Effect of bacterial lysate-based bioactive supplement on immunological blood parameters in grower pigs

Introduction. Modern pig farming in Russia is showing steady growth, which is accompanied by the introduction of new technologies aimed at increasing productive performance and reducing dependence on antibiotics. This causes increased interest in biologically active products with immunostimulatory and immunomodulatory properties. Multiple studies confirm their positive effect on the intestinal microflora, immune status and overall productive performance of animals. However, the morphofunctional and biochemical aspects of the action of these agents remain understudied, which highlights the necessity of further research in this field.

Objective. To justify the expediency of using immunomodulatory drug Immbaclys S for pigs during grower stage based on the analysis  of the published resources and experimental data.

Materials and methods. Sixty biological samples (blood) collected from grower pigs on the commercial pig farm in Kolomna Municipal Okrug, Moscow Oblast in April – July 2024 were studied. The samples were tested using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, flow cytometry,  and microscopy. The data was processed using the statistical analysis software Statistica v.13.0.

Results. Course administration of Immbaclys S to grower pigs (22–113 days old) induced statistically significant enhancements in cellular and humoral immunity markers, including elevated T- and B-lymphocyte counts, neutrophil phagocytosis, and IgG/IgM levels, demonstrating activation of immune defense pathways.

Conclusion. The dynamics of the parameters throughout the study period indicate a cumulative effect of the drug, particularly with respect  to the relative count of B-lymphocytes and the level of IgM, which may suggest its prolonged action upon repeated administration. These findings position Immbaclys S as an effective immunoprophylactic agent with potential for incorporation into veterinary health programs  to control and prevent immunodeficiency in intensively reared young pigs.

1. Kovalev Yu. I. Current trends in pig husbandry of Russia in the new reality and medium-term prospects up to 2025. Vsyo o myase. 2023; (4): 8–13. https://doi.org/10.21323/2071-24992023-4-8-13 (in Russ.)

2. Bazhov G. M. Intensive pig farming: Textbook. Saint Petersburg: Lanʼ. 2021. 416 p. (in Russ.)

3. Ovchinnikov A. A. Productivity of sows at the use of probiotics in the ration. Animal Husbandry and Fodder Production. 2017; (1): 119–123. https://elibrary.ru/yhpsrd (in Russ.)

4. Belookov A. A., Belookova O. V., Chukhutin E. V., Gorelik O. V. The efficiency of probiotics in industrial pig breeding. Agrarian Science. 2022; (7–8): 98–101. https://doi.org/10.32634/0869-8155-2022-361-7-8-98-101

5. Moskalenko E. A., Zabashta N. N. Usage of the combined probiotics in pig. Collected Scientific Papers of SKNIIZH. 2016; 5 (3): 150–155. https://elibrary.ru/wxzdrj (in Russ.)

6. Danilenko V. N., Ilyasov R. A., Yunes R. A., Yanenko A. S., Kozlovsky Yu. E., Sverchkova N. V., Kolomiets E. I. Microbiome of animals: search for biologically active ingredients for the creation of probiotics and pharmabiotics. Biology Bulletin Reviews. 2022; 142 (4): 333–348. https://elibrary.ru/rmmmus (in Russ.)

7. Brovkina L. I., Tuov A. R. Vertical agroindustrial integration as the mechanism of the decision of financial problems of the agricultural enterprises. Business in Law. 2011; (5): 238–241. https://elibrary.ru/ogjvbn (in Russ.)

8. Plaksin I. E., Plaksin S. I., Trifanov A. V. Trends and prospects of pig breeding development in Russia. AgroEkoInzheneriya. 2022; (1): 155–168. https://doi.org/10.24412/2713-2641-2022-1110-155-168 (in Russ.)

9. Shkredov V. V. Improving productive quality of piglets during finishing with the use of probiotic Gallobact-F: Author’s abstract of thesis for degree of Cand. Sci. (Biology). Ekaterinburg; 2022. 23 p. (in Russ.)

10. Kuznetsov A. F., Tyurin V. G., Semenov V. G., Holdoenko A. M., Rozhkov K. A. Animal management hygiene and technology. Saint Petersburg: Lanʼ; 2021. 380 p. (in Russ.)

11. Yuzhakov A. G., Zhukova E. V., Aliper T. I., Gulyukin A. M. Porcine reproductive respiratory syndrome: situation in Russia. Pigbreeding. 2022; (5): 32–35. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2022-5-32-35 (in Russ.)

