4.6 Article

Enhancing the Utility of Dietary Moringa oleifera Leaf Meal for Sustainable Jumbo quail (Coturnix sp.) Production

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 14, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su14095067

关键词

avian birds; blood indices; feed additives; growth traits; meat quality; phytogenics

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) [121399]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the effect of pre-treating Moringa oleifera leaf powder with different levels of polyethylene glycol on the growth performance of Jumbo quail. The condensed tannins in the leaf powder negatively affected growth performance, but pre-treatment improved its efficacy.
The effect of pre-treating Moringa oleifera leaf powder (MOLP) with different levels of polyethylene glycol (PEG) on the growth performance, serum biochemistry, hematology, and meat quality parameters of Jumbo quail was evaluated. Two-week-old quail chicks (n = 432; 239.6 +/- 6.48 g live-weight) were randomly allocated to six diets formulated by incorporating (10% w/w) untreated MOLP (PEG0) or MOLP pre-treated with PEG at 2.5% (PEG25), 5% (PEG50), 7.5% (PEG75), and 10% (PEG100) (w/w) into a standard grower diet (CON). Overall feed intake linearly increased with PEG levels. At week 4, significant quadratic trends were recorded for weight gain and feed conversion efficiency (FCE) but, at week 5, FCE linearly declined as PEG levels increased. Hemoglobin, phosphorus, and albumin showed quadratic trends, while calcium and chroma (1 h post-mortem) linearly declined in response to PEG levels. Diet PEG50 promoted a higher shear force value (2.41) than diets PEG0 and PEG25. The PEG50 diet promoted a similar (p > 0.05) shear force as diet CON. Based on the quadratic response for weight gain, the optimal PEG pre-treatment level was calculated to be 5.9%. It was concluded that MOLP condensed tannins negatively affect growth performance and should be ameliorated to enhance the utility of this nutraceutical source for Jumbo quail.

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

4.6
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