Role of Effective Microorganisms (EM) in Livestock Nutrition and Performance: A Review

1Postgraduate Programme, Faculty of Agriculture, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Puliyankulama, Anuradhapura 50000, Sri Lanka.
2Department of Animal and Food Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Puliyankulama, Anuradhapura 50000, Sri Lanka.

The use of effective microorganisms (EM), is a sustainable solution for addressing nutrient deficiencies and improving feed quality in all four major  livestock species (dairy and beef cattle, sheep, goats and swine), as it promises to enhance animal production, by the improving nutrient digestibility, feed conversion efficiency, overall animal health and environmental sustainability in a profitable way. This review synthesized the findings from accepted peer-reviewed academic journal articles written only in English. The findings revealed  the positive effect of EM on gut health, nutrient digestibility, feed  conversion efficiency, production performances, product quality and the environmental effects of the livestock industry. Despite these positive effects, multifunctional action with combined alternative feedstuff stains, mechanisms of action, influence on reproductive performances and impact on newborn offspring, major knowledge gaps were identified. Addressing these gaps, through well-developed studies, especially species-specific responses and the long-term effects of EM on livestock will be vital for improving EM use in the livestock production sector.

Effective microorganisms (EM), a mixture of beneficial bacterial and other microorganisms’ cultures, can be used as an innovative dietary approach to address the challenges in livestock nutrition and waste management (Higa, 2000; Sheikh et al., 2018). This technology was invented by Dr. Teruo Higa in  1980s by first introduced to improve soil health (Higa, 1999; Ezeagu et al., 2023), without harming the ecosystem through the way of reducing agricultural chemicals (Kodippili and Nimalan, 2018). Afterwards, it expanded to various fields, such as waste management, environmental consideration and other allied fields (Jarosz et al., 2022; Sung et al., 2023). When it gained attention in the livestock sector, it first focused on the application of waste management and then gained attention on animal nutrition (Amin and Mao, 2021). Effective microorganisms have shown promising results in livestock nutrition by enhancing digestion efficiency (Pitta et al., 2018; Soliman, 2022). The incorporation of EM into livestock feed aims to improve the gut microbial diversity in target livestock species and feed quality (Shen et al., 2024; Isaac et al., 2024). These mixtures of beneficial bacteria, yeasts and fungi act symbiotically by breaking down feed components that would otherwise be less digestible, thus enhancing nutrient availability (Nelson and Martini, 2009; Guo, et al., 2020). The fact that EM has the potential to improve feed efficiency, waste reduction, reduce enteric gas accumulation and enhance overall gastric performance has gained significant momentum in come forward in recent years (Higa, 1999 and 2000; Mohamed et al., 2018; Min et al., 2022). Moreover, EM showed promising results in improving immune responses and mitigating environmental pollution by reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Mohamed et al., 2018). Apart from that, some studies revealed that the EM has not influenced the overall performance of livestock and poultry (Tu-Kitaw et al., 2013; Yacout et al., 2021; Min et al., 2022). Those inconsistent results and limited understanding of EM demanded a comprehensive study in major livestock and poultry species, focusing on cattle, sheep, goat, swine and poultry.
       
A narrative review process was employed to synthesize the findings. Recently published peer-reviewed research articles and reputable websites (Lim et al., 2022) were used to collect and analyze the data. Relevant studies were identified in the Google Scholar database using the advanced search function. The keywords “effective microorganisms,” “livestock nutrition,” “EM supplementation,” “EM bokashi”, “Probiotics” and “animal health” were used for filtering the related articles. All the articles written in English were selected and their findings were reviewed and synthesized focusing on the major livestock categories; cattle (dairy and beef), goats, sheep and swine.
 
Dairy cattle
 
The dietary supplementation of EM has been studied to evaluate its efficacy on nutrient digestibility and rumen fermentation of dairy cows (Yacout et al., 2021). Soliman (2022) showed that EM improves fibre digestibility in forages containing high lignocellulose content. This improvement in fibre digestion enhances the production of volatile fatty acids (VFA), which are the primary by-products of ruminal fibre fermentation (Guo et al., 2020). Enhancements in fibre degradation and VFA production are crucial for dairy cows, as fibre is a major component of their diet and VFAs serve as their primary energy source (Nelson and Martini, 2009). Moreover, the excessive VFA production improves the energy availability, that especially necessary during the metabolic stress periods, i.e. parturition and early lactation of dairy cows (Vicente et al., 2024).
       
Furthermore, Pitta, et al., (2018) revealed that microbial fermentation fulfills approximately 70% of energy and 50% of protein requirements in dairy cows. Therefore, EM supplementation, by enhancing the microbial ecosystem, holds promise for improving energy and protein availability to meet the nutritional demands of the cows. Moreover, Mohamed et al., (2018) demonstrated that supplementing cross-bred dairy cows with EM solution containing Lactobacillus spp. led to an increase in milk yield while reducing milk fat percentage compared to the control group. Additionally, Sun et al., (2013) conducted a similar study evaluating the effect of EM strain Bacillus subtilis natto, isolated from fermented soybean, when supplemented in dairy cows. The study showed the supplementation of Bacillus subtilis natto at leat level of 0.5 x 1011 CFU increased the milk production and improved the milk compositions while reducing the somatic cell count (SSC), which is an important indicator of milk quality. These findings further confirmed that supplementing EM-based beneficial microorganisms could be beneficial for dairy production while improving feed efficiency, milk volume, quality and cow health. However, a study conducted by Tu-Kitaw et al., (2013) showed that the supplementation of EM with sprayed native pasture hay, including a concentrate mix, does not influence the milk volume and composition. This variation in the study observed may be attributed to differences in EM product composition, the specific EM strain used, cattle breed, seasonal factors, environmental conditions and geographical region.
 
Beef cattle
 
The EM’s promising approach to the beef production system, coupled with the better utilization of protein and fibre digestion, significantly contributed to the improved performance in beef cattle (Loor et al., 2016; Min et al., 2022). As observed in dairy cattle, beef cattle supplemented with EM have been reported the enhance ruminal fermentation and fiber digestion. Supplementation of microbes as probiotics has also been reported to improve protein synthesis and utilization, which are crucial for improving muscle mass and growth rates in beef cattle (Markowiak and Śliżewska, 2018). Beef cattle fed with Lactobacillus acidophilus (strain BT-1386) improved the feed conversion efficiency by 4.2% and average daily gain by 3.06% (Feedstuffs.com, 2020). The improvement of feed efficiency means less feed requirement for the fulfilment of daily nutritional needs of beef cattle (Ojo et al., 2024). This approach greatly supports beef production systems, whereas the feed cost is the most critical component in the total production cost in beef production systems, which accounts for 60%-70% of the total production (Kenny et al., 2018; Ojo et al., 2024).
       
When considering the production parameters of beef cattle, weight gain and carcass quality are crucial. Maamouri and Ben-Salem (2022) showed that supplementing Saccharomyces cerevisiae to the fattening calves resulted highest average daily gain (400 g calf-1) with the highest feed conversion rate. Furthermore, a similar study conducted by Mousa and Marwan (2019) investigated the effect of Bacillus subtilus supplementation on calves. The results showed that supplementation of B. subtilus 0.3 g  kg-1 to their diets improved the average body weight gain and FCR. Further, the supplementation of basal diet with 20 g d-1 cattle brewer’s yeast and cellulose resulted in the improvement of final body weight and FCR, with a 3.86% of net meat weight (Gao et al., 2022). These findings highlight the potential of EM to enhance beef production systems by improving feed utilization, promoting growth and enhancing carcass quality, ultimately leading to healthier steers.
 
Goat and sheep
 
Goats and sheep are also corresponding of the group of ruminants and are considered as small ruminants. They also play a crucial role in the livestock industry by contributing to producing meat, milk, wool, hides, etc. (Mazinani and Rude, 2020; Rout et al., 2021). Small ruminants with different rumen microbiota compared to cattle also showed a positive impact on supplementation of EM. Gemiyo et al., (2017) conducted an experiment supplementing Chlorias gayana hay with different levels of EM-bokashi in lambs. The results showed that a 26.6% increase in EM supplementation led to improved daily weight gain and enhanced economic profitability. Dietary supplementation of live yeast as EM to growing lambs increased feed intake and growth rate while also enhancing the population of ciliate protozoa and entodinomorphs (Tripathi and Karim, 2011). This process happens through effective ruminal fermentation by enhancing nutrient absorption in small ruminants fed with EM (Amin and Mao, 2021). The improved fermentation enables the better digestion of complex carbohydrates and fibrous compounds abounded in the sheep and goats’ diet (Kilula, 1997; Tripathi and Karim, 2011; Li et al., 2019). Apart from that, the EM-supplemented group of goats showed a reduction in faecal worm egg count and reduced anaemia condition (Razak et al., 2018). Moreover, improved nutrient intake from ruminal fermentation enhances the overall performance of small ruminants, leading to better growth, increased milk production, reduced worm burden and decreased anaemia conditions (Amin and Mao, 2021; Wahyono et al., 2022).
       
Moreover, Razak et al., (2018) conducted a study supplementing EM to female goats, resulting in improved body weight and blood metabolites. Further, supplementation with bacterial isolated commercial enzymes and yeast in lactating goats led to an increase in body weight, milk production and milk composition (Abou-Elenin  et al., 2015). Apart from that, two studies showed that supplementing a low protein diet with 5% EM bokashi® in lambs and goats resulted in higher body weight gain (Gemiyo et al., 2017; Direkvandi et al., 2020). Based on the key studies discussed above, the use of EM in sheep and goat nutrition is recommended due to its positive impact on improving nutrient absorption, feed efficiency, production performance and overall health, particularly through reducing intestinal worm burden.
 
Swine
 
Swine are denoted as monogastric animals, with the group of omnivores, which means acidic with a low pH value in their gastric sap (Saha and Pathak, 2021; Joysowal et al., 2021). Pigs, as omnivorous animals, consume a wide variety of feedstuffs, which can often lead to dyspepsia. While these issues are usually mild, in some cases, they can become severe and result in significant economic losses (Ponamarev et al., 2022). The supplementation of EM showed promising results for the condition of dyspepsia by enhancing digestive function, balancing the gut microbial population, alleviating gut pathogenic bacterial activity and improving immunity function in swine (Liao and Nyachoti, 2017; Shen et al., 2024). Further, Radzikowski and Milczarek (2021) revealed that supplementing beneficial microorganisms to different age groups of pigs increased feed intake, piglets’ weight gain and sows’ milk yield, boosting pig immunity and reducing pathogens from the gastrointestinal tract, by enhancing growth and development of the beneficial bacterial microflora. These results were in line and further explained by Jarosz et al., (2022) that supplementing EM Bokashi® for the late pregnant sows resulted in improved immunological quality of the colostrum and its milk, subsequently improving the piglets’ vigour against infections. Further, the use of beneficial microbes, particularly EM has contributed to less nitrogen excretion with the faeces, evidenced by better protein utilization. The way of reduction of nitrogen excretion is favourable for the environment, by better protein digestion, it also reduces waste generation and emissions (Yuquilema, 2019; Duarte and Kim, 2022; Jarosz et al., 2022; Sung et al., 2023).
       
When late pregnant and early lactating sows were fed with EM Bokashi® showed improved immunological quality of colostrum. Further, it also improved the piglets’ survival rate (Jarosz et al., 2022). Giang et al., (2011) showed that the supplementing mixture of beneficial bacteria and yeast improves the average daily gain and the FCR of the growing pigs. Further, Rybarczyk et al., (2021a) showed similar results when treating the fattening pigs fed with EM Bokashi®. Moreover, when fatteners fed with EM Bokashi® probiotics resulted in higher lean percentage, mineral (Na, Mg and Se) and lower fat content in the carcass, promising good quality pork (Rybarczyk et al., 2021b). While considering the effect of EM on the performance of swine, the use of EM has positively influenced swine performance by improving colostrum quality, enhancing piglet survival rate, boosting growth performance and improving carcass quality.
 
Livestock manure management and environmental effects
 
Overall, studies have demonstrated the positive impact of the use of EM as a dietary modification. Additionally, from an environmental perspective, the livestock sector significantly contributes to environmental pollution, negatively affecting the ecosphere (Haque, 2018). Major studies have focused on promising solutions to mitigate this pollution. The livestock industry contributes to environmental issues by releasing greenhouse gases, disrupting the nitrogen cycle and eutrophication in lakes and waterbodies (Abdel et al., 2023). There have been various strategies introduced to the field, but their efficacy and economic feasibility are somewhat hard for small and medium-scale livestock producers (Gerber et al., 2013; Herrero et al., 2016). The EM technology has been shown to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) production, manure emissions and odour from the livestock units without affecting the animal performance (Mori et al., 2017; Zhen et al., 2020). The studies conducted using beneficial microbes as the dietary modification for ruminants reduced enteric methane (CH4) production by ~30% (Hristov et al., 2013; Beauchemin et al., 2015; Min et al., 2022). Further, EM improves protein and mineral digestion, reduces the nitrogen (N) and sulfur (S) excretion through manure and helps decrease the release of odour-forming compounds such as ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and other nitrogenous compounds (Mori et al., 2017; Zhen et al., 2020; Vasilev, 2023). Moreover, the direct application of EM to the manure management yards increased manure degradation and boosted the decomposition rate (Zhang et al., 2019). Thus, the use of EM as the dietary modifier and, as manure management is promised as the eco-friendly approach to use in livestock production by reducing ecological footprint.
 
Future directions
 
The supplementation of EM has offered clear benefits in the livestock sector (Fig 1). However, several challenges have been identified. The variability of results could be a variation of the microbial strain of the respective product contained, variation of EM inoculated feed ingredient, livestock breed and species, duration of the particular study, climatic season and finally, geographical location. Moreover, the lack of understanding of the mechanisms and long-term effectiveness, mutual effect with different feed modifiers, should be further investigated.

Fig 1: Effect of EM on livestock and poultry.

Effective microorganisms provide promising results for improving livestock nutrient and environmental sustainability across cattle, goat, sheep and swine. The critically synthesised results from the existing studies revealed that EM improves nutrient digestibility and enhances production performances while mitigating environmental impact. However, further studies are required to investigate the multifunctional action and properties of EM, combined microbial stains and the mechanisms of action. Based on the synthesised knowledge, EM presents a promising approach in livestock nutrition, enhancing colostrum, milk and meat quality, while simultaneously reducing livestock emissions, contributing to improved environmental sustainability.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) of Sri Lanka through Grant No: NSF/RD/06/RG/2024/AG/01.
All authors have no conflict of interest in this study.

  1. Abdel, K.I.A.T., Ramadan, A.S., Saad, M. and Abdelrasoul, R.A.S. (2023). Effect of using effective microorganisms (EM) as a growth promoter on broilers performance, thyroid hormones, lipid profile, hepatosomatic index, immune response, enteric pathogens and antioxidant parameters. Egyptian Poultry Science Journal. 43(2): 259-275. doi: 10.21608/epsj.2023.305125.

