doi: 10.15389/agrobiology.2023.4.700eng

UDC: 636.5.033:636.084:579

Supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project No. 20-16-00078 П



O.V. Kvan ✉, E.A. Sizova, I.A. Vershinina, A.M. Kamirova

Federal Research Centre of Biological Systems and Agrotechnologies RAS, 29, ul. 9 Yanvarya, Orenburg, 460000 Russia, e-mail (✉ corresponding author),,,

Kvan O.V.
Vershinina I.A.
Sizova E.A.
Kamirova A.M.

Final revision received May 18, 2023
Accepted June 30. 2023

Various additives used in poultry diets can change the mineral status of the body. Dietary fiber has long been considered an anti-nutritional factor due to adverse effects on feed intake and nutrient absorption. However, with increasing evidence, it has been found that dietary fiber has a positive effect on nutrient digestion, fermentation, and absorption processes in poultry. In this work, for the first time, data were obtained on the influence of dietary fibers, the microcrystalline cellulose, lactulose and chitosan on mineral metabolism and caecal microbiocenosis of broiler chickens fed a semi-synthetic diet. A decrease in the accuulation of toxic microelements in the body of a bird was demonstrated, as well as a change in the microbial community of the caecum. Experiments on the Arbor Acres cross broiler chickens (Gallus gallus L.) were carried out in the vivarium (the FSC BSA RAS). A total of 150 of week-old broiler chickens were divided into 5 groups of analogues (n = 30 each). The duration of the experiment was 35 days. The first control group C1 was fed with a semi-synthetic diet (SS). The second control group C2 received a semi-synthetic diet deficient in trace elements (DSS). For dietary fibers, test group I was fed with dietary microcrystalline cellulose (E460, 0.25 g/kg feed), test group II with dietary lactulose (1 g/kg feed), and test group III with dietary chitosan (0.5 g/kg feed). In feed and biomaterial of broilers, 25 chemical elements were assayed: Ca, Cu, Fe, Li, Mg, Mn, Ni, As, Cr, K, Na, P, Zn, I, V, Co, Se, Ti, Al, Be, Cd, Pb, Hg, Sn, Sr by atomic emission spectrometry and mass spectrometry techniques. Microbial biodiversity of the caecum was assessed on day 42. NGS sequencing was performed using a MiSeq platform (Illumina, Inc., USA). In test group I, the dietary fiber led to a statistically significant increase in the calcium (by 23,4 %. p ≤ 0.05) vs. C2. In test group III, there was a 1.5-forl decrease in the indicator (p ≤ 0.05) vs. C1 and a 26.3 % decrease (p ≤ 0.05) vs. C2. The lithium content increased 1.7 times (p ≤ 0.05) vs. C1 when chitosan was added to a semi-synthetic diet deficient in trace elements. The concentration of manganese and cobalt significantly (p ≤ 0.05) decreased in all test groups vs. C1. In group I, the amount of selenium increased 2.35 times (p ≤ 0.05) vs. C1 it decreased 1.74 times (p ≤ 0.05) vs, C2. In the same group, the iodine level increased 1.74 times and 1.5 times (p ≤0.05) vs. control groups. In test groups II and III, selenium decrease 4.64 times and 4.55 times (p ≤ 0.05) vs. C2. The concentration of arsenic in group II exceeded C1 1.63 times (p ≤ 0.05), and in group III, its concentration, on the contrary, decreased 1.58 times and 2.0 times (p ≤ 0, 05) vs. C1 and C2. The dietary fiber scontributed to the removal of toxic elements. In test group I and group III, the concetration of strontium decreased (p ≤ 0.05) by 25.7 and 45.9 %, respectively, vs. C1. For C2, a decrease in the amount of strontium by 22.2 and 43.4 % was similarly revealed (p ≤ 0.05). In group I, the counts of Rikenellaceae increased 6.3 and 6.8 times, Lachnospiraceae 12 and 4.9 times, Ruminococcaceae2.1 times and 3. 9 times compared to C1 and C2, respectively. In group II, the abundance of Lactobicallaceae decreased 6 times, the number of Rikenellaceae increased 6.2 times, Lachnospiraceae 9.57 times, Ruminococcaceae 3.1 times compared to C1. In group III, there was a decrease in the content of Lactobicallaceae by 13.3 and 1.55 times compared to C1 and C2. The number of Rikenellaceae increased 5.5 times, Lachnospiraceae 11.8 times, Ruminococcaceae 3.5 times compared to C1. Thus, dietary fibers added to a semi-synthetic diet led to a decrease in the content of macroelements in the body of Arbor Aikres cross broiler chickens, the elimination of toxic elements, and increased the counts of Rikenellaceae and Lachnospiraceae taxa with a simultaneous decrease in the number of Lactobacillaceae in the intestine.

