4.7 Article

The effect of using different levels of shrimp meal in laying hen diets

Journal

POULTRY SCIENCE
Volume 80, Issue 5, Pages 633-636

Publisher

POULTRY SCIENCE ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.1093/ps/80.5.633

Keywords

shrimp meal; egg; yolk pigmentation; layer; chitin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The shrimp industry in Central America has grown significantly. Much waste is generated by this industry because of the high percentage of shrimp heads, exoskeletons, and soluble components lost during processing. The objective of this study was to measure the effect of substituting different levels of shrimp meal (SM) for soybean meal (SBM) in layer diets. A control corn-soybean layer diet and four different levels of SM substituted for SBM were fed to Single Comb White Leghorn hens from 18 to 38 wk of age. The SM replaced 0, 20, 40, 60, or 80% of SBM. The hens were housed three per cage, 30.5 cm wide x 45.7 cm deep. The five treatments were assigned randomly to three contiguous cages in each of eight rows in a randomized complete block design. Egg production was recorded daily, and feed consumption was recorded for an entire week every 21 d. Egg weight, specific gravity, and yolk pigmentation were recorded for three consecutive days every 21 d. Mortality was recorded daily. Our results showed that the different levels of SM in the diet did not significantly affect egg production. Feed consumption increased significantly (P < 0.01) only when 40 or 80% SM was used in the diet. Feed conversion was poorer for the same treatments. No significant differences were observed for mortality. Egg weights and specific gravities did not differ significantly among the treatments. Yolk pigmentation increased significantly (P < 0.001) as the levels of SM increased in the diets. In conclusion, properly processed SM can be used in relatively high levels to replace SBM in layer diets without causing detrimental effects on layer 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