4.4 Article

Phytoncide, phytogenic feed additive as an alternative to conventional antibiotics, improved growth performance and decreased excreta gas emission without adverse effect on meat quality in broiler chickens

期刊

LIVESTOCK SCIENCE
卷 181, 期 -, 页码 1-6

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2015.10.001

关键词

Broiler chickens; Excreta gas emission; Excreta microflora; Growth performance; Phytogenic feed additive

资金

  1. Department of Animal Resource & Science, Dankook University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A total of 384 one-day-old broiler chickens [initial body weight (BW): 47.4 +/- 0.3 g] were used to investigate the effect of dietary phytoncide, phytogenic feed additive extracted from Korean pine, as an alternative to tylosin on growth performance, excreta microflora, excreta gas emission, meat quality, and relative organ and tissue weight in the 35-d feeding experiment (starter phase, d 0-14 and finisher phase, d 14-35). Broiler chickens were assigned to 1 of 4 dietary treatments (6 replicate cages/treatment and 16 boiler chickens/cage) according to their BW. Dietary treatments were: positive control (PC; basal diet+0.2 g tylosin/kg) and basal diet+ 0, 0.5, or 1.0 g phytoncide/kg. During d 0-14 and 0-35, BW gain (BWG) of broiler chickens fed the PC diet was greater (P=0.02 and 0.03, respectively) compared with those fed with basal diet. During d 0-35, BWG, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio linearly improved (P=0.01, 0.03, and 0.03, respectively) as dietary phytoncide content increased. Broiler chickens fed the PC diet had lower (P=0.04) excreta Escherichia coli concentration compared with those fed with basal diet. Breast muscle linearly increased (P=0.05) and excreta gas emission linearly decreased (P < 0.05) as phytoncide concentration increased. In conclusion, phytoncide could be considered as an alternative to replace tylosin to improve growth performance and decrease excreta gas emission in broiler chickens without any adverse effect on meat quality. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据