Growth performance, organ attributes, nutrient and caloric utilization in broiler chickens differing in growth rates when fed a corn-soybean meal diet with multienzyme supplement containing phytase, protease and fiber degrading enzymes

Abstract

Growth performance, organ weight, ceca digesta short chain fatty acids ( SCFA ), jejunal histomorphometry, tibia ash, apparent retention ( AR ) of components and caloric efficiency were investigated in broiler chicken strains differing in growth rate fed diets with multienzyme supplement ( MES ). The strains differed in estimated time to reach 2.1 kg BW: 37, 43, 47, and 50 d and were designated C, F, J, and N, respectively. A corn-soybean meal diet was formulated for 2-phase program (starter and grower) and fed without or with MES containing phytase, protease and fiber-degrading enzymes. A total of 640-day-old chicks (42.3 + 0.01 g/bird) were housed in cages (5 cockerels and 5 pullets/cage) and allocated to give 8 replicates/ strain and diet combination. Equal amount of feed was fed based on observed ad-libitum intake of C strain in the starter (d 0–14) and grower (d 15–28). Body weight was monitored, grab excreta samples taken and at completion of allocated feed one bird per cage necropsied for samples. With exception of P, apparent metabolizable energy corrected for nitrogen ( AMEn ) and ceca digesta acetic acid, there was no ( P > 0.05) interaction between strain and MES on examined responses. Strains differed ( P < 0.01) on growth, FCR, gizzard weight, tibia ash, breast weight, ceca digesta concentration of lactic, propionic, and isobutyric acid and caloric efficiency. The final body weight ( BW ) was 1,344, 1,134, 959, and 916 g/bird for C, F, J, and N, respectively. Corresponding caloric efficiency was 4,930, 5,807, 6,680 and 7,199 kcal/kg BW gain, respectively. Birds fed MES had higher BW gain ( P < 0.05) in grower phase, larger gizzard, higher AR of CP, crude fat, neutral detergent fiber, and Ca than non-MES birds. In conclusion, growth rate influenced organ attributes, nutrient, and caloric utilization. Enzyme supplementation improved growth in grower phase and nutrient utilization independent of strain, suggesting that effects of feed enzymes are not influenced by inherent growth rate.

Lipid metabolism analysis in liver of different chicken genotypes and impact on nutritionally relevant polyunsaturated fatty acids of meat

“…23 . Accordingly, Mohammadigheisar et al 24 , demonstrated that the growth rate and the utilization efficiency of energy are closely linked in broilers.…”

“…High-performance genotypes use most of the dietary energy for muscle development rather than for other metabolic processes (kinetics, reproduction, immune response, thermotolerance, etc.) 23 , 24 . Thus, the growth rate largely affects the metabolic activity in fast-growing chickens in terms of PUFA accumulation 25 and in modification of metabolic pathways 26 .…”

Comparative growth performance, gizzard weight, ceca digesta short chain fatty acids and nutrient utilization in broiler chickens and turkey poults in response to cereal grain type, fiber level, and multienzyme supplement fed from hatch to 28 days of life

“…The apparent retention ( AR ) of components, apparent metabolizable energy ( AME ) and AME corrected for nitrogen ( AMEn ) were calculated as described by Mwaniki and Kiarie (2019) . The digestible crude protein conversion ratio ( CPCR g/kg BWG) and calories conversion ratio ( CCR mcal/kg BWG) were calculated according to Mohammadigheisar et al (2021) . …”

Effect of multi-enzyme complex and feed form on growth performance, slaughter characteristic, total tract nutrient digestibility, and energy utilization in broiler chickens

“…Zakaria et al (2010) suggested that the ineffectiveness of adding multi-enzyme to organ weights can be associated with levels. Mohammadigheisar et al (2021) also reported that adding multi-enzyme to broiler diets increased the gizzard weight, however; the connection between that increase and multi-enzyme is hard to explain, and the increase in weight is instead associated with the structural form of the feed.…”