Lucrări ştiinţifice Zootehnie şi Biotehnologii, vol. 42 (2) (2009), Timişoara THE EFFECTS OF SODIUM SELENITE AND SELENIZED YEAST SUPPLEMENTATION INTO THE DIET ON LAYING HENS BODY WEIGHT EFECTUL SUPLIMENTĂRII RAŢIEI CU SELENIT DE SODIU ŞI DROJDII CU SELENIU ASUPRA MASEI CORPORALE A GĂINILOR OUĂTOARE HENRIETA ARPÁŠOVÁ 1, MIROSLAVA KAČÁNIOVÁ 2, P.HAŠČIK 3, M.FÍK 1 1 Department of Poultry Science and Small Animal Husbandry 2 Department of Microbiology 3 Department of Animal Products Evaluation and Processing Slovak Agricultural University, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 949 76 Nitra, Slovak Republic 1 Address correspondence to Henrieta Arpasova, Department of Poultry Science and Small Animal Husbandry, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 949 76 Nitra, Slovak republic, +421376414314; E-mail henrieta.arpasova@uniag.sk In this experiment the effects of supplementation of the diet for laying hens with sodium selenite (SS) or selenized yeast (SY) on body weight of laying hens was studied. The chickens of Shaver Starcross 288 hybrid were randomly divided at the day of hatching into 4 groups (n=12; in each). The birds were fed from Day 1 of life to 9 months of age with diets differing in amounts and/or forms of selenium. Control group received basal diet (BD) containing selenium naturally occurring in feeds (0.1 mg Se/kg of dry matter (DM)). First and second experimental group of chickens were fed with a same BD enriched with equivalent dose of Se 0.4 mg/kg DM in form of sodium selenite or selenized yeast, respectively. The feed for third experimental group of birds consisted of BD supplemented with selenized yeast to the final amount of selenium 1.0 mg/kg DM. The supplementation of selenium into the diet significantly influenced the laying hens body weight for a breeding period (P<0.05). The highest body weight increase of birds was in the groups with the addition of Seyeast at a dose of 0.4mg/kg and 0.9mg/kg. Hen s body weight (g±sd) for a breeding period was in the order of groups: 1485.19 a ±177.19; 1557.39 b ±146.59; 1588.71 b ±184.79; 1585.93 b ±198.37. Higher average body weight of hens in all experimental groups with the selenium addition was recorded in the rearing period. However, the different was statistically non significant (P>0.05). The results showed that the body weight may be positively influenced by supplementation of laying hens with selenium, especially in the form of Se-yeast. Keywords: laying hens, sodium selenite, selenized yeast, body weight 402
Introduction In regard that use of antibiotics in the production of poultry meat and eggs is forbidden, there is an increasing demand to seek for safe and suitable alternatives, including phytobiotics, probiotics (Capcarova et al. 2008) and feed mixtures supplementation by organic forms of elements. Selenium (Se) has a special place among the feed-derived natural antioxidants, being an integral part of selenoproteins participating in the regulation of various physiological processes in the body. As a part of glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) (Kyriakopoulos and Behne, 2002), Se belongs to the first and second major levels of antioxidant defence in the cell. There are two major sources of Se for poultry organic selenium, mainly in the form of selenomethionine (SeMet), which can be found in any feed ingredient in varying concentrations and inorganic selenium, mainly selenite or selenate, which are widely used for dietary supplementation. There is a principal difference in metabolism and efficiency of these two forms of selenium, with SeMet being more effective. In fact SeMet possesses antioxidant properties, however, in some conditions selenite can be a pro-oxidant (Surai et al. 2002). In most EU countries the natural selenium content of grain and forages, which consists mainly of the selenoamino acids selenomethionine and selenocysteine in plant proteins, is only 0.03 0.12 mg/kg with values more commonly at the lower end of this range. Intake of such feeds can result in serious selenium deficiency and health problems, especially in highly productive animals. For this reason, feedstuffs are routinely supplemented with various selenium sources at 0.2-0.3 mg Se/kg of dry matter. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of diet supplementation with sodium selenite and selenized yeast on laying hens body weight. Material and Methods Animal, Diets and Treatments Hens of the laying breed Shaver Starcross 288 were randomly divided at the day of hatching into 4 groups. For a rearing (n=15) and breeding period (n=12) hens were fed with a diet containing different amounts and forms of selenium. The composition of the basal diet fed to the laying hens is shown in Table 1. Chickens in control group were fed with BD with native content 0.1 mg Se/kg of dry matter (DM). First and second experimental group received the same BD supplemented with equivalent dose of Se 0.4 mg/kg DM of either as sodium selenite (SS) or as selenized yeast (SY) (Sel Plex, Alltech Inc., USA), respectively. The BD for the third experimental group was supplemented with SY at a dose 0.9 mg Se/kg DM. The diets for all experimental groups were fortified with corresponding amounts of the yeast extract without Se (NUPRO, Alltech, USA), to obtain the same final levels of yeast extract as in the diet for third experimental group (81.9g per 100kg of feed). 403
The composition of the basal diet fed to the laying hens Table 1. Component g/kg Wheat, 10.5% CP 366 Barley, 12% CP 200 Maize, 8.3% CP 50 Soyabean meal, 45% CP, 1.5% fat 90 Limestone 82 Vitamin-mineral premix 35 Soyabean oil 7 Soyax, 35% CP, 20% fat 170 1 kg of basal diet contained, IU: vit. A 13469; vit. D 3 3106; mg: vit. E, 19; vit. K 2.49; tiamine, 5.6; riboflavin 6.6; pyridoxine 6.1; niacin, 59; pantothenic acid 13.86; biotin 0.09; folic acid 0.86; Se 0.1; Zn 64.2; I 0.77; Co 0.06; Mn 100.13; Cu 13.96; Fe 192.55; g: lysine 8.7; metionine 4.267; μg: cyanocobalamin 0.35 At the beginning of the experiment, the chickens were placed in one level cage battery in groups. After rearing the age of 4 months, the birds were then kept in three-stage cage battery for laying hens. All birds had free access to water and feed. Hens were in regular monthly intervals, weighted on the digital scale. The experiment was carried out in accordance with established standards for laying hens. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was done using one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the post hoc Duncan s multiple comparison test in the program SAS. Results and Discussion In our experiment appeared the addition of various forms and doses of selenium favourably. In rearing period were recorded higher average body weights of hens in all experimental groups with the selenium supplementation. The highest average weights were obtained in both experimental groups with the addition of Se-yeast. However, in comparison to the control group were recorded statistically no significant differences (P>0.05). Similar trend in higher weight increases in groups with selenium supplementation also reflected in the breeding - laying period. In the experimental groups with the selenium addition in both forms was recorded higher average body weight of hens. The highest body weight increase of birds was again in the groups with the addition of Se-yeast at a dose of 0.4 mg/kg and 0.9 mg/kg. In contrast to the period of rearing, in the laying period was the difference in the experimental groups compared to the control group statistically significant (P<0.05). Hen s body weight (g±sd) for a breeding period was in the 404
order of groups: 1485.19 a ±177.19; 1557.39 b ±146.59; 1588.71 b ±184.79; 1585.93 b ±198.37. Our results agree with the findings in which experiment Our results are in agreement with Skrivan et al. (2008) in the experiment of which dietary supplementation with selenomethionine increased (P<0.05) body weight, but only by about 3%. Alike in the experiment Sahin et al. (2008) a linear increase in feed intake, body weight, egg production and improvement in feed efficiency and egg quality were found in Se-supplemented birds. Ševčíková et al. (2006) recorded in performance traits higher (P<0.05) body weight of broiler chickens in the experimental group with Se-enriched yeast too. On the contrary Richter et al. (2006) indicated that the Se supplementation did not take effect on zoo-technical parameters like feed intake, egg production, feed efficiency, feathers, mortality, and body weight as well as parameters inside the laying hen s eggs. Niu et al. (2009) induced non significant influence body weight and feed intake by dietary Se, while feed conversion was significantly improved by a Se-supplementation of 0.2mg/kg. Alike results of the technical performance in the experiment Peric et al. (2007) showed a non significant growth increase. Whatever the origin of Se supplementation, no significant effect on body weight, body weight increase and feed intake was observed in the experiment of Deniz et al. (2005), or Fernandes et al. (2008). Table 2. The changes in hen s body weight caused by supplementation of sodium selenite and Se-yeast into basal diet (BD) for laying hens Group BD 0.1 mg Se per kg DM BD + Se 0.4 mg selenite BD + Se 0.4 mg Se-yeast BD + Se 0.9 mg Se-yeast P value rearing n 75 75 75 75 x 592.89 660.173 679.75 673.93 0.655087 SEM 53.94 55.03 54.94 54.00 SD 467.156 476.63 475.78 467.70 CV(%) 78.79 72.20 69.99 69.39 minimum 34 37 37 37 maximum 1707 1422 1422 1394 breeding n 60 60 60 60 x 1485.19 a 1557.39 b 1588.71 b 1585.93 b 0.006664 SEM 23.07 19.08 24.06 25.83 SD 177.19 146.59 184.79 198.37 CV(%) 11.93 9.41 11.63 12.50 minimum 1064 1284 1282 1180 maximum 1915 1940 2075 2000 a,b means with different letters within a row were significantly different (P<0.05) 405
1400 1200 body weight (g) 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1 2 3 4 5 months BD 0.1 mg Se per kg DM BD + Se 0.4 mg selenite BD + Se 0.4 mg Se-yeast BD + Se 0.9 mg Se-yeast Figure 1. Dynamics of hen s body weight changes for a rearing period body weight (g) 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1 2 3 4 5 months BD 0.1 mg Se per kg DM BD + Se 0.4 mg selenite BD + Se 0.4 mg Se-yeast BD + Se 0.9 mg Se-yeast Figure 2. Dynamics of hen s body weight changes for a breeding period Conclusions In conclusion, the results of this experiment show that the body weight may be 406
positively influenced by supplementation of laying hens with selenium, especially in the form of Se-yeast. Acknowledgement This study was supported by Grant Agency for Science, VEGA of Slovak Republic, Grant No. 1/0074/08. References 1. Capcarová, M., Kolesárová, A., Massányi, P., Kováčik, J., 2008, Selected Blood Biochemical and Haematological Parameters in Turkeys after an Experimental Probiotic Enterococcus Faecium M 74 Strain Administration, International Journal of Poultry Science, 7, 1194-1199 2. Deniz, G., Gezen, S. S., Turkmen, I. I., 2005, Effects of two supplemental dietary selenium sources (mineral and organic) on broiler performance and driploss, Revue de Medecine Veterinaire,.156, 423-426 3. Fernandes, J. I. M., Murakami, A. E., Sakamoto, M. I., Souza, L. M. G., Malaguido, A., Martins, E. N., 2008, Effects of organic and mineral dietary supplementation on production performance and egg quality of white layers, Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 10, 59-65 4. Kyriakopoulos, A., Behne, D., 2002, Selenium-containing proteins in mammals and other forms of life, Rev. Physiol. Biochem. Pharmacol, 145, 1-46 5. Niu, Z.,Y., Liu, F., Z, Yan, Q., L, Li, L., 2009, Effects of different levels of selenium on growth performance and immunocompetence of broilers under heat stress, Archives of Animal Nutrition, 63, 56-65 6. Peric, L., Nollet, L., Milosevic, N., Zikic, D., 2007, Effect of Bioplex and Sel-Plex substitution inorganic trace mineral sources on performance of broilers, Archiv fur Geflugelkunde, 71, 122-129 7. Richter, G., Leiterer, M., Kirmse, R., Ochrimenko, W. I., Arnhold W., 2006, Comparative investigation of dietary supplements of organic and inorganic bounded selenium in laying hens, Tieraerztliche Umschau, 61, 155 8. Sahin, N., Onderci, M., Sahin, K., Kucuk., O., 2008, Supplementation with organic or inorganic selenium in heat-distressed quail, Biological Trace Element Research, 122, 229-237 9. SAS. USER S GUIDE 2005. Version 9.1(TS1M3). 2005. SAS Institute Inc., Carry, NC, USA. SAS Enterprise Guide 3.0. 2005. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC. 10. Skřivan, M., Dlouhá, G., Masata, O., Ševčíková, S., 2008, Effect of dietary selenium on lipid oxidation, selenium and vitamin E content in the meat of broiler chickens, Czech Journal of Animal Science, 53, 306-311 11. Surai, P.F., 2002, Selenium in poultry nutrition. 1. Antioxidant properties, deficiency and toxicity, World's Poultry Science Journal, 58, 333-347 12. Ševčíková, S., Skřivan, M., Dlouhá, G., Koucký, M., 2006, The effect of selenium source on the performance and meat quality of broiler chickens, Czech J. 407