2006
DOI: 10.1093/japr/15.2.245
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of Corn Particle Size and Pellet Texture on Broiler Performance in the Growing Phase

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
51
1
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 112 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
13
51
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These results are similar to those reported by Nir et al (1995), Engberg et al (2002), Svihus et al (2004) and Cutlip et al (2008). These improvements have been variously attributed to increased nutritional density, increased nutrient intake, changes in the physical form of the feed, reduced feed wastage, decreased energy expenditure while eating (McKinney and Teeter, 2004;Skinner-Noble et al, 2005;Amerah et al, 2007;Cerrate et al, 2009;Yang et al, 2010), increased starch digestibility (Parsons et al, 2006), and improved apparent metabolisable energy (AME) and nutrient retention (Svihus et al, 2004;Adeyemi et al, 2008) mechanical action resulted in a rupture of the cell walls and thus made encapsulated nutrients of the feedstuff more accessible to digestive enzymes (Vande and Schrijver, 1988;Cutlip et al, 2008). Phytase and multienzymes plus phytase supplementation increased BW (3.3 and 4.6%) and BWG (3.7 and 4.9%), improved FCR (4.8 and 6.6%), and decreased feed intake by 1.6 and 2.2%, respectively, of the improvement in FCR as compared with those chicks fed a diet without enzyme supplementation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These results are similar to those reported by Nir et al (1995), Engberg et al (2002), Svihus et al (2004) and Cutlip et al (2008). These improvements have been variously attributed to increased nutritional density, increased nutrient intake, changes in the physical form of the feed, reduced feed wastage, decreased energy expenditure while eating (McKinney and Teeter, 2004;Skinner-Noble et al, 2005;Amerah et al, 2007;Cerrate et al, 2009;Yang et al, 2010), increased starch digestibility (Parsons et al, 2006), and improved apparent metabolisable energy (AME) and nutrient retention (Svihus et al, 2004;Adeyemi et al, 2008) mechanical action resulted in a rupture of the cell walls and thus made encapsulated nutrients of the feedstuff more accessible to digestive enzymes (Vande and Schrijver, 1988;Cutlip et al, 2008). Phytase and multienzymes plus phytase supplementation increased BW (3.3 and 4.6%) and BWG (3.7 and 4.9%), improved FCR (4.8 and 6.6%), and decreased feed intake by 1.6 and 2.2%, respectively, of the improvement in FCR as compared with those chicks fed a diet without enzyme supplementation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, these authors found an improvement of 63 kcal of AME n /kg in the feed when the average particle size of corn was increased from 561 to 997 μm. Parsons et al (2006), obtained a quadratic AMEn response as size of corn increased in broiler feed form from 781 to 2,242 μm, obtaining the greatest result with average particle size of 1,042 μm.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The reduction of mean particle size in diets facilitates the contact between the endogenous enzymes and the dietary components. In chickens nutrient digestion and performance is related to the increase of particle size (Parsons et al, 2006;Amerah et al, 2007;Gonzá lezAlvarado et al, 2007), whereas the granulometry has controversial effects in mammals. In the pig, a reduction in feed particle size, often leads to an improvement of the digestibility in terms of energetic value and growth performance (Lawrence et al, 2003), although other studies showed no effect on digestibility and growth performance (Valencia et al, 2008;Solà -Oriol et al, 2009).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%