4.7 Article

Dietary soluble non-starch polysaccharide level and xylanase supplementation influence performance, egg quality and nutrient utilization in laying hens fed wheat-based diets

期刊

ANIMAL NUTRITION
卷 7, 期 2, 页码 512-520

出版社

KEAI PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.aninu.2020.05.012

关键词

Soluble NSP; Xylanase; Laying hen; Production performance; Egg quality

资金

  1. Poultry Hub Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to evaluate the effects of dietary soluble non-starch polysaccharides (sNSP) content and xylanase supplementation on production performance, egg quality parameters, and nutrient digestibility in Hy-line Brown layers. The results showed that these factors influenced layer production performance and nutrient digestibility, suggesting the need for further research to optimize the benefits of xylanase application in laying hens.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of dietary soluble non-starch polysaccharide (sNSP) content and xylanase supplementation on production performance, egg quality parameters, and nutrient digestibility inHy-line Brown layers from 25 to 32 wk of age. A total of 144 Hy-line Brownlaying hens (25 wk of age) were randomly allocated to 1 of 4 wheat-based dietary treatments in a 2 x 2 factorial experimental design, with 36 replicates of individual hens per treatment. The diets were formulated to contain either a high or low sNSP level (at 13.3 or 10.8 g/kg) and were supplemented with either 0 or 12,000 BXU/kg exogenous xylanase. Birds were fed these treatment diets for an 8-wk period, and hen production performance, including daily egg production, average egg weight, daily egg mass, feed conversion ratio and proportion of dirty and abnormal eggs were measured at bird age 25 to 28 wk and 29 to 32 wk. An interaction between sNSP content of the diet and xylanase supplementation was observed on daily egg production from 25 to 28 wk of age (P = 0.018); birds fed the high sNSP diet without xylanase had lower egg production than those fed any other treatment. An interaction between the 2 dietary factors was also observed on hen weight gain at 29 to 32 wk of age (P = 0.014), with birds fed the low sNSP diet with 12,000 BXU/kg xylanase presenting greater weight gain compared to those fed the high sNSP diet with 12,000 BXU/kg xylanase. Feed intake at 29 to 32 wk of age was reduced by xylanase supplementation (P = 0.047). Xylanase supplementation also increased yolk colour score at both 28 and 32 wk of age, and decreased yolk weight at 32 wk of age (P = 0.014, 0.037 and 0.013, respectively). Birds fed the low sNSP diet presented lower protein digestibility (P = 0.024) than those fed the high sNSP diet. Additionally, birds fed high sNSP presented higher shell reflectivity at both 28 and 32 wk of age (P = 0.05 and 0.036, respectively). The influence of duration of feeding the treatment diets on egg quality was also determined. It was observed that egg weight, yolk weight and yolk colour score consistently increased over time, regardless of experimental treatment effects. In contrast, Haugh Unit and albumen height significantly decreased throughout the study period in all treatments, although this was less pronounced in hens fed the treatment with high sNSP and no supplemental xylanase. A reduction in shell breaking strength over time was observed only in hens fed the treatments without xylanase addition, and shell thickness was improved over time only in birds fed the low sNSP diet with xylanase. The impacts of the dietary treatments were largely inconsistent in this study, so a solid conclusion cannot be drawn. However, these findings do indicate that dietary NSP level influences layer production performance, and thus should be considered when formulating laying hen diets. It also proved that further research is warranted into how to optimize the benefits of xylanase application in laying hens. (C) 2021 Chinese Association of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd.

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