FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Front Immunol / Investigating the potential immunomodulatory effects of comm...
Frontiers in immunology2025; 15; 1487664; doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1487664

Investigating the potential immunomodulatory effects of commercial oral probiotic supplements on equine gastrointestinal tract barrier function.

Abstract: Oral probiotic dietary supplements are widely used in veterinary medicine, including in horses. It is hypothesized that the presence of probiotic strains can both modulate the intestinal microbiota and affect mucosal immunity parameters. Such a study has not yet been conducted in horses. Unassigned: This study involved 12 healthy horses, which were randomly divided into a control group and a group that received a commercial oral probiotic formula containing , or for 84 days. Fecal samples were collected from all horses on day 0 (D0), 28 days after starting the probiotic (D28), 56 days (D56), 84 days (D84) and 28 days after stopping the probiotic (DX) treatment. The samples were subjected to microbiome analysis via next-generation sequencing of hypervariable regions V3-V4 and V7-V9 of the gene for analysis of short-chain fatty acids via HPLC analysis and fecal secretory immunoglobulin A (SIgA) quantification via ELISA. Unassigned: Microbiome analysis revealed no significant differences in either alpha or beta diversity parameters between the groups. No probiotic strains were detected in the samples. Significant changes were detected in three taxa: the family RF16 group, the genus UCG-004, and the genus during the study in both groups. In all the cases, there was a gradual decrease in relative abundance over time. The concentrations of SCFAs, specifically acetic and propionic acids, significantly increased over time in both groups according to the generalized linear mixed effects (GLME) model. There were no significant differences in fecal SIgA secretion. Unassigned: The present study revealed no effect of the use of a commercial probiotic dietary supplement on either mucosal immunity or the composition of the intestinal microbiota.
Copyright © 2025 Żak-Bochenek, Żebrowska-Różańska, Bajzert, Łaczmański, Szponar, Siwińska, Gładysz, Sikorska and Chełmońska-Soyta.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-01-21 PubMed ID: 39906737PubMed Central: PMC11790434DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1487664Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study investigates the influence of commercial oral probiotic supplements on the intestinal tract barrier function of horses, finding no significant effect on their mucosal immunity or intestinal microbiota composition.

Objective and Methodology

  • The research aimed to understand whether oral probiotic supplements can impact the intestinal microbiota and the mucosal immunity parameters in horses, given their common usage in veterinary medicine.
  • 12 healthy horses participated in the study and were divided into two groups: a control group and a group that received a commercial oral probiotic formula over 84 days.
  • Fecal samples were collected at various intervals (D0, D28, D56, D84, and DX) for microbiome analysis, analysis of short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), and quantification of fecal secretory immunoglobulin A (SIgA).

Analysis and Findings

  • A range of analytical techniques were used including next-generation sequencing for microbiome analysis, and High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for SCFA and SIgA analysis respectively.
  • No significant differences were found in alpha or beta diversity parameters of the microbiome between the groups. Also, no probiotic strains were detected in any of the samples.
  • Three taxa (the family RF16 group, the genus UCG-004, and the genus) indicated significant changes, with a gradual decrease over time in both groups.
  • Also, concentrations of SCFAs, specifically acetic and propionic acids, were observed to increase over time in both groups.
  • No significant differences were seen in fecal SIgA secretion, indicating no major impact on mucosal immunity parameters.

Conclusion

  • Based on the collected data and analyses, the study concluded that the use of commercial probiotic dietary supplements doesn’t significantly impact the mucosal immunity and the composition of the intestinal microbiota in horses.
  • This result helps in understanding the effects of probiotic supplements on horses and can guide further studies and clinical usage of such supplements in veterinary medicine.

Cite This Article

APA
Żak-Bochenek A, Żebrowska-Różańska P, Bajzert J, Łaczmański Ł, Szponar B, Siwińska N, Gładysz K, Sikorska K, Chełmońska-Soyta A. (2025). Investigating the potential immunomodulatory effects of commercial oral probiotic supplements on equine gastrointestinal tract barrier function. Front Immunol, 15, 1487664. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1487664

Publication

Frontiers in immunology
ISSN: 1664-3224
NlmUniqueID: 101560960
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 15
Pages: 1487664
PII: 1487664

