Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:48:56.478Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Dual-enzyme Product Containing Protease in Broiler Diet: Efficacy and Tolerance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

A. Kocher ,
J.M. Hower  and
C.A. Moran
A. Kocher*
Affiliation:
Alltech Biotechnology, 8 Roseworthy Road, Roseworthy SA 5371, Australia
J.M. Hower
Affiliation:
Center for Animal Nutrigenomics and Applied Animal Nutrition, Alltech Inc., 3031 Catnip Hill Road, Nicholasville, KY, 40356 USA
C.A. Moran
Affiliation:
Regulatory Affairs Department, Alltech France SARL, 25 allée des Sapins, 44483 Carquefou, France
*
*Corresponding author: Andreas Kocher. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Exogenous enzymes are commonly added to poultry diets to improve nutrient utilisation, reduce excretion of nutrients into the environment as well as to improve zootechnical performance and reduce the cost of production. A series of four experiments were conducted in broilers to determine the efficacy and tolerance to an enzyme product (Vegpro™) containing protease and xylanase activities in wheat-soybean meal (SBM) diets fed to broilers from 1 to 39 or 42 d of age. Collectively, four experiments tested the following exogenous protease activity levels in wheat-SBM diet at levels of 0, 2,500, 5,000, 10,000, 20,000, 30,000, 40,000 or 100,000 HUT/kg of feed. Analysis of the four experiments together confirmed that Vegpro™ improved average daily gain and feed conversion ratio, especially in birds up to 21 d of age. Overall, inclusion of Vegpro™ to broiler diets at 10,000 HUT protease per kg of feed was shown to provide the maximum performance benefit (i.e. weight gain and feed conversion ratio). An exceptionally high protease activity (100,000 HUT/kg, ten times the manufacturer's recommended inclusion rate) was well tolerated and did not adversely affect the measured health and performance indicators from 1 to 42 d of age.

Keywords

broilerenzymeproteasetoleranceefficacy
Type
Original Research
Information
Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition , Volume 3 , 2015 , e6
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition Ltd. 2015 