  2. Abou-Elenin, E.I., El-Galil, A., Etab, R., Etman, K.E.I. and El-Shabrawy, H.M. (2015). Impact of feeding natural microbial resources on lactating goats performance. Egyptian Journal of Nutrition and Feeds. 18(1): 87-100. doi: 10.21608/ejnf. 2015.104686.

  3. Amin, A.B. and Mao, S. (2021). Influence of yeast on rumen fermentation, growth performance and quality of products in ruminants: A review. Animal Nutrition. 7(1): 31-41. doi: 10.1016/ j.aninu.2020.10.005.

  4. Beauchemin, K.A., McGinn, S.M., Flesch, T.K. and Harper, M.T. (2015). Dietary mitigation of enteric methane from ruminants. Animal Production Science. 55(6): 644-652. 

  5. Direkvandi, E., Mohammadabadi, T. and Salem, A.Z. (2020). Effect of microbial feed additives on growth performance, microbial protein synthesis and rumen microbial population in growing lambs. Translational Animal Science. 4(4): 203. doi: 10.1093/tas/txaa203.

  6. Duarte, M.E.E. and Kim, S.W. (2022). Nutritional intervention for reduced nitrogen excretion and better intestinal health. Journal of Animal Science. 100(3): 123-124. doi: 10.1093/jas/skac247.236.

  7. Ezeagu, G.G., Omotosho, A.O. and Suleiman, K.O. (2023). Effective microorganisms, their products and uses: A review. Nile Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences. 1(1): 209- 222. doi: 10.5455/njeas.147954.

  8. Feedstuffs. (2020). Probiotic strains may aid cattle feed efficiency. Available at: https://www.feedstuffs.com/beef/probiotic- strains-may-aid-cattle-feed-efficiency (Accessed: 2 January 2025).

  9. Gao, L., Yan, X., Liu, Y. and Xia, C. (2022). Effect of enzyme and probiotic supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, carcass traits and meat quality of simmental steers. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 51(E): e2022- 0034. doi: 10.37496/rbz5120220034.

  10. Gemiyo, D., Mengistu, S., Tessema, F., Yilma, M., Wolde, S. and Getachew, T. (2017). Effect of supplementing effective microbes (EM) on growth rate of lambs. Journal of Animal Research and Veterinary Science. 1(1): 1-4. doi: 10.24966/ARVS-3751/100004.

  11. Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A. and Tempio, G. (2013). Tackling climate change through livestock: A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Rome, Italy. Journal of Environmental Protection. 7(7): 139.

  12. Giang, H.H., Viet, T.Q., Ogle, B. and Lindberg, J.E. (2011). Effects of supplementation of probiotics on the performance, nutrient digestibility and faecal microflora in growing- finishing pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 24(5): 655-661. doi: 10.5713/ajas.2011.10238.

  13. Guo, L., Yao, D., Li, D., Lin, Y., Bureenok, S., Ni, K. and Yang, F. (2020). Effects of lactic acid bacteria isolated from rumen fluid and feces of dairy cows on fermentation quality, microbial community and in vitro digestibility of alfalfa silage. Frontiers in Microbiology. 10: 2998. doi: 10.3389/ fmicb.2019.02998.

  14. Haque, M. (2018). Dietary manipulation: A sustainable way to mitigate methane emissions from ruminants. Journal of Animal Science and Technology. 60: 1-10. doi: 10.1186/ s40781-018-0175-7.

  15. Herrero, M., Thornton, P.K., Power, B. and Campbell, B.M. (2016). Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nature Climate Change. 6(5): 452-461. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2925.

  16. Higa, T. (1999). Application of Effective Microorganism for sustainable crop production. Personal communication, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan, 24 May.

  17. Higa, T. (2000). What is EM technology? EM World Journal. 1: 1-6. Available at: https://cdn1.npcdn.net/userfiles/20596/ download/1735615084_dbd71aa3c25ad49d2a8784 de9590a7e1/EM_summary.pdf.

  18. Hristov, A.N., Zanton, G.I., Varga, G.A. and Lee, C. (2013). Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 185(1): 1-3. doi: 10.2527/jas.2013-6583.

  19. Isaac, Rebecca, S. and George A.M (2024). Recycling of leaf litters: Biowaste management for resource conservation. Agricultural Reviews. 45(3): 420-429. doi: 10.18805/ ag.R-2433.

  20. Jarosz, Ł., Ciszewski, A., Marek, A., Grądzki, Z., Kaczmarek, B. and Rysiak, A. (2022). The effect of feed supplementation with EM Bokashi® multimicrobial probiotic preparation on selected parameters of sow colostrum and milk. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins. 14: 1029-1041. doi: 10.1007/s12602-021-09850-z.

  21. Joysowal, M., Saikia, B.N., Tamuly, S. and Kalita, D. (2021). Comparative effect of probiotics (swine and dairy origin) on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood biochemical profile, immune status and faecal microbial count of earlyweaned grower-finisher crossbred pigs. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 55(11): 1308-1314. doi: 10.18805/IJAR.B-4137.

  22. Kenny, D.A., Fitzsimons, C., Waters, S.M. and McGee, M. (2018). Improving feed efficiency of beef cattle: The current state of the art and future challenges. Animals. 12(9): 1815-1826. doi: 10.1017/S1751731118000976.

  23. Kilula, J.B. (1997). Crop byproducts feeding: Diet digestibility and ruminal fermentation characteristics in normal or ciliate- free sheep. M.Sc. Thesis, Kansas State University, USA.

  24. Kodippili, K.P.A.N. and Nimalan, J. (2018). Effect of homemade effective microorganisms on the growth and yield of chilli (Capsicum annuum MI-2). AGRIEAST: Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 12(2): 27-34. doi: 10.4038/agrieast. v12i2.57.

  25. Li, R., Teng, Z., Lang, C., Zhou, H., Zhong, W., Ban, Z., Yan, X., Yang, H., Farouk, M.H. and Lou, Y. (2019). Effect of different forage-to-concentrate ratios on ruminal bacterial structure and real-time methane production in sheep. Plos One. 14(5): e02147-77. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0214777.

  26. Liao, S.F. and Nyachoti, M. (2017). Using probiotics to improve swine gut health and nutrient utilization. Animal Nutrition. 3(4): 331-343. doi: 10.1016/j.aninu.2017.06.007.

  27. Lim, W.M., Kumar, S. and Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ to contribute. The Service Industries Journal. 42(8): 481- 513. doi: 10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941.

  28. Loor, J.J., Elolimy, A.A. and McCann, J.C. (2016). Dietary impacts on rumen microbiota in beef and dairy production. Animal Frontiers. 6(3): 22-29. doi: 10.2527/af.2016-0030.

  29. Maamouri, O. and Ben-Salem, M. (2022). The effect of live yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae as probiotic supply on growth performance, feed intake, ruminal pH and fermentation in fattening calves. Veterinary Medicine and Science. 8(1): 398-404. doi: 10.1002/vms3.631. 

  30. Markowiak, P. and Œli¿ewska, K. (2018). The role of probiotics, prebiotics and symbiotics in animal nutrition. Gut Pathogens. 10: 1-20. doi: 10.1186/s13099-018-0250-0.

  31. Mazinani, M. and Rude, B. (2020). Population, world production and quality of sheep and goat products. American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences. 15(4): 291-299. doi: 10.3844/ajavsp.2020.291.299.

  32. Min, B.R., Lee, S., Jung, H., Miller, D.N. and Chen, R. (2022). Enteric methane emissions and animal performance in dairy and beef cattle production: Strategies, opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. Animals. 12(8): 948. doi: 10.3390/ani12080948.

  33. Mohamed, M., Amarasinghe, A.A.S.S.M. and Nayananjalie, W.A.D. (2018). Use of effective microorganisms in dry zone dairy farms in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Livestock Research. 8(4): 50-57. doi: 10.5455/ijlr.20171019045459.

  34. Mori, K., Kawai, K. and Sugimoto, T. (2017). The role of effective microorganisms (EM) in sustainable livestock farming. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 30(8): 1100-1108. 

  35. Mousa, S.A. and Marwan, A.A. (2019). Growth performance, rumen fermentation and selected biochemical indices in buffalo calves fed on Bacillus subtilis supplemented diet. International Journal of Veterinary Science. 8(3): 151-156.

  36. Nelson, K.A. and Martini, S. (2009). Increasing omega fatty acid content in cow’s milk through diet manipulation: Effect on milk flavor. Journal of Dairy Science. 92(4): 1378- 1386. doi: 10.3168/jds.2008-1780.

  37. Ojo, A.O., Mulim, H.A., Campos, G.S., Junqueira, V.S., Lemenager, R.P., Schoonmaker, J.P. and Oliveira, H.R. (2024). Exploring feed efficiency in beef cattle: From data collection to genetic and nutritional modeling. Animals. 14(24): 3633. doi: 10.3390/ani14243633.

  38. Pitta, D.W., Indugu, N., Baker, L., Vecchiarelli, B. and Attwood, G. (2018). Understanding diet-microbe interactions to enhance productivity of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 101(8): 7661-7679. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13858.

  39. Ponamarev, V., Yashin, A., Prusakov, A. and Popova, O. (2022). Influence of Modern Probiotics on Morphological Indicators of Pigs’ Blood in Toxic Dyspepsia. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Agriculture Digitalization and Organic Production (ADOP 2022), St. Petersburg, Russia, June 6-8. Springer, Singapore. pp. 133-142. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-7780-0_12.

  40. Radzikowski, D. and Milczarek, A. (2021). Selected feed additives used in pig nutrition. Journal of Central European Agriculture. 22(1): 54-65. doi: 10.5513/JCEA01/22.1.2927.

  41. Razak, M.A.A., Zakaria, M.Z., Tayid, M.A.M. and Ali, S.B.G. (2018). Effects of Diets Containing Effective Microorganisms (EM) on Growth Performance, Worm Burden, Hematological and Biochemical Analysis in Female Goats. In: Bioresources Technology in Sustainable Agriculture. Apple Academic Press, Florida, USA. pp. 67-80. doi: 10.1201/9781315365961.

  42. Rout, P.K. and Behera, B.K. (2021). Goat and Sheep Farming. In: Sustainability in Ruminant Livestock: Management and Marketing. Springer, Singapore. pp. 33-76. doi: 10.1007/ 978-981-33-4343-6_3.

  43. Rybarczyk, A., Bogusławska-Wąs, E. and Dłubała, A. (2021a). Effect of BioPlus YC probiotic supplementation on gut microbiota, production performance, carcass and meat quality of pigs. Animals. 11(6): 1581. doi: 10.3390/ ani11061581.

  44. Rybarczyk, A., Bogusławska-Wąs, E. and Pilarczyk, B. (2021b). Carcass and pork quality and gut environment of pigs fed a diet supplemented with the bokashi probiotic. Animals. 11(12): 3590. doi: 10.3390/ani11123590.

  45. Saha, S.K. and Pathak, N.N. (2021). Digestion, Absorption and Metabolism of Nutrients. In: Fundamentals of Animal Nutrition. Springer, Singapore. pp. 219-246. doi: 10.1007/ 978-981-15-9125-9_14.

  46. Sheikh, G.G., Ganai, A.M., Reshi, P.A., Bilal, S., Mir, S. and Masood, D. (2018). Improved paddy straw as ruminant feed: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 39(2): 137-143. doi: 10.18805/ag.R-1667.

  47. Shen, X., Xie, A., Li, Z., Jiang, C., Wu, J., Li, M. and Yue, X. (2024). Research progress for probiotics regulating intestinal flora to improve functional dyspepsia: A review. Foods. 13(1): 151. doi: 10.3390/foods13010151.

  48. Soliman, S.M. (2022). Comparative study on the influence of three feed additives on methane production, rumen fermentation and milk yield in dairy cows. Advanced Animal and Veterinary Science. 10(4): 739-752.

  49. Sun, P., Wang, J.Q. and Deng, L.F. (2013). Effects of Bacillus subtilis natto on milk production, rumen fermentation and ruminal microbiome of dairy cows. Animals. 7(2): 216-222. doi: 10.1017/S1751731112001188.

  50. Sung, J.Y., Johnson, T.A., Ragland, D. and Adeola, O. (2023). Impact of ileal indigestible protein on fecal nitrogen excretion and fecal microbiota may be greater compared with total protein concentration of diets in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 101: 409. doi: 10.1093/jas/ skac409.

  51. Tripathi, M.K. and Karim, S.A. (2011). Effect of yeast culture supplementation on live weight change, rumen fermentation, ciliate protozoa population, microbial hydrolytic enzyme status and slaughtering performance of growing lamb. Livestock Science. 135(1): 17-25. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci. 2010.06.007.

  52. Tu-Kitaw, G., Daba, T., Kehaliw, A., Assefa, G., Dejene, M. and Fekadu, D. (2013). Evaluation of effective microbes (EM) as non-conventional feed supplement to lactating crossbred cows and barn malodor control under Ethiopian condition. Journal of Renewable Agriculture. 141: 146. doi: 10.12966/ jra.11.02.2013.

  53. Vasilev, V. (2023). Identification of effective microbes for ammonia and odor removal from animal manure. Acta Microbiologica Bulgarica. 39(4): 444-451. doi: 10.59393/amb23390412. 

  54. Vicente, F., Campo-Celada, M., Menéndez-Miranda, M., García- Rodríguez, J. and Martínez-Fernández, A. (2024). Effect of postbiotic supplementation on nutrient digestibility and milk yield during the transition period in dairy cows. Animals. 14(16): 2359. doi: 10.3390/ani14162359.

  55. Wahyono, T., Sholikin, M.M., Konca, Y., Obitsu, T., Sadarman, S. and Jayanegara, A. (2022). Effects of urea supplementation on ruminal fermentation characteristics, nutrient intake, digestibility and performance in sheep: A meta-analysis. Veterinary World. 15(2): 331-340. doi: 10.14202/vetworld. 2022.331-340.

  56. Yacout, M.H., El-Badawi, A.Y., Khalel, M.S., Atia, S.E. and Hassan, A.A.M. (2021). Impact of effective microbes (EM) bokashi supplementation on nutrients digestibility, rumen fermentation and gas volume production in diets of sheep. Bulletin of University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca. Animal Science and Biotechnologies. 78(2): 66-75. doi: 10.15835/buasvmcn-asb:2021.0009.

  57. Yuquilema, J.E.M. (2019). Efficient microorganisms with probiotic effect: An alternative in swine health. Advances in Cytology and Pathology. 4(2): 18-19. doi: 10.15406/acp.2019.04.00074.

  58. Zhang, Z., Zhang, L. and Liu, G. (2019). Effects of EM application on manure decomposition and methane reduction in livestock farms. Environmental Technology and Innovation. 16(1): 100471. 

  59. Zhen, Z., Liu, G. and Liu, X. (2020). Effects of effective microorganisms on methane and ammonia emissions from livestock. Journal of Environmental Quality. 49(4): 924-931. 