Researcher Affiliations

Żak-Bochenek, Agnieszka
  • Department of Immunology, Pathophysiology and Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Żebrowska-Różańska, Paulina
  • Independent Researcher, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Bajzert, Joanna
  • Department of Immunology, Pathophysiology and Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Łaczmański, Łukasz
  • Laboratory of Genomics and Bioinformatics, Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Szponar, Bogumiła
  • Laboratory of Medical Microbiology, Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Siwińska, Natalia
  • Department of Internal Diseases and Clinic of Diseases of Horses, Dogs and Cats, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Gładysz, Klaudia
  • Student Scientific Association, Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Sikorska, Katarzyna
  • Division of Phytopathology and Mycology, Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Life Sciences and Technology, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.
Chełmońska-Soyta, Anna
  • Department of Immunology, Pathophysiology and Veterinary Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Wrocław University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wrocław, Poland.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Probiotics / administration & dosage
  • Probiotics / pharmacology
  • Horses / immunology
  • Horses / microbiology
  • Gastrointestinal Microbiome / drug effects
  • Gastrointestinal Microbiome / immunology
  • Feces / microbiology
  • Dietary Supplements
  • Male
  • Administration, Oral
  • Female
  • RNA, Ribosomal, 16S / genetics
  • Gastrointestinal Tract / immunology
  • Gastrointestinal Tract / microbiology
  • Immunoglobulin A, Secretory
  • Immunity, Mucosal / drug effects

