Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:27:02.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pet food and feed applications of inulin, oligofructose and other oligosaccharides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

E. A. Flickinger  and
G. C. Fahey Jr
E. A. Flickinger
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois, 132 Animal Sciences Laboratory, 1207 W. Gregory Drive, Urbana IL 61801, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Prebiotics may be considered as functional food ingredients. They are attracting considerable interest from pet owners, pet food manufacturers, livestock producers and feed manufacturers. The most common forms of prebiotics are nondigestible oligosaccharides (NDO), including inulin, oligofructose mannanoligosaccharides, gluco-oligosaccharides, and galacto-oligosaccharides. These NDO are nondigestible by enzymes present in the mammalian small intestine, but are fermented by bacteria present in the hindgut of nonruminants. Inulin and oligofructose are present in measurable quantities in feed ingredients like wheat, wheat by-products, barley, and peanut hulls. Consumption of prebiotic oligosaccharides elicits several purported health benefits. In companion animals, prebiotics have been shown to improve gut microbial ecology and enhance stool quality. In production livestock and poultry, prebiotics are employed to control pathogenic bacteria, reduce faecal odour, and enhance growth performance. Research to date indicates positive effects of prebiotics on health status and performance of companion animals, livestock, and poultry.

Keywords

PrebioticsFructansAnimal nutrition
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 87 , Issue S2 , May 2002 , pp. S297 - S300
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2002

References

Ammerman, E, Quarles, C & Twining, PV (1988) Broiler response to the addition of dietary fructooligosaccharides. Poultry Science 67, (Suppl), 1, (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Ammerman, E, Quarles, C & Twining, PV (1989) Evaluation of fructooligosaccharides on performance and carcass yield of male broilers. Poultry Science 68, (Suppl), 167, (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Araya-Kojima, T, Yaeshima, T, Ishibashi, N, Shimamura, S & Hayasawa, H (1995) Inhibitory effects of Bifidobacterium longum BB536 on harmful intestinal bacteria. Bifidobacteria Microflora 14, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, JR, Spencer, JL & Modler, HW (1997) The influence of complex carbohydrates on Salmonella typhimurium colonization, pH, and density of broiler ceca. Poultry Science 76, 445–451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farnworth, ER, Modler, HW, Jones, JD, Cave, N, Yamazaki, H & Rao, AV (1992) Feeding Jerusalem artichoke flour rich in fructooligosaccharides to weanling pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72, 977–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukata, T, Sasai, K, Miyamoto, T & Baba, E (1999) Inhibitory effects of competitive exclusion and fructooligosaccharide, singly and in combination, on Salmonella colonization of chicks. Journal of Food Protection 62, 229–233.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, GR & Roberfroid, MB (1995) Dietary modulation of the human colonic microbiota: introducing the concept of prebiotics. Journal of Nutrition 125, 1401–1412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, GR & Wang, X (1994) Regulatory effects of bifidobacteria on the growth of other colonic bacteria. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 77, 412–420.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Homma, N (1988) Bifidobacteria as a resistance factor in human beings. Bifidobacteria Microflora 7, 35–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houdijk, JGM, Bosch, MW, Verstegen, MWA & Berenpas, HJ (1998) Effects of dietary oliogsaccharides on the growth performance and faecal characteristics of young growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 71, 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussein, HS, Campbell, JM, Bauer, LL, Fahey, GC Jr, Hogarth, AJCL, Wolf, BW & Hunter, DE (1998) Selected fructooligosaccharide composition of pet food ingredients. Journal of Nutrition 128, 2803S–2805S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morisse, JP, Maurice, R, Boilletot, E & Cotte, JP (1993) Assessment of the activity of fructooligosaccharide on different caecal parameters in rabbits experimentally infected with E coli O103. Annales de Zootechnie 42, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, LE & Maribo, H (1999) Company products and feed for piglets. In Danish Slaughterhouse Report #443, [Igalac, FUT and Bokashi, F, editors]. Denmark: National Committee for Pig Breeding, Health and Production.Google Scholar
Quemener, B, Thibault, J-F & Coussement, P (1994) Determination of inulin and OF in food products, and integration in the AOAC method for measurement of total dietary fiber. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und-Technologie 27, 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberfroid, MB, Van Loo, JA & Gibson, ER (1998) The bifidogenic nature of chicory inulin and its hydrolysis products. Journal of Nutrition 128, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberfroid, M (2002) Functional Foods: concepts and application to inulin and oligofructose. British Journal of Nutrition 87, S139–S143, this issue.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowland, IR, Mallett, AK & Wise, A (1985) The effect of diet on the mammalian gut flora and its metabolic activities. CRC Critical Reviews in Toxicology 16, 31–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Loo, J, Coussement, P, Leenheer, LD, Hoebregs, H & Smits, G (1995) On the presence of inulin and OF as natural ingredients in the western diet. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 35, 525–552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Loo, J, Cummings, JH, Delzenne, N, Englyst, HN, Franck, A, Hopkins, MJ, Kok, N, Macfarlane, GT, Newton, DF, Quigley, ME, Roberfroid, MR, Van Vliet, T & Van den Heuvel, EGH (1999) Functional food properties of nondigestible oligosaccharides: a consensus report from the ENDO project (DGXII AIRII-CT94-1095). British Journal of Nutrition 81, 121–132.Google ScholarPubMed