Keywords: semi-synthetic diet, dietary fiber, metabolism, mineral metabolism, microbiome, caecum.



  1. Zhou C., Xu D., Lin K., Sun C., Yang X. Intelligent feeding control methods in aquaculture with an emphasis on fish: a review. Reviews in Aquaculture,2018, 10(4): 975-993 CrossRef
  2. Sklan D. Development of the digestive tract of poultry. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 2001, 57(4): 425-428 CrossRef
  3. Stein H.H., Sève B., Fuller M.F., Moughan P.J., de Lange C.F.M. Invited review: Amino acid bioavailability and digestibility in pig feed ingredients: Terminology and application. Journal of Animal Science, 2007, 85(1): 172-180 CrossRef
  4. Nahm K.H., Carlson C.W., Halverson A.W., Thiex N. Effects of cellulase supplementation and wheat bran on mineral utilization in broilers. South Dakota Poultry Field Day Proceedings and Research Reports, 1983: 12.
  5. Kvan O., Duskaev G., Rakhmatullin S., Kosyan D. Changes in the content of chemical elements in the muscle tissue of broilers on the background of plant extract and tetracyclines. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 2019, 10(12): 419-423 CrossRef
  6. Anwar M.N., Ravindran V. Influence of methodology on the measurement of ileal endogenous calcium losses in broiler chickens. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 2020, 48(1): 264-267 CrossRef
  7. Ivanov A.A., Polyakova E.P., Ksenofontov D.A. Еksperimental’naya i klinicheskaya gastroеnterologiya, 2012, 2: 71-75 (in Russ.).
  8. Bassi L.S., Teixeira L.V., Sens R.F., Almeida L., Zavelinski V.A.B., Maiorka A. High doses of phytase on growth performance, bone mineralization, diet utilization, and plasmatic myo-inositol of turkey poults. Poultry Science, 2021, 100(5): 101050 CrossRef
  9. Yaqoob M.U., Abd El-Hack M.E., Hassan F., El-Saadony M.T., Khafaga A.F., Batiha G.E., Yehia N., Elnesr S.S., Alagawany M., El-Tarabily K.A., Wang M. The potential mechanistic insights and future implications for the effect of prebiotics on poultry performance, gut microbiome, and intestinal morphology. Poultry Science,2021, 100(7): 101143 CrossRef
  10. Jiménez-Moreno E., de Coca-Sinova A., González-Alvarado J.M., Mateos G.G. Inclusion of insoluble fiber sources in mash or pellet diets for young broilers. 1. Effects on growth performance and water intake. Poultry Science, 2016, 95(1): 41-52 CrossRef
  11. Tejeda O.J., Kim W.K. Role of dietary fiber in poultry nutrition. Animals, 2021, 11(2): 461 CrossRef
  12. Scott M.L., Nesheim M.C., Young R.J. Nutrition of the chicken. M.L. Scott & Assoc, Ithaca, NY, 1969.
  13. Short F.J., Gorton P., Wiseman J., Boorman K.N. Determination of titanium dioxide added as an inert marker in chicken digestibility studies. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1996, 59(4): 215-221 CrossRef
  14. Ansia I., Stein H.H., Vermeire D.A., Brøkner C., Drackley J.K. Ileal digestibility and endogenous protein losses of milk replacers based on whey proteins alone or with an enzyme-treated soybean meal in young dairy calves. Journal of Dairy Science, 2020, 103(5): 4390-4407 CrossRef
  15. Blaut M. Relationship of prebiotics and food to intestinal microflora. European Journal of Nutrition, 2002, 41(Suppl. 1): i11-i16 CrossRef
  16. Jha R., Woyengo T.A., Li J., Bedford M.R., Vasanthan T., Zijlstra R.T. Enzymes enhance degradation of the fiber—starch—protein matrix of distillers dried grains with solubles as revealed by a porcine in vitro fermentation model and microscopy. Journal of Animal Science,2015, 93(3): 1039-1051 CrossRef
  17. Williams B.A., Grant L.J., Gidley M.J., Mikkelsen D. Gut fermentation of dietary fibres: physico-chemistry of plant cell walls and implications for health. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2017, 18(10): 2203 CrossRef
  18. JøRgensen H., Zhao X.Q., Knudsen K.E.B., Eggum B.O. The influence of dietary fibre source and level on the development of the gastrointestinal tract, digestibility and energy metabolism in broiler chickens. British Journal of Nutrition, 1996, 75(3): 379-395 CrossRef
  19. Sadeghi A., Toghyani M., Tabeidian S.A., Foroozandeh A.D., Ghalamkari G. Efficacy of dietary supplemental insoluble fibrous materials in ameliorating adverse effects of coccidial challenge in broiler chickens. Archives of Animal Nutrition, 2020, 74(5), 362-379 CrossRef
  20. Kheravii S.K., Morgan N.K., Swick R.A., Choct M., Wu S.B. Roles of dietary fibre and ingredient particle size in broiler nutrition. World's Poultry Science Journal,2018, 74(2): 301-316 CrossRef
  21. Sozcu A. Growth performance, pH value of gizzard, hepatic enzyme activity, immunologic indicators, intestinal histomorphology, and cecal microflora of broilers fed diets supplemented with processed lignocellulose. Poultry Science, 2019, 98(12): 6880-6887 CrossRef
  22. Mahmood T., Guo Y. Dietary fiber and chicken microbiome interaction: where will it lead to? Animal Nutrition,2020, 6(1): 1-8 CrossRef
  23. Mateos G.G., Jiménez-Moreno E., Serrano M., Lázaro R. Poultry response to high levels of dietary fiber sources varying in physical and chemical characteristics. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 2012, 21(1): 156-174 CrossRef
  24. Jha R., Fouhse J.M., Tiwari U.P., Li L., Willing B.P. Dietary fiber and intestinal health of monogastric animals. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2019, 6: 48 CrossRef
  25. Adhikari P., Kiess A., Adhikari R., Jha R. An approach to alternative strategies to control avian coccidiosis and necrotic enteritis. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 2020, 29(2): 515-534 CrossRef
  26. Li Y.P., Wang Z.Y., Yang H.M., Xu L., Xie Y.J., Jin S.L., Sheng D.F. Effects of dietary fiber on growth performance, slaughter performance, serum biochemical parameters, and nutrient utilization in geese. Poultry Science,2017, 96(5): 1250-1256 CrossRef
  27. Houshmand M., Azhar K., Zulkifli I., Bejo M.H., Meimandipour A., Kamyab A. Effects of non-antibiotic feed additives on performance, tibial dyschondroplasia incidence and tibia characteristics of broilers fed low-calcium diets. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2011, 95(3): 351-358 CrossRef
  28. Sadeghi A., Toghyani M., Gheisari A. Effect of various fiber types and choice feeding of fiber on performance, gut development, humoral immunity, and fiber preference in broiler chicks. Poultry Science,2015, 94(11): 2734-2743 CrossRef







Full article PDF (Rus)

Full article PDF (Eng)