4.3 Article

Dietary effects of commercial probiotics on growth performance, digestibility, and intestinal morphometry of broiler chickens

期刊

TROPICAL ANIMAL HEALTH AND PRODUCTION
卷 51, 期 5, 页码 1105-1115

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11250-018-01791-0

关键词

Production performance; Carcass quality; Probiotics; Antibiotic growth promotant; Apparent Metabolizable Energy; Intestinal morphometry

资金

  1. Evonik Industries [1] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared five commercially available probiotics vis-a-vis antibiotic growth promotant (AGP) supplementation and absence of feed additive based on efficiency, intestinal morphometry, and energy digestibility in improving broiler chicken production. A total of 630 straight run (Cobb) day-old broiler chicks were distributed to seven treatments following a completely randomized design, with ten replicates per treatment and nine birds per replicate per cage. Dietary treatments consisted of basal diet in combination with the following: without probiotics and AGP supplementation (treatment 1); 75 ppm each of chlorotetracycline (crc) and Zn bacitracin (treatment 2); probiotic A, Bacillus subtilis (treatment 3): probiotic B. Bacillus subtilis (treatment 4); probiotic C. Enterococcus fitecititn (treatment 5): and probiotic D. Bacillus subtilis (treatment 6); probiotic E, Enterococcus Jaeciurn. Bifidobacterium spp., Pediococcus spp., and Lactobacillus spp. (treatment 7). At day 42, energy digestibility was determined by fasting three randomly selected birds from each treatment for 12 h and then subjecting them to their corresponding dietary treatments. Excreta were collected and pooled after 24 h of feeding. Pooled excreta were weighed, oven-dried, and subjected to energy analyses after 3-day collection. Apparent total tract metabolizable energy was then computed. At day 47, three birds were randomly selected per treatment for intestinal morphometry (villi height and crypt depth) of the duodenum, jejunum, and ileum. Dietary supplementation using probiotics showed no significant effect on overall body weight, weight gain, feed consumption, feed efficiency, dressing percentage, mortality, harvest recovery, carcass quality parameters (e.g., meat to bone ratio and abdominal fat content), intestinal morphometry, and energy digestibility. Birds under treatment 7 (basal feed + probiotic E) generated the highest income over feed and chick cost.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据