Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:04:23.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Enzyme supplementation of dry and wet wheat-based feeds for broiler chickens: performance and gut responses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

S. Yasar  and
J. M. Forbes
S. Yasar
Affiliation:
Centre for Animal Sciences, Leeds Institute of Biotechnology and Agriculture, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
J. M. Forbes*
Affiliation:
Centre for Animal Sciences, Leeds Institute of Biotechnology and Agriculture, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Professor J. M. Forbes, fax +44 1132 33072, email [email protected]
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.

To test whether the improvements in digestive efficiency due to either wetting of the food or inclusion of enzymes are accompanied by the same changes in gut function, foods with a high content of wheat were fed to broiler chicks from 1–42 d old. Twenty-four birds were caged individually while a further sixty-four were in group pens in experiments of 2 × 2 factorial design with two levels of enzyme (0 or 1 g/kg, designed for wheat) and two levels of water addition (0 and 1300 g/kg). Food intake and live-weight gain were significantly increased by wet feeding (from 89·3 to 153·4 g/d and from 39·7 to 65·4 g/d respectively), the differences increasing with age, while the enzyme had no significant effect (120·5 and 122·2 g/d and 51·9 and 53·1g/week respectively). The viscosity of digesta was greatly reduced both by wetting (from 4·40 to 2·64 kPa · s) and enzyme (from 4·47 to 2·57 kPa · s) but there was a significant interaction with age in which the viscosity was low throughout in the wet only, enzyme only and wet + enzyme treatments but declined with age from a very high level in the dry, no enzyme treatment (11·5 kPa · s at 14 d). While wetting increased weight and length of digestive tract and thickness of some parts of the gut, enzyme had no significant effect, tending to reduce gut wall thickness. Crypt cell proliferation rate (CCPR) was significantly reduced by wet feeding (from 39·4 to 28·7 cells/crypt per 2 h) and by enzyme supplementation (from 38·9 to 29·2 cells/crypt per 2 h). Therefore, while both wetting and enzyme addition to the food reduced digesta viscosity and CCPR to a similar extent, the former had marked stimulatory effects on food intake and weight gain while the latter had little effect. The mode of action of wet feeding is therefore deduced to be not primarily through its effects on viscosity and CCPR.

Keywords

GrowthGut histo-morphologyWet foodBroiler chickens
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 84 , Issue 3 , September 2000 , pp. 297 - 307
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2000

