ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Use of antibiotics as growth promoters in animal feeds has been restricted due to the residues in poultry products such as egg and meat, furthermore to the antibiotic resistant of pathogenic bacteria. The prohibition of their use opens the opportunity for the use of non-antibiotic feed additives such as probiotics. The objectives of this study were to investigate the effect of the addition of Lactobacillus casei WB 315 and crude fish oil (CFO) to diets on growth performance, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), low density lipoproteins (LDL), high density lipoprotein (HDL), and cholesterol levesl of broiler chickens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this research, one-day old male broiler chicks were used and divided equally into four groups, namely a basal diet without L. casei WB 315 and without CFO (P0), basal diet supplemented with 0.5% L. casei WB 315 of total broiler basal feed (1.2 × 109 cfu/ml) and without CFO (P1), basal diet supplemented without L. casei WB 315 and 1% CFO of total broiler basal feed (P2), and basal diet supplemented with 0.5% L. casei WB 315 of total broiler basal feed (1.2 × 109 cfu/ml) and 1% CFO of total broiler basal feed (P3) for 35 days. RESULTS: The results of addition 0.5% Lactobacillus casei WB 315 (1.2 × 109 cfu/ml) and 1% CFO of total broiler basal feed after 35 days showed significant difference among treatment in feed efficiency (p<0.05), feed conversion ratio (p<0.05), feed consumption (p<0.05), EPA (p<0.05), DHA (p<0.05), increase HDL (p<0.05), reduced the LDL (p<0.05), and reduce cholesterol (p<0.05) in meat broiler chicken. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the addition of L. casei WB 315 and crude fish oil (CFO) could significant improve the growth performance (feed efficiency, feed conversion ratio, feed consumption) and could significantly improve EPA, DHA and increase HDL and decrease LDL in meat poultry product.
ABSTRACT
AIM: This study aimed to determine the use of probiotics Bifidobacterium spp. and Lactobacillus casei as alternative antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) to improve growth performance and business analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study used a completely randomized factorial design. The first factor was the time of administration (1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks) and the second was the use of probiotics (control without probiotics; 0.1% AGP and 0.5% Bifidobacterium spp. + 0.25% L. casei). One hundred and eighty laying hens (Lohmann strain), of 30 weeks old, were divided into 12 treatment groups, composed of five replicates, each consisting of three laying hens. RESULTS: The results showed that using 0.5% Bifidobacterium spp. + 0.25% L. casei in weeks 1 and 2 showed the lowest feed intake (FI) (112.11-112.19 g/day), the highest egg weight (60.28 g) in the 1st week, the lowest feed conversion ratio (FCR) (2.21-2.23), and highest feed efficiency (44.75-45.25%) for 3-4 weeks, and the highest hen-day production (86.66-86.90%) for 3-4 weeks and the most profitable business analysis (IDR. 30,353). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results, it can be concluded that the addition of 0.5% Bifidobacterium spp. + 25% L. casei probiotics can be used as a substitute for AGP; it can reduce the FI and FCR, increasing egg weight, feed efficiency, and hen-day production, as well as illustrating the results of the most profitable business analysis.
