Intestinal microbiota of broilers submitted to feeding restriction and its relationship to hepatic metabolism and fat mass: Fast‐growing strain

The present study was conducted to verify how feed restriction affects gut microbiota and gene hepatic expression in broiler chickens and how these variables are related to body weight gain. For the experiment, 21‐d‐old Cobb500TM birds were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition 2019-07, Vol.103 (4), p.1070-1080
Hauptverfasser: Lunedo, Raquel, Furlan, Luiz R., Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F., Squassoni, Gustavo H., Campos, Daniel M. B., Perondi, Dani, Macari, Marcos
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1080
container_issue 4
container_start_page 1070
container_title Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition
container_volume 103
creator Lunedo, Raquel
Furlan, Luiz R.
Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F.
Squassoni, Gustavo H.
Campos, Daniel M. B.
Perondi, Dani
Macari, Marcos
description The present study was conducted to verify how feed restriction affects gut microbiota and gene hepatic expression in broiler chickens and how these variables are related to body weight gain. For the experiment, 21‐d‐old Cobb500TM birds were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design with three treatments: T1. Control (ad libitum—3.176 Mcal/kg ME—metabolizable energy—and 19% CP—crude protein); T2. Energetic restriction (2.224 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) from 22 to 42 days with consumption equivalent to control; T3. Quantitative restriction (70% restriction, i.e., restricted broilers ingested only 30% of the quantity consumed by the control group—3.176 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) for 7 days, followed by refeeding ad libitum from 28 to 42 days. Ileum and caecum microbiota collections were made at 21, 28 and 42 days of age. Hepatic tissue was collected at 28 and 42 days old for relative gene expression analyses. At 43‐d‐old, body composition was quantified by DXA (Dual‐energy X‐ray Absorptiometry). Both feed restriction programmes decreased Lactobacillus and increased Enterococcus and Enterobacteriaceae counts. No differences were found in the refeeding period. Energetic restriction induced the expression of CPT1‐A (Carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A) gene, and decreased body fat mass. Quantitative feed restriction increased lipogenic and decreased lipolytic gene expression. In the refeeding period, CPT1‐A gene expression was induced, without changing the broilers body composition. Positive associations were found between BWG (Body Weight Gain) and Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups, and negatively associations with Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus bacterial groups. In conclusion, differences found in microbiota were similar between the two feed restriction programmes, however, hepatic gene expression differences were only found in quantitative restriction. Higher counts of Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups in ileum are likely to be related to better broiler performance and low expression of lipogenic genes.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/jpn.13093
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2202202089</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2252039092</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3533-f8e743be95afa3b62cdad9f3235f9ea11216dc7aaf73e0157290ffdc09fa6d193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc1q3DAUhUVp6EynXfQFiqCbZOFEP2N7lF0I-ZkwtF20a3NtSYkG23IkDSG7PELyin2SXGcmXQQiLggdvntA5xDyjbNDjudoPfSHXDIlP5Apn0uVMamKj2SKCs8EChPyOcY1Y7zMWfGJTEZ2zuf5lDwt-2Ricj20tHNN8LXzCai3tA7etSZEGjd151IymiZPrTHa9dc04FJwTXK-p9Br6lJErYVRiDduGNkbM-C7oZ1JUPvWxe4FtZBoBzEe03OI6d_D43Xwd6MnOoLrv5A9C200X3f3jPw9P_tzepmtfl0sT09WWSNzKTO7MOVc1kblYEHWhWg0aGWlkLlVBjgXvNBNCWBLaRjPS6GYtbphykKhuZIzsr_1HYK_3eB3qs7FxrQt9MZvYiUEG4ctRvTHG3TtNwEjG6lcYNpMCaQOthSmGGMwthqC6yDcV5xVY08V9lS99ITs950jhmv0f_K1GASOtsAdlnD_vlN19fvn1vIZtOigpA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2252039092</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Intestinal microbiota of broilers submitted to feeding restriction and its relationship to hepatic metabolism and fat mass: Fast‐growing strain</title><source>Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals</source><source>MEDLINE</source><creator>Lunedo, Raquel ; Furlan, Luiz R. ; Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F. ; Squassoni, Gustavo H. ; Campos, Daniel M. B. ; Perondi, Dani ; Macari, Marcos</creator><creatorcontrib>Lunedo, Raquel ; Furlan, Luiz R. ; Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F. ; Squassoni, Gustavo H. ; Campos, Daniel M. B. ; Perondi, Dani ; Macari, Marcos</creatorcontrib><description>The present study was conducted to verify how feed restriction affects gut microbiota and gene hepatic expression in broiler chickens and how these variables are related to body weight gain. For the experiment, 21‐d‐old Cobb500TM birds were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design with three treatments: T1. Control (ad libitum—3.176 Mcal/kg ME—metabolizable energy—and 19% CP—crude protein); T2. Energetic restriction (2.224 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) from 22 to 42 days with consumption equivalent to control; T3. Quantitative restriction (70% restriction, i.e., restricted broilers ingested only 30% of the quantity consumed by the control group—3.176 