Role of Effective Microorganisms (EM) in Livestock Nutrition and Performance: A Review

1Postgraduate Programme, Faculty of Agriculture, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Puliyankulama, Anuradhapura 50000, Sri Lanka.
2Department of Animal and Food Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, Puliyankulama, Anuradhapura 50000, Sri Lanka.

The use of effective microorganisms (EM), is a sustainable solution for addressing nutrient deficiencies and improving feed quality in all four major  livestock species (dairy and beef cattle, sheep, goats and swine), as it promises to enhance animal production, by the improving nutrient digestibility, feed conversion efficiency, overall animal health and environmental sustainability in a profitable way. This review synthesized the findings from accepted peer-reviewed academic journal articles written only in English. The findings revealed  the positive effect of EM on gut health, nutrient digestibility, feed  conversion efficiency, production performances, product quality and the environmental effects of the livestock industry. Despite these positive effects, multifunctional action with combined alternative feedstuff stains, mechanisms of action, influence on reproductive performances and impact on newborn offspring, major knowledge gaps were identified. Addressing these gaps, through well-developed studies, especially species-specific responses and the long-term effects of EM on livestock will be vital for improving EM use in the livestock production sector.

Effective microorganisms (EM), a mixture of beneficial bacterial and other microorganisms’ cultures, can be used as an innovative dietary approach to address the challenges in livestock nutrition and waste management (Higa, 2000; Sheikh et al., 2018). This technology was invented by Dr. Teruo Higa in  1980s by first introduced to improve soil health (Higa, 1999; Ezeagu et al., 2023), without harming the ecosystem through the way of reducing agricultural chemicals (Kodippili and Nimalan, 2018). Afterwards, it expanded to various fields, such as waste management, environmental consideration and other allied fields (Jarosz et al., 2022; Sung et al., 2023). When it gained attention in the livestock sector, it first focused on the application of waste management and then gained attention on animal nutrition (Amin and Mao, 2021). Effective microorganisms have shown promising results in livestock nutrition by enhancing digestion efficiency (Pitta et al., 2018; Soliman, 2022). The incorporation of EM into livestock feed aims to improve the gut microbial diversity in target livestock species and feed quality (Shen et al., 2024; Isaac et al., 2024). These mixtures of beneficial bacteria, yeasts and fungi act symbiotically by breaking down feed components that would otherwise be less digestible, thus enhancing nutrient availability (Nelson and Martini, 2009; Guo, et al., 2020). The fact that EM has the potential to improve feed efficiency, waste reduction, reduce enteric gas accumulation and enhance overall gastric performance has gained significant momentum in come forward in recent years (Higa, 1999 and 2000; Mohamed et al., 2018; Min et al., 2022). Moreover, EM showed promising results in improving immune responses and mitigating environmental pollution by reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Mohamed et al., 2018). Apart from that, some studies revealed that the EM has not influenced the overall performance of livestock and poultry (Tu-Kitaw et al., 2013; Yacout et al., 2021; Min et al., 2022). Those inconsistent results and limited understanding of EM demanded a comprehensive study in major livestock and poultry species, focusing on cattle, sheep, goat, swine and poultry.
       
A narrative review process was employed to synthesize the findings. Recently published peer-reviewed research articles and reputable websites (Lim et al., 2022) were used to collect and analyze the data. Relevant studies were identified in the Google Scholar database using the advanced search function. The keywords “effective microorganisms,” “livestock nutrition,” “EM supplementation,” “EM bokashi”, “Probiotics” and “animal health” were used for filtering the related articles. All the articles written in English were selected and their findings were reviewed and synthesized focusing on the major livestock categories; cattle (dairy and beef), goats, sheep and swine.
 
Dairy cattle
 
The dietary supplementation of EM has been studied to evaluate its efficacy on nutrient digestibility and rumen fermentation of dairy cows (Yacout et al., 2021). Soliman (2022) showed that EM improves fibre digestibility in forages containing high lignocellulose content. This improvement in fibre digestion enhances the production of volatile fatty acids (VFA), which are the primary by-products of ruminal fibre fermentation (Guo et al., 2020). Enhancements in fibre degradation and VFA production are crucial for dairy cows, as fibre is a major component of their diet and VFAs serve as their primary energy source (Nelson and Martini, 2009). Moreover, the excessive VFA production improves the energy availability, that especially necessary during the metabolic stress periods, i.e. parturition and early lactation of dairy cows (Vicente et al., 2024).
       
Furthermore, Pitta, et al., (2018) revealed that microbial fermentation fulfills approximately 70% of energy and 50% of protein requirements in dairy cows. Therefore, EM supplementation, by enhancing the microbial ecosystem, holds promise for improving energy and protein availability to meet the nutritional demands of the cows. Moreover, Mohamed et al., (2018) demonstrated that supplementing cross-bred dairy cows with EM solution containing Lactobacillus spp. led to an increase in milk yield while reducing milk fat percentage compared to the control group. Additionally, Sun et al., (2013) conducted a similar study evaluating the effect of EM strain Bacillus subtilis natto, isolated from fermented soybean, when supplemented in dairy cows. The study showed the supplementation of Bacillus subtilis natto at leat level of 0.5 x 1011 CFU increased the milk production and improved the milk compositions while reducing the somatic cell count (SSC), which is an important indicator of milk quality. These findings further confirmed that supplementing EM-based beneficial microorganisms could be beneficial for dairy production while improving feed efficiency, milk volume, quality and cow health. However, a study conducted by Tu-Kitaw et al., (2013) showed that the supplementation of EM with sprayed native pasture hay, including a concentrate mix, does not influence the milk volume and composition. This variation in the study observed may be attributed to differences in EM product composition, the specific EM strain used, cattle breed, seasonal factors, environmental conditions and geographical region.
 
Beef cattle
 
The EM’s promising approach to the beef production system, coupled with the better utilization of protein and fibre digestion, significantly contributed to the improved performance in beef cattle (Loor et al., 2016; Min et al., 2022). As observed in dairy cattle, beef cattle supplemented with EM have been reported the enhance ruminal fermentation and fiber digestion. Supplementation of microbes as probiotics has also been reported to improve protein synthesis and utilization, which are crucial for improving muscle mass and growth rates in beef cattle (Markowiak and Śliżewska, 2018). Beef cattle fed with Lactobacillus acidophilus (strain BT-1386) improved the feed conversion efficiency by 4.2% and average daily gain by 3.06% (Feedstuffs.com, 2020). The improvement of feed efficiency means less feed requirement for the fulfilment of daily nutritional needs of beef cattle (Ojo et al., 2024). This approach greatly supports beef production systems, whereas the feed cost is the most critical component in the total production cost in beef production systems, which accounts for 60%-70% of the total production (Kenny et al., 2018; Ojo et al., 2024).
       
When considering the production parameters of beef cattle, weight gain and carcass quality are crucial. Maamouri and Ben-Salem (2022) showed that supplementing Saccharomyces cerevisiae to the fattening calves resulted highest average daily gain (400 g calf-1) with the highest feed conversion rate. Furthermore, a similar study conducted by Mousa and Marwan (2019) investigated the effect of Bacillus subtilus supplementation on calves. The results showed that supplementation of B. subtilus 0.3 g  kg-1 to their diets improved the average body weight gain and FCR. Further, the supplementation of basal diet with 20 g d-1 cattle brewer’s yeast and cellulose resulted in the improvement of final body weight and FCR, with a 3.86% of net meat weight (Gao et al., 2022). These findings highlight the potential of EM to enhance beef production systems by improving feed utilization, promoting growth and enhancing carcass quality, ultimately leading to healthier steers.
 
