Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:59:27.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Amino acid uptake in chickens subjected to increasing levels of quantitative food restriction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. M. Gous
R. M. Gous
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Poultry Science, University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg 3200, South Africa
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Three groups of cockerels were reared from 3 to 11 weeks of age on increasingly severe quantitative food restriction treatments, resulting in body-weight values of 12, 19 and 27% below that of a control group which was fed ab lib.

2. The rate of uptake of L-arginine, glycine, L-lysine and L-phenylalanine was measured in vitro using intestinal rings, over a 5 min incubation period.

3. Uptake of L-arginine was significantly increased with increasing degrees of body-weight restriction. This amino acid and L-lysine were the only two to show a significantly enhanced uptake rate as a result of the restriction treatments.

4. No significant differences were noted in the case of glycine or L-phenylalanine uptake following food restriction, indicating a certain selectivity in the alteration of absorption rates following food restriction, when such tests are conducted in vitro.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , November 1977 , pp. 313 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1977

References

REFERENCES

Fabry, P. & Kujalova, V. (1958). Naturwissenschaften 45, 373.Google Scholar
Finch, L. R. & Hird, F. J. R. (1960). Biochirn. biophys. Acta 43, 268.Google Scholar
Gous, R. M. & Stielau, W. J. (1976). Br. Poult. Sci. 17, 487.Google Scholar
Hindmarsh, J. T., Kilby, D., Ross, B. & Wiseman, G. (1967). J. Physiol. 188, 207.Google Scholar
Kershaw, T. G., Neame, K. D. & Wiseman, G. (1960). J. Physiol. 152, 182.Google Scholar
Kimmich, G. A. (1970). Biochemistry 9, 3659.Google Scholar
Kujalova, V. & Fabry, P. (1960). Physiol. bohemoslov. 9, 35.Google Scholar
Nakamura, Y., Yasumoto, K. & Mitsuda, H. (1972). J. Nutr. 120, 359.Google Scholar
Neame, K. D. & Wiseman, G. (1959). J. Physiol. 146, 10P.Google Scholar
Preston-Mafham, R. A. & Sykes, A. H. (1970). Parasitol. 61, 417.Google Scholar
Rayner, A. A. (1967). A First Course in Biometry for Agriculture Students, Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press.Google Scholar
Wapnir, R. A., Hawkins, R. L. & Lifshitz, F. (1972). Am. J. Physiol. 223, 788.Google Scholar
Wapnir, R. A. & Lifshitz, F. (1974). J. Nutr. 104, 843.Google Scholar