Table 4 Effect of encapuslation of IgY on performance and the incidence of diarrhea in pigs challenged with E. coli
From: Alternatives to antibiotics as growth promoters for use in swine production: a review
| Â | Percentage of pigs with diarrhea after specific times (Fecal score in brackets)1 | Â | Â | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Items | 9Â h | 24Â h | 48Â h | 72Â h | Weight gain (g/d) | Recovery rate (%) |
Negative control, unchallenged | 0% (0.5) | 0% (0.0) | 0% (0.4) | 0% (0.0) | 116.6a | - |
Positive control | 75% (2.5) | 75% (2.5) | 75% (2.0) | 75% (2.0) | 13.5d | 0% |
Non-encapsulated IgY | 100% (2.0) | 75% (1.3) | 25% (1.0) | 0% (0.0) | 78.1b | 100% |
Microencapsulated IgY | 75% (2.0) | 0% (0.0) | 0% (0.0) | 0% (0.0) | 110.4a | 100% |
Aureomycin | 100% (2.0) | 50% (2.0) | 75% (1.5) | 50% (1.5) | 54.1c | 50% |