Review

The Promising Future of Resistant Starch as a Prebiotic for Enhancing Gut Health and Organic Meat Production in the Poultry Industry

Muhammad Saeed1,2 and Guiqin Liu1,2*

1College of Agriculture and Biology, Liaocheng University, Liaocheng, China; 2Shandong Donkey Industry Technology Collaborative Innovation Center, Liaocheng, China.

Received | August 11, 2025; Accepted | September 22, 2025; Published | September 27, 2025

*Correspondence | Guiqin Liu, College of Agriculture and Biology, Liaocheng University, Liaocheng, China; Email: [email protected]

Citation | Saeed, M. and G. Liu. 2025. The promising future of resistant starch as a prebiotic for enhancing gut health and organic meat production in the poultry industry. Advances in Agriculture and Animal Sciences, 41(1): 28-39.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.aaas/2025/41.1.28.39

Keywords | Resistant starch, Natural feed additive, Gut microbes, Production performance, Broiler

Copyright: 2025 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction

Intestinal health problems in poultry are common and remain a persistent challenge. The use of antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) has historically played a significant role in broiler production by reducing gastrointestinal issues and improving feed conversion efficiency. However, the misuse of antibiotics has contributed to the rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and the presence of antibiotic residues in meat. Around two decades ago, the use of antibiotics and antimicrobials in animal feed to enhance performance began to face increasing public scrutiny and political debate (Vondruskova et al., 2010).

In response, extensive research over the past 20 years has focused on developing alternatives to in-feed antibiotics to maintain animal health and performance (Zimmermann et al., 2001; Erickson and Hubbard, 2000; Hayhoe et al., 2022). The growing need for antibiotic-free broiler production has driven scientists to explore viable substitutes (Zhu et al., 2021; Cervantes, 2015; Haque et al., 2020). In alignment with market demand and efforts to combat AMR, many poultry farmers are shifting toward antibiotic-free production. They are reducing or eliminating antimicrobial feed additives while seeking ways to improve feed efficiency, growth performance, and gut health. Probiotics and phytobiotics have emerged as promising alternatives to AGPs (Fonseca et al., 2024).

The increasing demand for natural and functional feed additives in the poultry industry has led to innovations targeting gut health and growth promotion without the use of antibiotics (Ayalew et al., 2022). Among these, resistant starch (RS) has garnered attention for its ability to support a healthy gut microbiota, improve nutrient absorption, and enhance overall animal performance (Zhu et al., 2021). Consumer demand for high-quality products with health-promoting attributes has also fueled advancements in feed formulation and modern food processing techniques (Bolek, 2021; Khaneghah, 2021).

To support gut health, several dietary strategies have been employed, including the use of enzymes, probiotics, prebiotics, amino acids, and other bioactive compounds. Functional starches, such as RS, represent another promising approach (Dobranowski and Stintzi, 2021). RS, a type of starch that resists digestion in the small intestine, acts as a prebiotic by being fermented by microbiota in the large intestine (Landon et al., 2012; Slavin, 2013; Davani-Davari et al., 2019). As a functional dietary fiber, RS helps regulate gut health by promoting beneficial microbial activity in the hindgut.

Gut health is characterized by efficient digestion and nutrient absorption, a balanced intestinal microbiota, a strong immune response, and overall animal well-being (Bischoff, 2011). RS has shown the ability to influence intestinal health and support the growth of beneficial microbial populations (Qin et al., 2023). Because it bypasses digestion in the upper gastrointestinal tract, RS reaches the ceca, where it is fermented to produce short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), such as acetate, propionate, and butyrate (Landon et al., 2012). These SCFAs play vital roles in enhancing gut barrier function, nutrient absorption, and immune response (Macfarlane and Macfarlane, 2003).

Of the three main SCFAs, butyrate is considered the most beneficial for gut health and is strongly influenced by RS intake (Fuentes-Zaragoza et al., 2010; Demartino and Cockburn, 2020). For instance, supplementing the diet of Cherry Valley ducks with 120 g/kg of raw potato starch (RPS) for 35 days increased cecal concentrations of acetate, propionate, and butyrate (Qin et al., 2019). RS also lowers the pH in the ceca, creating a hostile environment for pathogenic bacteria and regulating SCFA production (Roy et al., 2006; Regassa and Nyachoti, 2018).

Resistant starch is classified into four types (Wang et al., 2023a): RS1, which is found in whole or coarsely ground grains and legumes; RS2, present in raw potatoes and unripe bananas; RS3, which forms when starchy foods such as rice or potatoes are cooked and then cooled; and RS4, which consists of chemically modified starches. While RS has demonstrated health benefits, some studies have also reported potential drawbacks. For instance, Zhang et al. (2020b) found that RS might affect intestinal morphology by activating the Notch pathway and suppressing goblet cell proliferation, resulting in decreased mucin production and tight junction gene expression.

Nonetheless, RS-rich diets have been associated with various health benefits, including reduced postprandial glycemia and insulinemia, improved mineral absorption, enhanced satiety, and better intestinal function (Sajilata et al., 2006; da Silva et al., 2012). SCFAs also modulate the metabolism of enterocytes and colonocytes, influencing intestinal muscle tone and blood flow. RS intake has been linked to improved gut barrier integrity, lower blood glucose and cholesterol levels, and reduced inflammation and risk of colon cancer in both animal and human studies (Bojarczuk et al., 2022).

In poultry, Ariza-Nieto et al. (2012) reported that pigeons fed RPS showed improved gut morphology, with higher villus-to-crypt ratios in the duodenum and jejunum compared to control groups, indicating potential benefits for intestinal structure and nutrient absorption.

Although numerous studies across various species have highlighted the benefits of RS, research specifically focused on poultry remains limited. This review aims to underscore the importance of addressing consumer demand for natural and health-promoting approaches in poultry nutrition. Emphasizing alternatives like RS can support a more sustainable and health-conscious future for poultry production systems.

Different types of resistant starches

The term “resistant starch” was first used to describe the part of starch that cooled down in cooked foods but α-amylase couldn’t break down. Then, this meaning was expanded to include starch and the parts of it that break down in the large intestine and become food for microbes to ferment (Englyst et al., 1982; Englyst et al., 1996). Later, RS was named as a similar carbohydrate that should be thought of as nutritional fiber (Champ, 2004).

RS type 1 (RS1) starches are inaccessible to the body in cereal and pulse diets. Amylolytic enzymes cannot access starches contained within intact plant cells or uncooked grains. Native resistant starch crystals (RS2) are present in raw potatoes and green bananas. They readily transform into gelatin when combined with water at 60°C. High amylose cornstarch is another type of RS 2 that doesn’t turn into gelatin at temperatures above 120°C. Retrograded starches (RS type 3) happen when starchy foods like bread and potatoes are cooked and turn into gelatinize. When they are cooled, they return to their original shape. Chemical changes are made to RS type 4 (RS4) carbs to stop amylase from working. For this, chemical bonds are made by dextrinization, etherification, esterification, oxidation, and cross-linking with chemicals (Champ, 2004; Birkett and Brown, 2008; Miao and Hamaker, 2021). Table 1 exhibited different kinds of resistance starches.

Different sources of resistant starches

RS is present in nearly all starchy foods, albeit in varying quantities. The quantity of starch is contingent upon the starch’s structural formation during biosynthesis and the methods of food preparation, processing, and storage, applicable in both domestic and industrial contexts (Rahman et al., 2007). Starch is present in plant tissues including leaves, tubers, fruits, and seeds. RS exists in both processed and unprocessed food items. Instances of this phenomenon include bananas and mangos, which, in their unripe state, contain high levels of RS, approximately 70–80% in mangos and 40–50% in bananas, while having minimal amounts of simple carbohydrates such as glucose, fructose, and sucrose (Sandhu and Lim, 2008). Additionally, legumes and cereal grains are also recognized as natural sources of RS, as shown in Table 2.

 

Table 1: Different types of resistant starches.

Kind of RS	Explanation of RS	Examples	Reference
RS1	Resistant starch that is physically inaccessible	Whole-kernel grains or Coarsely ground	Englyst et al., 1992
RS 2	It is granular starch that has the B- or C-polymorph.	Raw potato, corn starch with a lot of amyloses, banana starch	Englyst et al., 1992; Trachsel et al., 2019
RS3	Naturally occurring retrograded starch during food processing	Cooled down cooked starchy foods, wheat, rice	Woo and Seib, 2002; Giuberti et al., 2012
RS 4	Changes made to starches chemically	Starch with cross-links and octenyl succinate	Han and BeMiller, 2007

 

Table 2: Legumes and cereal grains as natural RS sources (g/100 g as eaten).

Different sources	Total dietary fiber	Total starch	Resistant starch
Legumes
Black-eyed peas	32.8	53.9	17.7
Red kidney beans	36.8	42.6	24.6
Lentils	33.1	53.3	25.4
Flours
Wheat	12.1	68.8	1.7
Potato	2.1	81.0	1.7
Corn	2.8	84.3	11.0
Cereal grains
Oats	37.7	43.4	7.2
Barley	17.0	52.2	18.2
White rice	1.5	95.1	14.1
Cereal products
White bread	n/a	46.7	1.9
Cooked spaghetti	n/a	n/a	2.9
Puffed wheat cereal	n/a	67.0	1.2
Potato products
Chips	n/a	29.5	4.8
Mashed potatoes	n/a	n/a	2.4
Boiled potatoes	n/a	n/a	2.0

 

Adapted from Lunn and Buttriss (2007); n/a: it mean not available.

 

Prebiotic effect of resistant starch

Resistant starch, a recognized prebiotic, has been incorporated into fiber-rich foods to modulate the gut microbiome and support overall health. Beneficial gut bacteria can selectively ferment RS, inhibiting the growth of potentially harmful microorganisms and thereby contributing to a balanced and healthy gut microbiome (Davis et al., 2011; Fuentes-Zaragoza et al., 2011). Prebiotics like RS are known to promote the proliferation of beneficial microbial populations, including Akkermansia, Eubacterium, Propionibacterium, Roseburia, and Faecalibacterium, in addition to the well-established probiotic genera Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium (Rezende et al., 2021; Włodarczyk and Śliżewska, 2021).

A group of prebiotics known as RS is distinguished by the fact that it is starch that is able to avoid being digested in the small intestine and instead makes its way to the large intestine (Keenan et al., 2015; Nugent, 2005). According to a review of studies that looked at how RS could specifically boost the growth and activity of good gut bacteria, type II RS was discovered to encourage the growth of Bifdobacterium and Bacteroidetes in mice (Sybille et al., 2013). According to (Purwani et al., 2012), the use of type III RS in vitro improved SCFA synthesis and aided Bifdobacterium proliferation. Although in vitro applications, type IV RS altered the characteristics of bacterial populations; in a clinical investigation, it also raised the synthesis of SCFA and lowered colonic pH (Erickson et al., 2018; Upadhyaya et al., 2016). The available evidence suggests that RS may have prebiotic properties; hence, there is a great deal of interest in the area of contemporary animal and human health related to the change of microbiota by means of RS. The caecal barrier function, intestinal shape, microbiota composition, inflammatory indicators, and barrier marker expression were all enhanced in ducks given meals containing 12% RPS. In comparison to the control diet, the 24% RPS diet had considerably greater levels of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium (Qin et al., 2020). The fermentation of RS promotes the proliferation of beneficial gut bacteria such as Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus, supporting its classification as a potential prebiotic (Tekin and Dincer, 2023). Microbiota analyses have shown that broilers fed diets containing 8% and 12% RS exhibited a 23.08% and 20.47% reduction in cecal Firmicutes, respectively, along with a corresponding 24.33% and 21.92% increase in Bacteroidetes, compared to the negative control group (P < 0.05) (Zhang et al., 2020a).

Beneficial impacts of RS on Gut health

Resistant starch has the potential to enhance gut health and function by altering and stabilizing the gut microbial ecology and by augmenting the host’s immune condition (Regassa and Nyachoti, 2018). It can also change the expression in the gut of genes that control the immune system, which in turn affects gut health. Among SCFA, butyrate, which is made by RS fermentation, is the main source of energy for colonocytes and is thought to affect the operation of the intestinal barrier and immunity (Peng et al., 2009; Leonel and Alvarez-Leite, 2012). RS has been demonstrated to induce gastrointestinal motility, minimize the transit time of intestinal contents, and boost feces volume; consequently, it helps prevent constipation occurrence (Qian et al., 2013; Wang et al., 2014). Dietary RS reduced ileum permeability and upregulated Mucin-2 and tight junction protein expression in ducks. Metabolomics demonstrated that RS diet treatment group metabolites were mostly connected with amino acid and lipid metabolism, vitamin metabolism pathway, and intestinal inflammation, helping explain how RS promotes intestinal health (Qin et al., 2023). Randomized controlled research showed that the RS diet changes gut flora using phylogenetic chip and quantitative PCR analysis, yet the diet only partially explained microbiota composition, much less than individual variability. This study shows that individual microbial flora respond differently to the diet, which is essential when assessing the impact of RS on intestinal integrity (Salonen et al., 2014). The most significant microbial activity transpires in the cecum and proximal colon of pigs; yet, considerable microbial activity also occurs in the distal portion of the small intestine (Knudsen et al., 1991; Jensen and Jørgensen, 1994). A meta-analysis of 24 research articles demonstrated that augmenting RS type 2 to a minimum dietary level of 10% in pigs decreased pH and enhanced the presence of Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria in feces, hence potentially inhibiting the proliferation of pathogenic bacteria in the hindgut (Metzler-Zebeli et al., 2019). Altering the metabolism of enterocytes and colonocytes is one of the ways that SCFAs contribute to the proper functioning of the lower digestive tract. This has an effect on the muscles and blood vessels in the intestines. In both humans as well as mice, the consumption of RS has been linked to numerous health advantages, including prebiotic properties, reductions in cholesterol and blood glucose levels, enhanced gut barrier integrity, and a decreased risk of inflammation and colon cancer (Bojarczuk et al., 2022). In addition, studies conducted on pigs and rats demonstrated that the health of the animals was enhanced against infections and that the intestinal shape was transformed (Bhandari et al., 2009; Kleessen et al., 1997). The cecum is the only place where RS is broken down. This changes the microbiota makeup of the cecum and increases the amount of SCFAs in both (Bhandari et al., 2009). Supplementation with RS may have augmented the tibial mass of meat ducks. Supplementation with 12% raw potato starch inhibited inflammation and modified gut microbiota and SCFAs production. Consequently, the reduction of inflammatory cytokine-mediated bone resorption resulted in an augmentation of bone mass (Zhang et al., 2022).

The aforementioned literature highlights the positive effects of RS on gut health and offers practical guidance for further research into its potential as an alternative to in-feed antibiotics. It also emphasizes the need for more targeted approaches to identify specific types of RS or other dietary fibers that effectively promote gut health.

Effects of resistant starches on growth performance

The ability of butyrate to suppress the growth of common pathogenic organisms in chicken has been examined through a variety of trials. In a study that investigated the capacity of butyrate to mitigate the adverse effects of coccidian, it was shown that birds that were given butyric acid before to the challenge saw higher rates of growth compared to those that were given non-medicated diet (Leeson et al., 2005). The better gut health brought about by butyrate medication helps to explain this better development performance. In young hens, similarly, coated butyric acid greatly reduced cecal Salmonella Enteritidis colonization at 3 days post-infection in comparison with control poultry birds (Van Immerseel et al., 2005) and butyrate-based additives demonstrated a noteworthy decrease in Salmonella Enteritidis infection in broiler chicks aged 1 day following 27 days of feeding throughout a 42-day experiment (Fernández-Rubio et al., 2009). Additionally, RS may lessen the production of toxic nitrogenous metabolites that result from consuming meals high in crude protein (Mu et al., 2016). According to the findings of the study, feeding broilers diets that had greater levels of RS was detrimental to the development of their small intestine. Because of this, it appeared as though the hens did not absorb as many nutrients, which resulted in a decrease in body weight gain (BWG), feed efficiency, and adverse carcass quality (Liu et al., 2020). Figure 1 illustrates the roles of RS in improving carcass quality, enhancing gut health and function, modulating and maintaining gut microbiota, and optimizing energy metabolism and growth performance in pigs and poultry (Regassa and Nyachoti, 2018).

