time that fisetin, a phytonutrient, would be tried on food animals to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, fisetin alone was not potent in alleviating heat stress in broiler chickens.

The molecular mechanism by which probiotic was able to elicit thermoregulation should be further investigated.

6. Conclusion

CT was significantly increased by the thermal environmental parameters, indicative that the study period was thermally stressful. Therefore, the administration of fisetin singly was not potent in eliciting antistress effect in broiler chickens exposed to thermal stress. Although, probiotic was potent in alleviating heat stress, hence its use singly is advocated.

Acknowledgments

Profs J. O. Ayo and T. Aluwong are highly appreciated for designing this research and for their mentorship all through the study. Their constructive criticism and meticulous corrections in bringing out the best in me and this research can never be underestimated.

Authorship Contributions

J.O.A. and T.A. conceived and designed the study. V.O.S., T.A., J.O.A., and N.E.O. conducted data gathering, V.O.S. performed statistical analyses, V.O.S., J.O.A., and T.A. wrote the article.

Data Availability Statement

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Funding Statement

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Aksoy, T., Curek, D. I., Narinc, D., & Onenc, A. (2021). Effects of season, genotype, and rearing system on broiler chickens raised in different semi-intensive systems: Performance, mortality, and slaughter results. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 53, 189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-021-02629-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aluwong, T., Kawu, M., Raji, M., Dzenda, T., Govwang, F., Sinkalu, V., & Ayo, J. O. (2013). Effect of yeast probiotic on growth, antioxidant enzyme activities and malondialdehyde concentration of broiler chickens. Antioxidants, 2, 326–339. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox2040326CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aluwong, T., Sumanu, V. O., Ayo, J. O., Ocheja, B., Zakari, F., & Minka, N. (2017). Daily rhythms of cloacal temperature in broiler chickens of different age groups administered with zinc gluconate and probiotic during the hot-dry season. Physiological Reports, 5(12): e13314. https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.13314CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Zghoul, M. B., & Saleh, K. M. M.(2020). Effects of thermal manipulation of eggs on the response of jejunal mucosae to posthatch chronic heat stress in broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 99, 2727–2735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2019.12.038CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, P. Y., Ho, Y. R., Wu, M. J., Huang, S. P., Chen, P. K., Tai, M. H., Ho, C. T., &Yen, J. H. (2015). Cytoprotective effects of fisetin against hypoxia-induced cell death in PC12 cells. Food and Function, 6, 287–296. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4fo00948gCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dzenda, T., Ayo, J. O., Lakpini, C. A. M., & Adelaiye, A. B. (2013). Seasonal, sex and liveweight variations in feed and water consumptions of adult captive African giant rat kept individually in cages. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 97, 465–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0396.2012.01287.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egbuniwe, C. I., Ayo, J. O., Mohammed, U. K., & Aliyu, M. (2015). Cloacal temperature responses of broiler chickens administered with betaine and ascorbic acid during the hot-dry season. Biological Rhythm Research, 46, 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/09291016.2014.974931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goel, A., Ncho, C. M., &Choi, Y. H. (2021). Regulation of gene expression in chickens by heat stress. Journal of Animal Science Biotechnology, 12, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-020-00523-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gogoi, S., Kolluri, G., Tyagi, J. S., Marappan, G., Manickam, K., & Narayan, R. (2021). Impact of heat stress on broilers with varying body weights: Elucidating their interactive role through physiological signatures. Journal of Thermal Biology, 97, 102840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtherbio.2021.102840CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gouda, A., Amer, S. A., Gabr, S., & Tolba, S. A. (2020). Effect of dietary supplemental ascorbic acid and folic acid on the growth performance, redox status, and immune status of broiler chickens under heat stress. Tropical Animal Health Production, 52, 2987–2996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-020-02316-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, S., Mohammed, A. A., Jacobs, J. A., Cramer, T. A., & Cheng, H. W. (2020). Effect of synbiotics on thyroid hormones, intestinal histomorphology, and heat shock protein 70 expression in broiler chickens reared under cyclic heat stress. Poultry Science, 99, 142–150. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pez571CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khan, N., Syed, D. N., Ahmad, N., & Mukhtar, H. (2013).Fisetin: A dietary antioxidant for health promotion. Antioxidants and Redox Signaling, 19, 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1089/ars.2012.4901CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kikusato, M., Xue, G., Pastor, A., Niewold, T. N., & Toyomizu, M. (2021). Effects of plant-derived isoquinoline alkaloids on growth performance and intestinal function of broiler chickens under heat stress. Poultry Science, 100, 957–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.11.050CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, D. H., Lee, Y. K., Kim, S. H., & Lee, K. W. (2021). The impact of temperature and humidity on the performance and physiology of laying hens. Animals, 11, 56. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11010056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, M., Park, H., Heo, J. M., Choi, H. J., & Seo, S. (2021). Multi-tissue transcriptomic analysis reveals that L-methionine supplementation maintains the physiological homeostasis of broiler chickens than D-methionine under acute heat stress. PLoS ONE, 16(1): e0246063. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246063CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Makeri, H. K., Ayo, J. O., Aluwong, T., &Minka, N. S. (2017). Daily rhythms of blood parameters in broiler chickens reared under tropical climate conditions. Journal of Circadian Rhythms, 15, 5–11. http://doi.org/10.5334/jcr.151CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Minka, N. S., & Ayo, J. O. (2013). Ameliorating effect of melatonin on colonic temperature and erythrocyte fragility of Japanese quails (Coturnixcoturnix japonica) transported by road. Archiv fur Geflugelkunde, 77, 137–143.Google Scholar
