USE OF SUNFLOWER MEAL IN FEED MIXTURES FOR LAYING HENS

Transcription

1 ACTA VET. BRNO 1997,66: USE OF SUNFLOWER MEAL N FEED MXTURES FOR LAYNG HENS V. 5ERMAN, N. MAS, V. MELENJUK, F. DUMANOVSK, Z. MKULEC Department of Animal Nutrition. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Univerity of Zagreb. Jug Dubrovnik. Dubrovnik, and Poljoprerada d.d., Zagreb. Croatia Received September 15, 1997 Accepted January 15, 1998 Abtract 5erman V.. N. Ma. V. Melenjuk. F. Dumanovki. Z. Mikulec: Ueo/Sunflower Meal ill Feed Mixture/or L(yillg Hen. Acta vet. Bmo : The nutritional effect of uing decorticated unflower meal (44 % protein) a the protein upplement in the laying hen feed mixture on egg production were invetigated. The trial wa performed on 75 laying hen (line hybrid a brown) during the firt 150 day of lay. The hen were divided in five group: control. and four experimental group (15 hen in each). The control group (C) wa fed on a commercial complete feed mixture (com-oybean meal and fih meal). The experimental feed mixture contained unflower meal (Ell. unflower meal with correction of energy value by addition of unflower oil (E,l. unflower meal with correction of lyine (E,l and unflower meal with con'ection of energy vaiue and lyine (E 4 ). The highet egg production wa found in group E3 and E 4. The lowet conumption offeed wa etablihed in group E while the highet conumption wa found in group E3 and C. The highet increae in body ma wa achieved in group E 4. The deficiency of lyine in unflower meal (Ell contributed to lower body ma, feed conumption and egg ma. Feed mixture containing unflower meal a the protein upplement (all experimental groups) had no influence on the health or mortality of laying hen. The reult of thi experiment indicate the poibility of a uccefull ue of unflower meal in the nutrition of laying hen if unflower meal i balanced with lyine and energy value. Laying hells, unfloll'er meal, lyine, energy balance Depending on local market, decorticated unflower meal. obtained a a by-product in the unflower eed oil production. might be a cheaper ource of protein for poultry production than oybean meal and fih meal. However, low energy value and amino acid deficiency make the wider ue of thi feedtuff quetionable. Ue of unflower meal in feed mixture in the production of laying hen ha been the ubject of numerou reearche. but the reult of thi reearch differ greatly. Ramirez et al. (1974) found that feed mixture with 50 and 100 % unflower meal, a the only ource of protein, increaed feed conumption and decreaed the laying capacity of Leghorn hen. S u j 0 t i et al. (1986) concluded that ubtitution of fih meal with a mixture of oy and unflower meal (25, 50 and 100 %) reduce egg production. n reearch reported by Kahani and Carlon (1988). 19 and 38 % unflower meal in the feed mixture decreaed the body weight of 19-week-old pullet and delayed the onet of egg laying compared to control pullet fed on commercial feed mixture. Deaton et al. (1979) oberved that ubtituting oybean meal with unflower meal increaed the ma of the mucular gizzard but had no effect on change in body ma, egg production, egg ma, hell-breaking trength or mortality. S okarov ki et al. (1988) found that ubtituting oybean meal with unflower meal had no negative effect on laying capacity. although it increaed feed conumption per egg and decreaed egg ma. According to Vieira et al. (1992) ubtitution of oybean meal with unflower meal (13-45 %) in feed mixture had no effect on laying capacity. egg ma, body ma and mortality of a brown hen. Addition oflyine in feed mixture ( %) had a beneficial effect only on body ma gain. nvetigating the potential for protein phae-feeding of laying hen, N athanae 1 and Sell (1980) found

2 220 that daily intake of 700 mg of lyine were required for optimum performance (egg production, egg ma). Michel and Sunde (1985) evaluated unflower meal a a replacement for oybean meal in pullet developer diet. n their experiment two unflower meal (28 and 34 % protein) with or without lyine completely replaced oybean meal. The addition of lyine to either of the two unflower meal failed to improve growth and feed efficiency. When bird were houed in cage, the diet utiliing 28 % protein meal produced pullet maller and le efficient than did the other diet. Thi effect wa not oberved when the floor management ytem wa ued. Cue a et al. (1973) found that in formulating ration containing unflower meal for hen, lyine i the mot limiting amino acid. Therefore in laying hen diet containing at leat 5 % unflower meal, ynthetic lyine mut be ued to provide the hen' daily requirement. The purpoe of thi invetigation wa to evaluate the effect of unflower meal a dietary protein ource on laying hen (a brown) production performance (laying capacity, egg ma, feed conumption, body ma). Standard protein component (oybean and fih meal) were ubtituted by decorticated unflower meal (44 % protein). Due to high portion of decorticated unflower meal, neceary to obtain the deired protein level in the mixture, the lyine content and energy value of the experimental mixture were lower than thoe of the commercial one. Therefore, the amino acid deficiency of unflower meal wa overcome by upplementing lyine (two experimental group) and the energy deficiency wa made up (two experimental group) by addition of unflower oil to the diet. Material and Method Animal and diet A total of 75 laying hen of the line hybrid a brown were divided into five group (control and four experimental gro\!ps with 15 hen in each). Twenty-two-week-old laying hen were kept in cage (one hen to a cage) during the firt five month of lay (150 day). The daily light and microclimatic condition (temperature. air humidity and concentration of NH3 and CO 2 ) met the technological and zoohygienic requirement for thi line throughout the invetigation. The health tate ofthe hen wa checked daily. All hen were included in the regular vaccination programme for laying hen of the line hybrid a brown. Table 1 Compoition of the feed mixture ued in the trial GROUPS Compound q, C E E2 E3 E4 Maize Soybean meal (44 % CP) Fih meal Sunflower meal (44 % CP) Dehydrated Alfalfa meal Limetone Sunflower oil Dicalcium phophate Salt Premix* Lyme Total *Premix contained: Feed.grad.e premix for hen~ pr~vided the following per kilogram: vitamin A, 2, V; vitamin D3: 3~,000 V; vltamm E, 4,000 mg; vltamm K3, 400 mg; B, 400 mg; Bo, 1,000 mg; B..6' 400 mg; B\Z 2,400 mcg; vltamm C, 2,000 mg; niacin, 6,000 mg; D-pantothenic acid, mg; choline chloride, ':15,000 mg; fo C acid, 80 mg; Fe, 6,000 mg; Cu, 600 mg; Mn. 16,000 mg; J, 150 mg; Zn, 10,000 mg; Co, 20 mg; Se, 20 mg; methionine, 40,000 mg; BHA

3 Feed and water were provided ad libitum. Compoition of feed mixture i given in Table 1. The control group (C) wa fed a commercial complete feed mixture, wherea the mixture for the experimental group contained unflower meal (44 % crude protein % crude fat, 8.42 % crude fibre, 7370 kj MElkg) a protein upplement. The experimental group E received a feed mixture containing unflower meal (without amino-acid and energy correction), E2 unflower meal with correction of energy value by addition of unflower oil, E3 unflower meal with correction of amino-acid compoition by addition of lyine, and E4 unflower meal with correction of both energy value and amino-acid compoition. Nutritive value and chemical compoition of the control and experimental diet are given in Table 2. Table 2 Nutritive value and chemical compoition of the feed mixture ued in the trial 221 Analyi a fed* C E Dry matter Ccr.kg- 1 ) Crude protein (g.kg ) Crude fat (g.kg ) Crude fibre (g.kg ) Ah (g.kg ) Calcium (g.kg ) Phophoru (g.kg Natrium (g.kg ) Arginine (g.kg l** Methionine (g.kg-)** Cytine (g.kg- )** Methionine + Cytine (g. kg- )** Lyine** Tlyptophan** ME (MJlkg) GROUPS E2 E E * Official method were ued throughout (A.O.A.C., 1984) ** Value of amino acid were calculated Meauring of production reult The effect of unflower meal in feed mixture on laying capacity, egg ma, feed conumption, body ma and health of hen were oberved. Egg were collected and weighed daily, with laying capacity being recorded for each month. The feed conumption of each group wa meaured monthly, with reult averaged per group, per hen and per egg. Body ma wa checked on the firt day of the trial and ubequently every 30 day (5 meaurement during the coure of the trial) by individual weighing of all hen. All reult were ubjected to tatitical analyi (S pa tz 1997). The mean value of meaured indice of each experimental group were compared with correponding value of the control group; the ignificance of difference wa aeed by Student' t-tet (P<0.05). Reult Feeding variable Average final body ma and average body ma gain (Table 3) how that the bet reult in body ma gain (expreed in percentage a related to control group), were obtained in experimental group E4 ( %). Hen in experimental group E2 and E3 had approximately the ame body ma gain a the control group ( and %), while the lowet gain wa recorded in experimental group E J (82.30 %). Thee value are hown in Fig. 1. The highet average total feed conumption (Table 4) per group wa recorded in experimental group E3 ( kg). Average total feed conumption in group E4 ( kg)

