In vitro assessment of the immunomodulatory effects of probiotic Bacillus strains on chicken PBMCs.

The beneficial effects of feeding probiotic Bacillus subtilis DSM 32315 (BS) and Bacillus velezensis CECT 5940 (BV) to chickens in vivo are well-documented, with potential immune modulation as a key mechanism. In this study, we investigated the direct interactions of chicken peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with BS or BV in vitro through whole transcriptome profiling and cytokine array analysis. Transcriptome profiling revealed 20 significantly differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in response to both Bacillus treatments, with twelve DEGs identified in BS-treated PBMCs and eight in BV-treated PBMCs. Pathway analysis using the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) indicated significant regulation of immune-related pathways by both BS and BV. Notably, BS treatment upregulated genes associated with immune cell surface markers (CD4, CD25, CD28), anti-inflammatory cytokine interleukin-10 (IL-10), and C-C motif chemokine ligand 5 (CCL5), while downregulating the gene encoding pro-inflammatory IL-16. BV treatment similarly affected genes associated with immune cell surface markers, IL-16, and CCL5, with no impact on the gene encoding IL-10. Both treatments induced higher expression of the gene encoding the avian β-defensin 1 (AvBD1). The results of this in vitro study indicate an immunomodulatory effect of BS and BV in chicken PBMCs by regulating genes involved in anti-inflammatory, bacteriostatic, protective, and pro-inflammatory responses. Consequently, BS and BV may serve to augment the immune system's capacity to defend against infection by modulating immune responses and cytokine expression. Thus, the administration of these probiotics holds promise for reducing reliance on antimicrobials in farming practices.
Competing Interests: Author GL was employed by the company Evonik Operations GmbH. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
(Copyright © 2024 Larsberg, Sprechert, Hesse, Falker-Gieske, Loh, Brockmann and Kreuzer-Redmer.)