4.6 Article

Growth Performance, Gut Health, Welfare and Qualitative Behavior Characteristics of Broilers Fed Diets Supplemented with Dried Common (Olea europaea) Olive Pulp

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su15010501

关键词

olive pulp; broilers; growth performance; gut health; welfare

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study investigated the dietary impact of dried olive pulp on broilers. The results showed that supplementing broilers' diets with 3% and 6% dried olive pulp positively affected foot pad dermatitis and feather cleanliness without adverse effects on behavior characteristics and growth performance. There were no significant differences in fecal microbiota population among the groups, but age-dependent changes in beta-diversity were observed.
The present study investigated the dietary impact of dried olive pulp (OP) on growth performance, gut health and some welfare and behavior characteristics of broilers. It was conducted in a commercial poultry farm using 108 13 day-old Ross male broilers. Chickens were equally and randomly assigned to 3 dietary treatments, CON, OP3 and OP6, based on the incorporation rate of OP in the ration (0%, 3%, and 6%, respectively). A beneficial impact on foot pad dermatitis (FPD) and feather cleanliness of OP-fed broilers was recorded. No adverse effects on qualitative behavior characteristics evaluated and on the overall growth performance of chickens were observed. No significant differences in the fecal microbiota population were observed among the groups. Changes of beta-diversity in an age-dependent way were only observed. The feces of chickens across all age and dietary groups were mainly dominated by the phylum Firmicutes (62.3 to 95.1%), mainly represented by the genus Lactobacillus (32.9 to 78.2%), Proteobacteria (2.0 to 35.6%), and Actinobacteria (1.5 to 11.4%). Supplementing broilers' diets with 3% and 6% OP beneficially affected chickens' health and welfare without compromising their growth performance and gut health.

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