4 222 wa imilar to that of the control group ( kg). The mallet average total feed conumption wa oberved in group E ( kg) and E2 ( kg). Feed conumption per egg in group E ( g), E4 ( g) and E2 ( g) wa maller than in the control group ( g), while the highet value wa found in group E3 ( g). Difference between control and experimental group preented in Table 3 and 4 were not tatitically ignificant (P>O.05). Table 3 Average body ma (g) and total body ma gain of laying hen during the trial Day of trial Stat. data C(n=15) Group El (n= 15) E2 (n = 15) E3 (n = 15) E4 (n = 15) 1 x x x x x x Average total body ma gain per hen (g) ndex % C6O 1=! 1 6) 1~ 1850 V- -..-:i 1:0.-'-- 1!1X) o 1-!,/~>t-... ~ / i /' ;?'---,,-tf/- / 0/' /' i/./ ~~.----~,/'1// (e-----f i Month Fig. 1 A verage body ma (g) of laying hen during the trial 3... c ---&1 -<> >< E-4

5 223 Table 4 A verage total feed conumption during the trial Total feed conumption Feed conumption Group per group per hen per egg per egg ma (kg) (kg) (g) (kg/kg) C E j E, E J E Egg production A verage number of egg per hen (Table 5) and average laying capacity (Table 6) during the trial were about the ame in experimental group E3 (average number of egg ; laying capacity 91.74%) and E4 (136.67; 91.48%). Control (C) and E group produced a imilar number of egg ( and ) and had a imilar laying capacity (89.44% and %), while the pooret value were found in group E2 (131.57; 88.01%). The difference between control and experimental group were tatitically non-ignificant (P>0.05). Average egg ma (Table 7) in experimental group E4 (64.36 g), E2 (64.13 g) and E3 (63.82 g) wa ignificantly higher (P<0.05) than in the control group (61.65 g). A verage egg ma in experimental group E 1 wa about the ame (61.43 g) a the control group. Table 5 A verage number of egg during the trial/per hen Day of Stat. Group trial data C(n=15) E j (n= 15) E2 (n = 15) E J (n=15) E4(n= 15) 30 x 21.27± ± ± ± ± x 28.60± ± ± ± ± x 28.67± ± ± ± ± x 30.13± ± ± ± ± x 25.00± ± ±0.61 2S.93±0.77 2S.60± Average x

6 224 Table 6 A verage laying capacity (%) during the trial Day of Stat. Group trial data C(n=15) E\ (n= 15) E 2 (n=15) E 3 (n=15) E4 (n = 15) 30 x x x x ~ x Average x Table 7 A verage egg ma ma (g) during the trial Day of Stat. Group trial data C(n= 15) E\ (n= 15) E 2 (n=15) E 3 (n=15) E 4 (n=15) 30 x x x x x Average x * 63.82* 64.36* * P<0.05 Average total egg production per hen (number of egg, laying capacity, egg ma) and per group (number of egg and total ma of egg) during the 150 day of trial i preented in Table 8. Dicuion Reult related to average body ma and to average body ma gain (Table 3) how that the difference between control and experimental group were tatitically non-ignificant (P>0.05). The highet body ma gain wa found in experimental group E4 (index %), fed on unflower meal with the addition oflyine and energy. Hen fed on energy-balanced

7 225 Table 8 Average production of egg during the trial (150 day) Average per hen Group n Number of Laying Weight of egg capacity % egg g C E J E E) E unflower meal (E %), amino acid balanced unflower meal (E %) and the control group (100 %), demontrated approximately the ame body ma gain. Laying hen fed on unflower meal without amino acid and energy correction (E l ) had a 17.7 % maller body ma gain than the control group, and maller than the other experimental group. Reult related to body ma gain are in complete accordance with the publihed data (Aleandri and Olivetti 1978; Kwayjan et al. 1983; Karunajeewa et al. 1989). Similar reult were obtained in a number of experiment carried out on chick (Valdi vie et al. 1976, 1977; Valdivie and Hernandez 1980; Ologhobo 1991; Serman et al. 1996). A verage total feed conumption of the group fed on unflower meal with added lyine and energy ( kg) wa about the ame a in the control group ( kg) - Table 4. Experimental group fed on unflower meal without any correction (E l ) or with only energy correction (E 2 ) had an average feed conumption of 4.3 % and 3.6 % le than the control group. Hen fed on unflower meal with the addition of lyine (E 3 ) conumed 3.5 % more feed than the control group. Feed conumption per egg wa highet in thi group alo. The lowet feed conumption wa recorded in the group of hen fed on unflower meal without correction (E l ). Similar reult related to feed conumption wa found by Karunajeew a et al. (1987) with White Leghorn hen. All group of hen had a imilar average number of egg (or average laying capacity), although the difference in average egg ma were tatitically ignificant (P<0.05). Laying hen fed on unflower meal without correction of energy and with no addition oflyine (E l ), a well a the control group, had imilar average egg ma ( and g), but difference between all other experimental group and the control group were tatitically non-ignificant (P>0.05). Thee reult are in accordance with imilar trial made by other author (Srichai and Balnave 1981; Karunajeewa et al. 1989). However, reult of reearch reported by R 0 e et al. (1972), how that the ue of 50 and 100 % unflower meal in feed mixture ignificantly decreaed laying capacity and egg ma. Converely, Mirza and Sial (1993) found that the ue of unflower meal in feed mixture for laying hen had no ignificant effect on production reult (laying capacity, egg ma, hell quality, mortality). During the whole duration of the experiment no ickne or death wa diagnoed. Vyuziti unecnicove moucky v krmnych meich pro nonice Bylo ledovano nutrient vyuziti proteinoveho pfidavku luneenicovych pokrutin (44 % bilkovin) ve krnme mei pro nonice na produkci vajec. K pokuu bylo pouzito 75 nonic (hybridni linie a brown) v prubehu prvych 150 dnu nuky. Nonice byly rozdeleny do peri kupin: kontrolni a 4 pokunych po 15 kuech. Kontrolni kupina byla krmena

