Analyze Diet
Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins2025; doi: 10.1007/s12602-025-10734-9

Postbiotics and Parabiotics in Veterinary Medicine: A Market Overview.

Abstract: Postbiotics and parabiotics (PP) are innovative concepts in veterinary medicine that have garnered substantial interest owing to their unique properties and potential benefits. PP offers a promising alternative to live bacteria, demonstrating properties such as prebiotic, immunomodulatory, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anticancer effects, while potentially mitigating some of the common challenges associated with live bacterial applications. PP products are manufactured and commercially employed in livestock, poultry, and pets. Moreover, postbiotic-based commercial products have exhibited a diverse range of beneficial effects including enhanced gut health and microbiota, strengthened immune modulation, stress mitigation, and improved animal production. Moreover, their antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory properties make them viable dietary supplements or additives, potentially replacing antibiotics and addressing the growing concern of antibiotic resistance in the livestock industry. This work reviews the commercial applications of PP in animal nutrition and therapeutics, including in poultry, cattle, sheep, horses, and pet animals. The growing demand for PP products shows that we need to keep researching to find new uses for PP.
Publication Date: 2025-09-01 PubMed ID: 40889059PubMed Central: 9262730DOI: 10.1007/s12602-025-10734-9Google 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.
  • Journal Article
  • Review

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.

Overview

  • This research article reviews the current market and applications of postbiotics and parabiotics (PP) in veterinary medicine, focusing on their benefits as alternatives to live bacteria in animal health and production.

Introduction to Postbiotics and Parabiotics (PP)

  • Definition: PP are innovative veterinary health agents derived from microorganisms but are not live bacteria themselves.
  • Types of Effects: They exhibit prebiotic, immunomodulatory, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anticancer properties.
  • Advantages over Live Bacteria: They potentially avoid challenges often encountered with live probiotics, such as stability issues, safety concerns, and regulatory hurdles.

Applications in Veterinary Medicine

  • Target Species: Livestock (including cattle, sheep), poultry, horses, and pet animals.
  • Health Benefits:
    • Enhancement of gut health and balance of intestinal microbiota.
    • Immune system modulation leading to better disease resistance.
    • Reduction in stress effects, improving animal well-being.
    • Overall improvement in production parameters like growth and yield.
  • Therapeutic Use: Used as dietary supplements or feed additives to improve animal performance and health.

Commercial Market and Product Use

  • Product Forms: Manufactured PP products for use in various animal feed formulations and supplements.
  • Diverse Benefits Noted: Commercial products show antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory properties, contributing to animal health improvement.
  • Antibiotic Alternative: PP products are considered a promising substitute for antibiotics, addressing the critical issue of antibiotic resistance in livestock.

Implications and Future Research

  • Growing Market Demand: Increasing interest and demand for PP products in veterinary nutrition and therapeutics.
  • Research Needs: Continuous investigation to discover novel applications and optimize the benefits of PP in different animal species.
  • Potential Impact: Wider adoption of PP could enhance sustainable livestock production, improve animal welfare, and reduce reliance on antibiotics.

Cite This Article

APA
Hosseini SH, Sharafi H, Emamjomeh A, Nasri F, Hosseini A, Mardani S, Moradi M. (2025). Postbiotics and Parabiotics in Veterinary Medicine: A Market Overview. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-025-10734-9

Publication

ISSN: 1867-1314
NlmUniqueID: 101484100
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Hosseini, Seyede Hanieh
  • Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.
Sharafi, Houshmand
  • Department of Food Hygiene and Quality Control, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.
Emamjomeh, Amirhossein
  • Department of Food Hygiene and Quality Control, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.
Nasri, Fatemeh
  • Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.
Hosseini, Ali
  • Department of Food Hygiene and Quality Control, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.
Mardani, Sepideh
  • Department of Food Hygiene and Quality Control, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran.
Moradi, Mehran
  • Department of Food Hygiene and Quality Control, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran. m.moradi@urmia.ac.ir.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Declarations. Ethics Approval: This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects. Use of AI: The authors used Paperpal to improve the language and clarity of the text, and subsequently performed their own review and editing. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

