Synbiotic, probiotic and neem leaf as alternatives to antibiotic growth promoter in broiler diet

M. Ahammed, MN Rahman
{"title":"Synbiotic, probiotic and neem leaf as alternatives to antibiotic growth promoter in broiler diet","authors":"M. Ahammed, MN Rahman","doi":"10.3329/bjas.v51i3.61788","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The feeding trial was carried out to compare the effect of probiotic, synbiotic and neem (Azadirachta indica) leaf as alternatives to antibiotic in broiler chicken diets. The experiment was performed for a period of 28 days with a number of 500 day-old straight run broiler chicks. Birds were divided into five dietary treatment groups with 4 replications having 25 birds in each. The dietary groups were; control (Basal diet), synbiotic, probiotic, neem leaf powder (NLP) and antibiotic group. The experimental diets were consisted as broiler starter (day-old to 14 days) and broiler grower (15 to 28 days). The supplementation of synbiotic, probiotic, NLP and antibiotic in the broiler diets had significant effect on growth performance. Diets supplemented with synbiotic showed significantly (p<0.05) higher live weight and weight gain at the end of the experiment compare to the control and antibiotic group. NLP and probiotic supplemented groups also showed significantly higher (p<0.05) body weight and body weight gain compared to control and showed almost similar performance compared to antibiotic group. Better FCR (p<0.05) was also noticed in synbiotic group (1.60) compare to the control (1.79), antibiotic group (1.65), NLP group (1.69) and probiotic group (1.70). There were no significant differences in meat quality characteristics among the dietary groups. The cost of production per kg of live broiler was slightly lower in synbiotic group compared to control and antibiotic groups. With regards to profit, synbiotic groups showed higher profitability than other groups. The result indicated that supplementation of synbiotic, probiotic and NLP in broiler diet had a positive effect on growth performance and profitability. It is therefore suggest that the synbiotic, probiotic and NLP could be potential feed additives in broiler diet and synbiotic could be considered as a better antibiotic alternative for broiler production. \nBangladesh Journal of Animal Science 51 (3): 122-132, 2022","PeriodicalId":8873,"journal":{"name":"Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/bjas.v51i3.61788","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The feeding trial was carried out to compare the effect of probiotic, synbiotic and neem (Azadirachta indica) leaf as alternatives to antibiotic in broiler chicken diets. The experiment was performed for a period of 28 days with a number of 500 day-old straight run broiler chicks. Birds were divided into five dietary treatment groups with 4 replications having 25 birds in each. The dietary groups were; control (Basal diet), synbiotic, probiotic, neem leaf powder (NLP) and antibiotic group. The experimental diets were consisted as broiler starter (day-old to 14 days) and broiler grower (15 to 28 days). The supplementation of synbiotic, probiotic, NLP and antibiotic in the broiler diets had significant effect on growth performance. Diets supplemented with synbiotic showed significantly (p<0.05) higher live weight and weight gain at the end of the experiment compare to the control and antibiotic group. NLP and probiotic supplemented groups also showed significantly higher (p<0.05) body weight and body weight gain compared to control and showed almost similar performance compared to antibiotic group. Better FCR (p<0.05) was also noticed in synbiotic group (1.60) compare to the control (1.79), antibiotic group (1.65), NLP group (1.69) and probiotic group (1.70). There were no significant differences in meat quality characteristics among the dietary groups. The cost of production per kg of live broiler was slightly lower in synbiotic group compared to control and antibiotic groups. With regards to profit, synbiotic groups showed higher profitability than other groups. The result indicated that supplementation of synbiotic, probiotic and NLP in broiler diet had a positive effect on growth performance and profitability. It is therefore suggest that the synbiotic, probiotic and NLP could be potential feed additives in broiler diet and synbiotic could be considered as a better antibiotic alternative for broiler production. Bangladesh Journal of Animal Science 51 (3): 122-132, 2022
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
合成菌、益生菌和楝叶在肉仔鸡饲粮中替代抗生素生长促进剂的研究
本试验旨在比较益生菌、合成菌和印楝叶在肉鸡饲粮中替代抗生素的效果。试验选用500日龄直饲肉鸡,试验期28 d。试验禽分为5个饲粮处理组,每组4个重复,每个重复25只。饮食组是;对照组(基础饲粮)、合成菌组、益生菌组、印楝叶粉组和抗生素组。试验饲粮分为肉仔鸡起始日龄(1日龄~ 14日龄)和生长日龄(15 ~ 28日龄)。在肉鸡饲粮中添加合成菌、益生菌、NLP和抗生素对肉鸡生长性能有显著影响。试验结束时,与对照组和抗生素组相比,添加合成菌组的活重和增重显著(p<0.05)提高。NLP组和益生菌组的体重和增重均显著高于对照组(p<0.05),且与抗生素组基本持平。与对照组(1.79)、抗生素组(1.65)、NLP组(1.69)和益生菌组(1.70)相比,合成菌组(1.60)的FCR显著提高(p<0.05)。饲粮组间肉质性状无显著差异。与对照组和抗生素组相比,合成菌组每公斤活肉鸡的生产成本略低。在利润方面,合成组的盈利能力高于其他组。由此可见,在肉鸡饲粮中添加合成菌、益生菌和NLP对肉鸡生长性能和盈利能力均有积极影响。综上所述,合成菌、益生菌和NLP均可作为肉鸡饲粮中潜在的饲料添加剂,合成菌可作为肉鸡生产中较好的抗生素替代品。动物科学学报,51 (3):122-132,2022
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of age on follicular dynamics of goat ovaries Neuroanatomy of lumbosacral and pudendal plexus in pigeon of Bangladesh Effect of diluters on frozen semen production of Black Bengal Goat Production performance, breeding practices and challenges of Holstein-Local crossbred cattle in some selected areas of Bangladesh Evaluation of degradability of Moringa, Pineapple waste and Plantain herbs by in situ and in vitro gas production technique
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1