12. Polkovnikova V. I. Pig farming: study guide. Perm: IPTs “Prokrost”; 2022. 95 p. (in Russ.)

13. Orlova V. S., Orlova E. V., Timokhina A. S., Stanishev- skiy Ya. M. The study of immunomodulating properties of the Vitanam. Drug Development & Registration. 2017; (4): 248–255. https://elibrary.ru/ztwvit (in Russ.)

14. Sepp A. L., Yashin A. V., Kotyleva M. P., Ermolenko E. I., Kavalionak Y. K., Dobrovolskiy S. A., Gromova L. V. Influence of the probiotic Enterococcus on the activity of digestive enzymes and the state of the intestinal microbiome in post-weaning piglets. International Journal of Veterinary Medicine. 2019; (3): 99–103. https://elibrary.ru/fpjeyb (in Russ.)

15. Levshin A. D., Kulmakova N. I., Latynina E. S. Metabolic processes in purebred and crossbred pigs at different age periods. Pigbreeding. 2022; (4): 50–52. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2022-4-50-52 (in Russ.)

16. Kudryavtseva E. N., Kovzov V. V., Ostrovsky A. V., Motuzko N. S., Makovsky E. G., Vishnevets Zh. V., et al. Endogenous control of digestion in farm animals: study guide. Vitebsk: Vitebsk State Academy of Veterinary Medicine; 2023. 152 p. (in Russ.)

17. Pavlov A. V., Pavlova S. V. Relationship between growth energy and feed conversion. Pigbreeding. 2024; (5): 62–63. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2024-5-62-63 (in Russ.)

18. Kletikova L. V., Ponomarev V. A., Yakimenko N. N., Pronin V. V. Morphostructure of the liver of pigs of the Vietnam bellow breed on the background of the application of a complex of biologically active substances. Agrarian Journal of Upper Volga Region. 2023; (2): 57–61. https://doi.org/10.35523/23075872-2023-43-2-57-61 (in Russ.)

19. Sysa L. V., Sysa S. A. The main factors negatively influencing the state of animals in the conditions of a series of pig farms. Animal Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine. 2022; (3): 26–29. https://elibrary.ru/tjgzmz (in Russ.)

20. Kang H., Tsoy Z. V., Nikulin Yu. P., Nikulina O. A. Waste from the fishing industry in pig feeding. Pigbreeding. 2023; (5): 32–34. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2023-5-32-34 (in Russ.)

21. Abramov S. V., Gorlov I. F., Slozhenkina M. I., Mosolov A. A., Starodubova Yu. V., Khoroshevskaya L. V. Feed additives with acidifying effect in the diets of weaning piglets under conditions of thermal stress. Pigbreeding. 2024; (8): 50–54. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2024-8-50-54 (in Russ.)

22. Bolotina E. N. Extruded feeds use for pigs fattening. Bulletin Samara State Agricultural Academy. 2014; (1): 118–122. https://elibrary.ru/saeykd (in Russ.)

23. Buyarov V. S., Mikhailova O. A., Buyarov A. V., Kreis V. V. Modern technology of pork production: study guide. Orel: Orel State Agrarian University; 2014. 184 р. https://elibrary.ru/uefnxt (in Russ.)

24. Popov V. S., Samburov N. V., Vorobieva N. V., Zorikova A. A. Secondary immunodeficiency swine: clinical and immunological characteristics and principles of immunocorrection. Vestnik of Kursk State Agricultural Academy. 2016; (3): 57–61. https://elibrary.ru/uesubx

25. Betin A. N., Frolov A. I., Filippova O. B. Biologically active additives in feeding suckling sows and piglets. Pigbreeding. 2022; (1): 15–17. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2022-1-15-17 (in Russ.)

26. Gerasimovich A. I., Tuaeva E. V., Chabaev M. G. The use of biologically active additives in feeding sows. Pigbreeding. 2023; (2): 19–22. https://doi.org/10.37925/0039-713X-2023-2-19-22 (in Russ.)

27. Bibikov S. O. Effect of multidirectional biologically active substances on productivity and clinical-p hysiological status of pigs: Author’s thesis for degree of Cand. Sci. (Agricultural Science). Volgograd; 2020. 133 p. (in Russ.)