This article includes 65 references
  1. Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G. Expert consensus document. The International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic.. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 11:506–514.
    doi: 10.1038/nrgastro.2014.66pubmed: 24912386google scholar: lookup
  2. Yaqoob MU, Wang G, Wang M. An updated review on probiotics as an alternative of antibiotics in poultry - a review.. Anim Biosci 35:1109–1120.
    doi: 10.5713/ab.21.0485pubmed: 35073660pmc: 9262730google scholar: lookup
  3. Moradi M, Molaei R, Guimarães JT. A review on preparation and chemical analysis of postbiotics from lactic acid bacteria.. Enzyme Microb Technol 143:109722.
  4. Leistikow KR, Beattie RE, Hristova KR. Probiotics beyond the farm: benefits, costs, and considerations of using antibiotic alternatives in livestock.. Front Antibiot .
    doi: 10.3389/frabi.2022.1003912pubmed: 39816405pmc: 11732145google scholar: lookup
  5. de Almada CN, de Almada CN, de Souza Sant’Ana A. Paraprobiotics as potential agents for improving animal Health.. In: Di Gioia D, Biavati B (eds) Probiotics and prebiotics in animal health and food safety. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 247–268.
  6. de Toledo Guimarães J, Barros C, Sharafi H. Postbiotics preparation for use in food and beverages.. In: Gomes da Cruz A, Silva MC, Colombo Pimentel T et al (eds) Probiotic foods and beverages : technologies and protocols. Springer US, New York, pp 223–242.
  7. Sharafi H, Divsalar E, Rezaei Z. The potential of postbiotics as a novel approach in food packaging and biopreservation: a systematic review of the latest developments.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr .
    doi: 10.1080/10408398.2023.2253909pubmed: 37667831google scholar: lookup
  8. Viswanathan K, Muthusamy S. Review on the current trends and future perspectives of postbiotics for developing healtheir foods.. eFood 3.
    doi: 10.1002/efd2.47google scholar: lookup
  9. Kaur S, Thukral SK, Kaur P, Samota MK. Perturbations associated with hungry gut microbiome and postbiotic perspectives to strengthen the microbiome health.. Futur Foods 4:100043.
  10. Lee N, Park Y-S, Kang D-K, Paik H-D. Paraprobiotics: definition, manufacturing methods, and functionality.. Food Sci Biotechnol 32:1981–1991.
    doi: 10.1007/s10068-023-01378-ypubmed: 37860741pmc: 10581967google scholar: lookup
  11. Deshpande G, Athalye-Jape G, Patole S. Para-probiotics for preterm neonates—the next frontier.. Nutrients .
    doi: 10.3390/nu10070871pubmed: 29976885pmc: 6073938google scholar: lookup
  12. Humam, Loh, Foo. Effects of feeding different postbiotics produced by Lactobacillus plantarum on growth performance, carcass yield, intestinal morphology, gut microbiota composition, immune status, and growth gene expression in broilers under heat stress.. Animals 9:644.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9090644google scholar: lookup
  13. Tukaram NM, Biswas A, Deo C. Effects of paraprobiotic as replacements for antibiotic on performance, immunity, gut health and carcass characteristics in broiler chickens.. Sci Rep 12:22619.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-27181-zpubmed: 36587047pmc: 9805422google scholar: lookup
  14. Zhang T, Zhang W, Feng C. Stronger gut microbiome modulatory effects by postbiotics than probiotics in a mouse colitis model.. NPJ Sci Food 6:53.
    doi: 10.1038/s41538-022-00169-9pubmed: 36379940pmc: 9666507google scholar: lookup
  15. Danladi Y, Loh TC, Foo. Effects of postbiotics and paraprobiotics as replacements for antibiotics on growth performance, carcass characteristics, small intestine histomorphology, immune status and hepatic growth gene expression in broiler chickens.. Animals .
    doi: 10.3390/ani12070917pubmed: 35405905pmc: 8997137google scholar: lookup
  16. Abd El-Ghany WA, Abdel-Latif MA, Hosny F et al (2022) Comparative efficacy of postbiotic, probiotic, and antibiotic against necrotic enteritis in broiler chickens. Poult Sci 101:101988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2022.101988
    doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2022.101988pubmed: 35809347pmc: 9272375google scholar: lookup
  17. Johnson CN, Kogut MH, Genovese K et al (2019) Administration of a postbiotic causes immunomodulatory responses in broiler gut and reduces disease pathogenesis following challenge. Microorganisms 7:080268. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms7080268
  18. Izuddin WI, Loh TC, Samsudin AA et al (2019) Effects of postbiotic supplementation on growth performance, ruminal fermentation and microbial profile, blood metabolite and GHR, IGF-1 and MCT-1 gene expression in post-weaning lambs. BMC Vet Res 15:315. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-019-2064-9
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-019-2064-9pubmed: 31477098pmc: 6719353google scholar: lookup
  19. Xu X, Duarte ME, Kim SW (2022) Postbiotic effects of Lactobacillus fermentate on intestinal health, mucosa-associated microbiota, and growth efficiency of nursery pigs challenged with F18+ Escherichia coli. J Anim Sci 100:skac210. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac210
