4.7 Article

Influence of the main cereal and feed form of the diet on performance and digestive tract traits of brown-egg laying pullets

期刊

POULTRY SCIENCE
卷 88, 期 5, 页码 994-1002

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.3382/ps.2008-00480

关键词

corn; wheat; feed form; pullet performance; digestive organ

资金

  1. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion, Madrid, Spain

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The influence of the main cereal and feed form of the diet on performance and digestive tract traits was studied in 576 brown-egg laying pullets from 1 to 120 d of age. From 1 to 45 d of age, 4 diets arranged factorially with 2 cereals (corn vs. wheat) and 2 feed forms (mash vs. pellets) were used. Each treatment was replicated 6 times (24 pullets per replicate). From 46 to 120 d of age, all diets were offered in mash form and the only difference among diets was the cereal used. Cumulatively, pullets fed the corn diets had higher BW gain (P < 0.05) but similar feed conversion ratio as pullets fed the wheat diets. From 1 to 45 d of age, pullets fed pellets consumed more feed (P < 0.001) and had higher BW gain (P < 0.001) than those fed mash. Most of the beneficial effects of pelleting on productive performance were still evident at 120 d of age. At 45 d of age, gizzard weight (g/kg of BW) was higher (P < 0.01) in pullets fed corn than in pullets fed wheat diets. Feeding pellets reduced the relative weight of the digestive tract and the gizzard (P < 0.001) as well as the length (cm/kg of BW) of the small intestine (P < 0.01) at both ages. The pH of gizzard contents at 120 d of age was not affected by cereal but was lower in pullets that were fed mash from 1 to 45 d of age (P < 0.01). We conclude that wheat can be used in substitution of corn in pullet diets with only a slight reduction in BW gain and that feeding pellets from 1 to 45 d of age increased BW gain and pH of the gizzard and reduced the relative weight of the gizzard and the length of the gastrointestinal tract at 120 d of age.

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

4.7
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