 

Promising effects of resistant starch in poultry nutrition

Consumer concern and the ban of antibiotic feed additives in some countries have compelled the quest for feed components that can promote poultry development and gut health (Vondruskova et al., 2010). Consequently, feed additives such RS can enhance beneficial bacterial proliferation and inhibit pathogen growth, resulting in altered intestinal architecture that influences growth performance in poultry nutrition (Yang et al., 2009). Resistant starch has the ability to enhance gut health and function by changing and stabilizing the gut microbial ecology and boosting the host’s immune condition in poultry nutrition (Regassa and Nyachoti, 2018). According to 16S rRNA sequence analysis, the diet with 12% raw potato starch (RPS) had more Firmicutes. Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium considerably increased in the 24% RPS diet compared to the control diet. In conclusion, that the dietary supplementation of RS enhanced caecal barrier function by improving intestinal shape and altering microbial composition and as well as improved the growth performance of ducks (Qin et al., 2020). Dietary resistant potato starch enhanced growth performance and feather development in Pekin ducks on a low phosphorus diet (Xu et al., 2021). Resistant starch comes in 5 types discussed in details by (Ashwar et al., 2016; Lockyer and Nugent, 2017) and SCFAs are one of the byproducts of fermenting RS. They can stop pathogens from growing (Topping et al., 2003). Resistant starch is advocated as a factor for intestinal health that can alter the microbiota composition of the digestive tract (Raigond et al., 2015). In another study by Lotfi et al., (2019) evaluated the effects of RS on performance and ileal morphology in broilers. They compared the effects of RS to those of fructooligosaccharide (FOS) and zinc bacitracin (ZnB). When compared to the group that was given FOS, the overall growth performance of the RS groups was much higher. The changed ileum morphology, which is characterized by increased villus height and decreased crypt depth, can be attributed to the enhanced growth performance of broilers that were given RS. An investigation conducted by M’Sadeq et al. (2015) assessed the effects of acetylated and butyralated high-amylose maize starch on broilers, revealing that acetylated high-amylose maize starch diminished luminal pH and augmented SCFAs, consequently enhancing intestinal health and growth performance in broilers subjected to Eimeria and C. perfringens challenges. Huff et al. (2015) tested three types of RS (HI Maize 260, unmodified potato starch, and fresh raw russet potato) in broilers and found that E. coli-challenged broilers fed unmodified potato starch under cold stress had a higher body weight than that of the other groups. Retrograded RS (S. Tuberosum and S. Phureja) and mannanoligosaccharide did not affect daily body weight increase in broilers compared to the control group, according to (Ariza-Nieto et al., 2012). However, broilers ingesting RS and fructooligosaccharide had better growth due to improved innate immunological function and higher SCFA synthesis, which may be absorbed through the hindgut and used as tissue energy, and results suggested that potato resistant starch is a potential prebiotic (Adhikari and Kim, 2017). Dietary RS modifies the microbial makeup and diversity, and influences the metabolic pathways of microbial metabolism in the caecum of broilers, that potentially impacting nutrient consumption and hindgut health of the host (Zhang et al., 2020c). This result was consistent with previous reports, which suggested that Japanese quails fed a diet rich in amylose yielded lower carcass weights. In addition, the results showed that hens fed a diet high in RS produced less semi-eviscerated and eviscerated meat than the control group, implying that a diet high in RS may indirectly increase the birds’ maintenance needs by shifting resources away from the carcass and toward the visceral organs (Cardoso et al., 2011). This review article had examined the contemporary comprehension of RS and its applications within the poultry business, investigating its mechanism of action, the evidence substantiating its advantages, and the ramifications for the future of sustainable chicken production (Figure 2). The summary of various beneficial effects of resistant starch studies in poultry has been summarized in Table 3.

 

Conclusion

Support the idea that resistant starch could be used as a natural and long-lasting feed addition to help chickens’ gut health and growth. Bring up the need for more research and what it means for lowering the use of antibiotics and making the poultry business more environmentally friendly. Research finding revealed that RS can be included at 4%, 8%, and 12% levels in corn-soybean diets. These dose-dependent levels enhanced jejunal lymphocytes and IgA-producing cells, improving gut health. At 21 days, 8% RS improved gut immune activity. In constructing diets with resistant starch, it is essential to consider both the level and the growing period of poultry, as well as the total diet composition, to optimize gut health advantages and prevent growth deficits. More research is required to go deeper into the mechanisms of RS digestion and its degree of inclusion.

 

Table 3: Summarized the various beneficial effects of resistant starch studies in poultry.

Different types of resistant starches	Effects	References
Dietary resistant starch	Dietary Resistant Starch increased the final body weight gain and effectively reduced lipid levels in broiler plasma and liver, likely due to alterations in bile acid production and reabsorption capacity.	Wang et al., 2023b
Potato-resistant starch	Birds fed with retrograded resistant starch had the highest villus: crypt ratio (12.34µm) compared to mannan-oligosaccharides (MOS) (8.25µm). The findings imply potato-resistant starch may be a prebiotic.	Ariza-Nieto et al., 2012
Raw potato starch	In meat ducks, resistant starch improved intestinal barrier function and increased caecal barrier function.	Qin et al., 2020
Corn resistant starch	Feeding broilers with diets containing higher concentrations of RS may inhibit the growth of the small intestine.	Liu et al., 2020
Resistant starches	Resistant starch may affect broiler chicken gut health and growth by modulating cecal SCFA and nutrient digestion.	Oluseyifunmi et al., 2024
Corn resistant starch	Cecal concentrations of acetic and butyric acid in broilers were elevated when fed 40, 80, and 120 g/kg of corn RS.	Zhang et al., 2020a
Slowly digestible starch	The findings indicated that broiler chickens exhibited a superior performance on diets with a small quantity of slowly digestible starch.	Weurding et al., 2003
Dietary resistant potato starch	Dietary resistant potato starch enhances feather development and performance of growth in Pekin ducks.	Xu et al., 2021
Dietary starch to lipid ratios	In finishing broiler chickens, starch has been linked to both meat quality and growth performance.	Khoddami et al., 2018
Resistant corn starch	The utilization of resistant corn starch for the development of low-fat meat products with health benefits in the broiler meat sector appears promising.	Wang et al., 2019