References

Adams, OL and Naber, EC (1969) Effect of physical and chemical treatments of grains on growth of and feed utilisation by the chick. Poultry Science 48, 853–858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, CM, McCracken KJ and Bedford, MR (1997) Effect of fat type, level of wheat inclusion and enzyme supplementation on diet metabolisability and broiler performance. British Poultry Science 38, S25–S26.Google Scholar
Almirall, M, Francesch, M, Perez-Vendrell, AM, Brufau, J and Esteve-Garcia, E (1995) The differences in intestinal viscosity produced by barley and β-glucanase alter digesta enzyme activities and ileal nutrient digestibilities more in broiler chicks than in cocks. Journal of Nutrition 125, 947–955.Google ScholarPubMed
Almirall, M and Garcia, EE (1994) Rate of passage of barley diets with chromium oxide: Influence of age and poultry strain and effect of β-glucanase supplementation. Poultry Science 73, 1433–1440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Annison, G (1991) Relationship between the levels of non-starch polysaccharides and the apparent metabolisable energy of wheat assayed in broiler chickens. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 39, 1252–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedford, MR (1993) Mode of action of feed enzymes. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 2, 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedford, MR (1995) Mechanism of action and potential environmental benefits from the use of feed enzyme. Animal Feed Science and Technology 53, 145–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bedford, MR and Classen, HL (1992) Reduction of intestinal viscosity through manipulation of dietary rye and pentosanase concentration of the intestinal aqueous phase and results in improved growth rate and food conversion efficiency of broiler chicks. Journal of Nutrition 122, 560–569.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bedford, MR, Classen, HL and Campbell, GL (1991) The effect of pelleting, salt, and pentosanase on the viscosity of intestinal contents and the performance of broilers fed rye. Poultry Science 70, 1571–1577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, DJ & Freeman, BM (1971) Physiology and Biochemistry of the Domestic Fowl, vol. 1. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Brenes, A, Smith, M, Guenter, W and Marquardt, RR (1993) Effect of enzyme supplementation on the performance and digestive tract size of broiler chickens fed wheat- and barley-based diets. Poultry Science 72, 1731–1739.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burnett, GS (1966) Studies of viscosity as probable factor involved in the improvement of certain barleys for chickens by enzyme supplementation. British Poultry Science 7, 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choct, M and Annison, G (1990) Anti-nutritive effect of wheat pentosans in broiler diets. British Poultry Science 31, 811–821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choct, M and Annison, G (1992) Anti-nutritive effect of wheat pentosans in broiler chickens: roles of viscosity and gut microflora. British Poultry Science 33, 821–834.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choct, M, Hughes, RJ, Wang, J, Bedford, MR, Morgan, AJ and Annison, G (1996) Increased small intestinal fermentation is partly responsible for the anti-nutritive activity of non-starch polysaccharides in chickens. British Poultry Science 37, 609–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Classen, HL, Campbell, GL, Rossnagel, BG, Bhatty, R and Reichert, RD (1985) Studies on the use of hulless barley in chick diets: Deleterious effects and methods of alleviation. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 65, 725–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, CA, Wilson, RG, Hanlon, L and Eastwood, MA (1992) Effect of the dietary fibre content of lifelong diet on colonic cellular proliferation in the rat. Gut 33, 1076–1079.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fengler, A and Marquardt, RR (1988) Water soluble pentosans from rye: 2. Effects on rate of dialysis and on the retention of nutrients by the chick. Cereal Chemistry 64, 1076–1079.Google Scholar
Fengler, A, Pawlic, JR and Marquardt, RR (1988) Improvement in nutrient retention and changes in excreta viscosities in chicks fed rye-containing diets supplemented with fungal enzymes, sodium taurocholate and penicillin. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68, 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, JM (1995) Voluntary Food Intake and Diet Selection in Farm Animals. Wallingford: CAB International.Google Scholar
Friesen, OG, Guenter, W, Marquardt, RR and Rotter, BA (1992) The effect of enzyme supplementation on the apparent metabolisable energy and nutrient digestibilities of wheat, barley, oats and rye for young broiler chicks. Poultry Science 71, 1710–1721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gohl, B, Alden, S, Eldwinger, K and Thomke, S (1978) Influence of β-glucanase on feeding value of barley for poultry and moisture content of excreta. British Poultry Science 19, 41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gohl, B and Gohl, I (1977) The effect of viscous substances and the transit time of barley digesta in rats. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 28, 911–915.Google ScholarPubMed
Goodlad, RA and Wright, NA (1982) Quantitative studies on epithelial replacement in the gut. Digestive Physiology P212, 1–23.Google Scholar
Graham, H and Petterson, D (1992) A note on the effect of beta-glucanase and a multi-enzyme on production in broiler chicks fed a barley-based diet. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 22, 39–42.Google Scholar
