Advances in Microbiology
Vol.06 No.04(2016), Article ID:65592,15 pages

Synbiotic as Feed Additives Relating to Animal Health and Performance

Hozan Jalil Hamasalim

Department of Animal Production, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani, Iraq

Copyright © 2016 by author and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).

Received 26 February 2016; accepted 16 April 2016; published 19 April 2016


According to the increasing of human population in the world, it reached about seven billion people and it continuously increased. In this background, the food source in both animal and plant origin must be increased accordingly. For these we must use and add some feed additives such as antibiotic, probiotic, prebiotic, postbiotic and synbiotic for the animal feed to increase production (meat, egg, milk and fish) and improve health. In early cases, probiotic as mono or mixed beneficial live microorganism was used as feed additive that plays a significant role in several health conditions and performances. In another way, the scientists use some ingredients indigestible with carbohydrates origin, especially oligosaccharides as a source of energy for beneficial microorganisms in the body which were called prebiotic, and it is indigestible fermented food substrates that stimulate the growth, composition and activity of microorganisms in gastrointestinal and improve host. Most of the scientists urged to use all the above in such way that have more benefits in animal health and performance which were therefore called synbiotic, that was a combination between probiotic and prebiotic which beneficially had significant effects on the host by improving the survival and implantation of live microbial dietary supplements in the gastrointestinal tract, and thus improving animal health and performance. So, it was proposed that the synbiotic in this research increased beneficial microorganisms in the gastrointestinal tract and improved intestinal architect, and then promoted intestine environment. Consequently, it can improve blood indices, and especially decrease bad cholesterol (Low-density lipoprotein), decrease harmful microorganisms and toxins. However, it can also improve ingredient product, increase mineral absorption and nutrient. In conclusion, it can improve animal health and performance.


Synbiotic, Animal, Intestinal Tract, Health and Performance

1. Introduction

People of the world have increased from 3 billion in 1959 to more than 7 billion in March 2012. As the world’s people grow, hunger persists in many locations and almost 1 billion people are reported to be malnourished [1] . By 2050, farmers will need to double crop production to meet the demand. In this background, the world needs food products with annual growth of 2.5% for the next 10 years [2] . Many scientists and nutrition specialists believe that animal production can play a role in increasing food production. A huge amount of antibiotics have been used to control diseases, improve performances and increase production in livestock. Additionally, the most commonly used alternatives to antibiotics have been probiotic, prebiotic, postbiotic and synbiotic.

Probiotic is defined as live microbial feed additive that beneficially affects the host animal by improving the intestinal microbial balance [3] - [6] . Also, prebiotic is “indigestible fermented diet substrates that selectively stimulate the composition, growth and activity of microflora in gastrointestinal tract” [7] [8] . Synbiotics refer to nutritional supplements combining probiotic and prebiotic in a form of synergism, hence, synbiotic can enhance their isolated beneficial effects. When two nutritional ingredients or supplements are given together, the resulting positive effect generally follows one of the three patterns: potentiation, synergism and additivity [9] [10] . Many studies have evaluated the effects of different synbiotic preparations [11] [12] . Further, Synbiotic affects the host by improving the survival and establishment of live microbial dietary supplements in the gastrointestinal tract by selectively stimulating the growth by activating the metabolism of one or a limited number of health promoting microorganisms and thus improving the host [7] [10] [13] . Furthermore, synbiotic can exert beneficial effects in the gastrointestinal tract as a result of alteration in whole body, feed consumption, and absorption of nutrient and beneficial changes in intestinal architecture [14] . In fact, intestinal microorganisms play an important role in the immunological, physiological, nutritional and protective functions of the host [15] and can be influenced by the food [16] . The most alternative additives for livestock and poultry feed include probiotic, prebiotic and synbiotic [17] . Though, the use of synbiotics may possibly produce greater benefits rather than the application of individual portions [18] .

Synbiotics provide more additive benefits in growth performance, feed conversion ratio, hematological and biochemical parameters than probiotic and prebiotic individual use of these additives [19] . Moreover, synbiotic could increase the digestibility and availability of many nutrient elements such as, vitamins, mineral elements and proteins [20] . After all, limited data are available regarding the application of synbiotic [21] - [24] .

The research questions that were asked in this review were as follows: Is the feeding of synbiotic supplement important while used in applied research and commerce? Does the use of synbiotic supplement in animal lead to improved intestinal microbiota and prevent pathogen? Does the use of synbiotic in animal benefit the performance and enhance blood picture and immunity? Hence, the aim of this review study is to update our information regarding the influences of synbiotic. This review focuses on the collection of the most scientific evidences concerning the aspects of synbiotic and its effect on animal growth, production and health, including the immune system, digestive tract, metabolic, intestinal organ and blood.

2. Gut Microflora

The intestinal microbiota (a term that has now replaced the old denomination of “microflora” [25] - [27] is an ecosystem shaped by a diversity of ecological niches, made of several bacterial species and a very large amount of strains [27] [28] . Also, intestine is populated by 100 trillions of microorganisms (called “microbiota”) that are important for health [29] [30] . While, the transition from soil and plants to the animal gut, has three areas of genomic adaptation [31] . The intestine’s normal microflora is a metabolically active but as yet unexplored area of host defense [32] [33] . Major functions of the gut microbiota include metabolic activities that result in salvage of energy and absorbable nutrients, trophic effects on the intestinal epithelium and protection of the host against invasion by harmful microorganism [34] [35] . The gastrointestinal tract which places a huge microbial ecosystem; the colon alone is estimated to contain over seventy percentage of all the microbes in the body [36] [37] . The gut microbiota or microflora has an important role in disease and well-being [38] . Commensal intestinal flora plays an essential role in the maintenance of the host health. However, reports of shifts in the composition of intestinal microbiota with age, with increased numbers of bacteria (mainly Enterobacter) and a decrease in the number of beneficial organisms such as Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria [39] . These changes, along with a general decrease in species diversity in most bacterial groups, and changes to diet and digestive physiology such as intestinal transit time, may result in increased putrefaction in the colon and a greater susceptibility to infection and disease [40] . The three major units of the gastrointestinal tract are the stomach, the small intestine, and the large intestine. Every unit has its own distinct microbiota [41] [42] . The amount and composition of microbial species differs along the digestive tract. Families, phyla and genera of the microbiota enriched in each particular niche are listed. Main bacterial phyla are represented in the mammalian gut microbiota; Streptococcus, Lactobscilus, Bacteroides, Clostridium, Streptococci, Lactobacilli, Eubacterium, Peptococcus, Streptococcus Fusobacterium and Bifidobacterium [43] .