Goat and sheep
 
Goats and sheep are also corresponding of the group of ruminants and are considered as small ruminants. They also play a crucial role in the livestock industry by contributing to producing meat, milk, wool, hides, etc. (Mazinani and Rude, 2020; Rout et al., 2021). Small ruminants with different rumen microbiota compared to cattle also showed a positive impact on supplementation of EM. Gemiyo et al., (2017) conducted an experiment supplementing Chlorias gayana hay with different levels of EM-bokashi in lambs. The results showed that a 26.6% increase in EM supplementation led to improved daily weight gain and enhanced economic profitability. Dietary supplementation of live yeast as EM to growing lambs increased feed intake and growth rate while also enhancing the population of ciliate protozoa and entodinomorphs (Tripathi and Karim, 2011). This process happens through effective ruminal fermentation by enhancing nutrient absorption in small ruminants fed with EM (Amin and Mao, 2021). The improved fermentation enables the better digestion of complex carbohydrates and fibrous compounds abounded in the sheep and goats’ diet (Kilula, 1997; Tripathi and Karim, 2011; Li et al., 2019). Apart from that, the EM-supplemented group of goats showed a reduction in faecal worm egg count and reduced anaemia condition (Razak et al., 2018). Moreover, improved nutrient intake from ruminal fermentation enhances the overall performance of small ruminants, leading to better growth, increased milk production, reduced worm burden and decreased anaemia conditions (Amin and Mao, 2021; Wahyono et al., 2022).
       
Moreover, Razak et al., (2018) conducted a study supplementing EM to female goats, resulting in improved body weight and blood metabolites. Further, supplementation with bacterial isolated commercial enzymes and yeast in lactating goats led to an increase in body weight, milk production and milk composition (Abou-Elenin  et al., 2015). Apart from that, two studies showed that supplementing a low protein diet with 5% EM bokashi® in lambs and goats resulted in higher body weight gain (Gemiyo et al., 2017; Direkvandi et al., 2020). Based on the key studies discussed above, the use of EM in sheep and goat nutrition is recommended due to its positive impact on improving nutrient absorption, feed efficiency, production performance and overall health, particularly through reducing intestinal worm burden.
 
Swine
 
Swine are denoted as monogastric animals, with the group of omnivores, which means acidic with a low pH value in their gastric sap (Saha and Pathak, 2021; Joysowal et al., 2021). Pigs, as omnivorous animals, consume a wide variety of feedstuffs, which can often lead to dyspepsia. While these issues are usually mild, in some cases, they can become severe and result in significant economic losses (Ponamarev et al., 2022). The supplementation of EM showed promising results for the condition of dyspepsia by enhancing digestive function, balancing the gut microbial population, alleviating gut pathogenic bacterial activity and improving immunity function in swine (Liao and Nyachoti, 2017; Shen et al., 2024). Further, Radzikowski and Milczarek (2021) revealed that supplementing beneficial microorganisms to different age groups of pigs increased feed intake, piglets’ weight gain and sows’ milk yield, boosting pig immunity and reducing pathogens from the gastrointestinal tract, by enhancing growth and development of the beneficial bacterial microflora. These results were in line and further explained by Jarosz et al., (2022) that supplementing EM Bokashi® for the late pregnant sows resulted in improved immunological quality of the colostrum and its milk, subsequently improving the piglets’ vigour against infections. Further, the use of beneficial microbes, particularly EM has contributed to less nitrogen excretion with the faeces, evidenced by better protein utilization. The way of reduction of nitrogen excretion is favourable for the environment, by better protein digestion, it also reduces waste generation and emissions (Yuquilema, 2019; Duarte and Kim, 2022; Jarosz et al., 2022; Sung et al., 2023).
       
When late pregnant and early lactating sows were fed with EM Bokashi® showed improved immunological quality of colostrum. Further, it also improved the piglets’ survival rate (Jarosz et al., 2022). Giang et al., (2011) showed that the supplementing mixture of beneficial bacteria and yeast improves the average daily gain and the FCR of the growing pigs. Further, Rybarczyk et al., (2021a) showed similar results when treating the fattening pigs fed with EM Bokashi®. Moreover, when fatteners fed with EM Bokashi® probiotics resulted in higher lean percentage, mineral (Na, Mg and Se) and lower fat content in the carcass, promising good quality pork (Rybarczyk et al., 2021b). While considering the effect of EM on the performance of swine, the use of EM has positively influenced swine performance by improving colostrum quality, enhancing piglet survival rate, boosting growth performance and improving carcass quality.
 
Livestock manure management and environmental effects
 
Overall, studies have demonstrated the positive impact of the use of EM as a dietary modification. Additionally, from an environmental perspective, the livestock sector significantly contributes to environmental pollution, negatively affecting the ecosphere (Haque, 2018). Major studies have focused on promising solutions to mitigate this pollution. The livestock industry contributes to environmental issues by releasing greenhouse gases, disrupting the nitrogen cycle and eutrophication in lakes and waterbodies (Abdel et al., 2023). There have been various strategies introduced to the field, but their efficacy and economic feasibility are somewhat hard for small and medium-scale livestock producers (Gerber et al., 2013; Herrero et al., 2016). The EM technology has been shown to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) production, manure emissions and odour from the livestock units without affecting the animal performance (Mori et al., 2017; Zhen et al., 2020). The studies conducted using beneficial microbes as the dietary modification for ruminants reduced enteric methane (CH4) production by ~30% (Hristov et al., 2013; Beauchemin et al., 2015; Min et al., 2022). Further, EM improves protein and mineral digestion, reduces the nitrogen (N) and sulfur (S) excretion through manure and helps decrease the release of odour-forming compounds such as ammonia (NH3) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and other nitrogenous compounds (Mori et al., 2017; Zhen et al., 2020; Vasilev, 2023). Moreover, the direct application of EM to the manure management yards increased manure degradation and boosted the decomposition rate (Zhang et al., 2019). Thus, the use of EM as the dietary modifier and, as manure management is promised as the eco-friendly approach to use in livestock production by reducing ecological footprint.
 
Future directions
 
The supplementation of EM has offered clear benefits in the livestock sector (Fig 1). However, several challenges have been identified. The variability of results could be a variation of the microbial strain of the respective product contained, variation of EM inoculated feed ingredient, livestock breed and species, duration of the particular study, climatic season and finally, geographical location. Moreover, the lack of understanding of the mechanisms and long-term effectiveness, mutual effect with different feed modifiers, should be further investigated.

Fig 1: Effect of EM on livestock and poultry.

Effective microorganisms provide promising results for improving livestock nutrient and environmental sustainability across cattle, goat, sheep and swine. The critically synthesised results from the existing studies revealed that EM improves nutrient digestibility and enhances production performances while mitigating environmental impact. However, further studies are required to investigate the multifunctional action and properties of EM, combined microbial stains and the mechanisms of action. Based on the synthesised knowledge, EM presents a promising approach in livestock nutrition, enhancing colostrum, milk and meat quality, while simultaneously reducing livestock emissions, contributing to improved environmental sustainability.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) of Sri Lanka through Grant No: NSF/RD/06/RG/2024/AG/01.
All authors have no conflict of interest in this study.

  1. Abdel, K.I.A.T., Ramadan, A.S., Saad, M. and Abdelrasoul, R.A.S. (2023). Effect of using effective microorganisms (EM) as a growth promoter on broilers performance, thyroid hormones, lipid profile, hepatosomatic index, immune response, enteric pathogens and antioxidant parameters. Egyptian Poultry Science Journal. 43(2): 259-275. doi: 10.21608/epsj.2023.305125.

  2. Abou-Elenin, E.I., El-Galil, A., Etab, R., Etman, K.E.I. and El-Shabrawy, H.M. (2015). Impact of feeding natural microbial resources on lactating goats performance. Egyptian Journal of Nutrition and Feeds. 18(1): 87-100. doi: 10.21608/ejnf. 2015.104686.

  3. Amin, A.B. and Mao, S. (2021). Influence of yeast on rumen fermentation, growth performance and quality of products in ruminants: A review. Animal Nutrition. 7(1): 31-41. doi: 10.1016/ j.aninu.2020.10.005.

  4. Beauchemin, K.A., McGinn, S.M., Flesch, T.K. and Harper, M.T. (2015). Dietary mitigation of enteric methane from ruminants. Animal Production Science. 55(6): 644-652. 

  5. Direkvandi, E., Mohammadabadi, T. and Salem, A.Z. (2020). Effect of microbial feed additives on growth performance, microbial protein synthesis and rumen microbial population in growing lambs. Translational Animal Science. 4(4): 203. doi: 10.1093/tas/txaa203.

  6. Duarte, M.E.E. and Kim, S.W. (2022). Nutritional intervention for reduced nitrogen excretion and better intestinal health. Journal of Animal Science. 100(3): 123-124. doi: 10.1093/jas/skac247.236.

  7. Ezeagu, G.G., Omotosho, A.O. and Suleiman, K.O. (2023). Effective microorganisms, their products and uses: A review. Nile Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences. 1(1): 209- 222. doi: 10.5455/njeas.147954.

  8. Feedstuffs. (2020). Probiotic strains may aid cattle feed efficiency. Available at: https://www.feedstuffs.com/beef/probiotic- strains-may-aid-cattle-feed-efficiency (Accessed: 2 January 2025).

  9. Gao, L., Yan, X., Liu, Y. and Xia, C. (2022). Effect of enzyme and probiotic supplementation on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, carcass traits and meat quality of simmental steers. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia. 51(E): e2022- 0034. doi: 10.37496/rbz5120220034.

  10. Gemiyo, D., Mengistu, S., Tessema, F., Yilma, M., Wolde, S. and Getachew, T. (2017). Effect of supplementing effective microbes (EM) on growth rate of lambs. Journal of Animal Research and Veterinary Science. 1(1): 1-4. doi: 10.24966/ARVS-3751/100004.

  11. Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A. and Tempio, G. (2013). Tackling climate change through livestock: A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Rome, Italy. Journal of Environmental Protection. 7(7): 139.

  12. Giang, H.H., Viet, T.Q., Ogle, B. and Lindberg, J.E. (2011). Effects of supplementation of probiotics on the performance, nutrient digestibility and faecal microflora in growing- finishing pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 24(5): 655-661. doi: 10.5713/ajas.2011.10238.

  13. Guo, L., Yao, D., Li, D., Lin, Y., Bureenok, S., Ni, K. and Yang, F. (2020). Effects of lactic acid bacteria isolated from rumen fluid and feces of dairy cows on fermentation quality, microbial community and in vitro digestibility of alfalfa silage. Frontiers in Microbiology. 10: 2998. doi: 10.3389/ fmicb.2019.02998.

  14. Haque, M. (2018). Dietary manipulation: A sustainable way to mitigate methane emissions from ruminants. Journal of Animal Science and Technology. 60: 1-10. doi: 10.1186/ s40781-018-0175-7.

  15. Herrero, M., Thornton, P.K., Power, B. and Campbell, B.M. (2016). Greenhouse gas mitigation potentials in the livestock sector. Nature Climate Change. 6(5): 452-461. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2925.

  16. Higa, T. (1999). Application of Effective Microorganism for sustainable crop production. Personal communication, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan, 24 May.

  17. Higa, T. (2000). What is EM technology? EM World Journal. 1: 1-6. Available at: https://cdn1.npcdn.net/userfiles/20596/ download/1735615084_dbd71aa3c25ad49d2a8784 de9590a7e1/EM_summary.pdf.

  18. Hristov, A.N., Zanton, G.I., Varga, G.A. and Lee, C. (2013). Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from ruminants. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 185(1): 1-3. doi: 10.2527/jas.2013-6583.

  19. Isaac, Rebecca, S. and George A.M (2024). Recycling of leaf litters: Biowaste management for resource conservation. Agricultural Reviews. 45(3): 420-429. doi: 10.18805/ ag.R-2433.

  20. Jarosz, Ł., Ciszewski, A., Marek, A., Grądzki, Z., Kaczmarek, B. and Rysiak, A. (2022). The effect of feed supplementation with EM Bokashi® multimicrobial probiotic preparation on selected parameters of sow colostrum and milk. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins. 14: 1029-1041. doi: 10.1007/s12602-021-09850-z.

  21. Joysowal, M., Saikia, B.N., Tamuly, S. and Kalita, D. (2021). Comparative effect of probiotics (swine and dairy origin) on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood biochemical profile, immune status and faecal microbial count of earlyweaned grower-finisher crossbred pigs. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 55(11): 1308-1314. doi: 10.18805/IJAR.B-4137.

  22. Kenny, D.A., Fitzsimons, C., Waters, S.M. and McGee, M. (2018). Improving feed efficiency of beef cattle: The current state of the art and future challenges. Animals. 12(9): 1815-1826. doi: 10.1017/S1751731118000976.

  23. Kilula, J.B. (1997). Crop byproducts feeding: Diet digestibility and ruminal fermentation characteristics in normal or ciliate- free sheep. M.Sc. Thesis, Kansas State University, USA.

  24. Kodippili, K.P.A.N. and Nimalan, J. (2018). Effect of homemade effective microorganisms on the growth and yield of chilli (Capsicum annuum MI-2). AGRIEAST: Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 12(2): 27-34. doi: 10.4038/agrieast. v12i2.57.

  25. Li, R., Teng, Z., Lang, C., Zhou, H., Zhong, W., Ban, Z., Yan, X., Yang, H., Farouk, M.H. and Lou, Y. (2019). Effect of different forage-to-concentrate ratios on ruminal bacterial structure and real-time methane production in sheep. Plos One. 14(5): e02147-77. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0214777.

  26. Liao, S.F. and Nyachoti, M. (2017). Using probiotics to improve swine gut health and nutrient utilization. Animal Nutrition. 3(4): 331-343. doi: 10.1016/j.aninu.2017.06.007.

  27. Lim, W.M., Kumar, S. and Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘What’, ‘Why’ and ‘How’ to contribute. The Service Industries Journal. 42(8): 481- 513. doi: 10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941.

  28. Loor, J.J., Elolimy, A.A. and McCann, J.C. (2016). Dietary impacts on rumen microbiota in beef and dairy production. Animal Frontiers. 6(3): 22-29. doi: 10.2527/af.2016-0030.

  29. Maamouri, O. and Ben-Salem, M. (2022). The effect of live yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae as probiotic supply on growth performance, feed intake, ruminal pH and fermentation in fattening calves. Veterinary Medicine and Science. 8(1): 398-404. doi: 10.1002/vms3.631. 

  30. Markowiak, P. and Œli¿ewska, K. (2018). The role of probiotics, prebiotics and symbiotics in animal nutrition. Gut Pathogens. 10: 1-20. doi: 10.1186/s13099-018-0250-0.

  31. Mazinani, M. and Rude, B. (2020). Population, world production and quality of sheep and goat products. American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences. 15(4): 291-299. doi: 10.3844/ajavsp.2020.291.299.

  32. Min, B.R., Lee, S., Jung, H., Miller, D.N. and Chen, R. (2022). Enteric methane emissions and animal performance in dairy and beef cattle production: Strategies, opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. Animals. 12(8): 948. doi: 10.3390/ani12080948.