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skac210pubmed: 35666999pmc: 9387594google scholar: lookup
  20. Ghimpețeanu OM, Pogurschi EN, Popa DC et al (2022) Antibiotic use in livestock and residues in food—a public health threat: a review. Foods 11:1430. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11101430
    doi: 10.3390/foods11101430pubmed: 35627000pmc: 9142037google scholar: lookup
  21. Yang L, Shen Y, Jiang J et al (2022) Distinct increase in antimicrobial resistance genes among Escherichia coli during 50 years of antimicrobial use in livestock production in China. Nat Food 3:197–205. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-022-00470-6
    doi: 10.1038/s43016-022-00470-6pubmed: 37117646google scholar: lookup
  22. Bacanlı M, Başaran N (2019) Importance of antibiotic residues in animal food. Food Chem Toxicol 125:462–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2019.01.033
    doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2019.01.033pubmed: 30710599google scholar: lookup
  23. Abd El-Ghany WA (2020) Paraprobiotics and postbiotics: contemporary and promising natural antibiotics alternatives and their applications in the poultry field. Open Vet J 10:323–330. https://doi.org/10.4314/ovj.v10i3.11
    doi: 10.4314/ovj.v10i3.11pubmed: 33282704pmc: 7703615google scholar: lookup
  24. Fernández C, Romero T, Badiola I et al (2023) Postbiotic yeast fermentation product supplementation to lactating goats increases the efficiency of milk production by enhancing fiber digestibility and ruminal propionate, and reduces energy losses in methane. J Anim Sci 101:skac370. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac370
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skac370pubmed: 36342746google scholar: lookup
  25. Abd El-Ghany WA, Fouad H, Quesnell R, Sakai L (2022) The effect of a postbiotic produced by stabilized non-viable Lactobacilli on the health, growth performance, immunity, and gut status of colisepticaemic broiler chickens. Trop Anim Health Prod 54:286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-022-03300-w
    doi: 10.1007/s11250-022-03300-wpubmed: 36083376pmc: 9463281google scholar: lookup
  26. Bearson SMD, Trachsel JM, Bearson BL et al (2023) Effects of β-glucan on Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium swine colonization and microbiota alterations. Porc Heal Manag 9:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-023-00302-4
  27. Middelbos IS, Godoy MR, Fastinger ND, Fahey GC (2007) A dose-response evaluation of spray-dried yeast cell wall supplementation of diets fed to adult dogs: effects on nutrient digestibility, immune indices, and fecal microbial populations1. J Anim Sci 85:3022–3032. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0079
    doi: 10.2527/jas.2007-0079pubmed: 17644789google scholar: lookup
  28. Hristov AN, Varga G, Cassidy T et al (2010) Effect of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product on ruminal fermentation and nutrient utilization in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 93:682–692. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2379
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2379pubmed: 20105539google scholar: lookup
  29. Duarte M, Oliveira AL, Oliveira C et al (2022) Current postbiotics in the cosmetic market—an update and development opportunities. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 106:5879–5891
    pubmed: 36008565
  30. Kanasugi H, Hasegawa T, Goto Y et al (1998) Single administration of enterococcal preparation (FK-23) augments non-specific immune responses in healthy dogs. Int J Immunopharmacol 19:655–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0192-0561(97)00109-4
  31. Varney JL, Coon CN, Norton SA (2021) PSV-B-20 effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product (SCFP) postbiotic in labrador retrievers during exercise and transport stress. J Anim Sci 99:332–333. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab235.611
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skab235.611pmc: 8506390google scholar: lookup
  32. Cicenia A, Scirocco A, Carabotti M et al (2014) Postbiotic activities of lactobacilli-derived factors. J Clin Gastroenterol 48(Suppl 1):S18–S22. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000000231
    doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000231pubmed: 25291118google scholar: lookup
  33. Falconer A (2022) Can probiotics help my dog’s itchy skin? Bestie Health. https://bestiehealth.com.au/blogs/nutrition/can-probiotics-help-my-dog-s-itchy-skin?srsltid=AfmBOooevy3AVpKcwHXY-5MR8bKpSyRATfZzGuJfjiN8Ekjv45JPbQMh
  34. Santoro D, Archer L, Fagman L (2021) Intradermal immunotherapy with actinomycetales preparations as treatment for feline atopic syndrome: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study. Vet Dermatol 32:638. https://doi.org/10.1111/vde.12946
    doi: 10.1111/vde.12946pubmed: 33890342google scholar: lookup
  35. Santoro D, Fagman L, Zhang Y, Fahong Y (2021) Clinical efficacy of spray-based heat-treated lactobacilli in canine atopic dermatitis: a preliminary, open-label, uncontrolled study. Vet Dermatol 32:114. https://doi.org/10.1111/vde.12915
    doi: 10.1111/vde.12915pubmed: 33245188google scholar: lookup
