Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Poult Sci ; 98(11): 5820-5830, 2019 Nov 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31392330

RESUMO

The addition of fiber in chick feeds is known to dilute nutrients; as a result, this may reduce nutrient digestibility and performance. However, recent studies suggest that moderate inclusion of insoluble fibers (2 to 3%) may stimulate gizzard development, which could result in better nutrient utilization and chick growth. The previous fiber sources evaluated were subject to wide fluctuation in their nutritional and chemical composition due to variation in processing. Miscanthus giganteus is a C4 grass purposefully grown for its fiber content which has a consistent fiber composition compared to food process residues. The objectives of this study were to determine the effect of dietary fiber source and particle size on day-old chick performance and nutrient digestibility. Day-old chicks (8 chicks per cage, 5 cages per treatment) were fed diets containing 3% of either sepiolite (SEP), cellulose (CEL), coarse beet pulp (BP), fine BP, coarse Miscanthus grass (MG), and fine MG. At the end of days 7, 14, and 21, chicks and experimental diets were weighed to compute average daily gain and feed intake. In addition, excreta from the previous 48 h of each data capture point was collected to determine nutrient digestibility. In general, chicks fed diets containing fiber consumed more feed, gained more weight, and had better feed conversion rate than birds fed the SEP diet. Particle size of the fiber had no effect on chick performance; however, nutrient utilization was higher (P < 0.05) for chicks fed coarse fiber particles compared to these fed fine fiber particles. Birds fed diets containing MG performed similar to chicks fed CEL (P > 0.05), but digestibility coefficients of birds fed BP diets were generally higher than chicks fed MG diets. In conclusion, chicks performed better with fiber in their diet and MG was comparable to CEL.


Assuntos
Galinhas/fisiologia , Fibras na Dieta/metabolismo , Digestão/efeitos dos fármacos , Nutrientes/fisiologia , Tamanho da Partícula , Poaceae/química , Ração Animal/análise , Fenômenos Fisiológicos da Nutrição Animal/efeitos dos fármacos , Animais , Beta vulgaris/química , Celulose/administração & dosagem , Celulose/metabolismo , Dieta/veterinária , Fibras na Dieta/administração & dosagem , Fibras na Dieta/classificação , Silicatos de Magnésio/administração & dosagem , Silicatos de Magnésio/metabolismo , Masculino , Distribuição Aleatória
2.
Poult Sci ; 98(3): 1371-1378, 2019 Mar 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30351365

RESUMO

New protein ingredients are used to support pet food market growth and the development of new products while maintaining animal dietary needs. However, novel protein sources (e.g., spray-dried chicken, and (or) rice, pea, and potato protein concentrates) have limited data available regarding their protein quality. The objective of this study was to evaluate protein ingredients used in the pet food industry by laboratory analysis and a chick growth assay as a model. Following analysis for proximate and amino acid composition, chicks (six birds per pen with four pens per treatment) were fed experimental diets for 10 d. Diets contained 10% crude protein from each of the experimental protein sources (spray-dried egg-SDEG; spray-dried egg white-SDEW, spray-dried inedible whole egg-SDIE, chicken by-product meal-CBPM, chicken meal-CKML, low-temperature fluid bed air-dried chicken-LTCK, low-temperature and pressure fluid bed dried chicken-LTPC, spray-dried chicken-SDCK, whey protein concentrate-WPCT, corn gluten meal-CGML, corn protein concentrate-CPCT, potato protein isolate-PPIS, rice protein concentrate-RPCT, pea protein isolate-PEPI, soy protein isolate-SPIS, and soybean meal-SBML) along with an N-free diet (negative control). Chicks fed SDEG, SDIE, and LTPC had the highest protein efficiency ratio (PER; P < 0.0001; 5.18, 5.37, and 5.33, respectively), LTCK and SDCK were intermediate (4.54 and 4.79), and the CBPM and CKML were the lowest among the poultry proteins for EAA:NEAA, PER, and Lys availability. Among the vegetable proteins, PPIS and SBML had the highest PER values (3.60 and 3.48, P < 0.0001). In general, the chick PER method ranked the quality of animal protein sources higher than vegetable proteins, and these results were consistent with the EAA:NEAA ratio and Lys availability.


Assuntos
Aminoácidos/análise , Ração Animal/análise , Proteínas Alimentares/metabolismo , Proteínas Alimentares/normas , Fenômenos Fisiológicos da Nutrição Animal , Animais , Galinhas/metabolismo , Dieta/veterinária , Proteínas Alimentares/administração & dosagem , Proteínas do Ovo/análise , Valor Nutritivo , Proteínas de Plantas/análise , Produtos Avícolas/análise , Proteínas do Soro do Leite/análise
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...