 

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Donkey Innovation Team of the Shandong Modern Agricultural Industry Technology System (SDAIT-27), the Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation (ZR2022QC242), the Science and Technology SMEs Innovation Ability Improvement Project of Shandong Province (2023TSGC0377), the Sci­ence and Technology Help SMEs Climb Plan of Liaocheng (2023PDJH22), the Key Research and Development Plan of Liaocheng (2023YD82), the Open Project of Liaocheng University Animal Hus­bandry Discipline (319312101-08, 319462207-14, 319312105-14), and the Research Foundation of Liaocheng University (318052122, K22LD04, K23LD64).

Novelty Statement

This review highlights the underexplored potential of resistant starch as a natural alternative to antibiotic growth promoters in poultry nutrition. By synthesizing current findings on RS’s prebiotic effects, its impact on gut microbiota, and growth performance, this article identifies critical research gaps and offers new insights into sustainable and health-promoting feed strategies for the poultry industry.

Author’s Contribution

All authors were equal contributors in writing this review article.

Ethics approval

Not applicable.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technology statement

No AI-assisted tool was used in this study.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

References

Adhikari, P.A. and Kim, W.K., 2017. Overview of prebiotics and probiotics: Focus on performance, gut health and immunity. A review. Ann. Anim. Sci., 17: 949-966. https://doi.org/10.1515/aoas-2016-0092

Ariza-Nieto, C., Rodriguez, D., Ariza-Nieto, M. and Afanador, G., 2012. Effects of resistant starch of common and native potato on broiler performance. Journal, (Wiley Online Library). https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.26.1_supplement.825.4

Ashwar, B.A., Gani, A., Shah, A., Wani, I.A. and Masoodi, F.A., 2016. Preparation, health benefits and applications of resistant starch. A review. Starch-Stärke, 68: 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1002/star.201500064

Ayalew, H., Zhang, H., Wang, J., Wu, S., Qiu, K., Qi, G., Tekeste, A., Wassie, T. and Chanie, D., 2022. Potential feed additives as antibiotic alternatives in broiler production. Front. Vet. Sci., 9: 916473. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.916473

Bhandari, S., Nyachoti, C. and Krause, D., 2009. Raw potato starch in weaned pig diets and its influence on postweaning scours and the molecular microbial ecology of the digestive tract. J. Anim. Sci., 87: 984-993. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2007-0747

Birkett, A. and Brown, I., 2008. Resistant starch and health. Journal, (Elsevier). pp. 63-85. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845693886.1.63

Bischoff, S.C., 2011. Gut health: A new objective in medicine? BMC Med., 9: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-24

Bojarczuk, A., Skąpska, S., Khaneghah, A.M. and Marszałek, K., 2022. Health benefits of resistant starch: A review of the literature. J. Funct. Foods, 93: 105094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2022.105094

Bolek, S., 2021. Food purchasing, preservation, and eating behavior during covid-19 pandemic: A consumer analysis. Ital. J. Food Sci., 33: 14-24. https://doi.org/10.15586/ijfs.v33i3.2048

Cardoso, D., Salem, A., Provenza, F.D., Rojo, R., Camacho, L. and Satterlee, D., 2011. Cereal type in diet and housing system influences on growth performance and carcass yield in two japanese quail genotypes. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 163: 52-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2010.09.014

Cervantes, H.M., 2015. Antibiotic-free poultry production: Is it sustainable? J. Appl. Poult. Res., 24: 91-97. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr/pfv006

Champ, M.M., 2004. Physiological aspects of resistant starch and in vivo measurements. J. AOAC Int., 87: 749-755. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/87.3.749

Da Silva, C.S., Van Den Borne, J.J., Gerrits, W.J., Kemp, B. and Bolhuis, J.E., 2012. Effects of dietary fibers with different physicochemical properties on feeding motivation in adult female pigs. Physiol. Behav., 107: 218-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2012.07.001

Davani-Davari, D., Negahdaripour, M., Karimzadeh, I., Seifan, M., Mohkam, M., Masoumi, S.J., Berenjian, A. and Ghasemi, Y., 2019. Prebiotics: Definition, types, sources, mechanisms, and clinical applications. Foods, 8: 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8030092

Davis, L.M., Martínez, I., Walter, J., Goin, C. and Hutkins, R.W., 2011. Barcoded pyrosequencing reveals that consumption of galactooligosaccharides results in a highly specific bifidogenic response in humans. PLoS One, 6: e25200. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025200

Demartino, P. and Cockburn, D.W., 2020. Resistant starch: Impact on the gut microbiome and health. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 61: 66-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2019.10.008

Dobranowski, P.A. and Stintzi, A., 2021. Resistant starch, microbiome, and precision modulation. Gut Microbes 13: 1926842. https://doi.org/10.1080/19490976.2021.1926842

Englyst, H., Wiggins, H.S. and Cummings, J., 1982. Determination of the non-starch polysaccharides in plant foods by gas-liquid chromatography of constituent sugars as alditol acetates. Analyst, 107: 307-318. https://doi.org/10.1039/an9820700307

Englyst, H.N., Kingman, S. and Cummings, J., 1992. Classification and measurement of nutritionally important starch fractions. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr., 46: S33-50.

