Hostname: page-component-55f67697df-px5tt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-08T09:48:33.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of probiotic supplementation on egg quality of old broiler breeder hens

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

K Shahsavari ,
F Shariatmadari  and
M Daneshyar
K Shahsavari
Affiliation:
Azad University, Shabestar, Islamic Republic of Iran
F Shariatmadari
Affiliation:
Azad University, Shabestar, Islamic Republic of Iran
M Daneshyar*
Affiliation:
Azad University, Shabestar, Islamic Republic of Iran
*
Email:[email protected]
Get access

Extract

The egg shell quality is related with bird age and is an important factor to poultry industry due to reproduction and economic implications (Peebs and Brake, 1987). Probiotics are biostimulators and immunomodulators containing live or lyophilizing bacterial cultures, which regulate and optimize the rations among the different types of microorganisms in the digestive system, preventing upsets and experting a stimulating effect on the disintegration and absorption of the nutrient substances (Nickolova and Penkov., 2004). Its stimulating effect on nutrients absorption possibility can improves the mineral availability such calcium and also egg shell quality. In some cases positive effects of probiotic (on damaged egg ratio; Balevi., 2001) or lactobacillus (on haugh units; Nahashon et al.,1994b) supplementations have indicated in layer hens. So possibility they could have positive effects on egg quality. Therefore this research was undertaken to asses the effects of probiotic (protexin) on egg quality (thickness, egg shell percentage, strength egg shell, egg shell weight and haugh unit) of old broiler breeder hens.

Type
Posters
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2008 , 2008 , pp. 258
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2008

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Balevi, T., Ucan, U. S., Coskun, B., Kurtoglu, V. and Cetingul, I. S. 2001. Effect of dietary probiotic on performance and humoral immune response in layer hens. British poultry Science. 42, 456–461.Google Scholar
Nahashon, S. N., Nakaue, H. S. and Mirosh, L. W. 1994b. Production variables and nutrient retention in single comb white leghorn laying pullets fed diets supplemented with direct-fed microbials. Poultry Science. 73, 1699–1711.Google Scholar
Naqi, S. A., Cook, J. and Sahin, N. 1984. Distribution of immunoglobulin-bearing cells in the gut-associated lymphoid tissues of the turkey: effect of oral treatment with intestinal microflora. American Journal of Veterinary, 45, 2193–2195.Google Scholar
Nickolova, M and Penkov, D. 2004. Experimental influence of laktina® probiotic on egg laying characteristic, fertility and viability in muscovy duck (carina moshcata). Journal of Central European Agriculture. 5, 353–358.Google Scholar
Peebs, E. D. and Brake, J. 1987 Eggshell quality and hatchability in broiler breeder eggs. Poultry Science. 66, 596–604.Google Scholar
Roush, W. B. 1981. T159 calculator program for Haugh Unit calculation. Poultry Science. 60, 1086–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timms, L. 1968. Observations on the bacterial flora of the alimentary tract in three treatments of normal chickens. British Veterinary Journal, 124, 470–477.Google Scholar