Effects of Dietary Brown Rice and Sake Lees on the Growth Performance and Color of Meat in Broiler Chicks.

In this study, we examined whether brown rice and sake lees (domestic feed ingredients) could replace corn and soybean meal (major imported feed ingredients) in broiler chick feed. In Experiment 1, 21-day-old broiler chicks were assigned to two groups and fed a corn-soybean- or a brown rice-soybean-based diet for three weeks (3 birds × 4 replicates/group). Dietary brown rice significantly improved body weight gain and feed conversion ratio. Brown rice feeding also significantly increased L* (lightness) in the thigh and significantly decreased a* (redness) and b* (yellowness) in the thigh and b* in the fat. In Experiment 2, 21-day-old broiler chicks were assigned to three groups and fed either a corn-soybean-based diet for 3 weeks, a corn-soybean-based diet for the first 2 weeks followed by a brown rice sake lees-based diet for the last week, or a brown rice sake lees-based diet for 3 weeks (3 birds × 4 replicates/group). Replacement of the imported feed ingredients significantly improved the feed conversion ratio. The a* values for the breast, thigh, and fat, and the b* values for the thigh and fat were significantly decreased by rice and sake lees feeding for 3 weeks. The a* values for the breasts and fat were significantly decreased by rice and sake lees feeding for 1 week. These results suggest that brown rice and sake lees can be used as replacements for imported feed ingredients such as corn and soybean meal in broiler chicks without detrimental effects on growth performance. These domestic feed ingredients may benefit local production and consumption of poultry in Japan.

A comparison of hyperbaric 1% and 3% solutions of small-dose lidocaine in spinal anesthesia.

UNLABELLED: We examined whether the concentration of hyperbaric lidocaine affected the regression of motor block when the dose of lidocaine was kept constant at 30 mg. We also examined the spread, duration, and regression of sensory block. Sixty-five patients (ASA physical status I or II), scheduled for elective perineum or lower limb surgery, were enrolled in this study. Patients received spinal anesthesia with 1 mL of 3% lidocaine or 3 mL of 1% lidocaine. Adequate level of block was obtained for surgery in 63 of 65 patients. Whereas the administration of 3 mL of hyperbaric 1% lidocaine solution produced a level of sensory block similar to that produced by the administration of 1 mL of hyperbaric 3% lidocaine solution in spinal anesthesia, the administration of 3 mL of hyperbaric 1% lidocaine solution resulted in shorter times to full motor recovery and to urination and produced less motor block compared with 1 mL of hyperbaric 3% lidocaine solution. Two patients receiving 1% lidocaine and four patients receiving 3% lidocaine required IV ephedrine because of hypotension. Our results showed the clinical advantages of hyperbaric 1% lidocaine spinal anesthesia compared with hyperbaric 3% lidocaine spinal anesthesia for surgery of short duration. IMPLICATIONS: When the dose of lidocaine was kept constant at 30 mg, hyperbaric 1% lidocaine solution resulted in shorter times for recovery from motor block and to urination than did hyperbaric 3% lidocaine solution. Levels of sensory block were similar. Therefore, the more dilute lidocaine for spinal anesthesia may be suitable for day-care surgery and short duration surgery.