Englyst, H.N., Kingman, S.M., Hudson, G.J. and Cummings, J.H., 1996. Measurement of resistant starch in vitro and in vivo. Br. J. Nutr., 75: 749-755. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19960178

Erickson, J.M., Carlson, J.L., Stewart, M.L. and Slavin, J.L., 2018. Fermentability of novel type-4 resistant starches in in vitro system. Foods, 7: 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7020018

Erickson, K.L. and Hubbard, N.E., 2000. Probiotic immunomodulation in health and disease. J. Nutr., 130: 403S-409S. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/130.2.403S

Fernández-Rubio, C., Ordonez, C., Abad-González, J., Garcia-Gallego, A., Honrubia, M.P., Mallo, J.J. and Balana-Fouce, R., 2009. Butyric acid-based feed additives help protect broiler chickens from Salmonella enteritidis infection. Poult. Sci., 88: 943-948. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00484

Fonseca, A., Kenney, S., Van Syoc, E., Bierly, S., Dini-andreote, F., Silverman, J., Boney, J. and Ganda, E., 2024. Investigating antibiotic free feed additives for growth promotion in poultry: Effects on performance and microbiota. Poult. Sci., 103: 103604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2024.103604

Fuentes-Zaragoza, E., Riquelme-Navarrete, M., Sánchez-Zapata, E. and Pérez-Álvarez, J., 2010. Resistant starch as functional ingredient: A review. Food Res. Int., 43: 931-942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2010.02.004

Fuentes-Zaragoza, E., Sánchez-Zapata, E., Sendra, E., Sayas, E., Navarro, C., Fernández-López, J. and Pérez-Alvarez, J.A., 2011. Resistant starch as prebiotic: A review. Starch-Stärke, 63: 406-415. https://doi.org/10.1002/star.201000099

Giuberti, G., Gallo, A., Cerioli, C. and Masoero, F., 2012. In vitro starch digestion and predicted glycemic index of cereal grains commonly utilized in pig nutrition. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 174: 163-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.03.006

Han, J.A. and Bemiller, J.N., 2007. Preparation and physical characteristics of slowly digesting modified food starches. Carbohyd. Polym., 67: 366-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2006.06.011

Haque, M.H., Sarker, S., Islam, M.S., Islam, M.A., Karim, M.R., Kayesh, M.E.H., Shiddiky, M.J. and Anwer, M.S., 2020. Sustainable antibiotic-free broiler meat production: Current trends, challenges, and possibilities in a developing country perspective. Biology, 9: 411. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology9110411

Hayhoe, M.A.N., Archbold, T., Wang, Q., Yang, X. and Fan, M.Z., 2022. Prebiotics and β-glucan as gut modifier feed additives in modulation of growth performance, protein utilization status and dry matter and lactose digestibility in weanling pigs. Front. Anim. Sci., 3: 855846. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2022.855846

Huff, G., Huff, W., Rath, N., El-Gohary, F., Zhou, Z. and Shini, S., 2015. Efficacy of a novel prebiotic and a commercial probiotic in reducing mortality and production losses due to cold stress and Escherichia coli challenge of broiler chicks. Poult. Sci., 94: 918-926. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev068

Jensen, B.B. and Jørgensen, H., 1994. Effect of dietary fiber on microbial activity and microbial gas production in various regions of the gastrointestinal tract of pigs. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 60: 1897-1904. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.60.6.1897-1904.1994

Keenan, M.J., Zhou, J., Hegsted, M., Pelkman, C., Durham, H.A., Coulon, D.B. and Martin, R.J., 2015. Role of resistant starch in improving gut health, adiposity, and insulin resistance. Adv. Nutr., 6: 198-205. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.114.007419

Khaneghah, A.M., 2021. New emerging techniques in combination with conventional methods in improving the quality, safety, and nutrient values of food products: Current state, further challenges, and the future. Qual. Assur. Saf. Crops Foods, 13: 12-13. https://doi.org/10.15586/qas.v13iSP1.1009

Khoddami, A., Chrystal, P.V., Selle, P.H. and Liu, S.Y., 2018. Dietary starch to lipid ratios influence growth performance, nutrient utilisation and carcass traits in broiler chickens offered diets with different energy densities. PLoS One, 13: e0205272. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0205272

Kleessen, B., Stoof, G., Proll, J., Schmiedl, D., Noack, J. and Blaut, M., 1997. Feeding resistant starch affects fecal and cecal microflora and short-chain fatty acids in rats. J. Anim. Sci., 75: 2453-2462. https://doi.org/10.2527/1997.7592453x

Knudsen, K.B., Jensen, B.B., andersen, J. and Hansen, I., 1991. Gastrointestinal implications in pigs of wheat and oat fractions: 2. Microbial activity in the gastrointestinal tract. Br. J. Nutr., 65: 233-248. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN19910083

Landon, S., Colyer, C. and Salman, H., 2012. The resistant starch report. Retrieved from Food Australia Supplement. Australia: Goodman Fielder Ltd and National.

Leeson, S., Namkung, H., Antongiovanni, M. and Lee, E., 2005. Effect of butyric acid on the performance and carcass yield of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 84: 1418-1422. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.9.1418

Leonel, A.J. and Alvarez-Leite, J.I., 2012. Butyrate: Implications for intestinal function. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care, 15: 474-479. https://doi.org/10.1097/MCO.0b013e32835665fa

Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Li, J., Wang, X., Xing, T., Zhu, X., Zhang, L. and Gao, F., 2020. Growth performance, carcass traits and digestive function of broiler chickens fed diets with graded levels of corn resistant starch. Br. Poult. Sci., 61: 146-155. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2019.1694137

Lockyer, S. and Nugent, A., 2017. Health effects of resistant starch. Nutr. Bull., 42: 10-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12244

Lotfi, K., Mahdavi, A., Jebelli Javan, A., Staji, H. and Darabighane, B., 2019. Effects of different levels of resistant starch on growth performance and ileum morphology in broilers: A comparison to fructooligosaccharide and zinc bacitracin. Iran. J. Appl. Anim. Sci., 9: 315-322.