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) for 7 days, followed by refeeding ad libitum from 28 to 42 days. Ileum and caecum microbiota collections were made at 21, 28 and 42 days of age. Hepatic tissue was collected at 28 and 42 days old for relative gene expression analyses. At 43‐d‐old, body composition was quantified by DXA (Dual‐energy X‐ray Absorptiometry). Both feed restriction programmes decreased Lactobacillus and increased Enterococcus and Enterobacteriaceae counts. No differences were found in the refeeding period. Energetic restriction induced the expression of CPT1‐A (Carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A) gene, and decreased body fat mass. Quantitative feed restriction increased lipogenic and decreased lipolytic gene expression. In the refeeding period, CPT1‐A gene expression was induced, without changing the broilers body composition. Positive associations were found between BWG (Body Weight Gain) and Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups, and negatively associations with Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus bacterial groups. In conclusion, differences found in microbiota were similar between the two feed restriction programmes, however, hepatic gene expression differences were only found in quantitative restriction. Higher counts of Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups in ileum are likely to be related to better broiler performance and low expression of lipogenic genes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0931-2439</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1439-0396</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jpn.13093</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30934145</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Adipose Tissue - metabolism ; Animal Feed - analysis ; Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena ; Animals ; Bacteria ; Birds ; Body Composition ; Body fat ; Body weight ; Body weight gain ; Carnitine ; Carnitine palmitoyltransferase ; Chickens ; Chickens - metabolism ; Clostridium ; Clusters ; Design of experiments ; Diet - veterinary ; Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry ; Energy ; Energy Metabolism ; Enterobacteriaceae ; Enterococcus ; Experimental design ; fast‐growing strain ; Fat metabolism ; feed restriction programmes ; Food Deprivation ; Gastrointestinal Microbiome ; Gene expression ; Gene Expression Regulation ; hepatic metabolism ; Ileum ; intestinal microbiota ; Intestinal microflora ; Intestine ; Lactobacillus ; Lipid Metabolism ; Liver ; Liver - metabolism ; Male ; Metabolism ; Microbiota ; Palmitoyltransferase ; Physical growth ; Poultry ; Weight Gain</subject><ispartof>Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition, 2019-07, Vol.103 (4), p.1070-1080</ispartof><rights>2019 Blackwell Verlag GmbH</rights><rights>2019 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3533-f8e743be95afa3b62cdad9f3235f9ea11216dc7aaf73e0157290ffdc09fa6d193</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3533-f8e743be95afa3b62cdad9f3235f9ea11216dc7aaf73e0157290ffdc09fa6d193</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5340-4442</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fjpn.13093$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fjpn.13093$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30934145$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lunedo, Raquel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlan, Luiz R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Squassoni, Gustavo H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campos, Daniel M. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perondi, Dani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Macari, Marcos</creatorcontrib><title>Intestinal microbiota of broilers submitted to feeding restriction and its relationship to hepatic metabolism and fat mass: Fast‐growing strain</title><title>Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition</title><addtitle>J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl)</addtitle><description>The present study was conducted to verify how feed restriction affects gut microbiota and gene hepatic expression in broiler chickens and how these variables are related to body weight gain. For the experiment, 21‐d‐old Cobb500TM birds were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design with three treatments: T1. Control (ad libitum—3.176 Mcal/kg ME—metabolizable energy—and 19% CP—crude protein); T2. Energetic restriction (2.224 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) from 22 to 42 days with consumption equivalent to control; T3. Quantitative restriction (70% restriction, i.e., restricted broilers ingested only 30% of the quantity consumed by the control group—3.176 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) for 7 days, followed by refeeding ad libitum from 28 to 42 days. Ileum and caecum microbiota collections were made at 21, 28 and 42 days of age. Hepatic tissue was collected at 28 and 42 days old for relative gene expression analyses. At 43‐d‐old, body composition was quantified by DXA (Dual‐energy X‐ray Absorptiometry). Both feed restriction programmes decreased Lactobacillus and increased Enterococcus and Enterobacteriaceae counts. No differences were found in the refeeding period. Energetic restriction induced the expression of CPT1‐A (Carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A) gene, and decreased body fat mass. Quantitative feed restriction increased lipogenic and decreased lipolytic gene expression. In the refeeding period, CPT1‐A gene expression was induced, without changing the broilers body composition. Positive associations were found between BWG (Body Weight Gain) and Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups, and negatively associations with Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus bacterial groups. In conclusion, differences found in microbiota were similar between the two feed restriction programmes, however, hepatic gene expression differences were only found in quantitative restriction. Higher counts of Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups in ileum are likely to be related to better broiler performance and low expression of lipogenic genes.</description><subject>Adipose Tissue - metabolism</subject><subject>Animal Feed - analysis</subject><subject>Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Bacteria</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Body Composition</subject><subject>Body fat</subject><subject>Body weight</subject><subject>Body weight gain</subject><subject>Carnitine</subject><subject>Carnitine palmitoyltransferase</subject><subject>Chickens</subject><subject>Chickens - metabolism</subject><subject>Clostridium</subject><subject>Clusters</subject><subject>Design of experiments</subject><subject>Diet - veterinary</subject><subject>Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry</subject><subject>Energy</subject><subject>Energy Metabolism</subject><subject>Enterobacteriaceae</subject><subject>Enterococcus</subject><subject>Experimental design</subject><subject>fast‐growing strain</subject><subject>Fat metabolism</subject><subject>feed restriction programmes</subject><subject>Food Deprivation</subject><subject>Gastrointestinal Microbiome</subject><subject>Gene expression</subject><subject>Gene Expression Regulation</subject><subject>hepatic metabolism</subject><subject>Ileum</subject><subject>intestinal microbiota</subject><subject>Intestinal microflora</subject><subject>Intestine</subject><subject>Lactobacillus</subject><subject>Lipid Metabolism</subject><subject>Liver</subject><subject>Liver - metabolism</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Metabolism</subject><subject>Microbiota</subject><subject>Palmitoyltransferase</subject><subject>Physical growth</subject><subject>Poultry</subject><subject>Weight Gain</subject><issn>0931-2439</issn><issn>1439-0396</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc1q3DAUhUVp6EynXfQFiqCbZOFEP2N7lF0I-ZkwtF20a3NtSYkG23IkDSG7PELyin2SXGcmXQQiLggdvntA5xDyjbNDjudoPfSHXDIlP5Apn0uVMamKj2SKCs8EChPyOcY1Y7zMWfGJTEZ2zuf5lDwt-2Ricj20tHNN8LXzCai3tA7etSZEGjd151IymiZPrTHa9dc04FJwTXK-p9Br6lJErYVRiDduGNkbM-C7oZ1JUPvWxe4FtZBoBzEe03OI6d_D43Xwd6MnOoLrv5A9C200X3f3jPw9P_tzepmtfl0sT09WWSNzKTO7MOVc1kblYEHWhWg0aGWlkLlVBjgXvNBNCWBLaRjPS6GYtbphykKhuZIzsr_1HYK_3eB3qs7FxrQt9MZvYiUEG4ctRvTHG3TtNwEjG6lcYNpMCaQOthSmGGMwthqC6yDcV5xVY08V9lS99ITs950jhmv0f_K1GASOtsAdlnD_vlN19fvn1vIZtOigpA</recordid><startdate>201907</startdate><enddate>201907</enddate><creator>Lunedo, Raquel</creator><creator>Furlan, Luiz R.</creator><creator>Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F.</creator><creator>Squassoni, Gustavo H.</creator><creator>Campos, Daniel M. B.</creator><creator>Perondi, Dani</creator><creator>Macari, Marcos</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5340-4442</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201907</creationdate><title>Intestinal microbiota of broilers submitted to feeding restriction and its relationship to hepatic metabolism and fat mass: Fast‐growing strain</title><author>Lunedo, Raquel ; Furlan, Luiz R. ; Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F. ; Squassoni, Gustavo H. ; Campos, Daniel M. B. ; Perondi, Dani ; Macari, Marcos</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3533-f8e743be95afa3b62cdad9f3235f9ea11216dc7aaf73e0157290ffdc09fa6d193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Adipose Tissue - metabolism</topic><topic>Animal Feed - analysis</topic><topic>Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Bacteria</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Body Composition</topic><topic>Body fat</topic><topic>Body weight</topic><topic>Body weight gain</topic><topic>Carnitine</topic><topic>Carnitine palmitoyltransferase</topic><topic>Chickens</topic><topic>Chickens - metabolism</topic><topic>Clostridium</topic><topic>Clusters</topic><topic>Design of experiments</topic><topic>Diet - veterinary</topic><topic>Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry</topic><topic>Energy</topic><topic>Energy Metabolism</topic><topic>Enterobacteriaceae</topic><topic>Enterococcus</topic><topic>Experimental design</topic><topic>fast‐growing strain</topic><topic>Fat metabolism</topic><topic>feed restriction programmes</topic><topic>Food Deprivation</topic><topic>Gastrointestinal Microbiome</topic><topic>Gene expression</topic><topic>Gene Expression Regulation</topic><topic>hepatic metabolism</topic><topic>Ileum</topic><topic>intestinal microbiota</topic><topic>Intestinal microflora</topic><topic>Intestine</topic><topic>Lactobacillus</topic><topic>Lipid Metabolism</topic><topic>Liver</topic><topic>Liver - metabolism</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Metabolism</topic><topic>Microbiota</topic><topic>Palmitoyltransferase</topic><topic>Physical growth</topic><topic>Poultry</topic><topic>Weight Gain</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lunedo, Raquel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlan, Luiz R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Squassoni, Gustavo H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campos, Daniel M. B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perondi, Dani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Macari, Marcos</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lunedo, Raquel</au><au>Furlan, Luiz R.</au><au>Fernandez‐Alarcon, Miguel F.</au><au>Squassoni, Gustavo H.</au><au>Campos, Daniel M. B.</au><au>Perondi, Dani</au><au>Macari, Marcos</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Intestinal microbiota of broilers submitted to feeding restriction and its relationship to hepatic metabolism and fat mass: Fast‐growing strain</atitle><jtitle>Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition</jtitle><addtitle>J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl)</addtitle><date>2019-07</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>103</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1070</spage><epage>1080</epage><pages>1070-1080</pages><issn>0931-2439</issn><eissn>1439-0396</eissn><abstract>The present study was conducted to verify how feed restriction affects gut microbiota and gene hepatic expression in broiler chickens and how these variables are related to body weight gain. For the experiment, 21‐d‐old Cobb500TM birds were distributed in a completely randomized experimental design with three treatments: T1. Control (ad libitum—3.176 Mcal/kg ME—metabolizable energy—and 19% CP—crude protein); T2. Energetic restriction (2.224 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) from 22 to 42 days with consumption equivalent to control; T3. Quantitative restriction (70% restriction, i.e., restricted broilers ingested only 30% of the quantity consumed by the control group—3.176 Mcal/kg ME and 19% CP) for 7 days, followed by refeeding ad libitum from 28 to 42 days. Ileum and caecum microbiota collections were made at 21, 28 and 42 days of age. Hepatic tissue was collected at 28 and 42 days old for relative gene expression analyses. At 43‐d‐old, body composition was quantified by DXA (Dual‐energy X‐ray Absorptiometry). Both feed restriction programmes decreased Lactobacillus and increased Enterococcus and Enterobacteriaceae counts. No differences were found in the refeeding period. Energetic restriction induced the expression of CPT1‐A (Carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A) gene, and decreased body fat mass. Quantitative feed restriction increased lipogenic and decreased lipolytic gene expression. In the refeeding period, CPT1‐A gene expression was induced, without changing the broilers body composition. Positive associations were found between BWG (Body Weight Gain) and Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups, and negatively associations with Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus bacterial groups. In conclusion, differences found in microbiota were similar between the two feed restriction programmes, however, hepatic gene expression differences were only found in quantitative restriction. Higher counts of Lactobacillus and Clostridium cluster IV groups in ileum are likely to be related to better broiler performance and low expression of lipogenic genes.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>30934145</pmid><doi>10.1111/jpn.13093</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5340-4442</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0931-2439
ispartof Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition, 2019-07, Vol.103 (4), p.1070-1080
issn 0931-2439
1439-0396
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2202202089
source Wiley Online Library - AutoHoldings Journals; MEDLINE
subjects Adipose Tissue - metabolism
Animal Feed - analysis
Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena
Animals
Bacteria
Birds
Body Composition
Body fat
Body weight
Body weight gain
Carnitine
Carnitine palmitoyltransferase
Chickens
Chickens - metabolism
Clostridium
Clusters
Design of experiments
Diet - veterinary
Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry
Energy
Energy Metabolism
Enterobacteriaceae
Enterococcus
Experimental design
fast‐growing strain
Fat metabolism
feed restriction programmes
Food Deprivation
Gastrointestinal Microbiome
Gene expression
Gene Expression Regulation
hepatic metabolism
Ileum
intestinal microbiota
Intestinal microflora
Intestine
Lactobacillus
Lipid Metabolism
Liver
Liver - metabolism
Male
Metabolism
Microbiota
Palmitoyltransferase
Physical growth
Poultry
Weight Gain
title Intestinal microbiota of broilers submitted to feeding restriction and its relationship to hepatic metabolism and fat mass: Fast‐growing strain
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T05%3A03%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Intestinal%20microbiota%20of%20broilers%20submitted%20to%20feeding%20restriction%20and%20its%20relationship%20to%20hepatic%20metabolism%20and%20fat%20mass:%20Fast%E2%80%90growing%20strain&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20animal%20physiology%20and%20animal%20nutrition&rft.au=Lunedo,%20Raquel&rft.date=2019-07&rft.volume=103&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1070&rft.epage=1080&rft.pages=1070-1080&rft.issn=0931-2439&rft.eissn=1439-0396&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jpn.13093&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2252039092%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2252039092&rft_id=info:pmid/30934145&rfr_iscdi=true