probiotics

[Cincy Ranchu]

I recently started feeding the koi and goldfish outside and noticed that this brand of wheat germ claimed probiotics, or beneficial bacteria in the pelleted mix. I also have some SAKI koi and some SAKI goldfish food. The SAKI offered some reasonable data of why it is important, the US manufactured wheat gern suggested some Bacillus species that were commonly used in bacterial cultures back in the 1980's. While I see the adds for probiotics in yoguert and understand they are taking about live yeast cultures, I am sketical that this is not much more than a skam to raise prices.

Goldfish and koi lack stomachs, having a primitive gut makes them relatively inefficient. I question wehter a dry bacteria culture has the residence time to rehydrate, and reproduce prior to becoming little more than fecal material.
Anybody ever ask these manufacturers for proof?

Any thoughts?

GH:youtellme:

[Virginia ranchu]

Hmmm, I think land animals, including people, can somewhat control what microbes they ingest, but it seems like a fish that mouths the muck in a pond all day would be pretty maxed out on the probiotics. Unless these are some sort of super bugs that can out-compete whatever else lives in the pond, or if the fish lives in a quasi-sterile environment, I can't see how they would become the dominant microbes in the fishes' gut.

[Cincy Ranchu]

Well Va Ranchu /Rob, these guys in the US are adding Bacillus, I am guessing as spores, how can this help, it has to be just marketing" sell the Americans some stuff with bugs in it, it sounds organics, we can get an extra $4 a pound?"

Anybody convinced!:yess::youtellme:

[Sabine]

I have been wondering about the benefit of adding lactobazillus (the bug that turns milk into yoghurt) to fish food for a while. This is a bug living in the guts of mammals - we are raised on milk, and lactobazillus helps digest milk sugar. I do wonder about the necessity for fish who do not come into contact with milk :youtellme:.
I'm not convinced ...

[*Ci*]

I have always added acidolpholus capsules to my gelfood - I figured goldies in a bare tank (and koi in a clean pond, for that matter) would be lacking in lactobacillus type bacteria, but whether or not they really need it, I don't know.
In humans, I've understood that these bacteria lived in the whole gastrointestinal trac and are also taken as supplements to decrease the chances of tumors and cancers.

[Cincy Ranchu]

The questions is really one of numbers, tank water contains hundreds to
1000's of bacteria /ml of water. Sedments and tank walls have even a higher cvell count, one wonders if adding Bacillus licheniformis and B. subtilis. Tiny, tiny doses of bacteria and bacteria prodcust such as spores seem to beworthless.

The SAKI products may have a stronger case for advanced biotechnology but we still have the question of exceedly tiny amounts of bacteria in the fish food that have been dried for months as compared to fish picking up mum from the bottom of the tank when it picks up a pellet. Pressuming the bacteria multiply at the same rate ( one divison every 30 minutes at 60F) it seems a 100X dose from the bottom of the tank always wins....

[bekko]

I agree.... it is probably snake oil. The probiotics created a labeling problem for Hikari and is the reason it has taken so long for the Sakai line to be marketed in the US.

However, probiotics can be useful when used in the culture medium (water) for intensive fry culture. They can prevent the occasional blooms of Vibrio and other nasties.

-steve

[dnalex]

Goldfish and koi lack stomachs, having a primitive gut makes them relatively inefficient. I question wehter a dry bacteria culture has the residence time to rehydrate, and reproduce prior to becoming little more than fecal material.
Anybody ever ask these manufacturers for proof?

Any thoughts?

GH:youtellme:

I know this is a really old thread, but this question has been one that I've been asking a lot. It's clear that feed containing probiotics can confer protection against lethal Aeromonas salmonicida infections in goldfish. Interestingly enough, research has been done to show that in rainbow trout, the beneficial effects of probiotics does not require for the probiotic organisms to actually be alive. So, while it's likely that there are multiple ways where probiotics can act to protect the fish host against bacterial pathogens, at least one mechanism of action is through probiotic-component stimulation of the fish's innate immune system.

Here are the papers on it.

Use of dead probiotic cells to control furunculosis in rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum).
Irianto A, Austin B.
J Fish Dis. 2003 Jan;26(1):59-62. No abstract available.

Oral administration of formalin-inactivated cells of Aeromonas hydrophila A3-51 controls infection by atypical A. salmonicida in goldfish, Carassius auratus (L.).
Irianto A, Robertson PA, Austin B.
J Fish Dis. 2003 Feb;26(2):117-20.

Effect of chemotherapy, vaccines and immunostimulants on innate immunity of goldfish infected with Aeromonas hydrophila.
Harikrishnan R, Balasundaram C, Heo MS.
Dis Aquat Organ. 2009 Dec 22;88(1):45-54.

[bekko]

If the microbes are not alive they would be called an immunostimulant rather than a probiotic.

There are some commercial probiotics made for incorporating into fish feed, but they seem impossible to buy in small quantities. Maybe they will eventually make their way to the retail suppliers like Aquatic Eco-Systems.

While it seems intuitive that the most effective probiotics would be those isolated from fish intestine, there have been some reports of Bacillus spp. from terrestrial sources being beneficial in fish feed. Bacillus subtillis comes to mind.

I went to the local health food store and bought a human probiotic with the largest number of species listed on the label and have been putting one or two capsules in very batch of food. The bottle is almost used up now and I can't say that I've noticed any difference in the fish. I tried to do a controlled study comparing feed with and without probiotics but did not have the opportunity to do a challenge study (intentionally exposing the fish to a known pathogen). The fish in both treatments remained healthy until the space was needed for something else.

-steve

[Cincy Ranchu]

I wonder if treating the tub/tank could havean effect, especially in cultures where people are draining water routinely? People sell sludge digester etc. for ponds, I wonder if it has a probiotic effect?

Iread the article that Rob posted on the Gel food thread this week , it seems to me that the experimental design was flawed because of the number of fish in a tanks.
Perhaps we should all write the manufacturers for their data

[dnalex]

If the microbes are not alive they would be called an immunostimulant rather than a probiotic.


Yes, it is true that they are immunostimulants; in this case, the immunostimulants are dead probiotic bacteria. Probiotic is just used to refer to the classes of (mostly) bacteria that are thought to have beneficial effects on their hosts.

My point is that probiotics seem to have beneficial effects both when alive and dead. Alive they serve as competitors for space in the gut; as inhibitors of pathogenic bacteria adhesion to target cells; as immunostimulants; and/or as manufacturers of low molecular weight antibiotics. When dead their components still can function as inhibitors of adhesion and as immunostimulants.

Steve, I am not at all surprised that your studies yielded little difference between the groups in your settings. Given your experience and skills as a goldfish breeder, I think it's safe to assume that living conditions for your fish are already superb. So, without the intentional lethal challenge, I would expect that both groups would fare excellently.