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

Adeola, O., and Cowieson, A.J. (2011). Board Invited Review: Opportunities and challenges in using exogenous enzymes to improve nonruminant animal production. Journal of Animal Science. 89:3189–3218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Angel, C.R., Saylor, W.Vieira, S.L. and Ward, N. (2011). Effects of a monocomponent protease on performance and protein utilization in 7- to 22-day-old broiler chickens. Poultry Science 90(10): 2281–2286.Google Scholar
Annison, G., and Choct, M. (1997). Enzymes in poultry diets. Pages 61–68 in Enzymes In Animal Nutrition, Kartause Ittingen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Antipatis, C., Knap, I. H., Pontoppidan, K., Valientes, R.A. and Angel, R. (2013). Exogenous proteases and their interaction with dietary ingredients. Proceedings Of the Australian Poultry Science Symposium, Sydney pp. 31–40Google Scholar
Ao, T. 2011. Using exogenous enzymes to increase the nutritional value of soybean meal in poultry diet. Ch. 10. pages 201- 214. In: Soybean and Nutrition, El-Shemy, Hany (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-307-536-5, InTech, Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/articles/show/title/using-exogenous-enzymes-to-increase-the-nutritional-value-of-soybean-meal-in-poultry-dietGoogle Scholar
AOAC. (2005). Official Methods of Analysis (17th edition) Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA, USA.Google Scholar
Bao, Y. M., Romero, L.F. and Cowieson, A.J. (2013). Functional patterns of exogenous enzymes in different feed ingredients. World's Poultry Science Journal 69:759–774.Google Scholar
Barekatain, M.R., Antipatis, C., Choct, M. and Iji, P.A. (2013). Interaction between protease and xylanase in broiler chicken diets containing sorghum distillers' dried grains with solubles. Animal Feed Science and Technology 182:71–81.Google Scholar
Bedford, M.R., and Schulze, H. (1998). Exogenous enzymes for pigs and poultry [Review]. Nutrition Research Reviews 11:91–114.Google Scholar
Burnett, G.S. (1962). The effect of damaged starch, amylolytic enzymes, and proteolytic enzymes on the utilisation of cereals by chickens. British Poultry Science 3:89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clickner, F.H., and Follwell, E.H. (1925). Application of ‘protozyme’ by Aspergillus Orizae to poultry feeding. Poultry Science. 5:241–247.Google Scholar
Choct, M., Kocher, A., Waters, D.L.E., Pettersson, D. and Ross, G. (2004). A comparison of three xylanases on the nutritive value of two wheats for broiler chickens. British Journal of Nutrition 92:53–61.Google Scholar
Cowieson, A.J. and Adeola, O. (2005). Carbohydrases, protease, and phytase have an additive beneficial effect in nutritionally marginal diets for broiler chicks. Poultry Science 84(12): 1860–1867.Google Scholar
Cowieson, A.J., and Ravindran, V. (2008a). Effect of exogenous enzymes in maize-based diets varying in nutrient density for young broilers: growth performance and digestibility of energy, minerals and amino acids. British Poultry Science 49:37–44.Google Scholar
Cowieson, A.J., and Ravindran, V. (2008b). Sensitivity of broiler starters to three doses of an enzyme cocktail in maize-based diets. British Poultry Science 49:340–346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs. (2002). Meat chickens and breeding chickens: Code of recommendations for the welfare of livestock. UK DEFRA, London.Google Scholar
Dillon, G.P., Filer, K. & Moran, C.A. 2015a. Validation of an Analytical Method for the Determination of the Activity of Protease in Animal Feed Additives and in Animal Feedingstuffs. Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition, 3, e1 (10 pages).Google Scholar
Dillon, G.P., Filer, K. & Moran, C.A. 2015b. Validation of an Analytical Method for the Determination of the Activity of Xylanase in Animal Feed Additives and in Animal Feedingstuffs. Journal of Applied Animal Nutrition, 3, e2 (11 pages).Google Scholar
Doskovic, V., Bogosavljevic-Boskovic, S., Pavlovski, Z., Milosevic, B., Škrbic, Z., Rakonjac, S. and Petricevic, V. (2013). Enzymes in broiler diets with special reference to protease. World's Poultry Science Journal 69:343–360.Google Scholar
Fischer, M., Glitsoe, V., Pettersson, D. and Fru, F. (2009). Efficacy of a novel feed protease on a variety of protein ingredients. ABSTRACT, International Poultry Scientific Forum Atlanta Georgia 26–27 January 2009Google Scholar
Kalmendal, R. and Tauson, R. (2012). Effects of a xylanase and protease, individually or in combination, and an ionophore coccidiostat on performance, nutrient utilisation, and intestinal morphology in broiler chickens fed a wheat-soybean meal-based diet. Poultry Science 91:1387–1393.Google Scholar
Kiarie, E., Romero, L.F. and Nyachoti, C.M. (2013). The role of added feed enzymes in promoting gut health in swine and poultry. Nutrition Research Reviews 26:71–88.Google Scholar
Liu, S.Y., Selle, P.H. and Cowieson, A.J. (2013). Strategies to enhance the performance of pigs and poultry on sorghum-based diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 181:1–14.Google Scholar
Madrid, J., Catalá-Gregori, P., García, V. and Hernández, F. (2010). Effect of a multienzyme complex in wheat-soybean meal diet on digestibility of broiler chickens under different rearing conditions. Italian Journal of Animal Science 9:1–5.Google Scholar
Markets and Markets.com (2014). Feed Enzymes Market by Livestock (Swine, Poultry, Ruminants, Aquatic Animals & Others), by Types (Phytase, Protease & Non-starch Polysaccharides enzymes) & by Geography - Global Trends & Forecasts to 2019 http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/feed-enzyme-market-1157.html?gclid=CjwKEAjwkf-gBRCd-b2m2aOo0EQSJABMeQDkKgBWZLMRnTNqIIwVneN3SjQvZXusPlMUKmp5Q-DuYhoCo67w_wcB Accessed 22/09/2014 2014.Google Scholar
Nagaraj, M., Hess, J.B. and Bilgili, S.F. (2007). Evaluation of a Feed-Grade Enzyme in Broiler Diets to Reduce Pododermatitis. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 16:52–61.Google Scholar
Oxenboll, K., Pontoppidan, K. and Fru-Nji, F. (2011). Use of a protease in poultry feed offers promising environmental benefits. International Journal of Poultry Science 10:842–848.Google Scholar
Ravindran, V. (2013). Feed enzymes: The science, practice, and metabolic realities. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research 22 (3): 628–636.Google Scholar
Romero, L. F., Parsons, C.M., Utterback, P.L., Plumstead, P.W. and Ravindran, V. (2013). Comparative effects of dietary carbohydrases without or with protease on the ileal digestibility of energy and amino acids and AMEn in young broilers. Animal Feed Science and Technology 181:35–44.Google Scholar
Silva, P., Freitas Neto, O., Laurentiz, A., Junquiera, O., and Fagliari, J. (2007). Blood serum components and serum protein test of Hybro-PG broilers of different ages. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science 9:229–232.Google Scholar
Simbaya, J., Slominski, B.A. , Guenter, W., Morgan, A. and Campbell, L. D. (1996). The effects of protease and carbohydrase supplementation on the nutritive value of canola meal for poultry - in vitro and in vivo studies. Animal Feed Science and Technology 61:219–234.Google Scholar
Slominski, B.A. (2011). Recent advances in research on enzymes for poultry diets. Poultry Science 90:2013–2023.Google Scholar
Uni, Z., Noy, Y. and Sklan, D. (1999). Posthatch Development of Small Intestinal Function in the Poult. Poultry Science 78:215–222.Google Scholar
Unistat Ltd. (2009). UNISTAT 6.0 User's Guide: Statistical package for Windows™ Unistat Ltd., London, England.Google Scholar
Yu, B., Wu, S.T., Liu, C.C., Gauthier, R. and Chiou, P.W.S. (2007). Effects of enzyme inclusion in a maize–soybean diet on broiler performance. Animal Feed Science and Technology 134:283–294.Google Scholar