8 226 kompletni komercni mei obahem kukuiice, oji a rybi moucky. Pokune krmeni mei obahovaly lunecnicove pokrutiny (moucku) korekci obahu energie piidanim lunecnicoveho oleje (Eo). lunecnicove moucky lyzinem (E l ) a lunecnicove moucky upravou obahu energie i lyzinu.. Nejvyi produkce vajec byla ve lupinach E3 a E..j. Nejnizi konzum krmiva byl zjiten ve kupine E, zatimco nejvyi byl nalezen ve kupinach E3 a C. NejvetSi pfirutky hmotnoti byly ve kupine E..j' Deficience lyzinu ve lunecnicove moucce (E ) e projevila nigi hmotnoti, konzumem knniva a hmotnoti vajec. Zkrmovani mei obahem kukuficne moucky jako pfidavkem bilkovin nemhlo vliy na zdravotni tay ani mortalitu nonic. V)'ledky pokuu ukazuji. ze kukuficnou moucku lze upene vyuzit ve vyzive nonic. je-i v knnne mei vyvazen obah energie a lyzinu. Reference ALEA:-iDR, Moo OLVETT. A. 1978: Micele vegetali nell alimentazione delle polatre e delle ovaiole in batelia. Avicoltura 47: A. O. A. C. 1984: Official Method of Analyi (14th Ed.). Aociation of Official Analytical Chemit. Arlington, VA. USA CUCA, M.. A VLA. Eoo SOSA. E. 1973: Threonine upplementation to unflower diet for chick. Poultry Sci. 52: DEATON. 1. Woo McNAUGHTON. J. L.. BCRDlCK. D. 1979: High-fibre unflower meal a a replacement for oybean meal in layer diet. Britih Poultry Sci. 20: KASHA:-\l. A. B., CARLSON. C. W. 1988: Ue of unflower eed in grower diet for pullet and ubequent performance a affected by aureomycin and pelleting. Poultry Sci. 67: KARCNAJEEWA, H., ABU-SEREWA. Soo THAM, S. Hoo EASON. P. 1987: The effect of dietary level of unflower eed and lyine on egg quality and laying performance of White Leghorn hen. J. Sci. Food and Agriculture 41: KARUNAJEEW A. H., THAM, S. H., ABU-SEREW A, S. 1989: Sunt10wer eed meal, unflower oil and full-fat unflower eed, hull and charnel for laying hen. Animal feed Sci.Technology 26: KWA YJAN. M. Goo AZAR. E. J., DAGHR. N. J. 1983: Sunflower eed in laying hen ration. Poultry Sci. 62: MCHEL J. Noo SUNDE. M. L 1985: Sunflower meal in pullet developer diet. Poultry Sci. 64: MRZA, M. A., SAL, M. A. 1993: Sunflower meal a a major vegetable protein ource in layer ration. Arch. Anim. Nutl. 42: NATHANAEL. A. S., SELL J. L. 1980: Quantitative meaurement of the lyine requirement of the laying hen. Poultry Sci. 59: OLOGHOBO... ~. D. 1991: Subtitution of unflower eed meal for oybean meal and groundnut meal in practical broiler diet. Arch. Anim. NUll. 41: RAMREZ. J. L, CUCA. G. Moo AVLA, G. E. 1974: Pata de girao1 (He1ianthu annu) para pola de reemplazo y potura. Aociacion Latinoamericana de produccion animalmemoria 9: ROSE. R. 1.. COT. R. N., SELL J. L 1972: Sunflower eed meal a replacement for oybean meal protein in laying hen ration. Poultry Sci. 51: SPATZ, C. 1997: Baic Statitic. 6th ed. BrooklCole Publihing Company. 511 Foret Lodge Road. Pacific Grove, Ca SRCHA, Y., BALNA VE, D. 1981: Egg weight repone to dietary upplementation with unflower oil and rice pollard. Autralian Journal of Agricultural Reearch 32: SUDOn, L. 1986: Mundeia e 1evendeimit te miellit te pehkut me beri oje dhe beri luledielli pjeeriht te zhvehur nete uhqyerit e pulave per veze qli mbahen ne bateri. Buletini i hkencave Zooteknike e Veterinare 4: SERMAN, Y., GOJEVC-ZRNC, F., DUMA\OVSKY, F., MAS, Noo MKULEC, Z., MELE\JUK, V.1996: Ue of unflower meal in feed mixture for fattening chick.. nfluence on the performance of fattening chick. Vet arhiv 66: SOKAROVSK, J., FLEV, K., JORDANOSKl, N. 1988: Alternativna krmiva za kukuruz i ojinu a#mu u ihrani noilja. Peradartvo 23: 11-12, V ALDV, M., ARAGON, E., JORDAN, H. 1976: Broiler diet with hioh content of unflower eed meal and different energy:protein ration. Cuban J. Agricultural Sci. 10: VALDV, M., ARAGON, E., JORDAN, H. 1977: Subtitution offih meal and lor oybean meal by a mixture of torula yeat and unflower eed meal in broiler ration. Cuban J. Agricultural Sci. 11:

9 227 V ALDV, M.. HERNANDEZ, J. 1980: Subtitution of oybean meal by combination of torula yeat: unflower eed meal in diet for fattening chicken. Cuban J. Agricultural Sci. 14: VERA, S. 1., PENZ, A, M. Jr., LEBOUTE. E. M., CORTELNE, J. 1992: A nutritional evaluation of a high fibre unflower meal. J. Applied Poultry Reearch : Addre for correpondence Prof. dr. ci. Vlata Serrnan Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Heinzelova Zagreb CROATA Phone: Fax: