نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشیار، گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران.
2 دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد، گروه علوم دامی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران.
چکیده
این پژوهش به‌منظور بررسی اثر نوع آنزیم و روش جیره‌نویسی بر عملکرد تولید، گوارش‌پذیری مواد مغذی و جمعیت میکروبی دستگاه گوارش جوجه‌های گوشتی انجام شد. در این آزمایش از 256 قطعه جوجه‌‌ی گوشتی مخلوط جنس نر و ماده سویه تجاری راس 308 در یک آزمایش فاکتوریل 2×2×2 با دو شیوه جیره نویسی (بر پایه آمینواسید کل و آمینواسید گوارش‌پذیر)، دو سطح آنزیم‌های ناتوزایم پلاس (صفر و0/035 درصد) و دو سطح مولتی بهزیم (صفر و 0/02 درصد) در قالب طرح کاملا تصادفی، با هشت تیمار و چهار تکرار استفاده شد. جیره‌نویسی آمینواسید کل نسبت به جیره‌نویسی آمینواسید گوارش‌پذیر، به طور معنی‌داری میانگین افزایش وزن روزانه را افزایش، ضریب تبدیل خوراک را در هر سه دوره‌ی رشد، پایانی و کل دوره و میزان مصرف غذای روزانه را در دوره های پایانی و کل دوره کاهش داد (P<0/05). جیره‌نویسی بر پایه آمینواسید کل سبب افزایش گوارش‌پذیری ماده خشک، درصد لاشه، طول روده و کاهش گوارش‌پذیری چربی شد (P<0/05). ناتوزایم پلاس سبب افزایش گوارش‌پذیری ماده خشک، پروتئین خام، چربی و کاهش جمعیت باکتری اشرشیا کلای در روده‌ی کور شد (P<0//05). مولتی بهزیم میانگین افزایش وزن روزانه در دوره‌ی رشد، ضریب تبدیل غذا در دوره‌ی پایانی و کل دوره، گوارش‌پذیری ماده خشک، پروتئین خام و چربی خام را به طور معنی داری افزایش داد (P<0/05). بر اساس نتایج حاصل، مولتی بهزیم قابل رقابت و جایگزینی با آنزیم ناتوزایم پلاس می‌باشد و علاوه بر این استفاده‌ی هم‌زمان آنزیم در جیره‌های دارای آمینو اسید گوارش‌پذیر و کم پروتئین می‌‌تواند اثر نامطلوب استفاده از جیره‌‌ها ی کم پروتئین را بهبود دهد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
The effect of adding two enzyme preparations and ration formulation using total and digestible amino acid on performance, nutrient digestibility and intestinal microflora in broilers
نویسندگان [English]
- Mohammad Reza Rezvani 1
- Razieh Iranparast 2
1 Animal Science Department, School of Agriculture, Shiraz Uni
2 Graduate Student in Department of Animal Science, College of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz 71441-65186, Iran
چکیده [English]
The aim of this research was to study the effect of adding enzyme preparations and ration formulation on performance, nutrient digestibility and intestinal microflora of broilers. Two hundred and fifty six day-old male and female broiler chicks of Ross 308 strain were used in a 2×2×2 factorial experiment consisting of two methods of diet formulation (total and digestible amino acid), two levels of Natuzyme Plus (0 and 0.035%) and two levels of Multi-behzyme (0 and 0.02%) as additives. The factors were arranged as a completely randomized design with eight treatments and four replications. Diet formulation based on total amino acids improved the average daily gain (ADG) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) during the grower and finisher and total periods, but decreased daily feed intake during the finisher and total periods (P ≤ 0.05). It also increased dry matter digestibility, dressing percentage and intestinal length, but it decreased fat digestibility (P ≤ 0.05). Natuzyme Plus increased dry matter, crude protein and fat digestibility and decreased the number of E .coli in the cecum. (P ≤ 0.05). Multibehzyme improved ADG during the grower period, FCR during the finisher period and total period and it increased dry matter, crude protein and crude fat digestibility (P ≤ 0.05). It was concluded that Multi- behzyme could be replaced with Natuzyme Plus, and its inclusion in the diets formulated by digestible amino acid and low protein content can improve the negative outcome of low level protein diets.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- broiler
- digestibility
- enzyme
- microflora
- performance
- total and digestible amino acid
2. Annison G, and Choct M (1991) Anti-nutritive activities of cereal non-starch polysaccharides in broiler diets and strategies minimizing their effects. World’s Poultry Science Journal 47:222-242.
3. Basavanta Kumar C, Gloridoss RG, Singh KC, Prabhu TM, and Suresh BN (2016) Performance of broiler chickens fed low protein, limiting amino acid supplemented diets formulated either on total or standardized ileal digestible amino acid basis. Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Science 29: 1616-1624.
4. Bedford MR (1995) Mechanism of action and potential environmental benefits from the use of feed enzymes. Animal Feed Science and Technology 53: 145-155.
5. Bedford MR (2000) Exogenous enzymes in monogastric nutrition, their current value and future benefits. Animal Feed Science and Technology 86: 1-13.
6. Choct M, and Anninson G (1990) Antinutritive activity of wheat pentosans in broiler diets. British Poultry Science 31: 811-822.
7. Dari RL, Penz JR, Kessler AM, and Jos HC (2005) The use of digestible amino acid and ideal protein concept in feed formulation for broilers. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 14: 195-203.
8. Emadinia A, Toghyani M, Gheisari AA, Tabeidian SA, Ale-Saheb Fosoul SS and Mohammadrezaei M (2014) Effect of wet feeding and enzyme supplementation on performance and immune responses of broiler chicks. Journal of Applied Animal Research 42: 32-37.
9. Farrell DJ, Mannion PF, and Perez-Maldonado RA (1999) A comparison of total and digestible amino acids in diets for broilers and layers. Animal Feed Science and Technology 82: 131-142.
10. Han Y, and Baker DH (1994) Digestible lysine requirement of male and female broiler chicks during the period three to six week post hatching. Poultry Science 73: 1739-1745.
11. Jiang Q, Motl MA, Fritts CA, and Waldroup PW (2000) Formulation on basis of digestible
amino acids does not overcome all problems associated with use of high levels of feather meal. Poultry Science Spp 1: 127-128.
12. Leeson S, and Summers JD (2000) Broiler Breeder Production. Nattigham University Press, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, pp.178-199.
13. Li WF, Sun JY and Xu ZR (2004) Effects of NSP degrading enzyme on in vitro digestion of barley. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 17: 122-126.
14. Lotfollahian H, Shariatmadari F, Shivazad M, and Mirhadi A (2004) Study on the effects of two kinds of natural zeolite in diets on blood biohemical parameters, relative weight of body organs and broilers performance, Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 17: 18-34.
15. Luo D, Yanga F, Yang X, Yao J, Shi B, and Zhou Z (2009) Effects of xylanase on performance, blood parameters, intestinal morphology, microflora and digestive enzyme activities of broilers fed wheat-based diets. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 22: 1288-1295. 16. Nasr J, and Kheiri F (2012) Effects of lysine levels of diets formulated based on total or digestible amino acids on broiler carcass composition. Brazilian Journal Poultry Science 14: 233-304.
17. NRC (1994) Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, 9th edition, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
18. Park W )2001) Present status of the use of digestible amino acid values in formulation of broiler diets. American Society of Agronomy, Technical Bulletin 46: 1-18.
sodium bentonite and two commercial products as aflatoxin adsorbents in diets for
broilers chickens. Animal Feed Science and Technology 132: 103-110.
20. Pettersson D, Graham H, and Man PA (1991) The nutritive value for broiler chickens of pelleting and enzyme supplementation of a diet containing barley, wheat and rye. Animal Feed Science and Technology 33: 1-14.
21. Quinn PJ, Carter ME, Markey B, and Carter GR (1994). Clinical veterinary microbiology. 1st Edn, London, Wolfe Publishing. PP: 1-648.
22. Ranade AS, and Rajmane BV (1992) Effect of enzyme feed supplement on commercial broilers. Proceedings of the 19th World Poultry Congress, Amsterdam, Netherlands WRSA 2: 485-487.
23. Rostagno HS, Pupa JMR, and Pack M. (1995) Diet formulation for broilers based on total versus digestible amino acid. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 4: 293-299.
24. SAS, Institute. (2004) SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Statistics. Release 9.1 SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
25. Scott ML, Nesheim MC, and Yaung RG (1979) Nutrition of the Chicken, Ithaca, NY, pp.7-54.
26. Seifi S (2013) Commercial enzyme influence on broilers fed different levels of wheat. Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry 29: 337- 344.
27. Sharifi SD, Golestani,G, Yaghobfar A, Khadem A, and Pashazanussi H (2013) Effects of supplementing a multienzyme to broiler diets containing a high level of wheat or canola meal on intestinal morphology and performance of chicks. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 22: 671-679.
28. Sibbald IR (1987) Estimation of bioavailable amino acids in feeding stuffs for poultry and pigs. A review with emphasis on balance experiments. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 67: 221-300.
29. Steenfeldt S, Hammershoj M, Mullertz A, and Jensen JF (1998) Enzyme supplementation of wheat-based diets for broilers. Effect on apparent metabolisable energy content and nutrient digestibility. Animal Feed Science and Technology 75: 45-64.
30. Trekova M, Matlova L, Dvorska L, and Pavlik I (2004) Kaolin, bentonite, and zeolites as feed supplements for animal health advantages and risks. Czech Veterinary Medicine 49: 389-399.
31. UFFDA (1992) User Friendly Feed Formulation. University of Georgia, Geogia, USA.
32. Williams CH, David DJ, and Iismaa, O (1962) The determination of chromic oxide in feces samples by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Journal of Agricultural Science 59: 381-385.
33. Wu YB, Ravindran V, Thomas DG, Birties MJ, and Hendriks WH (2004) Influence of method of whole wheat inclusion and xylanase supplementation on the performance, apparent metabolisable energy, digestive tract measurements and gut morphology of broilers. British Journal of Nutrition 45: 385-394.
34. Yasar S (2003) Performance, gut size and ileal digesta viscosity of broiler chickens fed with a whole wheat added diet and the diets with different wheat particle sizes. International Journal of Poultry Science 2: 75-82.
)