Lunn, J. and Buttriss, J., 2007. Carbohydrates and dietary fibre. Nutr. Bull., 32: 21-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-3010.2007.00616.x

M’sadeq, S.A., Wu, S.B., Swick, R.A. and Choct, M., 2015. Dietary acylated starch improves performance and gut health in necrotic enteritis challenged broilers. Poult. Sci., 94: 2434-2444. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pev219

Macfarlane, S. and Macfarlane, G.T., 2003. Regulation of short-chain fatty acid production. Proc. Nutr. Soc., 62: 67-72. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS2002207

Metzler-Zebeli, B., Canibe, N., Montagne, L., Freire, J., Bosi, P., Prates, J.A., Tanghe, S. and Trevisi, P., 2019. Resistant starch reduces large intestinal ph and promotes fecal lactobacilli and bifidobacteria in pigs. Animal, 13: 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118001003

Miao, M. and Hamaker, B.R., 2021. Food matrix effects for modulating starch bioavailability. Ann. Rev. Food Sci. Technol., 12: 169-191. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-food-070620-013937

Mu, C., Yang, Y., Luo, Z., Guan, L. and Zhu, W., 2016. The colonic microbiome and epithelial transcriptome are altered in rats fed a high-protein diet compared with a normal-protein diet. J. Nutr., 146: 474-483. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.115.223990

Nugent, A.P., 2005. Health properties of resistant starch. Nutr. Bull., 30: 27-54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-3010.2005.00481.x

Oluseyifunmi, I.W., Lourenco, J. and Olukosi, O.A., 2024. The interactivity of sources and dietary levels of resistant starches–impact on growth performance, starch, and nutrient digestibility, digesta oligosaccharides profile, cecal microbial metabolites, and indicators of gut health in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 103: 104337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2024.104337

Peng, L., Li, Z.R., Green, R.S., Holzmanr, I.R. and Lin, J., 2009. Butyrate enhances the intestinal barrier by facilitating tight junction assembly via activation of amp-activated protein kinase in caco-2 cell monolayers. J. Nutr., 139: 1619-1625. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.109.104638

Purwani, E.Y., Purwadaria, T. and Suhartono, M.T., 2012. Fermentation rs3 derived from sago and rice starch with clostridium butyricum bcc b2571 or eubacterium rectale dsm 17629. Anaerobe, 18: 55-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2011.09.007

Qian, Y., Zhao, X. and Kan, J., 2013. Preventive effect of resistant starch on activated carbon-induced constipation in mice. Exp. Therap. Med., 6: 228-232. https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2013.1096

Qin, S., Zhang, K., Applegate, T.J., Ding, X., Bai, S., Luo, Y., Wang, J., Peng, H., Su, Z. and Xuan, Y., 2020. Dietary administration of resistant starch improved caecal barrier function by enhancing intestinal morphology and modulating microbiota composition in meat duck. Br. J. Nutr., 123: 172-181. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114519002319

Qin, S., Zhang, K., Ding, X., Bai, S., Wang, J., Tian, G., Xuan, Y., Su, Z. and Zeng, Q., 2023. Microbiome-metabolomics analysis insight into the effects of dietary resistant starch on intestinal integrity. Food Chem., 401: 134148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.134148

Qin, S., Zhang, K., Ding, X., Bai, S., Wang, J. and Zeng, Q., 2019. Effect of dietary graded resistant potato starch levels on growth performance, plasma cytokines concentration, and intestinal health in meat ducks. Poult. Sci., 98: 3523-3532. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pez186

Rahman, S., Bird, A., Regina, A., Li, Z., Ral, J.P., Mcmaugh, S., Topping, D. and Morell, M., 2007. Resistant starch in cereals: Exploiting genetic engineering and genetic variation. J. Cereal Sci., 46: 251-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcs.2007.05.001

Raigond, P., Ezekiel, R. and Raigond, B., 2015. Resistant starch in food: A review. J. Sci. Food Agric., 95: 1968-1978. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6966

Regassa, A. and Nyachoti, C.M., 2018. Application of resistant starch in swine and poultry diets with particular reference to gut health and function. Anim. Nutr., 4: 305-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2018.04.001

Rezende, E., Lima, G. and As Beneficial, M.N.D.F., 2021. Microbiota modulators: A proposed classification by prebiotic categories., pp. 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2021.111217

Roy, C.C., Kien, C.L., Bouthillier, L. and Levy, E., 2006. Short-chain fatty acids: Ready for prime time? Nutr. Clin. Pract., 21: 351-366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0115426506021004351

Sajilata, M.G., Singhal, R.S. and Kulkarni, P.R., 2006. Resistant starch. A review. Compreh. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf., 5: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2006.tb00076.x

Salonen, A., Lahti, L., Salojärvi, J., Holtrop, G., Korpela, K., Duncan, S.H., Date, P., Farquharson, F., Johnstone, A.M. and Lobley, G.E., 2014. Impact of diet and individual variation on intestinal microbiota composition and fermentation products in obese men. ISME J., 8: 2218-2230. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2014.63

Sandhu, K.S. and Lim, S.T., 2008. Structural characteristics and in vitro digestibility of mango kernel starches (Mangifera indica L.). Food Chem., 107: 92-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.07.046

Slavin, J., 2013. Fiber and prebiotics: Mechanisms and health benefits. Nutrients, 5: 1417-1435. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu5041417