Johnson, IT, Gee, JM and Mahoney, RR (1984) Effect of dietary supplements of guar gum and cellulose on intestinal cell proliferation, enzyme levels and sugar transport in the rat. British Journal of Nutrition 52, 447–487.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kellerup, SU, Parker, JE and Arscott, GH (1965) Effect of restricted water consumption on broiler chickens. Poultry Science 44, 78–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McNab, JM and Smithard, RR (1992) Barley β-glucan: an antinutritional factor in poultry feeding. Nutrition Research Reviews 5, 45–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mannion, PF (1981) Enzyme supplementation of barley based diets for broiler chickens. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 21, 296–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, ET, Lall, SP and Summers, JD (1969) The feeding value of rye for the growing chick: Effect of enzyme supplements, antibiotics, autoclaving and geographical area of production. Poultry Science 48, 939–949.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pawlic, JR, Fengler, A and Marquardt, RR (1990) Improvement of the nutritional value of rye by the partial hydrolysis of the viscous water-soluble pentosans following water-soaking or fungal enzyme treatment. British Poultry Science 31, 525–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petterson, D and Aman, P (1989) Enzyme supplementation of a poultry diet containing rye and wheat. British Journal of Nutrition 62, 139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritz, CW, Hulet, RM, Self, BB and Denbow, DM (1995) Effects of protein level and enzyme supplementation upon growth and rate of digesta passage of male turkeys. Poultry Science 74, 1323–1328.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritz, CW, Hulet, RM, Self, BB and Denbow, DM (1995) Growth and intestinal morphology of male turkeys as influenced by dietary supplementation of amylase and xylanase. Poultry Science 74, 1329–1334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, RJ and Arscott, GH (1962) Use of barley in high-efficient broiler rations: 5. Further studies on the use of enzymes, soaking and pelleting barley for chicks. Poultry Science 41, 124–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savory, CJ (1975) Effects of group size on the feeding behaviour and growth of chicks. British Poultry Science 16, 343–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savory, CJ and Gentle, MJ (1976) Effects of dietary dilution with fibre on the food intake and gut dimensions of Japanese quail. British Poultry Science 17, 561–570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Savory, CJ and Gentle, MJ (1976) Changes in food intake and gut size in Japanese quail in response to manipulation of dietary fibre content. British Poultry Science 17, 571–580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, SSP and Smithard, RR (1996) Exogenous enzymes: crypt cell proliferation, digesta viscosity short chain fatty acids and xylanases in the jejunum. British Poultry Science 37, S77.Google Scholar
Turk, DA (1982) The anatomy of the avian digestive tract related to feed utilisation. Poultry Science 61, 1225–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Der Klis, JD and Van Voorst, A (1993) The effect of carboxy methyl cellulose (a soluble polysaccharide) on the rate of marker excretion from the gastrointestinal tract of broilers. Poultry Science 72, 503–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Der Klis, JD, Van Voorst, A and Van der Cruyningen, C (1993) Effect of a soluble polysaccharide (carboxy methyl cellulose) on the absorption of minerals from the gastrointestinal tract of broilers. British Poultry Science 34, 985–997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Der Klis, JD, Van Voorst, A and Van der Cruyningen, C (1993) Effect of a soluble polysaccharide (carboxy methyl cellulose) on the physico-chemical conditions in the gastrointestinal tract of broilers. British Poultry Science 34, 971–983.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Viveros, A, Brenes, A, Pizzaro, M and Castano, M (1994) Effect of enzyme supplementation of a diet based on barley, an autoclave treatment, on apparent digestibility, growth performance and gut morphology of broilers. Animal Feed Science and Technology 48, 237–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, WB, Bird, HR, Sunde, ML, Prentice, N, Burger, WC and Marlett, JA (1981) The viscosity interaction of barley beta-glucan with Trichoderma viride cellulase in chick intestine. Poultry Science 60, 1043–1048.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willingham, HE, Leong, KC, Jensen, LS and McGinnis, J (1959) Studies on the role of enzyme supplements and water treatment for improving the nutritional value of barley. Poultry Science 38, 539–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yalda, AY and Forbes, JM (1995) Food intake and growth in chickens given food in the wet form with and without access to drinking water. British Poultry Science 36, 357–369.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yalda, AY and Forbes, JM (1996) Effects of food intake, soaking time, enzyme and cornflour addition on the digestibility of the diet and performance of broilers given wet food. British Poultry Science 37, 797–807.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yasar, S (1998) Assessment of the Nutritional Effects of Water Treatment of Food for Poultry. PhD Thesis, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
Yasar, S and Forbes, JM (1999) Performance and gastro-intestinal response of broiler chickens fed on cereal grain-based foods soaked in water. British Poultry Science 40, 65–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yeomans, MR (1986) Overdrinking in the domestic fowl. British Poultry Science 27, 163.Google Scholar