3. Probiotic

Probiotic was first defined by Metchnikoff in 1908 based on his observations on the longevity of individuals who lived in a certain part of Bulgaria and which he attributed to their ingestion, on a regular basis, of a fermented milk product [44] [45] . Which contain of rod-shaped bacteria (Lactobacillus spp). Therefore, these bacteria affect the gut microflora positively and reduction the microbial toxic activity in intestine [46] - [49] . The expression “probiotic” comes from the Greek word “pro bios” which means “for life” as different to “antibiotics” which means “against life”. The history of probiotic began with the consumption of fermented diets by Greek and Romans [46] . Probiotic is defined as mono or mixed cultures of “live microorganisms which, when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host” [43] [50] [51] . A new description by the American Academy of Pediatric Committee on Nutrition states that probiotic is “microorganisms that generate small molecular metabolic by-products that exert beneficial regulatory effect on host biological functions and may function as immunomodulators” [52] . Probiotic is mainly lactic acid creating bacilli, mostly Lactobacilli (L. acidophilus DDS-1, Lactobacillus casei (L. casei), L. lactis, L. rhamnosus, L. salviarius) and Bifi dobacteria (B. longum, B. infantis, B. bifi dum), and the yeasts Sacharomyces boulardii (Brewer’s yeast) and Sacharomyces cervisiae (Baker’s yeast) [53] . Probiotic may play a beneficial role in several health conditions and performance, including Intestinal microbial composition, therapeutic effects, metabolic effects and immunomodulation [43] [54] [55] . The overall performance and well-being benefits of probiotic microorganisms are repre-sented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. General benefits of probiotic on health and performance.

4. Prebiotic

The word prebiotic was first used by Gibson and Roberfroid in 1995 [7] . Dietary fiber is the most generally utilized prebiotic [7] [8] . Also, Prebiotic is “indigestible fermented diet substrates that selectively stimulate the composition, growth, and activity of microflora in gastrointestinal tract and thus improve hosts’ health” [56] - [58] . Prebiotic carbohydrates are found naturally in such fruit and vegetables tomatoes, Jerusalem artichoke, as oatmeal, bananas, flaxseed, asparagus, barley, berries, garlic, wheat, onions and chicory, greens and legumes [59] . It is considered important to determine the definite health bonuses associated with prebiotic intake in people and their mechanisms of action [60] [61] . Prebiotic, such as fructooligosaccharides can be used as a dietary supplement for animals like, dogs and cats to maintain gastrointestinal well-being [62] . Prebiotic is not broken down by gastric enzymes, but pass unaltered into the large intestine, where they are then selectively fermented, creating beneficial effects [63] [64] . A study has shown that administration of prebiotic also results in increased numbers of beneficial intestinal flora (especially Bifidobacteria) [65] [66] . Probiotic, prebiotic and synbiotic administration have been documented to increase intestinal levels of beneficial Bifidobacteria, Enterocooci and Lactobacilli, with reduced levels of Enterobacter [67] [68] . Prebiotic have been demonstrated to increase mineral absorption, chiefly that of magnesium and calcium [69] [70] . The main prebiotic functions are shown in Figure 2.

5. Synbiotic

Synbiotic refers to nutritional supplements combining prebiotic and probiotic and in a form of synergism. The main aim for using a synbiotic is that a true probiotic, without its prebiotic food, does not survive well in the digestive system. Synbiotic refers to nutritional supplements combining Probiotic and Prebiotic that are thought to act together; i.e. synergism. It has been suggested that a combination of a probiotic and a prebiotic, i.e. Synbiotics, might be more effect than either a probiotic or prebiotic alone [71] - [75] . Furthermore, synbiotic is a mixture of probiotic and prebiotic which beneficially affect the host by improving the survival and the implantation of live microorganisms dietary supplements in the gastrointestinal tract, and thus improving host health [76] . The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) recommend that the word “synbiotic” be used only if the net health benefit is synergistic [77] . The first attempts should be to combine Probiotic and Prebiotic which have demonstrated individual benefits to determine if there are additive effects, alternatively, a more structured approach would be to determine the specific properties that a prebiotic requires to be beneficial to the probiotic and select the prebiotic accordingly [78] . Synbiotic is designed not only to present beneficial microorganisms populations, but also to promote proliferation of autochthonous-specific strains in the intestinal tract [79] . Studies on the effects of synbiotic on metabolic health still are limited. It is worth mentioning that the health effect will likely depend on the synbiotic combination. Therefore, synbiotics seem promising for the modulation of the gut microbiota composition [80] .

Figure 2. The mechanism action of prebiotic.

6. Probiotic, Prebiotic and Synbiotic as Compared with Each Other

Unlike probiotic, prebiotic do not add to an existing colony of bacteria, rather they provide nourishment for existing flora, allowing the colony to grow naturally and flourish. As probiotic is principally active in the small intestine and prebiotic is only effective in the large intestine, the combination of the two may give a synergistic influence. Probiotic is a live microbial food ingredient which is beneficial to host [3] [76] [81] - [83] while prebiotic is a non-digestible food ingredient which beneficially affects the host by selectively stimulating the growth and activity of one or a limited number of microorganisms in the colon having the potential to improve host well-being [76] [84] [85] nevertheless, synbiotic is a mixture of probiotic and prebiotic which beneficially affect the host and thus improving host health and well-being [74] [76] [86] . Examples of list of probiotic, prebiotic and synbiotic applied or studied for application in animal feed are included in Table 1.

7. Action Mechanism of Synbiotic

The gastrointestinal tract has a compound community of microbiota that provides benefits to its host in numerous different ways, including drug metabolism, nutrient production, and protection against pathogens, detoxification and regulation of the immune system. Animal studies have demonstrated that changes in these gut microbial communities can cause immune dysregulation; improve growth and influence on performance and there are information that support the use of probiotic and prebiotic and especially synbiotic. The synbiotic concepts about mechanism of action: altering the composition of intestinal microbiota by viable benefit organism and non-absorbable organism substrates are shown in Figure 3.

8. Synbiotic and Intestinal Flora

The gastrointestinal tract is an important immune organ and the largest defense barrier protecting the host from toxins, pathogens and subsequent inflammation while allowing commensal microorganisms to grow [87] . Also, the intestinal tract is a host to a vast ecology of microbes [88] . The notion of modulating bacterial activities directed towards improving gut microbial function has a long history [89] . The importance of the natural gut microflora for decreasing diseases in animals has long been recognized and it is now apparent that the composition of the microflora plays a crucial role both in digestion and in resistance to diseases [90] [91] . When, probiotic and prebiotic are administered at the same time, the combination is called Synbiotic. The prebiotic in the synbiotic mixture improves the survival of the probiotic microorganisms in the intestinal tract, and stimulates the activity of the host’s endogenous bacteria [79] [92] [93] . Then, supplemental probiotic from anaerobic microflora with prebiotic improved crude protein and dry matter digestibility as well as reducing noxious gas emission and enter pathogenic bacteria in early-weaning pigs [94] .

Smith and Jones [95] reported that supplemental synbiotic increased the production of lactate and antibody, altered intestinal bacteria colonies and reduced harmful bacteria growth in animals. In addition, synbiotic is also

Table 1. Examples of list of probiotic, prebiotic and synbiotic applied or studied for application in animal feed.

Figure 3. The mechanism action of synbiotic.

considered to reduction harmful bacteria counts and aid the adhesion of beneficial bacteria through the decrease of intestinal pH [96] . Also, Synbiotic supplementation maintaining populations of unprofitable or potential pathogens (E. coli) at relatively low levels (numerically) in the cecal digesta and small intestinal [97] . Further, synbiotic reduced Escherichia coli and total coliform populations in the intestines of broiler chickens. On the contrary, concentrations of the synbiotic higher than the suggested levels in the diet increased the lactic acid bacteria population in the gut of broiler chickens [98] . Furthermore, the addition of synbiotic increased the villus height/crypt depth ratio and villus height in ileum. However, the ileal crypt depth was reduced by dietary supplementation of synbiotic compared with control of broiler Chickens [14] .