Sybille, T., June, Z., Michael, K., Roy, M. and Maria, L.M., 2013. The intestinal microbiota in aged mice is modulated by dietary resistant starch and correlated with improvements in host responses. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol., 83: 299-309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2012.01475.x

Tekin, T. and Dincer, E., 2023. Effect of resistant starch types as a prebiotic. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 107: 491-515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-022-12325-y

Topping, D.L., Fukushima, M. and Bird, A.R., 2003. Resistant starch as a prebiotic and synbiotic: State of the art. Proc. Nutr. Soc., 62: 171-176. https://doi.org/10.1079/PNS2002224

Trachsel, J., Briggs, C., Gabler, N.K., Allen, H.K. and Loving, C.L., 2019. Dietary resistant potato starch alters intestinal microbial communities and their metabolites, and markers of immune regulation and barrier function in swine. Front. Immunol., 10: 1381. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2019.01381

Upadhyaya, B., Mccormack, L., Fardin-Kia, A.R., Juenemann, R., Nichenametla, S., Clapper, J., Specker, B. and Dey, M., 2016. Impact of dietary resistant starch type 4 on human gut microbiota and immunometabolic functions. Sci. Rep., 6: 28797. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28797

Van Immerseel, F., Boyen, F., Gantois, I., Timbermont, L., Bohez, L., Pasmans, F., Haesebrouck, F. and Ducatelle, R., 2005. Supplementation of coated butyric acid in the feed reduces colonization and shedding of salmonella in poultry. Poult. Sci., 84: 1851-1856. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/84.12.1851

Vondruskova, H., Slamova, R., Trckova, M., Zraly, Z. and Pavlik, I., 2010. Alternatives to antibiotic growth promoters in prevention of diarrhoea in weaned piglets: A review. Vet. Med., 55: 199-224. https://doi.org/10.17221/2998-VETMED

Wang, J., Huang, J.H., Cheng, Y.F. and Yang, G.M., 2014. Banana resistant starch and its effects on constipation model mice. J. Med. Food, 17: 902-907. https://doi.org/10.1089/jmf.2013.3016

Wang, X.X., Li, Y.S., Zhou, Y., Ma, F., Li, P.J. and Chen, C.G., 2019. Effect of resistant corn starch on the thermal gelling properties of chicken breast myosin. Food Hydrocoll., 96: 681-687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.06.013

Wang, Z., Wang, S., Xu, Q., Kong, Q., Li, F., Lu, L., Xu, Y. and Wei, Y., 2023a. Synthesis and functions of resistant starch. Adv. Nutr., 14: 1131-1144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advnut.2023.06.001

Wang, Z., Zhan, C., Zhang, Y., Zhang, L., Li, J., Xing, T., Zhao, L., Wang, J. and Gao, F., 2023b. Dietary resistant starch regulates bile acid metabolism by modulating the fxr/lrh-1 signaling pathway in broilers. Agriculture, 13: 2159. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13112159

Weurding, R., Enting, H. and Verstegen, M., 2003. The effect of site of starch digestion on performance of broiler chickens. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 110: 175-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(03)00219-0

Włodarczyk, M. and Śliżewska, K., 2021. Efficiency of resistant starch and dextrins as prebiotics: A review of the existing evidence and clinical trials. Nutrients, 13: 3808. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13113808

Woo, K. and Seib, P., 2002. Cross-linked resistant starch: Preparation and properties. Cereal Chem., 79: 819-825. https://doi.org/10.1094/CCHEM.2002.79.6.819

Xu, H., Zhang, K., Bai, S., Ding, X., Wang, J., Peng, H., Xuan, Y., Su, Z., Gang, T. and Zeng, Q., 2021. Dietary resistant potato starch improves growth performance and feather development in pekin ducks fed a low phosphorus diet. Poult. Sci., 100: 100947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.12.044

Yang, Y., Iji, P. and Choct, M., 2009. Dietary modulation of gut microflora in broiler chickens: A review of the role of six kinds of alternatives to in-feed antibiotics. World’s Poult. Sci. J., 65: 97-114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933909000087

Zhang, H., Qin, S., Zhu, Y., Zhang, X., Du, P., Huang, Y., Michiels, J., Zeng, Q. and Chen, W., 2022. Dietary resistant starch from potato regulates bone mass by modulating gut microbiota and concomitant short-chain fatty acids production in meat ducks. Frontiers in Nutrition 9: 860086. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.860086

Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Li, J., Xing, T., Jiang, Y., Zhang, L. and Gao, F., 2020a. Dietary corn-resistant starch suppresses broiler abdominal fat deposition associated with the reduced cecal firmicutes. Poult. Sci., 99: 5827-5837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.07.042

Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Li, J., Xing, T., Jiang, Y., Zhang, L. and Gao, F., 2020b. Dietary corn resistant starch regulates intestinal morphology and barrier functions by activating the notch signaling pathway of broilers. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci., 33: 2008. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.19.0967

Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Li, J., Xing, T., Jiang, Y., Zhang, L. and Gao, F., 2020c. Dietary resistant starch modifies the composition and function of caecal microbiota of broilers. J. Sci. Food Agric., 100: 1274-1284. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.10139

Zhu, Q., Sun, P., Zhang, B., Kong, L., Xiao, C. and Song, Z., 2021. Progress on gut health maintenance and antibiotic alternatives in broiler chicken production. Front. Nutr., 8: 692839. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.692839

Zimmermann, B., Bauer, E. and Mosenthin, R., 2001. Pro-and prebiotics in pig nutrition-potential modulators of gut health? J. Anim. Feed Sci., 10: 47-56. https://doi.org/10.22358/jafs/67940/2001