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as potential conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 41 references
  1. Schoster A, Weese JS, Guardabassi L. Probiotic use in horses - what is the evidence for their clinical efficacy?. J Vet Intern Med (2014) 28:1640–52.
    doi: 10.1111/jvim.12451pmc: PMC4895607pubmed: 25231539google scholar: lookup
  2. Berreta A, Kopper J. Equine probiotics-what are they, where are we and where do we need to go?. J Equine Vet Sci (2022) 115:104037.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2022.104037pubmed: 35688301google scholar: lookup
  3. Żak-Bochenek A, Bajzert J, Sambor D, Siwińska N, Szponar B, Łaczmański Ł. Homeostasis of the intestinal mucosa in healthy horses-correlation between the fecal microbiome, secretory immunoglobulin A and fecal egg count. Animals (2022) 12:3094.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12223094pmc: PMC9687066pubmed: 36428322google scholar: lookup
  4. Boucher L, Leduc L, Leclère M, Costa MC. Current understanding of equine gut dysbiosis and microbiota manipulation techniques: comparison with current knowledge in other species. Animals (2024) 14:758.
    doi: 10.3390/ani14050758pmc: PMC10931082pubmed: 38473143google scholar: lookup
  5. Hajfarajollah H, Eslami P, Mokhtarani B, Akbari Noghabi K. Biosurfactants from probiotic bacteria: A review. Biotechnol Appl Biochem (2018) 65:768–83.
    doi: 10.1002/bab.1686pubmed: 30120889google scholar: lookup
  6. Schoster A, Guardabassi L, Staempfli HR, Abrahams M, Jalali M, Weese JS. The longitudinal effect of a multi-strain probiotic on the intestinal bacterial microbiota of neonatal foals. Equine Vet J (2016) 48:689–96.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12524pubmed: 26509834google scholar: lookup
  7. Cooke CG, Gibb Z, Grupen CG, Schemann K, Deshpande N, Hernett JE. Effect of probiotics and prebiotics on the composition of the equine fecal and seminal microbiomes and sperm quality: A pilot study. J Equine Vet Sci (2024) 135:105032.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105032pubmed: 38401778google scholar: lookup
  8. MacNicol JL, Renwick S, Ganobis CM, Allen-Vercoe E, Weese JS, Perason W. The influence of a probiotic/prebiotic supplement on microbial and metabolic parameters of equine cecal fluid or fecal slurry. vitro. J Anim Sci (2023) 101:34.
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skad034pmc: PMC9994591pubmed: 36715114google scholar: lookup
  9. Celi P, Verlhac V, Pérez CE, Schmeisser J, Kluenter AM. Biomarkers of gastrointestinal functionality in animal nutrition and health. Anim Feed Sci Technol (2019) 250:9–31.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2018.07.012google scholar: lookup
  10. Siddiqui I, Majid H, Abid S. Update on clinical and research application of fecal biomarkers for gastrointestinal diseases. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther (2017) 8:39–46.
    doi: 10.4292/wjgpt.v8.i1.39pmc: PMC5292605pubmed: 28217373google scholar: lookup
  11. Fukushima Y, Kawata Y, Hara H, Terada A, Mitsuoka T. Effect of a probiotic formula on intestinal immunoglobulin A production in healthy children. Int J Food Microbiol (1998) 42:39–44.
    doi: 10.1016/s0168-1605(98)00056-7pubmed: 9706796google scholar: lookup
  12. Park JH, Um JI, Lee BJ, Goh JS, Park SY, Wan-Sup K. Encapsulated Bifidobacterium bifidum potentiates intestinal IgA production. Cell Immunol (2002) 219:22–7.
    doi: 10.1016/s0008-8749(02)00579-8pubmed: 12473264google scholar: lookup
  13. Freedman SB, Horne R, Johnson-Henry K, Xie J, Williamson-Urquhart S, Chui L. Probiotic stool secretory immunoglobulin A modulation in children with gastroenteritis: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr (2021) 113:905–14.
    doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqaa369pmc: PMC8023833pubmed: 34269370google scholar: lookup
  14. Zheng Y, Xu L, Zhang S, Liu Y, Ni J, Xiao G. Effect of a probiotic formula on gastrointestinal health, immune responses and metabolic health in adults with functional constipation or functional diarrhea. Front Nutr (2023) 10:1196625.
    doi: 10.3389/fnut.2023.1196625pmc: PMC10368241pubmed: 37497057google scholar: lookup
  15. Zak A, Siwinska N, Slowikowska M, Borowicz H, Kubiak K, Hildebrand J. Searching for ivermectin resistance in a Strongylidae population of horses stabled in Poland. BMC Vet Res (2017) 13:210.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1133-1pmc: PMC5496315pubmed: 28673347google scholar: lookup
  16. Marr I, Preisler V, Farmer K, Stefanski V, Krueger K. Non-invasive stress evaluation in domestic horses (Equus caballus): Impact of housing conditions on sensory laterality and immunoglobulin A. R Soc Open Sci (2020) 7:191994.
    doi: 10.1098/rsos.191994pmc: PMC7062079pubmed: 32257351google scholar: lookup
  17. Bolyen E, Rideout JR, Dillon MR, Bokulich NA, Abnet CC, Al-Ghalith G. Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using qiime 2. Nat Biotechnol (2019) 37:852–7.
    doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0209-9pmc: PMC7015180pubmed: 31341288google scholar: lookup
  18. Marcel M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J (2011) 17:10–2.
    doi: 10.14806/ej.17.1.200google scholar: lookup
  19. Callahan B, McMurdie P, Rosen M, Han AW, Johmson AJA, Holmes SP. DADA2: High-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods (2016) 13:581–3.
    doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3869pmc: PMC4927377pubmed: 27214047google scholar: lookup
