Utilization of potato peels and sugar beet pulp with and without enzyme supplementation in broiler chicken diets: effects on performance, serum biochemical indices and carcass traits

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Excerpt

With the current shortage and rising costs of conventional feed ingredients, animal nutritionists have advocated the use of agro‐industrial by‐products as unconventional feedstuffs, as they are cheaper and available in large quantities in countries with agro‐based economies. Agro‐industrial by‐products such as potato peels (PP) and sugar beet pulp (SBP) are readily available in many countries. The use of these products as feeds are mainly limited to the ruminant sector and not widely used in the poultry industry because of its high percentage of non‐starch polysaccharides (NSPs) (soluble and insoluble crude fibre) along with starch. NSPs are polymeric carbohydrates which differ in composition and structure from starch (Morgan and Bedford, 1995) and possess chemical cross‐linking among them therefore, are not well digested by poultry (Adams and Pough, 1993; Annison, 1993). Some of the common NSPs present in PP and SBP are cellulose, hemicellulose, xylose and lignin. Moreover, SBP contains high pectin content which has a viscosity and water holding capacity and may lead to sticky or wet excreta (Jozefiak et al., 2006). While PP characterizes by the presence of raw starch and trypsin inhibitors which has a laxative and growth depression effect (Fugui et al., 2012). Poultry do not produce enzymes to utilize the NSPs found in unconventional feeds. Fibre of this feed can act as an antinutrient in two ways. First, some nutrients such as starch and protein are trapped within the insoluble fibrous cell walls. Poultry are unable to access these trapped nutrients as they do not produce the enzymes capable of digesting the fibre within the cell walls (Bedford and Partridge, 2010). Secondly, soluble fibres dissolve in the bird's gut, forming viscous gels that trap nutrients, creates bulk, slow down the rates of digestion, passage of ingesta through the gut and subsequent feed intake and growth (Annison, 1993; Sobamiwa, 1993).
The use of enzymes as feed additives to reduce the cost of production has widely prevalent. Feed enzymes, as feed additives, help to meet consumer demand for safe and high quality food. Moreover, they play a major part in improving the efficiency of poultry feeding by changing the nutritional profile of feed ingredients. By targeting specific antinutrients in certain feed ingredients, feed enzymes allow poultry to extract more nutrients from the feed and so improve the feed efficiency (Bedford and Partridge, 2010). Research work has suggested that the negative effects of NSPs can be overcome by dietary modifications including supplementation of diets with suitable exogenous enzyme preparations (Creswell, 1994). The use of fibre degrading enzymes provides clearly visible benefits. By breaking down the soluble fibres, litter quality was significantly improved; feed costs were markedly reduced due to a marked improvement in feed efficiency and bird uniformity was enhanced (Elmakeel et al., 2007; Giraldo et al., 2008). Today, enzyme suppliers are actively promoting the additive benefits of combining more than one enzyme in feed to further diminish costs of poultry production. The theory is that each type of enzyme is targeting different antinutrients in the diet, and that by adding a combination of the enzyme activities, more energy, amino acids and minerals are released compared with these enzyme activities being used in isolation (Wang et al., 2005; Bedford and Partridge, 2010).
Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate two distinct unconventional feeds, such as PP and SBP, in broiler diets. In addition, the impact of using a commercial enzyme mixture in improving the nutritive value of these ingredients was investigated.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles