4.7 Article

Partitioning of dietary energy of chickens fed maize- or wheat-based diets with and without a commercial blend of phytogenic feed additives

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
Volume 93, Issue 4, Pages 1695-1702

Publisher

AMER SOC ANIMAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.2527/jas.2014-8175

Keywords

broilers; energy metabolism; net energy; plant extracts; poultry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of a standardized mixture of a commercial blend of phytogenic feed additives containing 5% carvacrol, 3% cinnamaldehyde, and 2% capsicum on utilization of dietary energy and performance in broiler chickens. Four experimental diets were offered to the birds from 7 to 21 d of age. These included 2 basal control diets based on either wheat or maize that contained 215 g CP/kg and 12.13 MJ/kg ME and another 2 diets using the basal control diets supplemented with the plant extracts combination at 100 mg/kg diet. Each diet was fed to 16 individually penned birds following randomization. Dietary plant extracts improved feed intake and weight gain (P < 0.05) and slightly (P < 0.1) improved feed efficiency of birds fed the maize-based diet. Supplementary plant extracts did not change dietary ME (P > 0.05) but improved (P < 0.05) dietary NE by reducing the heat increment (P < 0.05) per kilogram feed intake. Feeding phytogenics improved (P < 0.05) total carcass energy retention and the efficiency of dietary ME for carcass energy retention. The number of interactions between type of diet and supplementary phytogenic feed additive suggest that the chemical composition and the energy to protein ratio of the diet may influence the efficiency of phytogenics when fed to chickens. The experiment showed that although supplementary phytogenic additives did not affect dietary ME, they caused a significant improvement in the utilization of dietary energy for carcass energy retention but this did not always relate to growth performance.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available