9. Synbiotic and Performance

Supplemental antibiotic in animal feed improve feed efficiency and growth performance [99] . However, supplemental antibiotic increases the hazard of antibiotic residues and increases bacterial resistance [100] , making their use in animal production harmful to human health. Recently, the most commonly used replacements to antibiotic have been synbiotic. Supplemental synbiotic can be expected to improve swine production by improving the feeding environment of early weaning pigs [94] . Further, Supplemental synbiotic with ficus-indica var. saboten could decrease sulfide gas emissions and ammonia of finishing pigs [101] . Synbiotic had significant effect on growth performance in Danio rerio [102] . Conversely, supplemental probiotic from anaerobic microflora with prebiotic did not affect performance in Weaning Pigs [94] . Likewise, the results clarify that using synbiotic in sheep diet did not influence on performance traits such as feed conversion rate, daily gain and dry matter intake. However, Digestibility of dry matter, crude protein and organic matter were not affected with synbiotic [103] . Combination of mannan oligosaccharides and Bacillus spp. as synbiotic in European lobster larvae (Hommarus gammarus L.) [104] , combination of mannan oligosaccharides and Enterococus faecalis as synbiotic in rainbow trout (Oncorhyncchus mykiss) [21] and combination of Bacillus subtilis and fructooligosaccharides as synbiotic in yellow croaker, Larimichtys crocea [22] , synbiotic added to feed was not able to increase the growth and survival rate in grass carp but the best survival rate was obtained in feed added synbiotic [10] .

Application of synbiotic treatment combination of probiotic and prebiotic, showed improvement of digestive enzyme activity (lipase, protease and amylase) of Humpback Grouper (Cromileptes altivelis) [105] . Common carp fed dietary synbiotic showed better digestive enzyme activities and significantly higher trypsin and chymotrypsin activities compared with the control treatment [106] . Synbiotic could significantly improve growth parameters (length gain, specific growth rate, percentage weight gain and weight gain) but did not display any effect on survival rate of common carp [106] . Administration of synbiotic (E. faecalis and MOS/PHB) in rainbow trout for periods not affects the survival rate of fish [21] . Japanese flounder feeding B. clausii and MOS/FOS, in which fish maintained active ingestion, exhibited proper growth and survived for all time [107] . In yellow croaker and cobia, administration of B. subtillis/FOS or B. subtillis/chitosan respectively, not affects the survival rate, with no alterations among different dietary treatments [22] [108] . The study of Mehrabi et al. showed that after 60 days groups fed diets containing different levels of synbiotics (0.5, 1.0 and 1.5) improved body weight gain about 50, 59 and 53%, respectively, in comparison with the control group [109] . Body composition has been investigated by Rodriguez-Estrada [21] , Ye [107] and Mehrabi [109] . First of these studies, reported no significant differences in crude ash, moisture, crude proteins and crude lipids contents among all the experimental groups. Contrary to our finding, Jung [110] and Erdogan [111] reported that the diet supplemented with synbiotic had no effect on feed intake, body weight, feed conversion efficiency and weight gain, of broilers. The final body weight, feed conversion efciency, weight gain were significantly higher in synbiotic supplemented broilers compared with the control group [97] . Body weight gain was increased significantly in birds’ supplemented synbiotic compared with control and probiotic treated group [112] . The results showed that 1 g/kg synbiotic inclusion in the diet significantly improved body weight and feed conversion ratio of the ostrich chicks compared to control group [113] . Also, synbiotic substantially increased blood glucose but reduced cholesterol while Serum total protein and uric acid also decreased in the all dietary levels of synbiotic compared to control group of the ostrich chicks. Synbiotic has the ability to reduction the concentration of cholesteryl esters CE in LDL-cholesterol [114] . Prebiotic that present in the synbiotic mixture has hypocholesterolemic effects thereby decreasing the absorption of lipids in the intestine through binding bile acids, increasing cholesterol elimination and hepatic synthesis of new bile acid [115] . Finally, supplemental Aspergillus oryzae, one kind of prebiotic, increased growth performance and nitrogen retention in pigs, while supplemental Fermacto 500® from Aspergillus oryzae culture increased the digestibility of protein and fat in pigs [116] .

10. Synbiotic Hematological and Biochemical Parameters

Among the hematological and biochemical parameters evaluated in animal after treatments with synbiotic find triglyceride, cholesterol, high-density protein cholesterol, low-density protein cholesterol, albumin, globulin, total serum protein, glucose and hematocrit. Accordingly, a positive contact of prebiotic and probiotic was found concerning the number of leukogram and white blood cells while supplements to feed rations for ewes [117] . Also, Lambs fed on diet contain probiotic and prebiotic plasma was significant decrease of the level of total cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol fraction increase were observed [117] . But, supplementation of synbiotic had no influence on blood urea nitrogen, glucose and albumin concentrations in sheep [103] . Application of synbiotic treatment showed improvement of biochemical plasma (glucose and triglyceride) and haematology parameter (hematocrit, haemoglobin and phagocytic activity) of Humpback Grouper (Cromileptes altivelis) [105] . Rodriguez-Estrada and colleagues [21] found synbiotic influence on hematocrit value and significant higher hematocrit value was recorder in the feed added feed additives while compare control group. Serum biochemical parameters evaluated by Ye et al. [107] , reported the following results: The triglyceride level was lower or tended to be lower in fish fed the MOS, FOS and/or B. clausii-containing diets as opposed to the control diet. Dietary administration of commercial synbiotic in rainbow trout resulted in an increase of total serum protein content but other recorded parameters such as albumin/globulin ratio and triglycerides in fish fed with different levels of synbiotic did not show any significant difference in comparison with that from the control group at the end of the experiment [109] . In addition, diets containing synbiotic had no significant effect on total serum protein [118] [119] . Ashayerizadeh [120] and Mokhtari [121] found enhanced serum cholesterol level in broiler chickens in response to synbiotics supplementation and Shams [122] and Sharifi [123] also reported better hematological and cholesterol picture in broiler chickens when synbiotic was given in the diet. Liong and Shah [124] presented that the use of synbiotic consumption in broilers regulates the concentration of the organic acids and decrease cholesterol levels. Also, Sahin et al. [125] reported that adding a synbiotic supplements in the diet had a significant effect on blood parameters, including total serum protein and cholesterol. Uric acid, creatinine, Packed cell volume and urea concentration were increased significantly in birds’ supplemented synbiotic compared with control group [112] .

