## 4 Discussion
maltaromaticum_ probiotic bacteria (ACF) stored at 4 and 20 \({}^{\circ}\)C. The correlations between microbial counts in ACF 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C (N = 14) and ACF 20 \({}^{\circ}\)C (N = 14) samples were analyzed with [PERSON]’s test. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Microorganisms**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Differences (\(p\)) between**} \\ \cline{2-4}  & **Feed Type** & **Storage Temperature** & **Storage Time** \\ \hline TVC 28 \({}^{\circ}\)C 1 & 0.0000 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.2194 & 0.0242 \({}^{\ast}\) \\ Hem 37 \({}^{\circ}\)C 2 & 0.0000 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.3058 & 0.0476 \({}^{\ast}\) \\ _Staphylococcus_ sp. & 0.0000 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.0456 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.0493 \({}^{\ast}\) \\ Yeasts & 0.0050 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.0550 & 0.0011 \({}^{\ast}\) \\ ASFB 3 & 0.0005 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.2785 & 0.0005 \({}^{\ast}\) \\ _Clostridium_ sp. & 0.0001 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.0238 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.0483 \({}^{\ast}\) \\ Molds & 0.0003 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.0048 \({}^{\ast}\) & 0.9979 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
*—mesophilic bacteria (TVC 28 \({}^{\circ}\)C); \({}^{\ddagger}\)—-hemispheric mesophilic bacteria (Hem 37 \({}^{\circ}\)C); \({}^{\ddagger}\)—aerobic spore-forming bacteria (ASFB); \({}^{\star}\)—-statistically significant differences; one-way ANOVA, \(p\leq 0.05\).  
\end{table} 
Table 3: The quantitative composition of microorganisms in control feed (CF), feed supplemented with 20% amaranth meal (AF), and feed supplemented with 20% amaranth meal and _Cranobacterium maltaromaticum_ bacteria (ACF) stored at different temperatures (4 and 20 \({}^{\circ}\)C) for 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, 49, 56, 63, 70, 77, 84, 91, and 98 days, validated in the Kruskal–Wallis test (N = 84). AF 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C and AF 20 \({}^{\circ}\)C samples in successive weeks of the experiment. The above could be attributed to the fact that amaranth meal contains lignins whose antioxidant, antibacterial, antiviral, and fungistatic properties contribute to the maintaining of the adequate microbiological quality of feed [31; 56; 57; 58; 59]. The addition of amaranth meal stabilizes natural microbiota in animal feeds, enhances the nutritional value of feeds, and improves performance. Research studies have confirmed the beneficial influence of amaranth-supplemented feeds on the health status and body weight gains of rats [60], intensively farmed pigs [61; 62], chickens [63], calves, lambs, sheep, and ruminants [56]. Studies investigating the effect of amaranth-supplemented feeds on fish in different farming systems also demonstrated that amaranth meal stimulated the immune system of fish [64], their growth performance, and the enzymatic activity of their gut microbiota [5; 65]. The results of the present study indicate that amaranth meal can be effectively used to improve the quality and microbiological safety of fish feeds. The counts of all studied microorganisms (TVC 28 \({}^{\circ}\)C, Hem 37 \({}^{\circ}\)C, ASFB, _Staphylococcus_ sp., _Clostridium_ sp., yeasts, and molds) were lowest in ACF 4\({}^{\circ}\) and ACF 20\({}^{\circ}\) relative to AF and CF stored at the corresponding temperatures. The counts, percentage viability, and survival times of the evaluated microbial groups were considerably lower in ACF 4\({}^{\circ}\) and ACF 20\({}^{\circ}\) than in AF 4\({}^{\circ}\) and AF 20\({}^{\circ}\) (Figure 2C-F; Table S3), which indicates that amaranth meal and C. _maltaromaticum_ probiotic bacteria exert antibacterial and antifungal effects on natural microbiota and potentially pathogenic microorganisms in compound feed. The synergistic effects of the tested feed additives could be attributed to the symbiotic relationship between amaranth meal and the evaluated probiotic bacteria, and their ability to inhibit the growth and development of various microbial groups and genera.