<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.1 20151215//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xml:lang="en" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.1">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="pmc">EJ-AQUA</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">EJ-AQUA</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">EJ-AQUA</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>European Journal of Aquatic Sciences</journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">2976-7423</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>European Open Science</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>UK</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">22</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24018/ejaqua.2025.4.1.22</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Research Article</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Effect of Probiotic Supplimentations on the Gut Histoarchitecture of Stinging Catfish, <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic></article-title>
<alt-title alt-title-type="left-running-head">Effect of Probiotic Supplimentations on the Gut Histoarchitecture of Stinging Catfish, <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic></alt-title>
<alt-title alt-title-type="right-running-head">Aktar and Uddin</alt-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib id="author-1" contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name name-style="western"><surname>Aktar</surname> <given-names>Mt. Nur-A-Sharmin</given-names></name><email>sharminnur.bau@gmail.com</email></contrib>
<contrib id="author-2" contrib-type="author"><name name-style="western"><surname>Uddin</surname> <given-names>Md. Asek</given-names></name></contrib>
<aff><institution>Department of Aquaculture, Bangladesh Agricultural University</institution>, <country country="BD">Bangladesh</country></aff>
</contrib-group>
<author-notes>
<corresp id="cor1"><label>&#x002A;</label><bold><italic>Corresponding Author:</italic></bold> e-mail: <email>sharminnur.bau@gmail.com</email></corresp>
<fn fn-type="other"><p><bold>Conflict Of Interest:</bold> The authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.</p></fn>
</author-notes>
<pub-date date-type="collection" publication-format="electronic">
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date date-type="pub" publication-format="electronic">
<day>10</day>
<month>4</month>
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>4</volume>
<issue>1</issue>
<fpage>1</fpage>
<lpage>8</lpage>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>19</day>
<month>6</month>
<year>2024</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>10</day>
<month>4</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>&#x00A9; 2025 Aktar and Uddin</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2025</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Aktar and Uddin</copyright-holder>
<license>
<ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ali:license_ref>
<license-p>This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">Creative Commons Attribution License</ext-link>, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original source is cited.</license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<self-uri xlink:title="pdf" content-type="pdf" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22.pdf"></self-uri>
<abstract abstract-type="summary">
<p>The study was conducted to evaluate the effect of probiotics on the gut histology of stinging catfish, <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic>. The experiment was conducted in 15 ponds, each with 0.75 decimal and stocking density were 550 fingerlings/decimal (6.44 &#x00B1; 0.054 gm) and cultured for 90 days (May to August). Commercially available gut probiotic ZYMETIN, water probiotic pH FIXER and soil probiotic Super PS were used in the experiment. T<sub>1</sub> was designed with the recommended dose of Super PS (soil probiotic). T<sub>2</sub> was supplemented with the recommended dose of gut probiotic (ZYMETIN). T<sub>3</sub> was designed with combined application of Super PS, ZYMETIN and pH FIXER at recommended doses. T<sub>4</sub> was designed with the recommended dose of water probiotic (pH FIXER). Only basal feed was applied for T<sub>5</sub> (control). Water quality parameters, morphometric measurements, body weight of the experimental fish were measured, and fish gut samples were collected for histological study at fortnightly intervals. The results showed that all water quality parameters in pH FIXER treated ponds were more favorable for fish culture compared with others. In combined probiotic treated groups (T<sub>3</sub>) histoarchitecture of the gut were almost normal. Less pathological signs were observed in probiotic treated groups (T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2,</sub> and T<sub>4</sub>) compared with T<sub>5</sub> (control). From analysis of gut revealed that fold length, fold width and epithelial layer thickness were increased significantly (P &#x003C; 0.05) in combined probiotics treated fish. Fish from T<sub>2</sub> and T<sub>3</sub> exhibited larger fold length, width and epithelial layer thickness than those of T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>4</sub>, T<sub>5</sub> (control). Probiotic addition can improve intestinal structure of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> which may increase the nutrients absorption in fish. Hence, digestion capacity was increased that ultimately helps to improve the overall health condition of stinging catfish, <italic>H. fossilis</italic>.</p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group kwd-group-type="author">
<kwd>Gut histoarchitecture</kwd>
<kwd>Probiotics</kwd>
<kwd>stinging catfish (<italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic>)</kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="s1">
<label>1.</label>
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Aquaculture is one of the quickest food-yielding sector with the largest potential to achieve demand of aquatic food and nutrition (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-11">FAO, 2006</xref>). With the development and intensification of production in aquaculture, diseases and degradation of environmental conditions are major problems in fish culture. For prevention and control of diseases, antibiotics used as traditional strategy during the last decades for the fish growth (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-28">Uddin <italic>et al</italic>., 2019</xref>). However, the improvements of non-antibiotic agents are more suitable for health management in fish farming. Dietary supplements such as probiotics act as growth promoting factors for fish farming (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-12">FAO, 2010</xref>). Gradual declining of fish production is due to lack of proper and sustainable fish health management. In this case, probiotics is necessary to maintain sustainable balance of aquatic food production and keep the nature safe (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-29">Uddin &#x0026; Nur-A-Sharmin Aktar, 2022</xref>).</p>
<p>Shing (<italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic>) is native stinging catfish of South-East-Asia. The species is not only known for its excellent taste, unique flesh quality and commercial value. This native stinging catfish is also highly considered from nutritional and medicinal properties of view and fairly high quantity of calcium compared to other freshwater fish species (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-23">Saha &#x0026; Guha, 1939</xref>).</p>
<p>The word probiotic was first introduced by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-16">Lilly and Stillwell (1965)</xref> to describe &#x201C;substances secreted by one microorganism that stimulate the growth of another.&#x201D; The term probiotic comes from the Greek &#x201C;pro bios,&#x201D; which means &#x201C;for life&#x201D; (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-95">Soccol <italic>et al</italic>., 2010)</xref>. Probiotics are microscopic organisms that are applied orally at optimum amount to alter the microbiota of the specific host and lead to benefits for the host&#x2019;s health (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-3">Akhter <italic>et al</italic>., 2015</xref>). Probiotics was first applied in 1986, to trial ability to show great impact and increase growth rate of hydrobionts. Later, it is used to enhance quality of water, control of infectious bacteria and microorganisms. It shows a new measurement of disease counteraction and better water quality in aquaculture industry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-33">Wang <italic>et al</italic>., 2005</xref>). The purpose of using probiotics is to sustain a friendly relationship with pathogenic microorganisms (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-18">Minghetti <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>). The effect of probiotic organisms is acquired by improving the immune system of cultured species (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-25">Sayes <italic>et al</italic>., 2017</xref>) and restrain the pathogenic microorganisms from the formation of diseases in the host body (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-5">Ali, 2000</xref>).</p>
<p>At present, there are some commercial probiotic products prepared from numerous bacterial species such as <italic>Lactobacillus</italic> sp., <italic>Bacillus</italic> sp., <italic>Enterococcus</italic> sp., <italic>Carnobacterium</italic> sp., and the yeast species <italic>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</italic> among others, and their use is limited by careful administration and recommendations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-8">Boyd &#x0026; Massaut, 1999</xref>). As for probiotic strains Lactic Acid Bacteria have been largely used which are commonly present in the gut of fishes such as the <italic>Lactobacilli</italic> and <italic>Bifidobacteria</italic>. <italic>Bacillus</italic>, <italic>Enterococcus, Streptococcus</italic> are gram-positive bacteria act as a general probiotic strains which are the major gastrointestinal microorganisms (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-20">Pandiyan <italic>et al</italic>., 2013</xref>). Commercially available probiotics <italic>viz</italic>., ZYMETIN (Advance Pharma Co. Ltd., Bangkok, Thailand) functions as enzyme producer, organic decomposer and produce unfavorable condition for pathogenic bacteria. Super PS and pH Fixer maintains optimum water quality. Monitoring of water quality parameters is very important which directly regulate the production of <italic>H. fossilis</italic>. Thus, control of water quality parameters has become vital task for good health management and boost production.</p>
<p>Gut is one of the most important organ of fish which could definitely relates to changes in nutrient absorption of fish. Villi length is very important to determine the efficiency of the nutrient absorption of fishes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-21">Purushothaman <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). Nutrient absorption in villi may impact on the overall fish health (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-26">Sweetman <italic>et al</italic>., 2008</xref>). Toxic substances cause damage of normal gill tissue structure and histopathological degradations in fish body (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-19">Olojo <italic>et al</italic>., 2005</xref>). Histological method is one of the most important procedure for diagnosis of fish diseases to its tissue level. Practically this method has been used across the world. But in Bangladesh this process has used for diagnosis of fish in a limited extent (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-1">Ahmed <italic>et al</italic>., 1998</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2">
<label>2.</label>
<title>Materials and Methods</title>
<sec id="s2_1">
<label>2.1.</label>
<title>Study Area and Duration</title>
<p>The experiment was carried out at the research ponds of the Faculty of Fisheries, Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU), Mymensingh, Bangladesh for 90 days&#x2019; duration (May&#x2013;August).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_2">
<label>2.2.</label>
<title>Pond Preparation</title>
<p>Fifteen (15) ponds were selected for the present experiment. Each pond size was 0.75 decimal. Depth of each pond were 1.0 m to 1.3 m. At first ponds were dried for two weeks, pond dykes were repaired and then filled with underground water. After that lime and salt were applied in each pond at a dose of 1 kg/decimal.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_3">
<label>2.3.</label>
<title>Experimental Design</title>
<p>The research was conducted with five treatments and each treatment was designed with three replications. In first treatment (T<sub>1</sub>) commercial feed was used and soil probiotic mixed with sand was applied at a dose of 15 litre/hectare for 1&#x2013;30 days, 30 litre/hectare for 31&#x2013;60 days, 40 litre/hectare for 61&#x2013;90 days. Second treatment (T<sub>2</sub>) was prepared with gut probiotic ZYMETIN supplemented at a dose of 10 g/kg of basal feed. For third treatment (T<sub>3</sub>) combination of all three probiotics (Super PS, ZYMETIN and pH FIXER) were applied at recommended doses. For fourth treatment (T<sub>4</sub>) normal commercial feed was used and pH FIXER applied in water at a dose of 13 g/ponds/weeks. Fifth treatment (T<sub>5</sub>) was designed to use basal feed (control) only.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_4">
<label>2.4.</label>
<title>Stocking of Fish</title>
<p>Healthy stinging catfish (<italic>H. fossilis</italic>) fingerlings (average weight of 6.44 gm &#x00B1; 0.05 gm) were stocked at a density of 413/0.75 decimal. Fish were fed with the commercial feed (SMS Feeds Ltd.) supplemented with mentioned above probiotics. Control fish were provided same commercial feed without probiotics. Water exchange (30%) was done monthly.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_5">
<label>2.5.</label>
<title>Preparation of Probiotic Supplemented Feed</title>
<p>ZYMETIN (Advance Pharma Co. Ltd., Bangkok, Thailand) composed mainly with <italic>Streptococcus faecalis</italic>, <italic>Clostridium butyricum</italic>, <italic>Bacillus mesentericus</italic>, protease, lipase and beer yeast used in feed as gut probiotic and mixed with feed to increase the immunity and stop the growth of pathogenic organisms in gut; Water additives probiotic pH FIXER (CPF private limited, India) maintains optimum water quality parameters, which is composed of concentrated strain of beneficial <italic>Bacillus</italic> bacteria; Super PS (CPF private limited, India) is a soil probiotic which contains <italic>Rhodobacter</italic> spp. and <italic>Rhodococcus</italic> spp. is used to improve bottom condition of pond, diminish harmful bacteria and keep the suitable environmental condition for aquaculture. All the probiotic was selected based on the composition and purchased from registered local agent to use in the experiment. After probiotic supplementation, feeds were dried for overnight then stored in the laboratory at room temperature for daily feeding.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_6">
<label>2.6.</label>
<title>Feeding</title>
<p>Experimental diets were applied twice daily in the morning at 8:00 am and in afternoon at 5:00 pm at the rate of 10% of body weight. Gradually feeding rate was reduced with increasing growth of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> and given 5% of body weight after one month of culture and continued till termination of experiment.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_7">
<label>2.7.</label>
<title>Sampling of Fish</title>
<p>After fifteen days of experiment fish were sampled by net and body weight of the ten individual number fish was measured by using a weighing machine.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_8">
<label>2.8.</label>
<title>Monitoring of Water Quality Parameters</title>
<p>Water quality parameters are recorded and monitored during study period. Dissolved oxygen (DO) (mg/ L), free ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>), water temperature (&#x00B0;C), alkalinity and pH values were taken after fifteen days throughout the study period.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_9">
<label>2.9.</label>
<title>Histological Procedure</title>
<p>For histological observation gut segments were sampled from three fish from each treatment group and immediately fixed with 10% formalin (buffered). Automatic Tissue Processors were used to dehydration, clearing and infiltration of the sample. Samples were sectioned and stained with eosin and hematoxylin. Photomicrograph of the stained sections was done by a photo microscope (Primo Star ZEISS). At the end of experiment, assessment on fold width, fold length, and epithelial layer thickness of gut and villi structures were observed through ZEN 2.3 Lite software from the treatments as well as from control. Then analyzed data of fold length, width and epithelial layer thickness of gut villi were considered to evaluate effects of probiotics on those structures (Treatmentwise).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s3">
<label>3.</label>
<title>Results and Discssion</title>
<sec id="s3_1">
<label>3.1.</label>
<title>Water Quality Parameters</title>
<p>The water quality parameters of stinging catfish (<italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic>) in the rearing ponds were recorded.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_2">
<label>3.2.</label>
<title>Water Temperature (&#x00B0;C)</title>
<p>Water temperature were ranged from 27.86&#x00B0;C &#x00B1; 0.07&#x00B0;C to 33.26&#x00B0;C &#x00B1; 0.27&#x00B0;C during the study period. The maximum temperature was recorded as 33.26&#x00B0;C &#x00B1; 0.27&#x00B0;C on 18 August in T<sub>4</sub>, whereas, the minimum was 27.86&#x00B0;C &#x00B1; 0. 70&#x00B0;C on 17 July, 2019 in T<sub>3</sub>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_3">
<label>3.3.</label>
<title>Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)</title>
<p>The values of dissolved oxygen were varied from 3.33 &#x00B1; 0.17 to 7.00 &#x00B1; 0.29 mg/ L. The highest dissolved oxygen value was 7.00 &#x00B1; 0.29 mg/ L on 26 May in T<sub>1</sub> and on 9 June in T<sub>5</sub>, whereas, the lowest value was 3.33 &#x00B1; 0.17 mg/ L on 21 July, 2019 in T<sub>5.</sub></p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_4">
<label>3.4.</label>
<title>pH</title>
<p>The recorded water pH were ranged from 7.00 &#x00B1; 0.00 to 8.00 &#x00B1; 0.15 during the study period. The highest pH value was 8.00 &#x00B1; 0.15 on 26 May in T<sub>1</sub> while the lowest pH value was 7.00 &#x00B1; 0.00 on 18 August, 2019 in T<sub>5</sub>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_5">
<label>3.5.</label>
<title>Free Ammonia (mg/L)</title>
<p>The values of free ammonia were varied from 0.00 &#x00B1; 0.00 to 0.41 &#x00B1; 0.08 mg/L. The highest free ammonia value was 0.41 &#x00B1; 0.08 on 18 August in T<sub>1</sub> and the lowest value was 0.00 &#x00B1; 0.00 mg/L on 21 July, 2019 in T<sub>3.</sub></p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_6">
<label>3.6.</label>
<title>Alkalinity</title>
<p>The values of alkalinity were ranged from 96.66 mg/L &#x00B1; 6.67 mg/L to 173.33 mg/L &#x00B1; 3.33 mg/L. The highest value was 173.33 &#x00B1; 3.33 mg/L on 4 August in T<sub>1</sub> and the lowest value was 96.66 mg/L &#x00B1; 6.67 mg/L on 4 August, 2019 in T<sub>5.</sub></p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_7">
<label>3.7.</label>
<title>Histopathological Observation of the Gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic></title>
<p>Histopathological changes occurred in the gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the start, middle, and end of the experiments are described below.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_8">
<label>3.8.</label>
<title>At the Start of the Experiment</title>
<p>At the start of the experiment cross section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> had pathological signs in almost all treatment. There were vacuum and disrupted layer of gastrointestinal (GI) tract in T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-1">Fig. 1a</xref>). Gut of T<sub>2</sub> had lost villi and clubbing (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-1">Fig. 1b</xref>). Almost normal structure of villi except vacuum was found in T<sub>3</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-1">Fig. 1c</xref>). Partly clubbed villi and necrosis were found in T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-1">Fig. 1d</xref>). But gut of T<sub>5</sub> villi were partly lost, clubbed and necrosis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-1">Fig. 1e</xref>).</p>
<fig id="fig-1">
<label>Fig. 1</label>
<caption>
<title>Photomicrograph of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> during first sampling in (T<sub>1</sub>) in May with disrupted layer (DL) of gastrointestinal tract and vacuum (V). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (a), Section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> during first sampling in (T<sub>2</sub>) in May having partly lost villi (VL) and clubbing (CB). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (b), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> during first sampling in (T<sub>3</sub>) in May with almost normal structure except vacuum (V). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (c), Photomicrograph of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> during first sampling in (T<sub>4</sub>) in May having clubbed villi (CB) and necrosis (N). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (d), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at first sampling in (T<sub>5</sub>) in May with clubbed villi (CB), partly lost villi (VL) and necrosis (N). H &#x0026; E&#x00D7; 125 (e).</title>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="png" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22-fig-1.png"><alt-text>Images</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_9">
<label>3.9.</label>
<title>At the Middle of the Experiment</title>
<p>Treatments containing probiotic (T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>3</sub> and T<sub>4</sub>) have a better result than the control one (T<sub>5</sub>). Gut of T<sub>1</sub> had clubbed villi (CB), hemorrhages and partly lost villi (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-2">Fig. 2a</xref>) which treated with gut probiotic. In T<sub>2</sub> clubbed and partly lost villi were present (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-2">Fig. 2b</xref>). In T<sub>3</sub> gut section had almost normal structure (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-2">Fig. 2c</xref>). In T<sub>4</sub> had partly lost villi, clubbed villi and necrosis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-2">Fig. 2d</xref>). And gut section of T<sub>5</sub> (control) contained vacuum, necrosis and disrupted layer (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-2">Fig. 2e</xref>).</p>
<fig id="fig-2">
<label>Fig. 2</label>
<caption>
<title>Photomicrograph of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the middle of experiment (T<sub>1</sub>) in July with clubbed villi (CB), hemorrhage (H) and partly lost villi (VL). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (a), Cross-section of almost normal gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the middle of experiment (T<sub>2</sub>) in July with clubbed villi (CB) and partly lost villi (VL). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (b), Section of almost normal structure of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the middle of the experiment (T<sub>3</sub>) in July with necrosis (N) in GI. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (c), Photomicrograph of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the middle of experiment (T<sub>4</sub>) in July with clubbed villi (CB), necrosis (N) and partly lost villi (VL). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (d), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at in control group (T<sub>5</sub>) in July had disrupted layer (DL) of GI, necrosis (N), vacuum (V) and partly lost villi (VL). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (e).</title>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="png" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22-fig-2.png"><alt-text>Images</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_10">
<label>3.10.</label>
<title>At the End of the Experiment</title>
<p>At the end of the experiment, gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> in T<sub>1</sub> and T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>3</sub> had comparatively improved structure of villi except necrosis and clubbing (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-3">Figs. 3a</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-3">3b</xref>). Among five treatments T<sub>3</sub> had more or less normal structure (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-3">Fig. 3c</xref>). Gut section of T<sub>4</sub> had necrosis, clubbed villi and lost villi (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-3">Fig. 3d</xref>), whereas, T<sub>5</sub> (control) had necrosis (N), clubbed villi (CB) vacuum (V) and lost villi (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-3">Fig. 3e</xref>).</p>
<fig id="fig-3">
<label>Fig. 3</label>
<caption>
<title>Photomicrograph of normal gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>1</sub>) with necrosis (N) and clubbed villi (CB) in August. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (a), Cross-section of almost normal gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>2</sub>) with clubbed villi (CB) in August. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (b), Section of almost normal gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of the experiment (T<sub>3</sub>) except necrosis (N) in August. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (c). Photomicrograph of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>4</sub>) in August with necrosis (N), clubbed (CB) and lost villi (VL). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (d). Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>5</sub>) in August with necrosis (N), clubbed villi (CB) vacuum (V) and lost villi (VL). H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (e).</title>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="png" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22-fig-3.png"><alt-text>Images</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_11">
<label>3.11.</label>
<title>Effect on Gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic></title>
<p>All histological measurements including fold length (villus height), fold width (villus width), and epithelial layer thickness (mucosa width) of the midgut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> samples in response to the dietary administration of different host-associated probiotics are showed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table-1">Tables I</xref>&#x2013;<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-3">III</xref>.</p>
<table-wrap id="table-1">
<label>Table I</label>
<caption>
<title>Mean Thickness and Standard Deviation of the Fold Length (&#x03BC;m) of the Middle Portion of the Intestine of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the Start, Middle and End of the Experiment</title>
</caption>
<table>
<colgroup>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr align="center">
<th>Treatments</th>
<th>Start of the experiment</th>
<th>Middle of the experiment</th>
<th>End of the experiment</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>1</sub></td>
<td>36.36 &#x00B1; 1.26</td>
<td>40.97 &#x00B1; 1.53</td>
<td>47.40 &#x00B1; 2.33</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>38.33 &#x00B1; 1.40</td>
<td>42.34 &#x00B1; 2.10</td>
<td>53.11 &#x00B1; 3.60</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>3</sub></td>
<td>38.79 &#x00B1; 1.91</td>
<td>44.31 &#x00B1; 1.55</td>
<td>59.20 &#x00B1; 1.84</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>37.70 &#x00B1; 0.78</td>
<td>41.31 &#x00B1; 2.39</td>
<td>48.99 &#x00B1; 0.98</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>5</sub></td>
<td>36.18 &#x00B1; 1.22</td>
<td>39.49 &#x00B1; 1.98</td>
<td>44.87 &#x00B1; 0.90</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap><table-wrap id="table-2">
<label>Table II</label>
<caption>
<title>Mean Thickness and Standard Deviation of the Fold Width (&#x03BC;m) of the Middle Portion of the Intestine of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the Start, Middle and End of the Experiment</title>
</caption>
<table>
<colgroup>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr align="center">
<th>Treatments</th>
<th>Start of the experiment</th>
<th>Middle of the experiment</th>
<th>End of the experiment</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>1</sub></td>
<td>7.93 &#x00B1; 0.32</td>
<td>9.85 &#x00B1; 0.58</td>
<td>12.35 &#x00B1; 0.92</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>8.09 &#x00B1; 1.07</td>
<td>10.30 &#x00B1; 1.39</td>
<td>13.71 &#x00B1; 1.26</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>3</sub></td>
<td>8.40 &#x00B1; 0.54</td>
<td>11.09 &#x00B1; 1.04</td>
<td>14.68 &#x00B1; 0.60</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>8.04 &#x00B1; 0.54</td>
<td>10.08 &#x00B1; 0.42</td>
<td>12.81 &#x00B1; 0.27</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>5</sub></td>
<td>7.85 &#x00B1; 0.40</td>
<td>8.39 &#x00B1; 0.54</td>
<td>10.84 &#x00B1; 0.53</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap><table-wrap id="table-3">
<label>Table III</label>
<caption>
<title>Mean Thickness and Standard Deviation of Epithelial Layer Thickness (&#x03BC;m) of the Middle Portion of the Intestine of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the Start, Middle and End of the Experiment</title>
</caption>
<table>
<colgroup>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
<col align="center"/>
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr align="center">
<th>Treatments</th>
<th>Start of the experiment</th>
<th>Middle of the experiment</th>
<th>End of the experiment</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>1</sub></td>
<td>3.97 &#x00B1; 0.79</td>
<td>5.37 &#x00B1; 0.61</td>
<td>6.59 &#x00B1; 0.52</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>2</sub></td>
<td>4.12 &#x00B1; 0.07</td>
<td>5.72 &#x00B1; 0.73</td>
<td>7.76 &#x00B1; 0.70</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>3</sub></td>
<td>4.41 &#x00B1; 0.53</td>
<td>6.24 &#x00B1; 0.24</td>
<td>8.41 &#x00B1; 0.67</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>4</sub></td>
<td>3.98 &#x00B1; 0.67</td>
<td>5.64 &#x00B1; 0.58</td>
<td>6.91 &#x00B1; 0.33</td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>T<sub>5</sub></td>
<td>3.96 &#x00B1; 0.16</td>
<td>4.37 &#x00B1; 0.43</td>
<td>5.30 &#x00B1; 0.53</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_12">
<label>3.12.</label>
<title>Effect on Fold Length (Villus Height)</title>
<p>At the start of the experiment, there were no significance differences of fold length (FL) among the treatments. However, in the middle and end of the experiment FW of probiotic treated groups T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4a</xref>), T<sub>2</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4b</xref>), T<sub>3</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4c</xref>) and T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4d</xref>) had increased when compared with control treatment T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4e</xref>). At the end of the experiment, the highest FL (59.20 &#x03BC;m) was observed in T<sub>3</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4c</xref>) in comparison with other treatments and the lowest FL (44.87 &#x03BC;m) was observed on T<sub>5</sub> (control) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4e</xref>). Structure of gut in T<sub>2</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4b</xref>) had increased FL (53.11 &#x03BC;m) compared with T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4a</xref>), T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4d</xref>), and T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4e</xref>); T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4d</xref>) had increased FL (48.99 &#x03BC;m) compared with T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4a</xref>) and T<sub>5</sub> (control) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-4">Fig. 4e</xref>) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-1">Table I</xref>).</p>
<fig id="fig-4">
<label>Fig. 4</label>
<caption>
<title>Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>1</sub>) in August having 48.25 &#x03BC;m FL. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (a), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>2</sub>) in August having 52.62 &#x03BC;m FL. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (b), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>3</sub>) in August having 55.75 &#x03BC;m FL. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (c), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>4</sub>) in August having 49.56 &#x03BC;m FL. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (d), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>5</sub>) in August having 44.02 &#x03BC;m FL. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 125 (e).</title>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="png" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22-fig-4.png"><alt-text>Images</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_13">
<label>3.13.</label>
<title>Effect on Fold Width (Villus Width)</title>
<p>Fold width showed 7.85 &#x03BC;m to 8.40 &#x03BC;m at the start and 8.39 &#x03BC;m to 11.09 &#x03BC;m at the middle of the experiment. At the end of the experiment fold width exhibited 10.84 &#x03BC;m to 14.68 &#x03BC;m where highest (14.68 &#x03BC;m) was in combined treated groups T<sub>3</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5c</xref>) and the lowest (10.84 &#x03BC;m) was in control treatment T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5e</xref>). At the end of the experiment gut of T<sub>2</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5b</xref>) exhibited increased FW (13.71 &#x03BC;m) compared with T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5a</xref>) (12.35 &#x03BC;m), T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5d</xref>) (12.81 &#x03BC;m), and T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5e</xref>) (10.84 &#x03BC;m); T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5d</xref>) (12.81 &#x03BC;m) had increased FW compared with T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5a</xref>) (12.35 &#x03BC;m) and T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-5">Fig. 5e</xref>) (10.84 &#x03BC;m) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-2">Table II</xref>).</p>
<fig id="fig-5">
<label>Fig. 5</label>
<caption>
<title>Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>1</sub>) in August having 11.29 &#x03BC;m FW. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 425 (a), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>2</sub>) in August having 13.90 &#x03BC;m FW. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 430 (b), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>3</sub>) in August having 15.38 &#x03BC;m FW. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 430 (c), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>4</sub>) in August having 12.50 &#x03BC;m FW. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 430 (d), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>5</sub>) in August having 10.30 &#x03BC;m FW. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 420 (e).</title>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="png" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22-fig-5.png"><alt-text>Images</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_14">
<label>3.14.</label>
<title>Effect on Epithelial Layer Thickness (Mucosa Width)</title>
<p>Epithelial layer thickness showed 3.96 to 4.41 &#x03BC;m at the start and 4.37 to 6.24 &#x03BC;m at the middle of the experiment. At the end of the experiment fold width exhibited 5.30 to 8.41 &#x03BC;m where highest ELT was observed in T<sub>3</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6c</xref>) (8.41 &#x03BC;m) and the lowest ELT was observed on T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6e</xref>) (5.30 &#x03BC;m); gut of T<sub>2</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6b</xref>) (7.76 &#x03BC;m) showed increased ELT compared with T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6a</xref>) (6.59 &#x03BC;m), T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6d</xref>) (6.91&#x03BC;m), and T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6e</xref>) (10.84 &#x03BC;m); T<sub>4</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6d</xref>) provided larger ELT (6.91 &#x03BC;m) compared to T<sub>1</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6a</xref>) (6.59 &#x03BC;m) and T<sub>5</sub> (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig-6">Fig. 6e</xref>) (10.84 &#x03BC;m) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-3">Table III</xref>).</p>
<fig id="fig-6">
<label>Fig. 6</label>
<caption>
<title>Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>1</sub>) in August having 6.23 &#x03BC;m ELT. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 420 (a), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>2</sub>) in August having 8.52 &#x03BC;m ELT. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 430 (b), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>3</sub>) in August having 9.37 &#x03BC;m ELT. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 430 (c), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>4</sub>) in August having 7.05 &#x03BC;m ELT. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 430 (d), Cross-section of gut of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> at the end of experiment (T<sub>5</sub>) in August having 4.73 &#x03BC;m ELT. H &#x0026; E &#x00D7; 425 (e).</title>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="png" xlink:href="EJ-AQUA_22-fig-6.png"><alt-text>Images</alt-text></graphic>
</fig>
<p>Probiotic considered as a non-harmful microorganism with beneficial effects to the host body and culture environment, it ensures the betterment of host&#x2019;s response to diseases resistance and the water quality parameters (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-30">Verschuere <italic>et al</italic>., 2000</xref>). Aquatic environment contains a huge of microorganisms in direct contact with the aquatic animals, with the gills and with the food supplied and having free access to the digestive tract of the aquatic animal. Gut is a valuable part in fish which could clearly relates to alter the absorption of nutrition in fish body (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-21">Purushothaman <italic>et al</italic>., 2016</xref>). Gut villi length, width, enterocyte height are very important part which could determine the efficiency of absorption of nutrition. The present study was performed to understand the effect of commercial probiotics on the gut histological structure of <italic>H. fossilis</italic>. In this investigation the commercial probiotics Super PS (soil probiotic), ZYMETIN (gut probiotic) and pH FIXER (water probiotic) were analyzed for their potential effects on gut histoarchitecture of shing, <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic>.</p>
<p>For sustainable and successful aquaculture optimum values of water quality is very important. Improvement of water quality has proven in aquaculture by using water probiotics. During experimental period temperature of water were varied from 27.86&#x00B0;C to 33.26&#x00B0;C. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-15">Kohinoor <italic>et al</italic>. (2012)</xref> monitored temperature in ponds water varied from 27.90&#x00B0;C to 27.49&#x00B0;C which were more or less similar to the recent study. Dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration in water varied from 3.33 mg/L. to 7.00 mg/L observed from the present study. According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-22">Rahman (1992)</xref> dissolved oxygen value of an aquaculture pond should be 5.0 ppm or more. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-10">DoF (1996)</xref> reported that the value of suitable dissolved oxygen (DO) for fish farming would be 5.50 to 6.50 mg/L. So, it could be mentioned that the values of DO concentration monitored in the present study were suitable for aquafarming.</p>
<p>pH refers the condition of acidity-alkalinity in the water body. It is called the productivity index of aquatic environment. Optimum range of pH for fish farming is 6.50 to 8.50, whereas slightly alkaline pH is most suitable for fish culture. By contrast, acidic pH of water reduces the growth and metabolic rate as well as other physiological activities of fishes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-27">Swingle, 1967</xref>). In the present research, the range of pH were varied from 7.00 to 8.00. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-2">Ahmed <italic>et al</italic>. (1996)</xref> observed that pH ranged from 6.50 to 8.50 and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-15">Kohinoor <italic>et al</italic>. (2012)</xref> recorded pH range from 7.08 to 7.15 which is almost similar with the finding of the present experiment.</p>
<p>Unionized form of ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) is fatal to fish, while the ammonium ion (NH<sub arrange="stack">4</sub><sup arrange="stack">&#x002B;</sup>) is not toxic. In the present study free ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) concentrations were varied from 0.01 mg/L to 0.41 mg/L. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-24">Santhosh and Singh (2007)</xref>, stated that maximum limit of ammonia concentration for aquatic organisms is 0.10 mg/L while <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-6">Bhatnagar and Singh (2010)</xref> recommended that ammonia levels of less than 0.20 mg/L are suitable for aquaculture. The concentration of unionized ammonia should not exceed more than 0.025 ppm (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-14">Jhingran, 1988</xref>). So, it could be stated that the values of ammonia concentration observed in the present research were suitable for fish culture.</p>
<p>From the present study alkalinity varies between 96.66 mg/L to 173.33 mg/L which is suitable for <italic>H. fossilis</italic> culture. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-9">Chakraborty and Nur (2012)</xref> indicated that better <italic>H. fossilis</italic> growth within the alkalinity range between 140.50 mg/L to 188.40 mg/L. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-7">Boyd (1982)</xref> mentioned that the total alkalinity value should be more than 20 mg/L in cultured ponds to increase the production. The variation of total alkalinity in all the treatments were within the productive range for aquaculture ponds which also coincided with the result of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-32">Wahab <italic>et al</italic>. (1995)</xref>.</p>
<p>Based on observations made on histological section of gut, pathological signs like necrosis (N), vacuum (V), clubbed villi (CB) and partly lost villi (VL) were present in T<sub>5</sub> (control), however, gut structures of T<sub>3</sub> were almost normal except few vaccums. From the research findings of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-4">Akter (2019)</xref> gut structure of Thai pangas (<italic>P. hypophthalmus</italic>) in combined application of gut and water probiotics (T<sub>3</sub>) was comparatively improved and normal than the start of the experiment; fish of T<sub>4</sub> (gut probiotic) had normal structure of intestine but fish of T<sub>5</sub> (control) showed hemorrhage, necrosis, clubbing, partly missing villi, and almost lost gastrointestinal tract. On the other hand, T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2</sub> and T<sub>4</sub> had necrosis, partly lost and clubbed villi at the start of the experiment. But towards termination of the experiment very few pathologies in gut were observed in T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>3</sub> and T<sub>4</sub> compared the start of the experiment. According to research findings of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-31">Vishwakarma <italic>et al</italic>. (2021)</xref> highest damage was noticed in the gastrointestinal tract layer with ruptured and fused microvilli, hyperplasia of villi and necrotic enterocytes. Other degenerative modifications might be the cause of haemorrhage inside the layers. According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-13">Inmaculada <italic>et al</italic>. (2021)</xref> significant damage was noticed in the gut tissue, mainly due to chemical effect and to adherent bacterial populations of the gut.</p>
<p>In the present experiment, histological measurements of gut sections of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> showed that fish in treatments applied with probiotics had significantly increased fold length, fold width and epithelial layer thickness compared to the treatments with no probiotic. Based on measurement made, combined probiotics treated fish (T<sub>3</sub>) showed the highest fold length (59.20 &#x03BC;m), Fold width (14.68 &#x03BC;m) and epithelial layer thickness (8.41 &#x03BC;m) followed by fish in T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>4</sub> and T<sub>5</sub> at the end of the experiment. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-4">Akter (2019)</xref> found that fish from T<sub>3</sub> and T<sub>4</sub> showed larger fold length, width and enterocyte height than that of T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>5</sub> (control). Thus, probiotic supplementations can improve the intestinal morphology of Thai pangas (<italic>P. hypophthalmus</italic>) which may increase absorption of nutrition in fish and thereby enance the digestion capacity that ultimately helps to improve the health status. From the present study, T<sub>2</sub> (FL 53.11 &#x03BC;m, FW 13.71 &#x03BC;m, ELT 7.76 &#x03BC;m) and T<sub>4</sub> (FL 48.99 &#x03BC;m, FW 12.81 &#x03BC;m, ELT 6.91 &#x03BC;m) had larger fold length, fold width and epithelial layer thickness than that of T<sub>1</sub> (FL 47.40 &#x03BC;m, FW 12.35 &#x03BC;m, ELT 6.59 &#x03BC;m) at the end of the experiment. The lowest value was found in T<sub>5</sub> (FL 36.18 &#x03BC;m, FW 7.85 &#x03BC;m, ELT 3.96 &#x03BC;m) at the start of the experiment. It could be due to the fact that more efficient nutrient absorption had occurred when fish treated with combind probiotic supplementation resulted to a physically healthy fish. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-17">Mayra <italic>et al</italic>. (2018)</xref> mentioned that after 109 days of feeding the probiotic supplimented feed to totoaba, histological measurements showed significantly larger FL (435.6 &#x03BC;m) in the proximal segment of the gastrointestinal tract compared to the treatments with no probiotic (382.3 &#x03BC;m) and fish fed the diet containing both probiotic and prebiotic, showed the largest FL (448.7 &#x03BC;m). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-35">Merrifield <italic>et al</italic>. (2010)</xref> observed that dietary applications of <italic>P. acidilactici</italic> could significantly improve length of microvilli in <italic>O. mykiss</italic> compared to the control group. According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref-4">Akter (2019)</xref> noticed highest fold length (FL, 75.540 &#x00B5;m &#x00B1; 0.35 &#x00B5;m), width (FW, 51.657 &#x00B5;m &#x00B1; 0.12 &#x00B5;m), enterocyte height (EH, 23.584 &#x00B5;m &#x00B1; 0.07 &#x00B5;m) in T<sub>3</sub> in comparison with other treatments and the lowest fold length (FL), fold width (FW), enterocyte height (EH) was observed in T<sub>5</sub> (control). Fish of T<sub>4</sub> also showed larger fold length (FL), fold width (FW), enterocyte height (EH) compare to T<sub>1,</sub> T<sub>2</sub> and T<sub>5</sub>. Fish of T<sub>2</sub> provided larger fold length (FL), enterocyte height (EH) and fold width (FW) compared to T<sub>1</sub> and T<sub>5</sub>.</p>
<p>So, it could be stated that combind application of gut, soil and water probiotics provided the increased fold length, width and epithelial layer thickness than those of only supply of gut, soil or water probiotic treated fish. This showed the highest nutrient absorption occurred in the fish gut which can be reflected by better growth performance when compared to control. The fish from T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>2</sub>, T<sub>3</sub>, T<sub>4</sub> showed increased fold length, width and epithelial layer thickness than those of T<sub>5</sub> (control) at the end of the experiments which indicates that probiotic supplementation can improve the gut structure of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> which increase nutrient absorption capacity, thereby improve the digestion ability of fish. For this reason health status of <italic>H. fossilis</italic> improved in the probiotics applyed treatments.</p>
<p>From this investigation, it can be mentioned that probiotic supplementation can improve gut structure. Probiotic bacteria inhibit colonization and invation of pathogenic bacteria through hepatic portal system by improving epithelial layer thikness. Probiotic improves the intestinal morphology which are related to nutrients absorption of fish. The digestibility of fish can be increased through probiotic supplementation which results in improve health condition of cultured fish. Thus probiotics could be applied with fish feeds, soil and water to attain healthy fish as well as to a boost production in farming systems through improve immune and defence mechanism of fish.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s4">
<label>4.</label>
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>Probiotic is one of the key tools to prevention of fish diseases and development of efficiency of nutrient absorption in aquafarming. Due to increasing demand for eco-friendly aquaculture system use of probiotics is becoming popular day by day. Based on observations made on histological section of gut less pathological sign was present in combined treated fish (T<sub>3)</sub> at the end of the experiment. T<sub>1,</sub> T<sub>2</sub> and T<sub>4</sub> had improved structure with less pathological sign than that of T<sub>5</sub> (control). T<sub>2</sub> (gut probiotic) had improved structure with less pathological sign compared to T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>4</sub> and T<sub>5</sub> (control). Most pathological sign was found in control group of fish (T<sub>5)</sub>. Under the experimental conditions, some differential responses were observed in the fold length, fold width and epithelial layer thickness of the gut morphology in the fish treated with probiotics. Highest fold length (FL), fold witdh (FW) and epithelial layer thickness (ELT) was observed in T<sub>3</sub> (combined probiotic supplementation of Super PS, ZYMETIN, and pH FIXER) followed by T<sub>1</sub> (Soil probiotic), T<sub>2</sub> (Gut probiotic)<sub>,</sub> T<sub>4</sub> (Water probiotic)<sub>,</sub> and the lowest was observed in T<sub>5</sub> (control). T<sub>2</sub> had larger FL, FW and ELT compared to T<sub>1</sub>, T<sub>4</sub> and T<sub>5</sub> (control). Improved intestinal morphology results in more efficient nutrient absorption. It could be concluded that probiotic supplementation of single or combined way (ZYMETIN, pH FIXER, and Super PS) can improve the gut condition of fish which helps in regular digestion, more nutrient absorption and growth of fish.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>

<ref-list content-type="authoryear">
<title>References</title>
<ref id="ref-1"><label>Ahmed <italic>et al</italic>. (1998)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ahmed</surname>, <given-names>G. U.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Houque</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Khatun</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Nessa</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Investigation of catfish disease in Mymensingh area through histopathological techniques</article-title>. <source>Bangladesh Journal of Fisheries</source>, <volume>23</volume>, <fpage>45</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>55</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-2"><label>Ahmed <italic>et al</italic>. (1996)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ahmed</surname>, <given-names>G. U.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Sarder</surname>, <given-names>M. R. I.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Kibria</surname>, <given-names>M. G.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1996</year>). <article-title>Culture feasibility of pangus (Pangasius pangasius) in earthen ponds with different supplement diets</article-title>. <source>Bangladesh Journal of Fisheries</source>, <volume>19</volume>, <fpage>23</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>27</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-3"><label>Akhter <italic>et al</italic>. (2015)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Akhter</surname>, <given-names>N.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Wu</surname>, <given-names>B.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Memon</surname>, <given-names>A. M.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Mohsin</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Probiotics and prebiotics associated with aquaculture: A review</article-title>. <source>Fish and Shellfish Immunology</source>, <volume>45</volume>, <fpage>733</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>741</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-4"><label>Akter (2019)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Akter</surname>, <given-names>F.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title><italic>Intestinal morphology of Thai pangas (Pangasianodon hypophthalmus) under probiotic supplemented conditions</italic> [MS Thesis]</article-title>. <comment>Department of Aquaculture, BAU, Mymensingh</comment>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-5"><label>Ali (2000)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Ali</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Liver-microbiome axis in health and disease</article-title>. <source>Trends in Immunology</source>, <volume>39</volume>, <fpage>712</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>723</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-6"><label>Bhatnagar &#x0026; Singh (2010)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Bhatnagar</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Singh</surname>, <given-names>G.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Culture fisheries in village ponds: A multi-location study in Haryana, India</article-title>. <source>Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America</source>, <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>961</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>968</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-7"><label>Boyd (1982)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Boyd</surname>, <given-names>C. E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1982</year>). <article-title>Water quality management for pond fish culture</article-title>. <source>Development in Aquaculture and Fisheries Science</source>, <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>318</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>320</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-8"><label>Boyd &#x0026; Massaut (1999)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Boyd</surname>, <given-names>C. E.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Massaut</surname>, <given-names>L.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Risk associated with the use of chemicals in pond aquaculture</article-title>. <source>Aquaculture Engineering</source>, <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>113</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>132</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-9"><label>Chakraborty &#x0026; Nur (2012)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Chakraborty</surname>, <given-names>B. K.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Nur</surname>, <given-names>N. N.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Growth and yield performance of shing, <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic> and koi, <italic>Anabas testudineus</italic> in Bangladesh under semi-intensive culture systems</article-title>. <source>International Journal of Agriculture Research Innovation and Technology</source>, <volume>2</volume>, <fpage>15</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>24</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-10"><label>DoF (1996)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab>DoF</collab></person-group>. (<year>1996</year>). <source>Annual Report</source>. pp. <fpage>81</fpage>. <publisher-loc>Dhaka, Bangladesh</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name> Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-11"><label>FAO (2006)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab>FAO</collab></person-group>. (<year>2006</year>). <source>The State of Food Insecurity in the World</source>. pp. <fpage>235</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>240</lpage>, <publisher-loc>Rome, Italy</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-12"><label>FAO (2010)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab>FAO</collab></person-group>. (<year>2010</year>). <source>The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture</source>. Contributing to food security and nutrition for all. pp. <fpage>800</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>810</lpage>. <publisher-loc>Rome, Italy</publisher-loc>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-13"><label>Inmaculada <italic>et al</italic>. (2021)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Inmaculada</surname>, <given-names>V.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Osorio</surname>, <given-names>K.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Estensoro</surname>, <given-names>I.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Catala</surname>, <given-names>F. N.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Bobadilla</surname>, <given-names>A. S.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Navarro</surname>, <given-names>J. C.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Sanchez</surname>, <given-names>J. P.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Torreblanca</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Piazzon</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Effect of virgin low density polyethylene microplastic ingestion on intestinal histopathology and microbiota of gilthead sea bream</article-title>. <source>Aquaculture</source>, <volume>945</volume>, <fpage>7337</fpage>&#x2013; <lpage>7345</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-14"><label>Jhingran (1988)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Jhingran</surname>, <given-names>V. G.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1988</year>). <source>Fish and Fishes of India</source>. <publisher-loc>Delhi, India</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Hindustan Publishing Corporation</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-15"><label>Kohinoor <italic>et al</italic>. (2012)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Kohinoor</surname>, <given-names>A. H. M.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Khan</surname>, <given-names>M. M.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Yeasmine</surname>, <given-names>S.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Mandol</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Islam</surname>, <given-names>M. S.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>Effects of stocking density on growth and production performance of indigenous Stinging catfish, <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic> (bloch)</article-title>. <source>International Journal of Agricultural Resources Innovation and Technology</source>, <volume>2</volume>, <fpage>9</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>14</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-16"><label>Lilly &#x0026; Stillwell (1965)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Lilly</surname>, <given-names>D. M.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Stillwell</surname>, <given-names>R. H.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1965</year>). <article-title>Probiotics: Growth-promoting factors produced by microorganisms</article-title>. <source>Science</source>, <volume>147</volume>, <fpage>747</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>748</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-17"><label>Mayra <italic>et al</italic>. (2018)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Mayra</surname>, <given-names>L.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Filiberto</surname>, <given-names>S.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Fernando</surname>, <given-names>Y.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Adrian</surname>, <given-names>O. L.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Effects of commercial dietary prebiotic and probiotic supplements on growth, innate immune responses, and intestinal microbiota and histology of <italic>Totoaba macdonaldi</italic></article-title>. <source>Aquaculture</source>, <volume>491</volume>, <fpage>239</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>251</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-18"><label>Minghetti <italic>et al</italic>. (2017)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Minghetti</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Drieschner</surname>, <given-names>C.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Bramaz</surname>, <given-names>N.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Schug</surname>, <given-names>H.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Schirmer</surname>, <given-names>K.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>A fish intestinal epithelial barrier model established from the rainbow trout (<italic>Oncorhynchus mykiss</italic>) cell line</article-title>. <source>Toxicology</source>, <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>539</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>555</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-35"><label>Merrifield <italic>et al</italic>. (2010)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Merrifield</surname>, <given-names>D. L.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Dimitroglou</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Foey</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Davies</surname>, <given-names>S. J.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Baker</surname>, <given-names>R. T.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>B&#x02205;gwald</surname>, <given-names>J.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Castex</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Ring&#x02205;</surname>, <given-names>E.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>The current status and future focus of probiotic and prebiotic applications for salmonids</article-title>. <source>Aquaculture</source>, <volume>302</volume>(<issue>1&#x2013;2</issue>), <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>18</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-19"><label>Olojo <italic>et al</italic>. (2005)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Olojo</surname>, <given-names>R. T.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Dasis</surname>, <given-names>E.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Diniz</surname>, <given-names>C. G.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Abreu</surname>, <given-names>P. C.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Evaluation of the presence and efficiency of potential probiotic bacteria in the gut of tilapia (<italic>Oreochromis niloticus</italic>) using the fluorescent in situ hybridization technique</article-title>. <source>Aquaculture</source>, <volume>388</volume>, <fpage>115</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>121</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-20"><label>Pandiyan <italic>et al</italic>. (2013)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Pandiyan</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Balaraman</surname>, <given-names>D.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Thirunavukkarasu</surname>, <given-names>R.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>George</surname>, <given-names>E. G. J.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Subaramaniyam</surname>, <given-names>K.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Manikkam</surname>, <given-names>S.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Probiotics in aquaculture</article-title>. <source>Drug Invent Today</source>, <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>55</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>59</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-21"><label>Purushothaman <italic>et al</italic>. (2016)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Purushothaman</surname>, <given-names>K.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Lau</surname>, <given-names>D.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Saju</surname>, <given-names>J. M.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Lunny</surname>, <given-names>D. P.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Vij</surname>, <given-names>S.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Orb&#x00E1;n</surname>, <given-names>L.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Morpho-histological characterisation of the alimentary canal of an important food fish, Asian seabass (<italic>Lates calcarifer</italic>)</article-title>. <source>Journal of Life and Environmental Sciences</source>, <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>2369</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2377</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-22"><label>Rahman (1992)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Rahman</surname>, <given-names>M. S.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1992</year>). <source>Water Quality Management in Aquaculture</source>. pp. <fpage>84</fpage>. <publisher-loc>Mohakhali, Dhaka, Bangladesh</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>BRAC Prokashana</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-23"><label>Saha &#x0026; Guha (1939)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Saha</surname>, <given-names>K. C.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Guha</surname>, <given-names>B. C.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1939</year>). <article-title>Nutritional investigation of Bengal fish</article-title>. <source>The Indian Journal of Medical Research</source>, <volume>26</volume>, <fpage>921</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>927</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-24"><label>Santhosh &#x0026; Singh (2007)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Santhosh</surname>, <given-names>B.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Singh</surname>, <given-names>N. P.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <source>Guidelines for Water Quality Management for Fish Culture in Tripura</source>. <publisher-loc>Tripura Center</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region. Publication No. 29</publisher-name>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-25"><label>Sayes <italic>et al</italic>. (2017)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Sayes</surname>, <given-names>C. C.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Cai</surname>, <given-names>S. A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Pang</surname>, <given-names>C. M. A.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Atlantic cod in the dynamic probiotics research in aquaculture</article-title>. <source>Aquaculture</source>, <volume>424</volume>, <fpage>53</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>62</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-95"><label>Soccol <italic>et al</italic>. (2010)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Soccol</surname>, <given-names>C. R.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Vandenberghe</surname>, <given-names>L. P. S.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Spier</surname>, <given-names>M. R.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Medeiros</surname>, <given-names>A. B. P.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Yamaguishi</surname>, <given-names>C. T.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Lindner</surname>, <given-names>J. D.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Pandey</surname>, <given-names>A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x00026; <string-name><surname>Thomaz-Soccol</surname>, <given-names>V.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>The potential of probiotics: A review</article-title>. <source>Food Technology and Biotechnology</source>, <volume>48</volume>, <fpage>413</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>434</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-26"><label>Sweetman <italic>et al</italic>. (2008)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Sweetman</surname>, <given-names>C. M.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Cesar</surname>, <given-names>D. E.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Abreu</surname>, <given-names>P. C.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Bacterial community of pond&#x2019;s water, sediment and in the guts of tilapia (<italic>Oreochromis niloticus</italic>) juveniles characterized by fluorescent in situ hybridization technique</article-title>. <source>Aquaculture Research</source>, <volume>46</volume>, <fpage>707</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>715</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-27"><label>Swingle (1967)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Swingle</surname>, <given-names>H. S.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1967</year>). <article-title>Standardization of chemical analysis for mud pond water</article-title>. <source>Fisheries Research</source>, <volume>44</volume>, <fpage>397</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>421</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-28"><label>Uddin <italic>et al</italic>. (2019)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Uddin</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Islam</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Islam</surname>, <given-names>R.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Yesmin</surname>, <given-names>R.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Halim</surname>, <given-names>K. M. A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Hasanuzzaman</surname>, <given-names>K. M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Study on health status of farmed shing (<italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic>) in Mymensingh region</article-title>. <source>Research in Agriculture Livestock and Fisheries</source>, <volume>6</volume>, <fpage>445</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>455</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-29"><label>Uddin &#x0026; Nur-A-Sharmin Aktar (2022)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Uddin</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Nur-A-Sharmin Aktar</surname>, <given-names>M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Status of ichthyofauna under conservations and threats in the historical Pahang River, Pahang, Malaysia</article-title>. <source>European Journal of Aquatic Sciences</source>, <volume>1</volume>(<issue>1</issue>), <fpage>25</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>44</lpage>. <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24018/ejaqua.2022.1.1.6</pub-id>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-30"><label>Verschuere <italic>et al</italic>. (2000)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Verschuere</surname>, <given-names>L.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Rombau</surname>, <given-names>t G.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Sorgeloos</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Verstraete</surname>, <given-names>W.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Probiotic bacteria as biological control agents in aquaculture</article-title>. <source>Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews</source>, <volume>64</volume>, <fpage>655</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>671</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-31"><label>Vishwakarma <italic>et al</italic>. (2021)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Vishwakarma</surname>, <given-names>P.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Maurya</surname>, <given-names>R.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Saxena</surname>, <given-names>A. M.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>The histopathology of alimentary canal of stinging catfish <italic>Heteropneustes fossilis</italic> (Bloch, 1794). Susceptible for Trematodes Incursion</article-title>. <source>Agricultural Science Digest</source>, <volume>35</volume>, <fpage>5360</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>5366</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-32"><label>Wahab <italic>et al</italic>. (1995)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Wahab</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Ahmed</surname>, <given-names>Z. F.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Haque</surname>, <given-names>M. S.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Haque</surname>, <given-names>M. A.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Biswas</surname>, <given-names>B. K.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Effect of frequency of fertilization on the pond ecology and growth of fishes</article-title>. <source>Bangladesh Agricultural University Research Progress</source>, <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>410</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>419</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
<ref id="ref-33"><label>Wang <italic>et al</italic>. (2005)</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><string-name><surname>Wang</surname>, <given-names>Y. B.</given-names></string-name>, <string-name><surname>Xu</surname>, <given-names>Z. R.</given-names></string-name>, &#x0026; <string-name><surname>Xia</surname>, <given-names>M. S.</given-names></string-name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>The effectiveness of commercial probiotics in northern white shrimp (<italic>Penaeus vannamei</italic> L.)</article-title>. <source>Ponds Fish Science</source>, <volume>71</volume>, <fpage>1034</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1041</lpage>.</mixed-citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back></article>