Ogbuagu, N. E., Aluwong, T., Ayo, J. O., & Sumanu, V. O.(2018). Effect of fisetin and probiotic supplementation on erythrocyte osmotic fragility, malondialdehyde concentration and superoxide dismutase activity in broiler chickens exposed to heat stress. Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, 80, 1895–1900. https://doi.org/10.1292/jvms.18-0477CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qaid, M. M., Al-Mufarrej, S. I., Azzam, M. M., Al-Garadi, M. A., Albaadani, H. H., Alhidary, I. A., & Aljumaah, R. S. (2021). Growth performance, serum biochemical indices, duodenal histomorphology, and cecal microbiota of broiler chickens fed on diets supplemented with cinnamon bark powder at prestarter and starter phases. Animals, 11, 94. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11010094CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhoads, R. P., Baumgard, L. H., Suagee, J. K., & Sanders, S. R. (2013). Nutritional interventions to alleviate the negative consequences of heat stress. Advances in Nutrition, 4, 267–276. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.112.003376CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, O. H., Lida, F. F. T., Jairo, A. O. S., Luciano, B. M., Keller, S. O. R., & Lina, M. G. G. (2016). Thermal environment in two broiler barns during the first three weeks of age. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental, 20, 275–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v20n3p256-262Google Scholar
Sahebi-Ala, F., Hassanabadi, A., & Golian, G.(2021). Effect of replacement different methionine levels and sources with betaine on blood metabolites, breast muscle morphology and immune response in heat-stressed broiler chickens. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 20, 33–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2020.1868358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shakeri, M., Oskoueian, E., Le, H. H., & Shakeri, M. (2020). Strategies to combat heat stress in broiler chickens: unveiling the roles of selenium, vitamin E and vitamin C. Veterinary Science, 7, 71–77. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci7020071CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sinkalu, V. O., Ayo, J. O., Adelaiye, A. B., & Hambolu, J. O. (2015). Ameliorative effect of melatonin administration and photoperiods on diurnal fluctuations in cloacal temperature of Marshal broiler chickens during hot-dry season. International Journal of Biometeorology, 59, 79–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.07.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugiharto, S., Yudiarti, T., Isroli, I., Widiastuti, E., & Kusumanti, E. (2017). Dietary supplementation of probiotics in poultry exposed to heat stress—A review. Annals of Animal Science, 17, 591–604. https://doi.org/10.1515/aoas-2016-0062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumanu, V. O., Aluwong, T., Ayo, J. O., & Ogbuagu, N. E. (2019). Evaluation of changes in tonic immobility, vigilance, malondialdehyde, and superoxide dismutase in broiler chickens administered fisetin and probiotic (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and exposed to heat stress. Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, 31, 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2019.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumanu, V. O., Aluwong, T., Ayo, J. O., & Ogbuagu, N. E. (2021). Effect of probiotic and fisetin supplementation on performance, carcass characteristics and small intestinal morphology in broiler chickens. Open Veterinary Science, 2, 23–32. https://10.1515/ovs-2020-0106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, H., Jiang, R., Xu, S., Zhang, Z., Xu, G., Zheng, J., & Qu, L. (2015). Transcriptome responses to heat stress in hypothalamus of a meat-type chicken. Journal of Animal Science Biotechnology, 6, 6–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-015-0003-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tao, X., & Xin, H. (2003). Acute synergistic effects of air temperature, humidity and velocity on homeostasis of market-size boilers. Transactions of American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, 46, 491–497. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.12971Google Scholar
Yin, C., Tang, S., Liu, L., Cao, A., Xie, J., & Zhang, H. (2021). Effects of bile acids on growth performance and lipid metabolism during chronic heat stress in broiler chickens. Animals, 11, 630–638. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11030630CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Variations in thermal environmental parameters on selected days of the study period

Figure 1

Table 2. Circadian variation in cloacal temperature of broiler chickens during Day 21 of study

Figure 2

Table 3. Circadian variation in cloacal temperature of broiler chickens during Day 28 of study

Figure 3

Table 4. Circadian variation in cloacal temperature of broiler chickens during Day 35 of study

Reviewing editor:  Michael Nevels University of St Andrews, Biomolecular Sciences Building, Fife, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, KY16 9ST
This article has been accepted because it is deemed to be scientifically sound, has the correct controls, has appropriate methodology and is statistically valid, and has been sent for additional statistical evaluation and met required revisions.

Review 1: Cloacal temperature responses of broiler chickens administered with fisetin and probiotic (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and exposed to heat stress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/exp.2021.15.pr1 [Opens in a new window]
Mohammed Ibrahim [Opens in a new window] West Kordofan University, Veterinary Anatomy, Onderstepoort, University of Pretoria, department of anatomy and physiology, Pretoria, gauteng, South Africa, 0110 University of Pretoria, University of Pretoria, Paraclinical Science, department of anatomy and physiology, Pretoria, gauteng, South Africa, 0110
Date of review:  03 July 2021
Role: reviewer

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none

Comments

Comments to the Author: Dear Editor,

Thank you for considering me as a reviewer for this publication in your esteemed journal Experimental Results. I have provided my comments as follows.

The authors have achieved their objective and the manuscript is, generally speaking, well-written.

1- There are some grammar issues in L11 (There is a death), L19 (The probiotic-supplemented), L90 (CT values were), L127 (These findings are), L135 (also as an anti-stress).

2- In L79 and 80 (add the full name of the DBT and RH). In addition, please delete all the means values throughout the result in the text since you have mentioned them in the tables, this will be a repetition of the result.

3- In L114 (change the sentence to “fisetin or its combination with probiotics”).

4- Could the authors explain what are these numbers between brackets in all tables, which is very confusing? since the authors have provided the mean values ± SEM.

Thank you

Mohammed Ibrahim

Presentation

Overall score 3.6 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
4 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
3 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
4 out of 5

Context

Overall score 3.8 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
4 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
3 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
4 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
4 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 4 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
4 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
4 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
4 out of 5

Review 2: Cloacal temperature responses of broiler chickens administered with fisetin and probiotic (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and exposed to heat stress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/exp.2021.15.pr2 [Opens in a new window]
Tadayuki Yanagi Junior [Opens in a new window] Universidade Federal de Lavras, Engenharia Agrícola, Escola de Engenharia, Caixa Postal 3037, Lavras, MInas Gerais, Brazil, 37200900
Date of review:  06 July 2021
Role: reviewer

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to the Author: Sumaru and co-authors compared the effect of fisetin, probiotic and combination of both on CT of broiler chickens subject to natural thermal challenges. The mitigation of CT, that is a physiological response used to indicate heat stress, is widely desirable, especially in the sub-tropics and tropics. Hot conditions are a worldwide problem that negatively affect poultry performance, causing economic loss. Therefore, this is an interesting study.

The authors reported that the experiment was conducted in an intensive management system. However, constructive details of the facility (dimensions and materials description) should be informed.

The bird`s thermal sensation is affected by wind and thermal radiation. For this study, can air velocity and thermal radiation be neglected? If so, a justification must be addressed in the text for using the THI. Otherwise, another thermal index should be used, such as the black globe-humidity index (BGHI).

Inform the accuracy of each sensor used.

In the discussion related to the overall mean CT values recorded at day 28, the probability (P>0.05) must be (P<0.05), as a significant difference was found.

Statistical interpretation on day 35 should be verified. The CT value for (F+P) is different in the text (41.41 ± 0.03) when compared to the value listed in Table 4 (41.11 ± 0.03). Which value is correct? Based on the letters attributed for the means of CT by the Tukey’s test (Table 4), overall CT values in the (F+P) differ statically (P<0.05) from the control group.

Presentation

Overall score 4.3 out of 5
Is the article written in clear and proper English? (30%)
5 out of 5
Is the data presented in the most useful manner? (40%)
4 out of 5
Does the paper cite relevant and related articles appropriately? (30%)
4 out of 5

Context

Overall score 5 out of 5
Does the title suitably represent the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the abstract correctly embody the content of the article? (25%)
5 out of 5
Does the introduction give appropriate context? (25%)
5 out of 5
Is the objective of the experiment clearly defined? (25%)
5 out of 5

Analysis

Overall score 4.6 out of 5
Does the discussion adequately interpret the results presented? (40%)
4 out of 5
Is the conclusion consistent with the results and discussion? (40%)
5 out of 5
Are the limitations of the experiment as well as the contributions of the experiment clearly outlined? (20%)
5 out of 5