4.2 Article

Evaluation of the nutritional value of sunflower meal and its effect on performance, digestive enzyme activity, organ weight, and histological alterations of the intestinal villi of broiler chickens

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED POULTRY RESEARCH
Volume 21, Issue 2, Pages 293-304

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.3382/japr.2011-00396

Keywords

blood parameter; broiler; digestive enzyme; histology; metabolizable energy; sunflower meal

Funding

  1. Excellent Center of Animal Sciences in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (Mashhad, Iran)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the AME of sunflower meal (SFM) and the use of various levels of SFM on the performance, digestive enzyme activity, organ weight, and histological alterations of intestinal villi of broilers chickens. In experiment 1, the AME(n) of SFM was determined. The extrapolation value for the AMEn of SFM at 100% inclusion was 1,219 kcal/kg. In experiment 2, the effects of various levels of SFM (0, 70, 140, and 210 g/kg) on chick performance, blood parameters, digestive enzyme activities, and morphological measurements of intestinal villi were tested. Body weight gain, feed intake, and FCR were improved (P < 0.05) when up to 140 g of SFM was used. However, 210 g of SFM had a negative effect on performance (P < 0.05). Relative weights (g of organ/kg of BW) of the gastrointestinal tract and gizzard increased (P < 0.05). The activities of digestive enzyme (protease and alpha-amylase) were not influenced by treatment. Among the blood parameters, concentration of high-density lipoprotein increased significantly and that of low-density lipoprotein decreased (P < 0.05). Villus height was decreased and crypt depth was increased in both the duodenum and jejunum with increasing levels of SFM (P < 0.05). Therefore, up to 140 g of SFM/kg of diet can be used in broiler diets without adverse effects on performance or other parameters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available