  20. Fuks G, Elgart M, Amir A, Zeisel A, Turnbaugh PJ, Soen Y. Combining 16S rRNA gene variable regions enables high-resolution microbial community profiling. Microbiome (2018) 6:17.
    doi: 10.1186/s40168-017-0396-xpmc: PMC5787238pubmed: 29373999google scholar: lookup
  21. Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res (2013) 41:D590–596.
    doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1219pmc: PMC3531112pubmed: 23193283google scholar: lookup
  22. Yilmaz P, Parfrey LW, Yarza P, Gerken J, Pruesse E, Quast C. The SILVA and All-species Living Tree Project (LTP) taxonomic frameworks. Nucleic Acids Res (2014) 42:D643–648.
    doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1209pmc: PMC3965112pubmed: 24293649google scholar: lookup
  23. Torii T, Kanemitsu K, Wada T, Itoh S, Kinugawa K, Hagiwara A. Measurement of short-chain fatty acids in human faeces using high- performance liquid chromatography: specimen stability. Ann Clin Biochem (2010) 47:447–52.
    doi: 10.1258/acb.2010.010047pubmed: 20595408google scholar: lookup
  24. Arpaia N, Campbell C, Fan X, Dikiy S, van der Veeken J, deRoos P. Metabolites produced by commensal bacteria promote peripheral regulatory T-cell generation. Nature (2013) 504:451–5.
    doi: 10.1038/nature12726pmc: PMC3869884pubmed: 24226773google scholar: lookup
  25. Reback J, Jbrockmendel, McKinney W, Van den Bossche J, Augspurger T, Colud P. Pandas (Version 1.2.5) [Software]. Zenodo (2021).
    doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5013202google scholar: lookup
  26. McKinney W. Data structures for statistical computing in Python. Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference SciPy; (2010). p. 56–61.
    doi: 10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00agoogle scholar: lookup
  27. Hunter JD. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Computing Sci Eng (2007) 9:90–5.
    doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55google scholar: lookup
  28. Caswell TA, Droettboom M, Lee A, Sales de Andrade E, Hoffmann T, Hunter J. matplotlib/matplotlib: REL: v3.4.3 (v3.4.3) [Software]. Zenodo (2021).
    doi: 10.5281/zenodo.5194481google scholar: lookup
  29. Harris CR, Millman KJ, van der Walt SJ, Gommers R, Virtanen P, Cournapeau D. Array programming with numPy. Nature (2020) 585:357–62.
    doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2pmc: PMC7759461pubmed: 32939066google scholar: lookup
  30. Waskom ML. seaborn: statistical data visualization. J Open Source Software (2021) 6:3021.
    doi: 10.21105/joss.03021google scholar: lookup
  31. Rideout JR, Caporaso G, Bolyen E, McDonald D, Vázquez Baeza Y, Alastuey JC. scikit-bio/scikit-bio: scikit-bio 0.6.0 (0.6.0). Zenodo (2024).
    doi: 10.5281/zenodo.10888788google scholar: lookup
  32. Chakravorty S, Helb D, Burday M, Connell N, Alland D. A detailed analysis of 16S ribosomal RNA gene segments for the diagnosis of pathogenic bacteria. J Microbiol Methods (2007) 69:330–9.
    doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2007.02.005pmc: PMC2562909pubmed: 17391789google scholar: lookup
  33. Yuyama T, Yusa S, Takai S, Tsubaki S, Kado Y, Morotomi M. Evaluation of a host-specific lactobacillus probiotic in neonatal foals. Int J Appl Res Veterinary Med (2004) 18:101–6.
    doi: 10.11209/jim.18.101google scholar: lookup
  34. Chaucheyras-Durand F, Sacy A, Karges K, Apper E. Gastro-intestinal microbiota in equines and its role in health and disease: the black box opens. Microorganisms (2022) 10:2517.
    doi: 10.3390/microorganisms10122517pmc: PMC9783266pubmed: 36557769google scholar: lookup
  35. Edwards JE, Shetty SA, van den Berg P, Burden F, van Doorn DA, Pellikaan WF. Multi-kingdom characterization of the core equine fecal microbiota based on multiple equine (sub)species. Anim Microbiome (2020) 2:6.
    doi: 10.1186/s42523-020-0023-1pmc: PMC7807809pubmed: 33499982google scholar: lookup
  36. Yuki N, Shimazaki T, Kushiro A, Watanabe K, Uchida K, Yuyama T. Colonization of the stratified squamous epithelium of the nonsecreting area of horse stomach by lactobacilli. Appl Environ Microbiol (2000) 66:5030–4.
    doi: 10.1128/AEM.66.11.5030-5034.2000pmc: PMC92416pubmed: 11055960google scholar: lookup
  37. Żak-Bochenek A, Żebrowska-Różańska P, Bajzert J, Siwińska N, Madej JP, Kaleta-Kuratewicz K. Comparison and characterization of the bacterial microbiota and SIgA production in different gastrointestinal segments in horses. Vet Res Commun (2024) 48:3605–20.
    doi: 10.1007/s11259-024-10489-8pmc: PMC11538275pubmed: 39180603google scholar: lookup
  38. Costa MC, Silva G, Ramos RV, Staempfli HR, Arroyo LG, Kim P. Characterization and comparison of the bacterial microbiota in different gastrointestinal tract compartments in horses. Vet J (2015) 205:74–80.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.03.018pubmed: 25975855google scholar: lookup
  39. Weese JS. Microbiologic evaluation of commercial probiotics. J Am Vet Med Assoc (2002) 220:794–7.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.2002.220.794pubmed: 11918274google scholar: lookup
  40. Desrochers AM, Dolente BA, Roy MF, Boston R, Carlisle S. Efficacy of Saccharomyces boulardii for treatment of horses with acute enterocolitis. J Am Vet Med Assoc (2005) 227:954–9.
    doi: 10.2460/javma.2005.227.954pubmed: 16190596google scholar: lookup
  41. Grimm P, Philippeau C, Julliand V. Faecal parameters as biomarkers of the equine hindgut microbial ecosystem under dietary change. Animal (2017) 11:1136–45.
    doi: 10.1017/S1751731116002779pubmed: 28065211google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,383 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.