Animal Production

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Effects of a commercial probiotic supplement on performance, plasma metabolites and carcass characteristics in Morkhoz goat kids

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

PhD student; Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Razi University

Abstract

Effects of feeding a commercial probiotic (primalac) on performance and carcass characteristics of Morkhoz goat kids were studied using 16 male kids (13.2 ± 1.6 kg body weight, 3 months old) based on a completely randomized design (2 treatments and 8 replicates). For this purpose kids were fed for 119 days. The amount of feed consumption was recorded daily and body weight gain and feed conversion ratio were recorded and calculated monthly. Blood samples were collected from jugular vein three times during the experimental period, in equal intervals. At the end of the experimental period animals from each treatment were slaughtered to determine the carcass characteristics. Feeding probiotic did not affect performance parameters including the final live body weight, average feed intake, average daily gain, and feed conversion ratio. With the exception of creatinine concentration, which was lower (P<0.05) in probiotic consuming animals, plasma concentration of other metabolites did not affect by the probiotic consumption. Carcass characteristics measured in this study including weights of live body, carcasss, gastrointestinal tract, liver, heart and internal adipose tissues, weights of neck, rib, loin and long leg cuts and rib eye area did not affect by the treatments and only back fat thickness and shoulder weight were affected (P<0.05). In conclusion, it seems that the probiotic used in this experiment had no effect on performance and carcass chararcteristics of healthy, growing Morkhoz goat kids.

Keywords

References
  1. AOAC (1990) Official methods of analysis (pp. 931–932). (15th ed.). Arlington, VA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
  2. Ayisigi K, Atasoglu K, Yurtman C, Mendes M and Pala A (2005) Effect of Probiotic Supplementation Shortly Before and After Weaning on Growth of Turkish Saanen Kids. Arch Tierzucht Dummerstorf. 48(6): 601-611.
  3. Brown MS, Smith C and Mitchell D (2006) Effects of Micro-Cellon feedlot performance by yearling beef steers. In: Beef Cattle Research in Texas 2006: available at http://animalscience. tamu.edu/main/academics/beef/bcrt/BCR 2006Final.pdf AccessedMay 15, 2007.
  4. Chiofalo V, Liotta L and Chiofalo B (2004) Effects of the administration of Lactobacilli on body growth and on the metabolic profile in growing Maltese goat kids. Reproduction Nutrition Development. 44: 449-457.
  5. Deka RS (2009) Effect of probiotic Biobloom as growth promoter in kids. Indian Veterinary. 86(11): 1192-1193.
  6. Elam NA, Gleghorn JF, Rivera JD, Galyean ML, Defoor PJ, Brashears MM andYounts-Dahl SM (2003) Effects of live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus (strains NP45 and NP51) and Propionibacterium freudenreichii on performance, carcass, and intestinal characteristics and Escherichia coli strain O157 shedding of finishing beef steers. Journal of Animal Science. 81: 2686-2698.
  7. Galyean ML, Nunnery GA, Defoor PJ, Salyer GB and Parsons CH (2000) Effects of live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus (Strains 45 and 51) and Propionibacterium freudenreichiiPF-24 on performance and carcass characteristics of finishingbeef steers. Burnett Center Progress Report No. 8. Available at: http://www.afs.ttu.edu/burnett center/ progress reports/bc8.pdf. Accessed Feb. 2003.
  8. Gill DR, Smith RA and Ball RL (1987) The effect of probioticfeeding on health and performance of newly-arrived stockercalves. Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station Circular. 119: 202-204.
  9. Hillal H, El-Sayaad G and Abdella M (2011) Effect of growth promoters (probiotics) supplementation on performance, rumen activity and some blood constituents in growing lambs. Archiv Tierzucht. 54(6): 607-617.
  10. Johnson PL, Purchas RW, McEwan JC and Blair HT (2005) Carcass composition and meat quality differences between pasture-reared ewe and ram lambs. Meat Science. 71: 383-391.
  11. Kiesling HE, Lofgreen GP and Thomas JD (1982) A viablelactobacillus culture for feedlot cattle. Proc. Western Sect. AmericanSociety of Animal Science. 33: 53-6.
  12. Krehbiel CR, Rust SR, Zhang G and Gilliland SE (2003) Bacterial direct-fed microbials in ruminant diets: Performanceresponse and mode of action. Journal of Animal Science. 81: E120-E132.
  13. Mason IL (1996) A World Dictionary of Livestock Breeds, Types and Varieties. Fourth Edition. C.A.B International, Wallingford, UK.
  14. NRC (2007) Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: sheep, goats, cervids, and NewWorld camelids. National Academy Press.
  15. Pazzola M, Dettori ML, Carcangiu V, Luridiana S, Mura MC and Vacca GM (2011) Relationship between milk urea, blood plasma urea and body condition score in primiparous browsing goats with different milk yield level. Archiv Tierzucht. 54(5): 546-556.
  16. Peterson RE, Klopfenstein TJ, Erickson GE, Folmer J, Hinkley S, Moxley RA and Smith DR (2007) Effect of Lactobacillusacidophilus strain NP51 on Escherichia coli O157: H7 fecalshedding and finishing performance in beef feedlot cattle. Journal of Food Protection. 70: 287-291.
  17. Rust SR, Metz K and Ware DR (2000) Effects of BovamineTMrumen culture on the performance and carcass characteristicsof feedlot steers. Michigan Agricaltural Experience Station of Beef Cattle, Sheep, andForage Systems. 569: 22-26. Available at: http://beef.ans.msu.edu/Extension/Publications/Beef_Sheep_and_Forage_Researc/MSU_ Beef_Sheep_and_Forage_Report_2000.pdf.Accessed February 1, 2003.
  18. Sadik MF (1989) Effect of lactobacillus concentrate (LBC) as a new growth promoter on the performance of growing buffalo heifers raised on milk replacer. Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. M.Sc. Thesis.
  19. SAS Institute (2002) STAT user's guide: Statistics. Version 9.1. Cary, NC: Statistical AnalysisSystem Institute, Inc.
  20. Swinney-Floyd D, Gardner BA, Owens FN, Rehberger T andParrot T (1991) Effect of inoculation with either Propionibacteriumstrain P-63 alone or combined with Lactobacillus acidophilusstrain LA53545 on performance of feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science 77(Suppl. 1):77 (Abst.)
  21. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB and Lewis BA (1991) Methods fordietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharidesin relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science. 74: 3583-3597.
  22. Vasconcelos JT, Elam NA, Brashears MM and Galyean ML (2008) Effects of increasing dose of live cultures of Lactobacillus acidophilus (Strain NP 51) combined with a single dose of Propionibacterium freudenreichii (Strain NP 24) on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing beef steers. Journal of Animal Science. 86: 756-762.
  23. Webb EC, Casey NH and Simela L (2005) Goat meat quality. Small Ruminant Research. 60: 153-166.
  24. Whitley NC, Cazac D, Rude BJ, Jackson-O'Brien D and Parveen S (2009) Use of a commercial probiotic supplement in meat goats. Journal of Animal Science. 87: 723-728.
  25. Windschitl P, Kirsten M, Randall M and Brainard DJ (1991) Growth performance of Holstein dairy calves supplemented with a probiotics. Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station School of Agriculture and Land Resources Management. April 1991: 22.
Animal Production
Volume 18, Issue 4
December 2016
Pages 761-773
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics