Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T19:42:17.652Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Role of Coated Sodium Butyrate on Performance of Broilers Fed High Protein and Reduced Energy Diets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2016

S.A. M'Sadeq ,
R.A. Swick ,
M. Choct  and
S-B Wu
S.A. M'Sadeq
Affiliation:
School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
R.A. Swick
Affiliation:
School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
M. Choct
Affiliation:
School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia Poultry Cooperative Research Centre, University of New England, Armidale, Australia
S-B Wu*
Affiliation:
School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
*
* Corresponding author:[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Addition of butyrate or its salt has been reported to have a positive impact on growth performance in broilers due to its bactericidal and bacteriostatic properties. This study investigated the effect of enterically coated dietary sodium butyrate (SB) on broiler performance. In experiment 1, 408 day-old male Ross 308 chicks were used in a 2 × 2 factorial design. Factors were dietary energy (standard or minus 50 kcal/kg relative to standard diet) and coated SB level (0 and 1 g/kg). In experiment 2, 2160 day-old male Cobb 500 birds were used in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial plus one arrangement of treatments. Factors included grain source (corn or wheat); protein level (standard or high); coated SB level (0 and 1 g/kg) plus a treatment using 2 kg SB in a high protein wheat-based diet. The results from the experiments showed no effect of coated SB on performance at 1 g/kg inclusion in feed across the ME range or across basal diet type (grain) or protein level (P > 0.05). However, birds fed the high protein wheat diet with 2 g/kg SB had higher body weights than the control birds at 10 and 24 days old. Birds fed high protein diets had lower body weight gain (WG) than those fed standard protein diets (P < 0.05), whereas birds fed corn based diets had higher WG than those fed wheat based diets (P < 0.05). Birds fed high dietary protein or wheat based diet showed decreased pH of caecal contents. The results indicated that dietary coated SB had no effect on broiler performance, the concentration of caecal and ileal short chain fatty acids (SCFA) or intestinal pH. Higher inclusion levels may play a beneficial role but this warrants further investigation.

Keywords

broiler chickenshort chain fatty acidsodium butyrate
Type
Original Research
Information
Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition , Volume 4 , 2016 , e2
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition Ltd. 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdollahi, M.R., Ravindran, V., and Svihus, B. (2013) Influence of grain type and feed form on performance, apparent metabolisable energy and ileal digestibility of nitrogen, starch, fat, calcium and phosphorus in broiler starters. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 186: 193–203.Google Scholar
Afsharmanesh, M., and Pourreza, J. (2005) Effect of calcium, citric acid, ascorbic acid vitamin D3 on the efficacy of microbial phytase in broiler starters fed wheat-based diets on performance, bone mineralisation and ileal digestibility. International Journal of Poultry Science, 4: 418–424.Google Scholar
Antongiovanni, M., Buccioni, A., Petacchi, F., Leeson, S., Minieri, S., Martini, A., and Cecchi, R. (2007) Butyric acid glycerides in the diet of broiler chickens: effects on gut histology and carcass composition. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 6: 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choct, M., Hughes, R.J., and Bedford, M.R. (1999) Effects of a xylanase on individual bird variation, starch digestion throughout the intestine, and ileal and caecal volatile fatty acid production in chickens fed wheat. British Poultry Science, 40: 419–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corduk, M., Ceylan, N., Dede, N., and Tel, O. (2008) Effects of novel feed additives on performance, carcass traits and E. coli, aerobic bacteria and yeast counts in broilers. Archiv fur Geflugelkunde, 72: 61–67.Google Scholar
Czerwiński, J., Højberg, O., Smulikowska, S., Engberg, R.M., and Mieczkowska, A. (2012) Effects of sodium butyrate and salinomycin upon intestinal microbiota, mucosal morphology and performance of broiler chickens. Archives of Animal Nutrition, 66: 102–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garcia, V., Catalá-Gregori, P., Hernandez, F., Megias, M.D., and Madrid, J. (2007) Effect of formic acid and plant extracts on growth, nutrient digestibility, intestine mucosa morphology, and meat yield of broilers. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 16: 555–562.Google Scholar
Hassan, H.M.A., Mohamed, M.A., Youssef, A.W., and Hassan, E.R. (2010) Effect of using organic acids to substitute antibiotic growth promoters on performance and intestinal microflora of broilers. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science, 23: 1348–1353.Google Scholar
Hu, Z., and Guo, Y. (2007) Effects of dietary sodium butyrate supplementation on the intestinal morphological structure, absorptive function and gut flora in chickens. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 132: 240–249.Google Scholar
Jensen, M.T., Cox, R.P., and Jensen, B.B. (1995) microbial production of skatole in the hind gut of pigs fed different direts and its relation to skatole deposition in back fat. Animal Science 16: 293–304.Google Scholar
Langhout, P. (2000) New additives for broiler chickens. World poultry, 16: 22–27.Google Scholar
Mahdavi, R., and Torki, M. (2009) Study on usage period of dietary protected butyric acid on performance, carcass characteristics, serum metabolite levels and humoral immune response of broiler chickens. Journal of Animal and Veterienary Advances, 8: 1702–1709.Google Scholar
Mirzaie, S., Zaghari, M., Aminzadeh, S., and Shivazad, M. (2012) The effects of non-starch polysaccharides content of wheat and xylanase supplementation on the intestinal amylase, aminopeptidase and lipase activities, ileal vis-cosity and fat digestibility in layer diet. Iranian Journal of Biotechnology, 10: 208–214.Google Scholar
Molatová, Z., Skřivanová, E., Baré, J., Houf, K., Bruggeman, G., and Marounek, M. (2011) Effect of coated and non coated fatty acid supplementation on broiler chickens experimentally infected with Campylobacter jejuni . Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 95: 701–706.Google Scholar
Mroz, Z., Koopmans, S., Bannink, A., Partanen, K., Krasucki, W., Øverland, M., Radcliffee, S., Mosenthin, R., Zentek, J., and Żebrowska, T. (2006) Carboxylic acids as bioregulators and gut growth promoters in nonruminants. Biology of nutrition in growing animals: 81–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordgaard, I., Mortensen, P.B., and Langkilde, A.M. (1995) Small intestinal malabsorption and colonic fermentation of resistant starch and resistant peptides to short-chain fatty acids. Nutrition, 11: 129–137.Google Scholar
Oenema, O., Bannink, A., Sommer, S., Van Groenigen, J., and Velthof, G. (2008). Gaseous nitrogen emissions from livestock farming systems. Nitrogen in the Environment: Sources, Problems, and Management , Second edition, Hatfield, JL & Follett, RF (Eds.) Acad. Press, Amsterdam, 395–441.Google Scholar
Ritz, C., Fairchild, B., and Lacy, M. (2004) Implications of ammonia production and emissions from commercial poultry facilities: A review. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 13:684–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smulikowska, S., Czerwiński, J., Mieczkowska, A., and Jankowiak, J. (2009) The effect of fat-coated organic acid salts and a feed enzyme on growth performance, nutrient utilisation, microflora activity, and morphology of the small intestine in broiler chickens. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences, 18: 478–489.Google Scholar
Taherpour, K., Moravej, H., Shivazad, M., Adibmoradi, M., and Yakhchali, B. (2009) Effects of dietary probiotic, prebiotic and butyric acid glycerides on performance and serum composition in broiler chickens. African Journal of Biotechnology, 8: 2329–2334.Google Scholar
van der Wielen, P.W., Biesterveld, S., Notermans, S., Hofstra, H., Urlings, B.A., and van Knapen, F. (2000) Role of volatile fatty acids in development of the caecal microflora in broiler chickens during growth. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 66: 2536–2540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, W.H., Jiang, Y., Zhu, Q.F., Gao, F., Dai, S.F., Chen, J., and Zhou, G.H. (2011) Sodium butyrate maintains growth performance by regulating the immune response in broiler chickens. British Poultry Science, 52: 292–301.Google Scholar