  33. Mohamed, M., Amarasinghe, A.A.S.S.M. and Nayananjalie, W.A.D. (2018). Use of effective microorganisms in dry zone dairy farms in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Livestock Research. 8(4): 50-57. doi: 10.5455/ijlr.20171019045459.

  34. Mori, K., Kawai, K. and Sugimoto, T. (2017). The role of effective microorganisms (EM) in sustainable livestock farming. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 30(8): 1100-1108. 

  35. Mousa, S.A. and Marwan, A.A. (2019). Growth performance, rumen fermentation and selected biochemical indices in buffalo calves fed on Bacillus subtilis supplemented diet. International Journal of Veterinary Science. 8(3): 151-156.

  36. Nelson, K.A. and Martini, S. (2009). Increasing omega fatty acid content in cow’s milk through diet manipulation: Effect on milk flavor. Journal of Dairy Science. 92(4): 1378- 1386. doi: 10.3168/jds.2008-1780.

  37. Ojo, A.O., Mulim, H.A., Campos, G.S., Junqueira, V.S., Lemenager, R.P., Schoonmaker, J.P. and Oliveira, H.R. (2024). Exploring feed efficiency in beef cattle: From data collection to genetic and nutritional modeling. Animals. 14(24): 3633. doi: 10.3390/ani14243633.

  38. Pitta, D.W., Indugu, N., Baker, L., Vecchiarelli, B. and Attwood, G. (2018). Understanding diet-microbe interactions to enhance productivity of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 101(8): 7661-7679. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13858.

  39. Ponamarev, V., Yashin, A., Prusakov, A. and Popova, O. (2022). Influence of Modern Probiotics on Morphological Indicators of Pigs’ Blood in Toxic Dyspepsia. In: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Agriculture Digitalization and Organic Production (ADOP 2022), St. Petersburg, Russia, June 6-8. Springer, Singapore. pp. 133-142. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-7780-0_12.

  40. Radzikowski, D. and Milczarek, A. (2021). Selected feed additives used in pig nutrition. Journal of Central European Agriculture. 22(1): 54-65. doi: 10.5513/JCEA01/22.1.2927.

  41. Razak, M.A.A., Zakaria, M.Z., Tayid, M.A.M. and Ali, S.B.G. (2018). Effects of Diets Containing Effective Microorganisms (EM) on Growth Performance, Worm Burden, Hematological and Biochemical Analysis in Female Goats. In: Bioresources Technology in Sustainable Agriculture. Apple Academic Press, Florida, USA. pp. 67-80. doi: 10.1201/9781315365961.

  42. Rout, P.K. and Behera, B.K. (2021). Goat and Sheep Farming. In: Sustainability in Ruminant Livestock: Management and Marketing. Springer, Singapore. pp. 33-76. doi: 10.1007/ 978-981-33-4343-6_3.

  43. Rybarczyk, A., Bogusławska-Wąs, E. and Dłubała, A. (2021a). Effect of BioPlus YC probiotic supplementation on gut microbiota, production performance, carcass and meat quality of pigs. Animals. 11(6): 1581. doi: 10.3390/ ani11061581.

  44. Rybarczyk, A., Bogusławska-Wąs, E. and Pilarczyk, B. (2021b). Carcass and pork quality and gut environment of pigs fed a diet supplemented with the bokashi probiotic. Animals. 11(12): 3590. doi: 10.3390/ani11123590.

  45. Saha, S.K. and Pathak, N.N. (2021). Digestion, Absorption and Metabolism of Nutrients. In: Fundamentals of Animal Nutrition. Springer, Singapore. pp. 219-246. doi: 10.1007/ 978-981-15-9125-9_14.

  46. Sheikh, G.G., Ganai, A.M., Reshi, P.A., Bilal, S., Mir, S. and Masood, D. (2018). Improved paddy straw as ruminant feed: A review. Agricultural Reviews. 39(2): 137-143. doi: 10.18805/ag.R-1667.

  47. Shen, X., Xie, A., Li, Z., Jiang, C., Wu, J., Li, M. and Yue, X. (2024). Research progress for probiotics regulating intestinal flora to improve functional dyspepsia: A review. Foods. 13(1): 151. doi: 10.3390/foods13010151.

  48. Soliman, S.M. (2022). Comparative study on the influence of three feed additives on methane production, rumen fermentation and milk yield in dairy cows. Advanced Animal and Veterinary Science. 10(4): 739-752.

  49. Sun, P., Wang, J.Q. and Deng, L.F. (2013). Effects of Bacillus subtilis natto on milk production, rumen fermentation and ruminal microbiome of dairy cows. Animals. 7(2): 216-222. doi: 10.1017/S1751731112001188.

  50. Sung, J.Y., Johnson, T.A., Ragland, D. and Adeola, O. (2023). Impact of ileal indigestible protein on fecal nitrogen excretion and fecal microbiota may be greater compared with total protein concentration of diets in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 101: 409. doi: 10.1093/jas/ skac409.

  51. Tripathi, M.K. and Karim, S.A. (2011). Effect of yeast culture supplementation on live weight change, rumen fermentation, ciliate protozoa population, microbial hydrolytic enzyme status and slaughtering performance of growing lamb. Livestock Science. 135(1): 17-25. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci. 2010.06.007.

  52. Tu-Kitaw, G., Daba, T., Kehaliw, A., Assefa, G., Dejene, M. and Fekadu, D. (2013). Evaluation of effective microbes (EM) as non-conventional feed supplement to lactating crossbred cows and barn malodor control under Ethiopian condition. Journal of Renewable Agriculture. 141: 146. doi: 10.12966/ jra.11.02.2013.

  53. Vasilev, V. (2023). Identification of effective microbes for ammonia and odor removal from animal manure. Acta Microbiologica Bulgarica. 39(4): 444-451. doi: 10.59393/amb23390412. 

  54. Vicente, F., Campo-Celada, M., Menéndez-Miranda, M., García- Rodríguez, J. and Martínez-Fernández, A. (2024). Effect of postbiotic supplementation on nutrient digestibility and milk yield during the transition period in dairy cows. Animals. 14(16): 2359. doi: 10.3390/ani14162359.

  55. Wahyono, T., Sholikin, M.M., Konca, Y., Obitsu, T., Sadarman, S. and Jayanegara, A. (2022). Effects of urea supplementation on ruminal fermentation characteristics, nutrient intake, digestibility and performance in sheep: A meta-analysis. Veterinary World. 15(2): 331-340. doi: 10.14202/vetworld. 2022.331-340.

  56. Yacout, M.H., El-Badawi, A.Y., Khalel, M.S., Atia, S.E. and Hassan, A.A.M. (2021). Impact of effective microbes (EM) bokashi supplementation on nutrients digestibility, rumen fermentation and gas volume production in diets of sheep. Bulletin of University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca. Animal Science and Biotechnologies. 78(2): 66-75. doi: 10.15835/buasvmcn-asb:2021.0009.

  57. Yuquilema, J.E.M. (2019). Efficient microorganisms with probiotic effect: An alternative in swine health. Advances in Cytology and Pathology. 4(2): 18-19. doi: 10.15406/acp.2019.04.00074.

  58. Zhang, Z., Zhang, L. and Liu, G. (2019). Effects of EM application on manure decomposition and methane reduction in livestock farms. Environmental Technology and Innovation. 16(1): 100471. 

  59. Zhen, Z., Liu, G. and Liu, X. (2020). Effects of effective microorganisms on methane and ammonia emissions from livestock. Journal of Environmental Quality. 49(4): 924-931. 
In this Article
Published In
Agricultural Reviews

Editorial Board

View all (0)