11. Synbiotic and Health

The gut-associated lymphoid tissue and gut microbiota are fundamental components of the both digestive and immune system function and homeostasis. Microbes of the GIT can be generally separated into potentially pathogenic or beneficial groups. Harmful microorganisms may be involved in localized or systemic infections, toxin formation, and intestinal putrefaction. Some intestinal organisms may have useful effects such as vitamin production, stimulation of the immune system through nonpathogenic mechanisms, and inhibition of the growth and establishment of harmful microbial groups [126] . Antimicrobial action of Probiotic (Bifidobacterium sp), Prebiotics (chicory roots) and Inulin and synbiotic: (Bifidobacterium sp + chicory) and (Bifidobacterium sp + Inulin) against Pathogenic bacteria was tested by using agar diffusion assay [127] . The synergistic inhibitory influence of Synbiotic (Bifidobacterium sp + inulin) and (Bifidobacterium sp + chicory) on Pathogenic bacteria was higher than the effect of Bifidobacterium sp alone, chicory alone and inulin alone [128] . The microbiota of the GIT of mammals can be considered a metabolically active organ with its wide biodiversity in term of species and the high number of cells [129] - [131] . The positive effects of both probiotic and prebiotic on immune system in different animal strains have been confirmed [91] [132] [133] . Supplementation of synbiotic had influence blood metabolites, both non-esterifies fatty acids and total immunoglobulin of in sheep [103] . Lysozyme activity: Lysozyme is one of the significant bactericidal enzymes of innate immunity, and constitutes an essential defense mechanism against pathogens in fish [134] . As synbiotic therapy may offer a suitable alternative for controlling pathogens, the effectiveness of synbiotic in terms of protection against infectious agents could be evaluated by a challenge test. To date, challenge test carried out in fish following to symbiotic administration, have employed Vibrio sp species as pathogens, specifically V. anguillarum and V. harveyi [100] [107] [108] . Today, specific health effects are being investigated and documented, including alleviation of chronic intestinal inflammatory diseases [135] , and prevention and treatment of pathogen induced diarrhea [136] , urogenital infections [137] , and atopic diseases [138] . The combination of a probiotic and prebiotic as single administration, is called synbiotic which is characterized by antimicrobial, anticarcinogenic, immune stimulating actions and antiallergic. It also improves the absorption of minerals, protects from diarrhea and optimizes nutrient digestion processes [139] . Supplemental synbiotic from Lactobacillus sp reduced diarrhea, as well as increased feed efficiency and performance in initial weaning pigs [140] .

12. Conclusion and Future Perspective

From the research, we could conclude that the intestine was a variable niche of beneficial and harmful microorganisms. And in a different way they benefit or harm their host. The gastrointestinal tract has a compound community of microbiota that provides benefits to its host in many different methods, including nutrient production, protection against pathogens, detoxification, drug metabolism and regulation of the immune system. Animal studies have demonstrated changes in these gut microbial communities, and there are documents funding the use of probiotic, prebiotic and synbiotic. Though, the practice of synbiotic may possibly produce greater benefits rather than the application of individual portions. In recent years, synbiotic has become an integral part of the animal practices for improving the growth, enhancing blood picture, stimulating intestinal architecture, improving performance and competing against the pathogenic microbes. But limited information is available regarding the application of synbiotic in animal science. Experts recommend further research to substantiate preventive and therapeutic health benefits, mechanism of action, optimal intake, duration of treatment and selection of the best synbiotic (specific probiotic strains and type of prebiotic) for a targeted outcome in agriculture’s animals.

Cite this paper

Hozan Jalil Hamasalim, (2016) Synbiotic as Feed Additives Relating to Animal Health and Performance. Advances in Microbiology,06,288-302. doi: 10.4236/aim.2016.64028


  1. 1. Alexander, R. (2013) Does a Child Die of Hunger Every 10 Seconds? BBC News Magazine, Accessed 15 October 2013.

  2. 2. Mack, M. (2009) Role of Technology Is Crucial in Improving Food Security. Syngenta CEO in USDA Outlook Forum, Washington DC and Syngenta International AG, Basel.

  3. 3. Fuller, R. (1989) A Review: Probiotics in Man and Animals. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 66, 365-378.

  4. 4. Kelly, D. (1998) Probiotics in Young and Newborn Animals. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences, 7, 15-23.

  5. 5. Ko, S.Y. and Yang, C.J. (2008) Effect of Green Tea Probiotics on the Growth Performance, Meat Quality and Immune Response in Finishing Pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 21, 1339-1347.

  6. 6. Ko, S.Y., Bae, I.H., Yee, S.T., Lee, S.S., Uuganbayar, D.J., Oh, I. and Yang, C.J. (2008) Comparison of the Effect of Green Tea By-Product and Green Tea Probiotics on the Growth Performance, Meat Quality, and Immune Response of Finishing Pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 21, 1486-1494.

  7. 7. Gibson, G.R. and Roberfroid, M.B. (1995) Dietary Modulation of the Human Colonic Microbiota: Introducing the Concept of Prebiotics. Journal of Nutrition, 125, 1401-1412.

  8. 8. Hamasalim, H.J. (2015) Oligosaccharides as Prebiotic. Health Journal, 1, 4-9.

  9. 9. Chou, T.-C., Rideout, D., Chou, J. and Bertino, J.R. (1991) Chemotherapeutic Synergism, Potentiation and Antagonism. In: Dulbecco, R., Ed., Encyclopedia of Human Biology, Vol. 2, Academic Press, San Diego, 371-379.

  10. 10. Nekoubin, H. and Sudagar, M. (2012) Assessment of the Effects of Synbiotic (Biomin Imbo) via Supplementation with Artificial Diet (with Different Protein Levels) on Growth Performance and Survival Rate in Grass Carp (Ctenopharyngodon Idella). World Journal of Zoology, 7, 236-240.

  11. 11. Haghighi, H.R., Gong, J., Gyles, C.L., Hayes, M.A., Sanei, B., Parvizi, P., Gisavi, H., Chambers, J.R. and Sharif, S. (2005) Modulation of Antibody-Mediate Immune Response by Probiotics in Chicken. Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology, 12, 1387-1392.

  12. 12. Metzler, B., Bauer, E. and Mosenthin, R. (2005) Microflora Management in the Gastrointestinal Tract of Piglets. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 18, 1353-1362.

  13. 13. Awad, W.A., Gharee, K. and Böhm, J. (2011) Evaluation of the Chicory Inulin Efficacy on Ameliorating the Intestinal Morphology and Modulating the Intestinal Electrophysiological Properties in Broiler Chickens. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 95, 65-72.

  14. 14. Awad, W., Ghareeb, K. and Böhm, J. (2008) Intestinal Structure and Function of Broiler Chickens on Diets Supplemented with a Synbiotic Containing Enterococcus faecium and Oligosaccharides. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 9, 2205-2216.

  15. 15. Vispo, C. and Karasov, W.H. (1997) The Interaction of Avian Gut Microbes and Their Host: An Exclusive Symbiosis. In: Mackie, R.J., White, B.A. and Issacson, R.E., Eds., Gastrointestinal Microbiology: Gastrointestinal Microbes and Host Interactions, Chapman and Hall, New York, 116-155.

  16. 16. Rehman, H., Vahjen, W., Awad, W.A. and Zentek, J. (2007) Indigenous Bacteria and Bacterial Metabolic Products in the Gastrointestinal Tract of Broilers. Archives of Animal Nutrition, 61, 319-335.

  17. 17. Doley, S., Gupta, J.J. and Reddy, P.B. (2009) Effect of Supplementation of Ginger, Garlic and Turmeric in Broiler Chicken. Indian Veterinary Journal, 86, 644-645.

  18. 18. Merrifield, D.L., Dimitroglou, A., Foey, A., Davies, S.J., Baker, R.T.M. and Bogwald, J. (2010) The Current Status and Future Focus of Probiotic and Prebiotic Applications for Salmonids. Aquaculture, 302, 1-18.

  19. 19. Abdel-Fattah, F.A.I. and Fararh, K.M. (2009) Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Probiotic, Prebiotic and Synbiotic on Performance, Carcass Characteristics, Blood Picture and Some Biochemical Parameters in Broiler Chickens. Benha Veterinary Medical Journal, 20, 9-23.

  20. 20. Naji, S.A.H., Al-kassie, G.A., Al-Hadithi, M.F., Al-Hillali, A.H. and Jameel, Y.J. (2009) Poultry Health Management. Brochure No. 27. Iraqi Poultry Producer Association. (In Arabic)

  21. 21. Rodriguez-Estrada, U., Satoh, S., Haga, Y., Fushimi, H. and Sweetman, J. (2009) Effect of Single and Combined Supplementation of Enterococcus faecalis, Mannan Oligosaccharide and Polyhydrobutyric Acid on Growth Performance and Immune Response of Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. Aquaculture Science, 57, 609-617.

  22. 22. Ai, Q., Xu, H., Mai, K., Xu, W., Wang, J. and Zhang, W. (2011) Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Bacillus subtilis and Fructooligosaccharide on Growth Performance, Survival, Non-Specific Immune Response and Disease Resistance of Juvenile Large Yellow Croaker, Larimichthys crocea. Aquaculture, 317, 155-161.

  23. 23. Zhang, Q., Tan, B., Mai, K., Zhang, W., Ma, H. and Ai, Q. (2011) Dietary Administration of Bacillus (B. licheniformis and B. subtilis) and Isomaltooligosaccharide Influences the Intestinal Microflora, Immunological Parameters and Resistance against Vibrio alginolyticus in Shrimp, Penaeus japonicus (Decapoda: Penaeidae). Aquaculture Research, 42, 943-952.

  24. 24. Daniels, C., Merrifield, D., Boothroyd, D., Davies, S., Factor, J. and Arnold, K. (2010) Effect of Dietary Bacillus spp. and Mannan Oligosaccharides (MOS) on European Lobster (Homarus gammarus L.) Larvae Growth Performance, Gut Morphology and Gut Microbiota. Aquaculture, 304, 49-57.

  25. 25. Quigley, E.M. (2010) Prebiotics and Probiotics; Modifying and Mining the Microbiota. Pharmacological Research, 61, 213-218.

  26. 26. Laparra, J.M. and Sanz, Y. (2010) Interactions of Gut Microbiota with Functional Food Components and Nutraceuticals. Pharmacological Research, 61, 219-225.

  27. 27. Aureli, P., Capursob, L., Castellazzi, A.M., Clerici, M., Giovanninie, M., Morellif, L., Poli, A., et al. (2011) Probiotics and Health: An Evidence-Based Review. Pharmacological Research, 63, 366-376.

  28. 28. Jones, B.V. and Marchesi, J.R. (2007) Accessing the Mobile Metagenome of the Human Gut Microbiota. Molecular BioSystems, 3, 749-758.

  29. 29. Hooper, L.V. and Macpherson, A.J. (2010) Immune Adaptations That Maintain Homeostasis with the Intestinal Microbiota. Nature Reviews Immunology, 10, 159-169.

  30. 30. Kamada, N., Seo, S.U., Chen, G.Y. and Nú&ntildeez, G. (2013) Role of the Gut Microbiota in Immunity and Inflammatory Disease. Nature Reviews Immunology, 13, 321-335.

  31. 31. Lebeer, S., Vanderleyden, J. and De Keersmaecker, S.C. (2008) Genes and Molecules of Lactobacilli Supporting Probiotic Action. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 72, 28-764.

  32. 32. Berg, R.D. (1996) The Indigenous Gastrointestinal Microflora. Trends in Microbiology, 4, 430-435.

  33. 33. Cummings, J.H., Gibson, G.R. and Macfarlane, G.T. (1989) Quantitative Estimates of Fermentation in the Hind Gut of Man. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. Supplementum, 86, 76-82.

  34. 34. Guarner, F. and Malagelada, J.R. (2003) Gut Flora in Health and Disease. Lancet, 361, 512-519.

  35. 35. Backhed, F., Ding, H., Wang, T., Hooper, L.V., Koh, G.Y., Nagy, A., et al. (2004) The Gut Microbiota as an Environmental Factor That Regulates Fat Storage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101, 15718-15723.

  36. 36. Ley, R.E., Peterson, D.A. and Gordon, J.I. (2006) Ecological and Evolutionary Forces Shaping Microbial Diversity in the Human Intestine. Cell, 124, 837-848.

  37. 37. Whitman, W.B., Coleman, D.C. and Wiebe, W.J. (1998) Prokaryotes: The Unseen Majority. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 95, 6578-6583.

  38. 38. Vyas, U. and Ranganathan, N. (2012) Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics: Gut and Beyond. Gastroenterology Research and Practice, 2012, Article ID: 872716.

  39. 39. H&eacutebuterne, X. (2003) Gut Changes Attributed to Ageing: Effects on Intestinal Microflora. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care, 6, 49-54.

  40. 40. Woodmansey, E.J. (2007) Intestinal Bacteria and Ageing. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 102, 1178-1186.

  41. 41. Dethlefsen, L., Eckburg, P.B., Bik, E.M. and Relman, D.A. (2006) Assembly of the Human Intestinal Microbiota. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 21, 517-523.

  42. 42. Savage, D. (1977) Microbiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract. Annual Review of Microbiology, 31, 107-133.

  43. 43. Hamasalim, H.J. (2015) The Impact of Some Widely Probiotic (Iraqi Probiotic) on Health and Performance. Journal of Biosciences and Medicines, 3, 25-36.

  44. 44. Chauhan, S.V. and Chorawala, M.R. (2012) Probiotics, Prebiotics and Synbiotics. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, 3, 711-726.

  45. 45. Eamonn, M. and Quigley, M. (2010) Prebiotics and Probiotics; Modifying and Mining the Microbiota. Pharmacological Research, 61, 213-218.

  46. 46. Gismondo, M.R., Drago, L. and Lombardi, A. (1999) Review of Probiotics Available to Modify Gastrointestinal Flora. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 12, 287-292.

  47. 47. Guarner, F., Perdigon, G., Corthier, G., Salminen, S., Koletzko, B. and Morelli, L. (2005) Should Yoghurt Cultures Be Considered Probiotic? British Journal of Nutrition, 93, 783-786.

  48. 48. Akir, I.C. (2003) Determination of Some Probiotic Properties on Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria. PhD Thesis, Ankara University, Ankara.

  49. 49. Chuayana Jr., E.L., Ponce, C.V., Rivera, M.R.B. and Cabrera, E.C. (2003) Antimicrobial Activity of Probiotics from Milk Products. The Philippine Journal of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 32, 71-74.

  50. 50. Sekhon, B.S. and Jairath, S. (2010) Prebiotics, Probiotics and Synbiotics: An Overview. Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, 1, 13-36.

  51. 51. FAO and WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization Report) (2007) Probiotic.

  52. 52. Hickey, L., Jacobs, S.E. and Garland, S.M. (2012) Probiotics in Neonatology. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 48, 777-783.

  53. 53. Kumar, A.V. (2013) Probiotics: Nature’s Medicine. International Journal of Nutrition, Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases, 3, 219-228.

  54. 54. Brown, A.C. and Valiere, A. (2004) Probiotics and Medical Nutrition Therapy. Nutrition in Clinical Care, 7, 56-68.

  55. 55. Anandharaj, M., Sivasankari, B. and Rani, R.P. (2014) Effects of Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics on Hypercholesterolemia: A Review. Chinese Journal of Biology, 2014, Article ID: 7572754.

  56. 56. Roberfroid, M.B. (2000) Prebiotics and Probiotics: Are They Functional Foods? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 71, 1682S-1687S.

  57. 57. Gibson, G.R., Beatty, E.R., Wang, X. and Cummings, J.H. (1995) Selective Stimulation of Bifidobacteria in the Human Colon by Oligofructose and Inulin. Gastroenterology, 108, 975-982.

  58. 58. Patel, P.J., Singh, S.K., Panaich, S. and Cardozo, L. (2012) The Aging Gut and the Role of Prebiotics, Probiotics, and Synbiotics: A Review. Journal of Clinical Gerontology & Geriatrics, 5, 3-6.

  59. 59. Crittenden, R. and Payne, M.J. (2008) Nutrition News. Facts and Functions of Prebiotics, Probiotics and Synbiotics. May 2008, pp. 1-2. Department of Human Nutrition, K-State Research and Extension, Kansas State University; Prebiotics. In: Lee, Y.K. and Salminen, S., Eds., Handbook of Probiotics and Prebiotics, 2nd Edition, Chap. 4, Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken, 535-582.

  60. 60. Hamasalim, H.J. (2012) Inulin. Zanisti Sardam, 47, 175-178.

  61. 61. Venter, C.S. (2007) Prebiotics: An Update. Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences, 35, 17-25.

  62. 62. Lynn, S.S. (2010) Why “Biotics”? Using Prebiotics and Probiotics in Your Practice. Practical Applications for Achieving Gastintestinal Wellness Conference Proceeding 2010, Supplement to Compendium: Continuing Education for Veterinarians.

  63. 63. Williams, N.T. (2010) Probiotics. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 67, 449-458.

  64. 64. Hamasalim, H.J. (2009) The Effect of Different Levels of Feeding on Karadi Lambs Response to Local Iraqi Probiotics. Master’s Thesis, University of Sulaimani, Sulaimani.

  65. 65. Vulevic, J., Drakoularakou, A., Yaqoob, P., Tzortzis, G., Gibson, G.R. (2008) Modulation of the Fecal Microflora Profile and Immune Function by a Novel Transgalactooligosaccharide Mixture (B-GOS) in Healthy Elderly Volunteers. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 88, 1438-1446.

  66. 66. Schiffrin, E.J., Kumar, V.B., Brown, C., Hager, C., Van’t Hof, M.A., Morley, J.E., et al. (2007) Systemic Inflammatory Markers in Older Persons: The Effect of Oral Nutritional Supplementation with Prebiotics. The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 11, 475-479.

  67. 67. Ahmed, M., Prasad, J., Gill, H., Stevenson, L. and Gopal, P. (2007) Impact of Consumption of Different Levels of Bifidobacterium lactis HN019 on the Intestinal Microflora of Elderly Human Subjects. The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 11, 26-31.

  68. 68. Bartosch, S., Woodmansey, E.J., Paterson, J.C., McMurdo, M.E. and Macfarlane, G.T. (2005) Microbiological Effects of Consuming a Synbiotic Containing Bifidobacterium bifidum, Bifidobacterium lactis, and Oligofructose in Elderly Persons, Determined by Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction and Counting of Viable Bacteria. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 40, 28-37.

  69. 69. De Preter, V., Hamer, H.M., Windey, K. and Verbeke, K. (2011) The Impact of Pre- and/or Probiotics on Human Colonic Metabolism: Does It Affect Human Health? Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, 55, 46-57.

  70. 70. Demigné, C., Jacobs, H., Moundras, C., Davicco, M.J., Horcajada, M.N., Bernalier, A., et al. (2008) Comparison of Native or Reformulated Chicory Fructans, or Non-Purified Chicory, on Rat Cecal Fermentation and Mineral Metabolism. European Journal of Nutrition, 47, 366-374.

  71. 71. Bengmark, S. (2005) Bioecological Control of the Gastrointestinal Tract: The Role of Flora and Supplemented Probiotics and Synbiotics. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America, 34, 413-436.

  72. 72. Bengmark, S. and Martindale, R. (2005) Prebiotics and Synbiotics in Clinical Medicine. Nutrition in Clinical Practice, 20, 244-261.

  73. 73. Rioux, K.P., Madsen, K.L. and Fedorak, R.N. (2005) The Role of Enteric Microflora in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Human and Animal Studies with Probiotics and Prebiotics. Gastroenterology Clinics of North America, 34, 465-482.

  74. 74. Panesar, P.S., Kaur, G., Panesar, R. and Bera, M.B. (2009) Synbiotics: Potential Dietary Supplements in Functional Foods. Food Science Central.

  75. 75. De Vrese, M. and Schrezenmeir, J. (2008) Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics. In: Stahl, U., Donalies, U.E.B. and Nevoigt, E., Eds., Food Biotechnology, Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, Vol. 111, Springer, Berlin, 1-66.

  76. 76. Harish, K. and Varghese, T. (2006) Probiotics in Humans—Evidence Based Review. Calicut Medical Journal, 4, e3.

  77. 77. Cecic, A. and Chingwaru, W. (2010) The Role of Functional Foods, Nutraceuticals, and Food Supplements in Intestinal Health. Nutrients, 2, 611-625.

  78. 78. Geier, M.S., Butler, R.N. and Howarth, G.S. (2007) Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Current Insights into Pathogenesis and New Therapeutic Options; Probiotics, Prebiotics and Synbiotics. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 115, 1-11.

  79. 79. Gourbeyre, P., Denery, S. and Bodinier, M. (2011) Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics: Impact on the Gut Immune System and Allergic Reactions. Journal of Leukocyte Biology, 89, 685-695.

  80. 80. Scavuzzi, B.M., Henrique, F.C., Miglioranza, L.H.S., Sim ão, A.N.C. and Dichi, I. (2014) Impact of Prebiotics, Probiotics and Synbiotics on Components of the Metabolic Syndrome. Annals of Nutritional Disorders & Therapy, 1, 1009.

  81. 81. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; World Health Organization (FAO/WHO) (2001) Evaluation of Health and Nutritional Properties of Probiotics in Food Including Powder Milk with Live Lactic Acid Bacteria. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, Córdoba, Argentina.

  82. 82. Vershuere, L., Rombaut, G., Sorgeloos, P. and Verstraete, W. (2000) Probiotic Bacteria as Biological Control Agents in Aquaculture. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 64, 655-671.

  83. 83. Fuller, R. (Ed.) (1992) Probiotics: The Scientific Basis. Chapman & Hall, London.

  84. 84. Duggan, C., Gannon, J. and Walker, W.A. (2002) Protective Nutrients and Functional Foods for the Gastrointestinal Tract. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 75, 789-808.

  85. 85. Roberfroid, M. (2007) Prebiotics: The Concept Revisited. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 830-837.

  86. 86. Batvani, R. (2009) Synbiotics, the Combination of Probiotics, Prebiotics and Immune System Stimulants. Farda Etouk Research Group.

  87. 87. Medzhitov, R. and Janeway, C. (2000) Innate Immunity. The New England Journal of Medicine, 343, 338-344.

  88. 88. Huilan, S., Zhen, L.G., Mathan, M.M., Mathew, M.M., Olarte, J., Espejo, R., Khin Maung, U., Ghafoor, M.A., Khan, M.A., Sami, Z. and Sutton, R.G. (1991) Etiology of Acute Diarrhoea among Children in Developing Countries: A Multicentre Study in Five Countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 69, 549-555.

  89. 89. Naidu, A.S., Bidlack, W.R. and Clemens, R.A. (1999) Probiotic Spectra of Lactic Acid Bacteria (LAB). Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 39, 13-126.

  90. 90. Awad, W.A., Ghareeb, K., Abdel-Raheem, S. and Böhm, J. (2009) Effects of Dietary Inclusion of Probiotic and Symbiotic on Growth Performance, Organ Weights, and Intestinal Histomorphology of Broiler Chickens. The Journal of Poultry Science, 88, 49-55.

  91. 91. Provenza, F.D. and Villalba, J.J. (2010) The Role of Natural Plant Products in Modulating the Immune System: An Adaptable Approach for Combating Disease in Grazing Animals. Small Ruminant Research, 89, 131-139.

  92. 92. Vandenplas, Y., De Greef, E., Devreker, T., Veereman-Wauters, G. and Hauser, B. (2013) Probiotics and Prebiotics in Infants and Children. Current Infectious Disease Reports, 15, 251-262.

  93. 93. Boirivant, M. and Strober, W. (2007) The Mechanism of Action of Probiotics. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology, 23, 670-692.

  94. 94. Lee, S.J., Shin, N.H., Ok, J.U., Jung, H.S., Chu1, G.M., Kim, J.D., et al. (2009) Effects of Dietary Synbiotics from Anaerobic Microflora on Growth Performance, Noxious Gas Emission and Fecal Pathogenic Bacteria Population in Weaning Pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 22, 1202-1208.

  95. 95. Smith, H.W. and Jones, J.E.T. (1963) Observations on the Alimentary Tract and Its Bacterial Flora in Healthy and Diseased Pigs. The Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology, 86, 387-412.

  96. 96. Underdahl, N.R., Torres-Median, A. and Doster, A.R. (1982) Effect of Streptococcus faecium C-68 in the Control of Escherichia coli-Induced Diarrhea in Genotociotic Pigs. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 43, 2227-2232.

  97. 97. Abdel-Raheem, S.M., Abd-Allah, S.M.S. and Hassanein, K.M.A. (2012) The Effects of Prebiotic, Probiotic and Synbiotic Supplementation on Intestinal Microbial Ecology and Histomorphology of Broiler Chickens. International Journal for Agro Veterinary and Medical Sciences, 6, 277-289.

  98. 98. Dibaji, S.M., Seidavi, A., Asadpour, L. and da Silva, F.M. (2012) Effect of a Synbiotic on the Intestinal Microflora of Chickens. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 23, 1-6.

  99. 99. Hays, V.W. (1977) Effectiveness of Feed Additive Usage of Antimicrobial Agents in Swine and Poultry Production. Office of Technology Assessment, Washington DC.

  100. 100. Witte, W. (2000) Selective Pressure by Antibiotic Use in Livestock. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 16, S19-S24.

  101. 101. Ra, J.C., Han, H.J. and Song, J.E. (2004) Effect of Probiotics on Production and Improvement of Environment in Pigs and Broilers. Korean Journal of Veterinary Public Health, 28, 157-167.

  102. 102. Nekoubin, H., Gharedaashi, E., Imanpour, M., Nowferesti, H. and Asgharimoghadam, A. (2012) The Influence of Synbiotic (Biomin imbo) on Growth Factors and Survival Rate of Zebrafish (Danio rerio) Larvae via Supplementation with Biomar. Global Veterinaria, 8, 503-506.

  103. 103. Kazemi-Bonchenar, M., Ghasemi, H.A., Khodaei-Motlagh, M., Khaltabadi-Farahani, A.H. and Ilani, M. (2013) Influence of Feeding Synbiotic Containing Enterococcus faecium and Inulin on Blood Metabolites, Nutrient Digestibility and Growth Performance in Sheep Fed Alfalfa-Based Diet. Scientific Research and Essays, 8, 853-857.

  104. 104. Daniels, C.L., Merrifield, D.L., Ringo, E. and Davies, S.J. (2013) Probiotic, Prebiotic, Synbiotic Applications for the Improvement of Larval European Lobster (Homarus gammarus) Culture. Aquaculture, 416-417, 396-406.

  105. 105. Marlida, R., Suprayudi, M.A., Widanarni and Harris, E. (2014) Growth, Digestive Enzyme Activity and Health Status of Humpback Grouper (Cromileptes altivelis) Fed with Synbiotic. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 13, 319-326.

  106. 106. Dehaghani, P.G., Baboli, M.J., Moghadam, A.T., Ziaei-Nejad, S. and Pourfarhadi, M. (2015) Effect of Synbiotic Dietary Supplementation on Survival, Growth Performance, and Digestive Enzyme Activittraies of Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio) Fingerlings. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 60, 224-232.

  107. 107. Ye, J.D., Wang, K., Li, F.D. and Sun, Y.Z. (2011) Single or Combined Effects of Fructo- and Mannan Oligosaccharide Supplements and Bacillus clausii on the Growth, Feed Utilization, Body Composition, Digestive Enzyme Activity, Innate Immune Response and Lipid Metabolism of the Japanese Flounder Paralichthys olivaceus. Aquaculture Nutrition, 17, 902-911.

  108. 108. Geng, X., Dong, X.H., Tan, B.P., Yang, Q.H., Chi, S.Y., et al. (2011) Effects of Dietary Chitosan and Bacillus subtilis on the Growth Performance, Non-Specific Immunity and Disease Resistance of Cobia, Rachycentron canadum. Fish and Shellfish Immunology, 31, 400-406.

  109. 109. Mehrabi, Z., Firouzbakhsh, F. and Jafarpour, A. (2012) Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Synbiotic on Growth Performance, Serum Biochemical Parameters and Carcass Composition in Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Fingerlings. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 96, 474-481.

  110. 110. Jung, S.J., Houde, R., Baurhoo, B., Zhao, X. and Lee, B.H. (2008) Effects of Galacto-Oligosaccharides and a Bifidobacteria lactis-Based Probiotic Strain on the Growth Performance and Fecal Microflora of Broiler Chickens. Poultry Science, 87, 1694-1699.

  111. 111. Erdogan, Z., Erdogan, S., Aslantas, O. and Celik, S. (2010) Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Synbiotics and Phytobiotics on Performance, Caecal Coliform Population and Some Oxidant/Antioxidant Parameters of Broilers. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 94, e40-e48.

  112. 112. Ahmed, K.S., Hasan, M., Asaduzzaman, M., Khatun, A. and Islam, K. (2015) Effects of Probiotics and Synbiotics on Growth Performance and Haemato-Biochemical Parameters in Broiler Chickens. Journal of Science, 5, 926-929.

  113. 113. Fallah, R., Fosoul S.S.A.S. and Rezaei, H. (2014) Effect of Synbiotic on Performance and Serum Biochemical Parameters of Ostrich Chicks. Journal of Farm Animal Nutrition and Physiology, 9/1, 51-56.

  114. 114. Grimes, J.L., Maurice, D.V., Lightsey, S.F. and Lopez, J.G. (1997) The Effect of Dietary Fermacto on Layer Hen Performance. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 6, 399-403.

  115. 115. klebaniuk, R. and Czech, A. (2007) The Influence of Synbiotic Participation in Feed Ration for Ewes on Selected Lamb Blood Parameters. Annales, 2, 1-5.

  116. 116. Al-Kassi, G.A.M. (2009) Influence of Plant Exteracts Derived from Thyme and Cinnamon on Broiler Performance. Pakistan Veterinary Journal, 29, 169-173.

  117. 117. Farinu, G.O., Ademola, S.G., Ajayi Obe, A.O. and Babatunde, G.M. (2004) Growth, Haematological and Biochemical Studies on Garlic and Ginger-Fed Broiler Chickens. Moor Journal of Agricultural Research, 5, 122-128.

  118. 118. Ashayerzadeh, A., Dabiri, N., Mirzadeh, K.H. and Ashayerzadeh, A. (2010) The Comparison between Antibiotics, Probiotics and Prebiotics on Growth Response and Some Blood Parameters in 42 Days Old Broiler. Proceedings of 4th Animal Science Congress, Karaj, 786-789.

  119. 119. Mokhtari, R., Yazdani, A.R., Rezaee, M. and Ghorbani, B. (2009) The Effect of Synbiotics and Phytobiotic on Broiler Blood Parameters. Proceedings of 4th Animal Science Congress, Karaj, 142-145.

  120. 120. Shams, M., Azadeghan Mehr, M., Dastar, B. and Hosseini, S. (2008) Effect of Different Levels of Protein and Probiotics on Production Traits and Some Blood Parameters in Broiler. Journal of Agriculture Science, 14, 15.

  121. 121. Sharifi, M.R., Shams, M., Dastar, B. and Hosseini, S. (2009) Effect of Different Levels of Synbiotics Supplementation on Performance and Some Blood Parameters in Japanese Quail. Proceedings of 4th Animal Science Congress, Karaj, 1-4.

  122. 122. Liong, M.T. and Shah, N.P. (2006) Effects of a Lactobacillus casei Symbiotic on Serum Lipoprotein, Intestinal Microflora and Organic Acid in Rats. Journal of Dairy Science, 89, 1390-1399.

  123. 123. Sahin, T., Kaya, I., Unal, Y. and Emali, D.A. (2008) Dietary Supplementation of Probiotics and Prebiotics Combination on Performance, Carcass Quality and Blood Parameters in Growing Quail. Journal of Animal and Veterinary, 7, 1370-1373.

  124. 124. Min-Tze, L., Dunshea, F.R. and Shah, N.P. (2007) Effect of Synbiotic Containing Lactobacillus acidophilus ATCC 4962 on Plasma Lipid Profiles and Morphology of Erythrocytes in Hypercholestrolaemic Pigs on High- and Low-Fat Diets. British Journal of Nutrition, 98, 736-744.

  125. 125. Zhang, W.F., Li, D.F., Lu, W.Q. and Yi, G.F. (2003) Effect of Isomaltooligosaccharides on Broiler Performance and Intestinal Micro Flora. Poultry Science, 82, 657-663.

  126. 126. Jeurissen, S.H., Lewis, F., Van der Klis, J.D., Mroz, Z., Rebel, J.M. and Ter Huurne, A.A. (2002) Parameters and Techniques to Determine Intestinal Health of Poultry as Constituted by Immunity, Integrity, and Functionality. Current Issues in Intestinal Microbiology, 3, 1-14.

  127. 127. Ibrahim, S.A. and Salameh, M.M. (2001) Simple Rapid Method for Screening Antimicrobial Activities of Bifidobacterium sp of Human Isolates. Rapid Methods and Automation in Microbiology, 9, 52-63.

  128. 128. Salman, J.A.S. (2009) Synbiotic Effect of Probiotic (Bifidobacterium sp) and Prebiotics (Chicory and Inulin) against Some Pathogenic Bacteria. Um-Salama Science Journal, 6, 355-360.

  129. 129. Murphy, W.J., Larkin, D.M., van der Wind, A.E., Bourque, G., Tesler, G., Auvil, L., Beever, J.E., Chowdhary, B.P., Galibert, F., Gatzke, L., Hitte, C., Meyers, S.N., Milan, D., Ostrander, E.A., Pape, G., Parker, H.G., Raudsepp, T., Rogatcheva, M.B., Schook, L.B., Skow, L.C., Welge, M., Womack, J.E., O’brien, S.J., Pevzner, P.A., Lewin, H.A. (2009) Dynamics of Mammalian Chromosome Evolution Inferred from Multispecies Comparative Maps. Science, 309, 613-618.

  130. 130. Backhed, F., Ley, R.E., Sonnenburg, J.L., Peterson, D.A. and Gordon, J.I. (2005) Host-Bacterial Mutualism in the Human Intestine. Science, 307, 1915-1920.

  131. 131. Macfarlane, S., Macfarlane, G.T. (2004) Bacterial Diversity in the Human Gut. Advances in Applied Microbiology, 54, 261-289.

  132. 132. Benyacoub, J., Maulden, G.L.C., Cavadini, C., Sauthier, T., Anderson, R.E., Schiffrin, E.J. and Weid, T.V.D. (2003) Supplementation of Food with Enterococcus faecium (SF68) Stimulates Immune Functions in Young Dogs. Journal of Nutrition, 133, 1158-1162.

  133. 133. Newman, K. (1994) Mannan-Oligosaccharides: Natural Polymers with Significant Impact on the Gastrointestinal Microflora and the Immune System. In: Lyons, T.P. and Jacques, K.A., Eds., Biotechnology in the Feed Industry. Proceeding of Alltech’s Tenth Annual Symposium, Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, 167-175.

  134. 134. Lindsay, G.J.H. (1986) The Significance of Chitinolytic Enzymes and Lysozyme in Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri) Defence. Aquaculture, 51, 169-173.

  135. 135. Mach, T. (2006) Clinical Usefulness of Probiotics in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology, 57, 23-33.

  136. 136. Yan, F. and Polk, D.B. (2006) Probiotics as Functional Food in the Treatment of Diarrhea. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care, 9, 717-721.

  137. 137. Reid, G. (2008) Probiotic Lactobacilli for Urogenital Health in Women. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology, 42, S234-S236.

  138. 138. Vanderhoof, J.A. (2008) Probiotics in Allergy Management. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, 47, S38-S40.

  139. 139. Gruzauskas, R., Lekavicius, R., Raceviciute-Stupeliene, A., Sasyte, V. and Guarner, F. (2004) Inulin and Oligofructose: Impact on Intestinal Diseases and Disorders. British Journal of Nutrition, 93, 61-65.

  140. 140. Pollman, D.S. (1986) Additives, Flavors, Enzymes and Probiotics in Animal Feeds. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Nutrition Conference, University of Guelph.