ELIMINATION OF PATHOGENIC BACTERIUM, Aeromonas hydrophila BY THE USE OF PROBIOTICS

The present investigation was carried out to study the elimination of pathogenic, chloroamphinicol resistant Aeromonas hydrophila (A. hydrophilaChr) by the use of single pro-biotics; Probiotic 1 (Lactobacillus sporogenes), Probiotic 2 (Saccharomyces boulardii) or mixture of probiotics; Probiotic 3 (Nitromonas spp., Rhodococcus spp., Bacilus megaterium, Lecheni formis, Desulphovibrio sulphuricum, Psuedomonas spp., Chromatium spp., Chloro-bium spp., Thiobacillus spp., Thioxidants spp., Thiobacilus ferroxidant, Methylomonas methyanica, Glucon acetobactor, Azospirillum spp., Trichoderma spp., Shizophyllum commune and Sclertium gluconicum); in vitro as well as in vivo. For this purpose probiotics 1, 2 and 3 were tested against the pathogenic Aeromonas hydrophilachr. In vitro experiment revealed that the zones of inhibition of probiotic 1 were highest than probiotic 3 followed by probiotic 2 with values of 19.67 ± 0.67, 19.33 ± 0.33 and 17.00 ±0.58 mm, respectively. In vivo experi-ment also showed that the elimination of pathogenic A. hydrophilachr from 1.54 x 1011 CFU/mL to 1.90 x 101, 2.30 x 101 and 5.33 x 101 CFU/mL lasted four weeks by probiotic 1, probiotic 3 and probiotic 2, respecticvely. In conclusion, the viable counts of pathogenic bacterium were the highest in the fish inoculated only with the pathogenic bacteria 6.07x1012 cells/mL in four weeks. Probiotic cultures used had significantly reduced the viable count of A. hydrophila in fish. The numbers of viable counts was the lowest in catfishes treated with probiotic 1 followed by probiotic 3 and probiotic 2 over a period of four weeks.

[1]  M. Mancuso Probiotics in Aquaculture , 2014 .

[2]  Wei-fen Li,et al.  Inhibition ability of probiotic, Lactococcus lactis , against A. hydrophila and study of its immunostimulatory effect in tilapia ( Oreochromis niloticus ) , 2011 .

[3]  S. Nimrat,et al.  In vitro evaluation of commercial probiotic products used for marine shrimp cultivation in Thailand , 2011 .

[4]  M. Heo,et al.  Use of herbal concoction in the therapy of goldfish [Carassius auratus] infected with Aeromonas hydrophila , 2009 .

[5]  A. Kesarcodi-Watson,et al.  Probiotics in aquaculture: The need, principles and mechanisms of action and screening processes , 2008 .

[6]  K. Nour-Eddine,et al.  IN VITRO PRESELECTION CRITERIA FOR PROBIOTIC LACTOBACILLUS PLANTARUM STRAINS OF FERMENTED OLIVES ORIGIN , 2006 .

[7]  B. Gómez‐Gil,et al.  Culture of Vibrio alginolyticus C7b, a potential probiotic bacterium, with the microalga Chaetoceros muelleri , 2002 .

[8]  I. Karunasagar,et al.  Inhibition of shrimp pathogenic vibrios by a marine Pseudomonas I-2 strain , 2002 .

[9]  W. Verstraete,et al.  Probiotic Bacteria as Biological Control Agents in Aquaculture , 2000, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews.

[10]  L. Gram,et al.  Inhibition of Vibrio anguillarum byPseudomonas fluorescens AH2, a Possible Probiotic Treatment of Fish , 1999, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[11]  B. Austin,et al.  A probiotic strain of Vibrio alginolyticus effective in reducing diseases caused by Aeromonas salmonicida, Vibrio anguillarum and Vibrio ordalii , 1995 .

[12]  E. Ringø,et al.  Microflora of Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.): gastrointestinal microflora of free‐living fish and effect of diet and salinity on intestinal microflora , 1994 .