  36. Osumi T, Shimada T, Sakaguchi M, Tsujimoto H (2019) A double-blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of orally administered heat-killed Enterococcus faecalis FK-23 preparation in atopic dogs. Vet Dermatol 30:127. https://doi.org/10.1111/vde.12725
    doi: 10.1111/vde.12725pubmed: 30663154google scholar: lookup
  37. Wernimont SM, Radosevich J, Jackson MI et al (2020) The effects of nutrition on the gastrointestinal microbiome of cats and dogs: impact on health and disease. Front Microbiol 11:1–24
  38. Xiao J, Alugongo GM, Ji S et al (2018) Effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products on the microbial community throughout the gastrointestinal tract of calves. Animals 9:4. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9010004
    doi: 10.3390/ani9010004pubmed: 30577678pmc: 6356610google scholar: lookup
  39. Marins TN, Gutierrez Oviedo FA, Costa MLGF et al (2023) Impacts of feeding a Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product on productive performance, and metabolic and immunological responses during a feed-restriction challenge of mid-lactation dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 106:202–218
    pubmed: 36460513
  40. Henriott M, Hart K, Herrera N et al (2019) The impacts of feeding natursafe (an immune support product) on beef quality. Meat Muscle Biol 3:64–64. https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb2019.0064
    doi: 10.22175/mmb2019.0064google scholar: lookup
  41. Khalouei H, Seranatne V, Fehr K et al (2021) Effects of saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products and subacute ruminal acidosis on feed intake, fermentation, and nutrient digestibilities in lactating dairy cows. Can J Anim Sci 101:143–157. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjas-2020-0018
    doi: 10.1139/cjas-2020-0018google scholar: lookup
  42. Harris TL, Liang Y, Sharon KP et al (2017) Influence of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products, SmartCare in milk replacer and Original XPC in calf starter, on the performance and health of preweaned Holstein calves challenged with Salmonella enterica serotype Typhimurium. J Dairy Sci 100:7154–7164. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12509
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-12509pubmed: 28734601google scholar: lookup
  43. Butler JM, Kwan T, Reedy C et al (2018) 437 NaturSafe® increases volatile fatty acid production across various beef diets in vitro. J Anim Sci 96:234–235. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky073.434
    doi: 10.1093/jas/sky073.434google scholar: lookup
  44. Xiao JX, Alugongo GM, Chung R et al (2016) Effects of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products on dairy calves: ruminal fermentation, gastrointestinal morphology, and microbial community. J Dairy Sci 99:5401–5412. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-10563
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2015-10563pubmed: 27157569google scholar: lookup
  45. Izuddin WI, Loh TC, Foo HL et al (2019) Postbiotic L. plantarum RG14 improves ruminal epithelium growth, immune status and upregulates the intestinal barrier function in post-weaning lambs. Sci Rep 9:9938. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46076-0
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-46076-0pubmed: 31289291pmc: 6616331google scholar: lookup
  46. Shen Y, Wang H, Ran T et al (2018) Influence of yeast culture and feed antibiotics on ruminal fermentation and site and extent of digestion in beef heifers fed high grain rations1. J Anim Sci 96:3916–3927. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/sky249
    doi: 10.1093/jas/sky249pubmed: 30060086pmc: 6127774google scholar: lookup
  47. Tun HM, Li S, Yoon I et al (2020) Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products (SCFP) stabilize the ruminal microbiota of lactating dairy cows during periods of a depressed rumen pH. BMC Vet Res 16:237. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-020-02437-w
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-020-02437-wpubmed: 32653000pmc: 7353776google scholar: lookup
  48. Vailati-Riboni M, Coleman DN, Lopreiato V et al (2021) Feeding a Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product improves udder health and immune response to a Streptococcus uberis mastitis challenge in mid-lactation dairy cows. J Anim Sci Biotechnol 12:62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-021-00560-8
    doi: 10.1186/s40104-021-00560-8pubmed: 33827684pmc: 8028142google scholar: lookup
  49. Mahmoud AHA, Slate JR, Hong S et al (2020) Supplementing a saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product modulates innate immune function and ameliorates bovine respiratory syncytial virus infection in neonatal calves. J Anim Sci 98:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa252
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skaa252google scholar: lookup
  50. McDonald PO, Schill C, Maina TW et al (2021) Feeding Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation products lessens the severity of a viral–bacterial coinfection in preweaned calves. J Anim Sci. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skab300
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skab300pubmed: 34673945pmc: 8599294google scholar: lookup
  51. Duffield TF, Rabiee AR, Lean IJ (2008) A meta-analysis of the impact of monensin in lactating dairy cattle. Part 1. Metabolic effects. J Dairy Sci 91(4):1334–1346. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0607
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0607pubmed: 18349226google scholar: lookup
  52. Bartz BM, McIntyre DR, Grimes JL (2018) Effects of management related practices on Turkey hen performance supplemented with either original XPC™ or AviCare™. Front Vet Sci 5:1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2018.00185
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00185google scholar: lookup
  53. Liu C, Ma N, Feng Y et al (2023) From probiotics to postbiotics : concepts and applications. Anim Res One Health. https://doi.org/10.1002/aro2.7
    doi: 10.1002/aro2.7google scholar: lookup
  54. Sakai Y, Tsukahara T, Bukawa W et al (2006) Cell preparation of Enterococcus faecalis strain EC-12 prevents vancomycin-resistant Enterococci colonization in the cecum of newly hatched chicks. Poult Sci 85:273–277. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.2.273
    doi: 10.1093/ps/85.2.273pubmed: 16523627google scholar: lookup
  55. Loh TC, Choe DW, Foo HL et al (2014) Effects of feeding different postbiotic metabolite combinations produced by Lactobacillus plantarum strains on egg quality and production performance, faecal parameters and plasma cholesterol in laying hens. BMC Vet Res 10:149. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-6148-10-149
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-10-149pubmed: 24996258pmc: 4099141google scholar: lookup
  56. Humam AM, Loh TC, Foo HL et al (2020) Dietary supplementation of postbiotics mitigates adverse impacts of heat stress on antioxidant enzyme activity, total antioxidant, lipid peroxidation, physiological stress indicators, lipid profile and meat quality in broilers. Animals. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10060982
    doi: 10.3390/ani10060982pubmed: 32516896pmc: 7341226google scholar: lookup
  57. Chang HM, Foo HL, Loh TC et al (2020) Comparative studies of inhibitory and antioxidant activities, and organic acids compositions of postbiotics produced by probiotic Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains isolated from malaysian foods. Front Vet Sci 7:602280. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.602280
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.602280pubmed: 33575277google scholar: lookup
  58. Thorakkattu P, Khanashyam AC, Shah K et al (2022) Postbiotics: current trends in food and pharmaceutical industry. Foods 11:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11193094
    doi: 10.3390/foods11193094google scholar: lookup
  59. Danladi Y, Loh TC, Foo HL et al (2022) Impact of feeding postbiotics and paraprobiotics produced from Lactiplantibacillus plantarum on colon mucosa microbiota in broiler chickens. Front Vet Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.859284
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.859284pubmed: 35425828pmc: 9001976google scholar: lookup
  60. Moore GE, Leatherwood JL, Glass KG et al (2024) 86 Evaluation of dietary Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product on markers of joint inflammation in young, exercising horses following an intra-articular lipopolysaccharide challenge. J Anim Sci 102:19–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skae019.022
    doi: 10.1093/jas/skae019.022pmc: 10908510google scholar: lookup
  61. Lucassen A, Hankel J, Finkler-Schade C et al (2022) Feeding a Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product (Olimond BB) does not alter the fecal microbiota of thoroughbred racehorses. Animals. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121496
    doi: 10.3390/ani12121496pubmed: 35739833pmc: 9219515google scholar: lookup
  62. Lucassen A, Finkler-Schade C, Schuberth H-J (2021) A Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product (Olimond BB) alters the early response after influenza vaccination in racehorses. Animals. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11092726
    doi: 10.3390/ani11092726pubmed: 34573692pmc: 8466050google scholar: lookup
  63. Tench M, Bobel JM, Bazurto C et al (2021) Dietary Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentate affects mucosal immunity in young stress-challenged horses in training. J Equine Vet Sci 100:103503. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JEVS.2021.103503
  64. Urban JF, Nielsen MK, Gazzola D et al (2021) An inactivated bacterium (paraprobiotic) expressing Bacillus thuringiensis Cry5B as a therapeutic for Ascaris and Parascaris spp. infections in large animals. One Health 12:100241
    pubmed: 33889707pmc: 8048022
  65. Ganda E, Chakrabarti A, Sardi MI et al (2023) Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product improves robustness of equine gut microbiome upon stress. Front Vet Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1134092
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1134092pubmed: 36908513pmc: 9998945google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.