NEW TRIAL PERFORMANCE ON COLOR
CHICKENS AND GUT HEALTH SITUATION
Nguyen Quang Thieu*, Thikhamporn Charoenwai**, Carsten Pedersen**
*Nong Lam University, Hochiminh City, Vietnam.
**Hamlet Protein A/S
[email protected]
1
Introduction
• Color feather chickens are popular in Vietnam,
Luong Phuong breed
• Color feather chickens account for 72%
• Feather: yellow, black spot, different color
• Yellow skin, good quality meat
• At 70 days old, 1.5-1.6 kg LW, FCR: 2.4 – 2.6
Year
Poultry
Chicken
Broiler
White
feather
Color
feather
2013
314.7
231,763
179.802
52,034
127,768
2014
327,6
246,028
191,046
52,102
138,944
2015
341,9
259,295
199,528
59,766
139,762
2016
361,7
277,189
213,851
59,820
154,031
2
Introduction
• Today, chicks grow at an incredible rate in the first week after
hatching even for color feather chickens
• During this time, the chick’s weight increases four times
• Need for lots of nutrients to secure this growth.
• However, due to the undeveloped digestive tract, the capacity to
absorb nutrients is impaired
3
Introduction
• Chicks tend to draw on the immunoglobulins and unsaturated fatty
acids in the yolk sack for energy rather than for development and
immunity
• Another factor, such as anti-nutritional factors (ANFs) in the soybean
meal, affects gut development and results to the growth
performance, and increases the risk of pathogenic bacteria
• This causes poor health and lower performance of chicks
4
Introduction
• To overcome this problem,
• a special feed with more digestible ingredients
• lowest possible level of ANFs is essential
• Enzymatically treated soy (HPA) is a product of the co-processing of
soy and yeast, very low in ANFs
• Hypothesis is, that feeding chicks with lowest possible ANFs diets will
improve nutrient uptake in the first day and improve the gut health
and enhance the overall performance of chickens
5
Materials and methods
• Trial was conducted at experimental station of Nong
Lam University, Hochiminh City, Vietnam
• Time: April – June, 2016
• Chicken: Luong Phuong breed, 500 heads, mixed sex
• 5 treatments
• 10 replicates per treatment
• 10 birds per replicate
• Trial time: 60 days
• Two period
• Period 1: 1 – 28 days
• Period 2: 29 – 60 days
6
Trial design
• CON diets: contained without fish
meal either enzymatically treated
soy.
• HPA2.5, HPA5, HPA7.5 diets
contained 2.5%, 5.0% and 7.5% of
Enzymatically treated soy,
respectively and without fish meal.
• FM5 diet contained 5% fish meal.
• Crumble feed for starter (P1) and
pelleting feed for grower (P2).
• CRD design
7
Feed composition (%)
INGREDIENTS
Corn
Rice bran
Soybean oil
SBM 46
Fish meal 60
Amino acid
Additives
Premix Vit-Min.
HPA
Total
CON
55.34
5.00
4.05
31.23
0
0.79
3.35
0.25
0
100.00
HPA2.5
56.38
5.00
3.68
28.21
0
0.64
3.33
0.25
2.5
100.00
P1
HPA5
57.43
5.00
3.31
25.19
0
0.5
3.33
0.25
5
100.00
P2
HPA7.5
58.43
5.00
2.94
22.18
0
0.39
3.32
0.25
7.5
100.00
FM5
59.64
6.40
2.01
23.77
5.00
0.67
2.26
0.25
0
100.00
57.03
5.00
4.57
29.30
0
0.48
3.37
0.25
0
100.00
8
Nutrient composition
NUTRIENT
UNIT
CON
HPA2.5
HPA5
HPA7.5
FM5
P2
Dry Matter
ME
Crude protein
Crude Fat
Crude Fiber
Calcium
Avail Phosphor
Lysine
Methionine
Met + Cys
Threonine
Tryptophan
Arginine
Iso-Leucine
Leucine
Valine
%
Kcal/kg
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
88.7
3050
20.0
7.36
2.70
0.80
0.45
1.30
0.70
1.00
0.85
0.25
1.35
0.88
1.84
0.97
88.7
3050
20.0
7.04
2.70
0.80
0.45
1.30
0.68
1.00
0.85
0.26
1.42
0.94
1.93
1.03
88.7
3050
20.0
6.72
2.71
0.80
0.45
1.30
0.67
1.00
0.85
0.28
1.49
0.99
2.02
1.09
88.8
3050
20.0
6.41
2.72
0.80
0.45
1.30
0.65
1.00
0.88
0.30
1.56
1.05
2.11
1.15
88.5
3050
20.0
6.00
2.67
0.80
0.45
1.30
0.71
1.00
0.85
0.24
1.24
0.91
1.90
1.02
88.7
3100
19.0
7.90
2.67
0.80
0.45
1.10
0.56
0.85
0.80
0.24
1.28
0.85
1.79
0.94
9
Measurement
• Live weigh (LW), average daily gain (ADG), feed intake (FI), feed
conversion ratio (FCR), intestinal villus height and crypt depth,
mortality ratios were measured.
• Carcass evaluation on dressing percentage and cut up part of yield as
percentage were evaluated at 60 day of age.
• Villus height and crypt depth: intestinal samples were collected at 28
days old and at 60 days old. Intestinal samples (2 cm each) were
collected from Meckel’s diverticulum to ileum.
• Chicks were fed ad libitum daily at 08:00 am and 16:00 pm, and feed
residue was record at 7:00 am next day.
• Drinking water was offered ad libitum during experiment.
10
Results and discussion
Table 1: Effects of enzymatically treated soy on performance of color chickens (g)
Item
CON
HPA2.5
HPA5
HPA7.5
FM5
P
Weight (1 day)
39.9
39.7
39.9
40.1
39.2
>0.05
Weight (28 days)
654.11
649.4
654.0
649.8
628.0
>0.05
Weight (60 days)
1666.6
1655.3
1729.8
1686.2
1640.7
>0.05
11
g/head/day
ADG of chickens
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
31,64
27,12
21,94
CON
31,43
26,93
21,78
HPA2.5
ADG P1*
33,62
28,17
21,93
HPA5
ADG P2**
32,39
27,44
21,78
HPA7.5
31,65
26,69
21,03
FM5
ADG (overall)
12
Feed Intake
Table 2: Effects of enzymatically treated soy on feed intake (g/head/day)
Item
CON
HPA2.5
HPA5
HPA7.5
FM5
P
FI P1*
35.52
36.00
36.21
35.46
34.46
>0.05
FI P2**
88.40
84.89
84.53
84.16
85.12
>0.05
FI (overall)
62.07
60.00
61.35
60.17
60.23
>0.05
13
Feed conversion ratio
3
2,8
2,5
2
2,7
2,29
1,62
2,52
2,23
1,66
2,6
2,27
2,19
2,18
1,65
2,74
1,63
1,64
1,5
1
0,5
0
CON
HPA2.5
FCR P1
HPA5
FCR P2
HPA7.5
FM5
FCR (overall)
14
µm
Effects of enzymatically treated soy to villus
height and crypt depth of chickens
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
167,3
139
117
191,8
180,1
103,8
CON
Villus height P1
122,8
136,2 130,6
99,8
HPA2.5
Villus height P2
190,3
183,3
137
124,4
HPA7.5
Crypt depth P1
151,6
110,4
101
95,6
HPA5
136,5
139
FM5
Crypt depth P2
15
Ratio of villus height to crypt depth
1,6
1,4
1,2
1,13
1,21
1,23
1,32
1,38 1,41
1,23
1,34
1,28 1,26
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
CON
HPA2.5
He/De P1
HPA5
HPA7.5
FM5
He/De P2
16
Survival rate
120
100
99
93
97
88
99 95
95 95
100 96
%
80
60
40
20
0
CON
HPA2.5
1 day
HPA5
28 days
HPA7.5
FM5
60 days
17
Table: Carcass yield and meat part yield of color chickens fed enzymatically treated soy
Item
N (head)
Live weight (g)
Carcass (g)
Legs (g)
Breast (g)
Digest tract (g)
Carcass rate (%)
Leg rate (%)
Breast rate (%)
Digest tract rate (%)
CON
10
1,756
1,231
409.5
356.7
336
68.92
23.28
20.39
19.21
HPA2.5
10
1,725
1,243
414.0
346.0
309
72.37
23.96
20.16
17.77
HPA5
10
1,721
1,215
407.0
337.0
310
70.51
23.53
19.56
18.16
HPA7.5
10
1,839
1,273
419.5
350.5
306
69.32
22.82
19.17
16.77
FM5
10
1,821
1,286
439.1
344.5
340
70.55
24.09
19.04
18.72
P
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
>0.05
18
Discussion
• The final weight, ADG and FCR of chickens fed 5% and 7.5% of
enzymatically treated soy in the diets tend to be better, especially
when compared to the CON treatment.
• Ruitz et al. (2004) found trypsin inhibitors (TI) and urea activity (UA)
are significantly correlated to body weight and feed conversion ratio.
• Feng et al. (2007) reported an increase in the activities of trypsin,
lipase and protease in intestinal content of starter broilers when diet
content of ANFs was low.
19
Discussion
• Feng et al. (2007) observed the increasing villus height and decrease
crypt depth of jejunum and duodenum mucosa when replaced
soybean meal by low ANFs soybean meal
• Iji et al. (2013) found improving ileal digestibility of protein, gross
energy and dry matter and increasing villus height and villus/crypt
rate when increased from 2.5%, 5% and 10% of enzymatically treated
soy in the diets of broilers
• The present study found the inclusion of enzymatically treated soy to
diets of color feather chickens showed good results in villus height
and crypt depth of the intestine
• Feeding a low ANFs diet to chicks increases villus height, improves
digestibility, and enhances overall performance of chickens
20
Conclusion
• Inclusion of enzymatically treated soy to starter diets of
color feather chickens improved BWG, ADG, FCR and
villus/crypt rate, especially at 5%.
• Feeding of enzymatically treated soy in starter diets to
color feather chickens should be considered by poultry
producers.
21
Thank you
for your attention
22