NAAS Score 2020

                   5.36

UserOnline

Free counters!

Previous Next

Feeding Corn Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles and Enzyme Supplementation on Performance of Broiler Chicken

K. K. Khose S. J. Manwar R. N. Dhore S.V. Kuralkar S. P. Waghmare
Vol 8(5), 220-228
DOI- http://dx.doi.org/10.5455/ijlr.20170928083452

The present experiment was conducted on 420 commercial day old (Vencobb-400) broiler chicks up to 42 days to evaluate the effect of feeding corn distillers dried grains with solubles (cDDGS) and enzyme supplementation on performance of broiler chicken. The birds in control group (A) offered basal diet adequate in all nutrients as per BIS (2007). The birds in dietary treatment groups B, C and D were offered diet containing cDDGS at 5, 10 and 15% level and birds in groups E, F and G were offered diet cDDGS at 5, 10, and 15% level with multienzyme (DSM, Mumbai), respectively. All the diets were isocaloric and iso-nitrogenous. At 6th week of age, the body weight and cumulative weight gain were significantly (P<0.01) higher in treatment groups B and E having 5% cDDGS with or without multienzyme than all other groups. The inclusion of 5 % cDDGS with or without multienzyme was observed significantly (P<0.05) higher feed intake than all treatment groups, except treatment group F (10% cDDGS with multienzyme). The significantly increased (P<0.05) feed conversion ratio (FCR) in treatment group D (15% cDDGS) was observed as compared to control group. The FCR was numerically better in groups having 5% cDDGS with or without multienzyme as compared to control group. The cost of production rupees per kg live weight in all groups A to G was 67.98, 65.77, 67.81, 68.59, 65.47, 67.36 and 67.92, respectively. The highest net profit in terms of rupees per kg live weight was observed in treatment groups E followed by B, F, C, G, A and D. The results of the present experiment suggested that the inclusion of cDDGS at 5 and 10% levels in broiler diets was found to be beneficial. Moreover, the inclusion of cDDGS at 5% level with supplementation of multienzyme was found to be more beneficial in terms of growth performance and economics of broiler production.


Keywords : Broilers Corn DDGS Economics Multienzyme Performance

Introduction

In poultry production, the feed cost alone constitutes about 70-75% of the total cost of production of poultry meat and eggs. Distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) are by-products of the spirit industry and of bioethanol production. They are obtained as a result of multi-stage concentration, and then, long-lasting drying of cereal mash. These products are constituted by components from initial raw material, being insensitive to fermentation (non-starch carbohydrates, protein, fat, ash and others) and biomass of the multiplied yeasts. Dried grains of cereal distillers are rich in protein, exogenous amino acids, B-group vitamins, biotin and mineral compounds, including phosphorus (Koreleski and Swiatkiewicz, 2006; Thacker and Widyaratne, 2007; Min et al., 2008). Investigations have been conducted on the possibility of using DDGS in feed for various animal species, including broiler chicken (Swiatkiewicz and Koreleski, 2007; Thacker and Widyaratne, 2007; Swiatkiewicz and Koreleski, 2008). These studies indicated that soybean meal in a feed may be replaced partially by DDGS without affecting production level. However, concern has been raised towards balancing of the diet in respect of amino acids and energy and in respect of ensuring quantities of minerals and vitamins. An increase in ethanol production during the last 5 to 10 years has led to an increased supply of DDGS that is available for livestock feed (Noll et al., 2007). Researchers have reported that broilers can be fed 6% DDGS during the starter period (Lumpkins et al., 2004) and 12 to 15% DDGS during the finishing stage without affecting carcass composition or growth (Lumpkins et al., 2004; Wang et al., 2007a, b). Whitney et al. (2006) also stated that 20 to 30% DDGS inclusion in the diet resulted in decreased growth performance but had minimal effects on meat quality. Furthermore, the DDGS are richer in fibre, protein and fat than the cereal source (Swiatkiewicz and Koreleski, 2008) and also contain significant amounts of non-starch polysaccharides (NSPs). The use of appropriate enzymes to hydrolyze these compounds can increase the nutritional value of DDGS and promote greater inclusion in poultry diets (Juanpere et al., 2005). In view of the above facts the present investigation was planned to study the effect of feeding corn distillers dried grains with solubles and enzyme supplementation on performance of broiler chicken.

Materials and Methods

Experimental Design and Management 

The experiment was conducted on 420 commercial day-old (Vencobb-400) straight broiler chicks for 0-42 days. The birds were randomly distributed into seven dietary treatments groups with three replicates of 20 birds each. The birds in control group (A) offered basal diet adequate in all nutrients as per BIS (2007). The birds in dietary treatment groups B, C and D were offered diets containing cDDGS at 5, 10 and 15% level and birds in groups E, F and G were offered diets cDDGS at 5, 10, and 15% level with multienzyme (DSM, Mumbai) at recommended dose 400 g/ton of feed, respectively. The standard and uniform managemental practices were followed for all treatment groups throughout the experimental period. The birds were offered ad-lib fresh and clean drinking water throughout the experiment.

Procurement of Ingredients and Feed Formulation

The good quality feed ingredients were procured from local market for preparation of experimental diets. The corn DDGS was procured from M/s Grainotch Industries Ltd., Aurangabad – 431109 Maharashtra, India.  The chemical analysis of corn DDGS was carried out and presented in Table 1. Batal and Dale (2006) reported metabolizable energy in corn DDGS was 2906 kcal/kg and same was considered for the feed formulation. The multienzyme was supplied by M/s DSM, Nutritional Products India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai- 400 098, Maharashtra, India.

Table 1: Chemical analysis of corn DDGS (cDDGS)

S. No. Nutrient Percent (%)
1 Moisture 9.68
2 Crude protein 28.03
3 Crude fat 10.15
4 Total ash 4.55
5 Acid insoluble ash 0.39
6 Crude fibre 6.30
7 Salt 0.12
8 Total phosphorus 0.59
9 Calcium 0.40

The rations were formulated as per BIS (2007) for pre-starter, starter and finisher phases. All the diets were isocaloric and iso-nitrogenous. The inclusion of various levels of cDDGS with partial replacement of soybean meal and energy sources in different dietary treatments. The ingredients and nutrient composition of different dietary treatments A, B, C and D has been prepared in Table 2. The diets for treatment groups E, F and G were prepared adding multienzyme at 400g/ton of feed to diets B, C and D, respectively.

Data Collection

Data was collected on weekly weight changes determined by weighing the birds on weekly basis and replicate wise weight gain was calculated by subtracting the weight of the previous week from that of the current week. The feed intake was determined by subtracting the left-over feed from the feed offered, while feed conversion ratio was calculated as average feed intake divided by average weight gain taking into consideration of mortality, if any. The cost of rearing the chicks for experiment was calculated by considering the prevailing costs of chicks, feed, litter and vaccine etc.

Table 2: Ingredient and nutrient composition of various rations containing cDDGS at different levels

Feed Ingredients (%) Pre-Starter Starter Finisher
A (Control) B

(5%)

C (10%) D (15%) A (Control) B

(5%)

C (10%) D (15%) A (Control) B

(5%)

C (10%) D (15%)
Maize 52.00 49.67 47.34 45.01 53.22 50.89 48.56 46.23 57.76 55.43 53.10 50.77
Soybean Meal 40.71 38.06 35.41 32.76 38.25 35.60 32.95 30.30 32.90 30.25 27.60 24.95
Corn DDGS 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00
Vegetable oil 3.15 3.10 3.05 3.00 4.45 4.40 4.35 4.30 5.30 5.25 5.20 5.15
Dicalcium Phosphate 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
Limestone Powder 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20
Salt (NaCl) 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Trace Mineral Mixture * 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Vitamin Premix** 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
DL-Methionine 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.12
L-Lysine 0.05 0.09 0.13 0.17 0.03 0.07 0.11 0.15 0.02 0.06 0.10 0.14
Choline Chloride 60% 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12
Toxin Binder 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Coccidiostat 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Sodium Bicarbonate 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
TOTAL 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Nutrient Composition
ME (kcal/kg) 3002.54 3001.69 3000.83 2999.98 3101.37 3100.52 3099.66 3098.81 3201.56 3200.71 3199.85 3199.00
Crude Protein (%) 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00
Ether Extract (%) 5.52 5.87 6.21 6.55 6.84 7.18 7.53 7.87 7.82 8.16 8.51 8.85
Crude Fiber (%) 4.21 4.28 4.35 4.42 4.08 4.16 4.23 4.30 3.87 3.94 4.02 4.09
Calcium (%) 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
Total Phosphorus (%) 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.74 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.73 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.71
Available Phosphorus (%) 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Total Lysine (%) 1.31 1.31 1.31 1.32 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.09
Total Methionine (%) 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.46 0.46 0.45 0.45

Statistical Analysis

All the generated data was subjected to statistical analysis by using Complete Randomized Design by Snedecor and Cochran, (2002).  The treatment means were compared by Critical Differences (CD) and Analysis of Variance.

Results and Discussion

Live Body Weight and Weight Gain

The analysis of variance for live body weight and cumulative weight gain showed significant (P<0.01) differences among the treatment groups (Table 3). At 6th week of age, the live body weight and cumulative weight gain were significantly (P<0.01) higher in treatment groups B and E with inclusion of 5% cDDGS with or without multienzyme than all treatment groups, whereas, there was non-significant difference in control and other treatment groups. Similarly, Liu et al. (2011) reported that supplementing xylanase to diets containing corn DDGS can improve growth performance and digestibility of diet components in broilers. Choi et al. (2008) reported that no significant difference was found in growth performances at inclusion of 0, 5, 10 and 15% corn DDGS in broilers. Oryschak et al. (2010a) reported that feed enzyme complex supplementation and extrusion both increased the nutritive value of triticale DDGS for broilers. Further, they opined that triticale DDGS can be fed at up to 10% of practical broiler diets without adverse effect on performance. Shim et al. (2011) reported that broilers fed ≥8% levels of DDGS showed increased body weight gain compared with those fed the control diet at 42 days. Swiatkiewicz et al. (2014) reported that DDGS can be included at a level of 12% (starter) or 18% (finisher) in the diet of broiler chicken without any detrimental effect on performance and observed that feed additives such as enzymes (xylanase+phytase), probiotic, and chitosan can increase the nutritional efficacy of the diets with a high level of DDGS.

Feed Intake

The significantly (P<0.05) higher feed intake was recorded in treatment groups B and E (5 % cDDGS with or without multienzyme) than all treatment groups, except treatment group F (10% cDDGS with multienzyme) at 6th weeks. However, there was non-significant difference in treatment groups C, D, F and G as compared to control group (Table 3). Similarly, Oryschak et al. (2010a) reported that feeding triticale DDGS up to 10% had no adverse effect on feed intake, weight gain, or feed efficiency of broilers compared with controls over the 42-days study. Liu et al. (2011) also observed that the inclusion of xylanase increased feed intake by 4–5% during 1–21 days and did not affect FCR in broilers.

Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR)

The significantly (P<0.05) poor FCR was observed in treatment group D (15% cDDGS) as compared to control group at 6th week of age. However, the supplementation of enzyme was found to enhance the FCR in birds fed 15% cDDGS. The FCR was numerically better in groups having 5% cDDGS with or without enzyme as compared to control groups, but the difference was statistically non-significant. However, the inclusion of 5, 10 and 15% cDDGS with multienzyme numerically improved FCR than non supplementation of multienzyme groups. These results are in close agreement with Oryschak et al. (2010b) who observed that no adverse effect on feed efficiency by including corn or wheat DDGS at up to 10% in broiler diet. Jung et al. (2011) also reported that the supplementation of enzymes to broiler diets with high DDGS inclusion level may overcome the negative effects of DDGS. Ruan et al. (2017) reported that the average daily feed intake and FCR increased linearly in response to corn DDGS inclusion from 1 to 21 days.

Table 3: Weekly live body weight, cumulative weight gain, feed intake and FCR in broilers under different dietary treatments

Treatment Groups Age (weeks)
  Live body weight (g/b)
  I II III IV V VI
A (Control) 152.90±3.18 318.68±10.54b 627.17±3.64b 1058.10±12.20b 1520.22±8.06b 1937.14±12.30bc
B  (5% cDDGS) 163.01±1.46 329.12±8.01ab 673.67±1.35a 1101.82±18.83a 1592.36±19.46a 2039.14±39.03a
C (10% cDDGS) 150.97±1.70 312.88±11.97b 630.42±4.36b 1034.39±15.43bc 1494.19±14.90bc 1904.13±5.87bc
D (15% cDDGS) 146.37±8.93 306.28±3.97b 618.81±8.47b 1006.29±1.15c 1457.27±10.94c 1869.62±30.52c
E (5% cDDGS+Enz.) 164.03±1.57 352.63±8.06a 684.88±21.02a 1102.31±12.93a 1596.73±16.04a 2076.38±21.60a
F (10% cDDGS+ Enz.) 153.35±3.48 325.90±8.13b 630.72±16.78b 1038.66±2.45bc 1517.07±13.64b 1959.76±15.60b
G (15% cDDGS+Enz.) 153.05±2.49 307.64±5.37b 626.23±11.93b 1011.09±5.31c 1470.47±5.24c 1897.98±12.13bc
CD NS 25.487* 49.606** 48.897** 56.406** 94.122**
CV % 4.550 4.521 3.180 1.915 1.525 1.981
  Cumulative weight gain (g/b)
A (Control) 110.05±3.08 275.83±10.44b 584.32±3.54b 1015.25±12.14b 1477.37±7.97b 1894.29±12.19bc
B  (5% cDDGS) 119.88±1.12 285.99±7.95ab 630.53±0.92a 1058.69±18.97a 1549.22±19.67a 1996.01±39.25a
C (10% cDDGS) 107.97±1.43 269.88±11.69b 587.42±4.30b 991.39±15.17bc 1451.19±14.64bc 1861.13±6.15bc
D (15% cDDGS) 103.43±8.84 263.35±3.71b 575.88±8.09b 963.36±1.05c 1414.34±10.75c 1826.69±30.46c
E (5% cDDGS+Enz.) 120.10±1.48 308.69±8.17a 640.95±20.91a 1058.37±12.8a 1552.80±16.00a 2032.44±21.56a
F (10% cDDGS+ Enz.) 109.68±3.34 282.23±8.51b 587.05±16.88b 994.99±2.69bc 1473.40±14.20b 1916.09±16.26b
G (15% cDDGS+Enz.) 109.25±2.31 263.84±5.35b 582.43±11.70b 967.29±5.12c 1426.67±5.25c 1854.18±12.21bc
CD NS 25.390* 49.210** 48.725** 56.609** 94.600**
CV % 6.149 5.205 3.383 1.991 1.576 2.036
  Cumulative feed intake (g/b)
A (Control) 131.65±3.43 353.35±10.52 811.62±5.84bc 1434.57±3.86bc 2218.70±7.28b 3051.23±14.28b
B  (5% cDDGS) 135.63±0.57 355.70±13.32 852.51±9.57a 1516.32±21.61a 2337.38±23.43a 3166.93±63.63a
C (10% cDDGS) 127.27±4.45 345.49±11.52 816.23±5.13bc 1448.82±20.04bc 2204.82±34.10bc 3030.20±15.92b
D (15% cDDGS) 121.45±11.25 339.19±3.18 791.69±4.32cd 1416.52±10.67cd 2197.42±14.73bc 3033.90±26.40b
E (5% cDDGS+Enz.) 135.37±1.38 384.70±12.77 838.50±21.27ab 1473.36±16.61ab 2308.35±15.30a 3183.92±51.23a
F (10% cDDGS+ Enz.) 128.85±2.29 359.74±5.60 795.20±12.62cd 1423.28±5.32c 2238.08±30.82b 3085.16±24.34ab
G (15% cDDGS+Enz.) 131.05±7.93 339.30±8.68 774.03±10.92d 1370.24±18.20d 2139.53±13.98c 3012.94±2.17b
CD NS NS 47.787** 64.30** 92.256** 105.242*
CV % 7.598 4.895 2.423 1.836 1.698 1.951
  Cumulative feed conversion ratio
A (Control) 1.20±0.01 1.28±0.01 1.39±0.02a 1.41±0.01cd 1.50±0.01bc 1.61±0.01bc
B  (5% cDDGS) 1.13±0.01 1.24±0.01 1.35±0.01abc 1.43±0.01bc 1.51±0.00bc 1.59±0.00bc
C (10% cDDGS) 1.18±0.05 1.28±0.01 1.39±0.00a 1.46±0.00ab 1.52±0.01b 1.63±0.00ab
D (15% cDDGS) 1.17±0.01 1.29±0.01 1.38±0.02ab 1.47±0.01a 1.55±0.02a 1.66±0.03a
E (5% cDDGS+Enz.) 1.13±0.01 1.25±0.01 1.31±0.01c 1.39±0.00d 1.49±0.01c 1.57±0.03c
F (10% cDDGS+ Enz.) 1.18±0.02 1.28±0.01 1.36±0.02abc 1.43±0.01bc 1.52±0.01b 1.61±0.00bc
G (15% cDDGS+Enz.) 1.20±0.05 1.29±0.02 1.33±0.02bc 1.42±0.01cd 1.50±0.02bc 1.63±0.01ab
CD NS NS 0.051* 0.047** 0.033* 0.049*
CV % 4.373 1.979 2.144 1.355 1.248 1.743

The means bearing different superscripts within a column differ significantly. * Significant at 5 % level (P<0.05), ** Significant at 1% level (P<0.01), NS – Non-Significant, CV – Coefficient of Variance, CD – Critical Difference, Enz.- Multienzyme

 

Mortality

The mortality was showed normal pattern and within range in all treatment groups. The mortality from groups A to G was 1.67, 1.67, 3.33, 3.33, 1.67, 1.67 and 1.67%, respectively. Similarly, Shalash et al. (2009) also observed that the inclusion of DDGS in the broiler diets had no effect on mortality rate.

Economics of Broiler Production

The cost of production rupees per kg live weight in groups A to G was 67.98, 65.77, 67.81, 68.59, 65.47, 67.36 and 67.92, respectively. The higher net profit rupees per kg of live weight was observed in treatment group E followed by B, F, C, G, A and D. Similarly, Roberson (2003) reported that that ethanol-derived DDGS can be effectively included at 10% in growing/finishing diets for turkey hens if proper formulation matrix values for all nutrients are used. Also, Choi et al. (2008) reported that the use of  corn DDGS in broiler diets up to 15% could decrease the feed cost by replacing part of corn and soybean meal, without any negative effect on growth performance and meat qualities. Patil (2008) reported that the use of DDGS along with enzyme and acidifier, either singly or in combination was beneficial for better growth performance and higher net profits in broilers.

The beneficial effect of cDDGS in broiler diets against improved performance revealed that the inclusion of 5 and 10% cDDGS improved the net profit by reducing cost of broiler production. Furthermore, the inclusion cDDGS at 5 and 10% with supplementation of multienzyme was found to be more economical.

Conclusion

The results of the present experiment suggested that the inclusion of cDDGS at 5 and 10% levels in broiler diets was found to be beneficial. Moreover, the inclusion of cDDGS at 5% level with supplementation of multienzyme was found to be more beneficial in terms of growth performance and economics of broiler production.

Acknowledgement

The authors are highly grateful to Director of Research, MAFSU, Nagpur and Associate Dean, Post Graduate Institute of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Akola for providing necessary facilities and for his help at various stages of the experiment. The authors are also thankful to M/s. DSM, Nutritional Products India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, Maharashtra, India for providing the multienzyme preparation and Dr. B. V. Rao Poultry Research Foundation, Pune for awarding Dr. B. V. Rao, WPC’1996-Research Grants for this study.

 

References

  1. Batal A and Dale N 2006. True metabolizable energy and amino acid digestibility of distillers dried grains with soluble. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 15:89-93.
  2. BIS 2007. Indian standards. Poultry Feed Specification (fifth revision) 3-5.
  3. Choi HS, Lee HL, Shin MH, Cheorun Jo, Lee SK and Lee BD 2008. Nutritive and economic values of corn distiller’s dried grains with solubles in broiler diets. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 21(3): 414-419.
  4. Juanpere J, Pérez Vendrell AM, Angulo E and Brufau J 2005. Assessment of potential interactions between phytase and glycosidase enzyme supplementation on nutrient digestibility in broilers. Poultry Science 84: 571-580.
  5. Jung B, Hoerler M, Batal AB and Mitchell R 2011. Evaluation of feeding distillers dried grains with solubles and the effects of dietary enzymes on broiler performance and carcass characteristics. Poult. Sci. 90 (E-Suppl. 1):18. www.aaap.info/2011meeting.
  6. Koreleski J and Swiatkiewicz S 2006. Nutritive value and use of biofuel by products in poultry nutrition, Wiadomości Zoot, 44: 29-37.
  7. Liu N, Ru YJ, Tang DF, Xu TS and Partridge GG 2011. Effects of corn distillers dried grains with solubles and xylanase on growth performance and digestibility of diet components in broilers. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 163: 260–266.
  8. Lumpkins B, Batal A and Dale N 2004. Evaluation of distillers dried grains with solubles as a feed ingredient for broilers. Poultry Sci. 83:1891-1896.
  9. Min YN, Liu FZ, Wang Z, Coto C, Cerrate S, Costa FP, Yan F and Waldroup PW 2008. Evaluation of distillers dried grains with solubles in combination with glycerin in broiler diets. International J. Poult. Sci. 7:7, 646-654.
  10. Noll S, Carl P and William D 2007. Formulating poultry diets with DDGS-How far can we go? Proc., 5th Mid-Atlantic Nutrition Conference, Baltimore, MD.
  11. Oryschak M, Korver D, Zuidhof M and Beltranena E 2010a. Nutritive value of single-screw extruded and non-extruded triticale distillers dried grains with solubles, with and without an enzyme complex, for broilers, Poultry Science. 89 (7): 1411-1423.
  12. Oryschak M, Korver D, Zuidhof M, Meng X and Beltranena E 2010b. Comparative feeding value of extruded and non-extruded wheat and corn distillers dried grains with solubles for broilers. Poultry Science. 89 (10): 2183–2196.
  13. Patil UM. 2008. Studies on effects of using distillery dried grains with solubles (DDGS) in the diets with certain feed additives on performance of broilers, M. V. Sc. Thesis. Bombay Veterinary College, Parel, Maharashtra Animal and Fishery Science University, Nagpur.
  14. Roberson KD 2003. Use of dried distillers grains with solubles in growing-finishing diets of turkey hens. International Journal of Poultry Science. 2 (6): 389-393.
  15. Ruan D, Jiang SQ, Hu YJ, Ding FY, Fan Q L, Chen F, Lin, XJ, Li L and Wang Y 2017. Effects of corn distillers dried grains with solubles on performance, oxidative status, intestinal immunity and meat quality of Chinese Yellow broilers. Journal Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition. doi:10.1111/jpn.12637
  16. Shalash, S. M. M., Abou El-Wafa S., Sayyad M. A. M., Hoda E. El- Gabry, Ramadan N. A. and Mohamed M. S. 2009. Nutritive value of distillers dried grains with soluble and broiler performance at starter period. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 8 (8): 783-787.
  17. Shim MY, Pesti GM, Bakalli RI, Tillman PB and Payne RL 2011. Evaluation of corn distillers dried grains with soluble as an alternative ingredient for broilers. Poultry Science. 90: 369–376.
  18. Snedecor GW and Cochran WG 2002. Statistical Methods, 8th Edition, Oxford and IBH publishing company Calcutta, Bombay and New Delhi.
  19. Swiatkiewicz S and Koreleski J 2007. Quality of egg shells and bones in laying hens fed a diet containing distillers dried grains with solubles. Medycyna Weterynaryjna. 63(1): 99-103.
  20. Swiatkiewicz S and Koreleski J 2008. The use of distillers dried grains with soluble (DDGS) in poultry nutrition. World Poultry Sci. J. 64(2):257-265.
  21. Swiatkiewicz S, Arczewska-Wlosek A and Jozefiak D 2014. Feed enzymes, probiotic, or chitosan can improve the nutritional efficacy of broiler chicken diets containing a high level of distillers dried grains with solubles. Livestock Science. 163:110–119
  22. Thacker PA and Widyaratne GP 2007. Nutritional value of diets containing graded levels of wheat distillers grains with solubles fed to broiler chicks. J. Sci. Food Agr. 87(7):1386-1390.
  23. Wang Z, Cerrate S, Coto C, Yan F and Waldroup PW 2007a. Effect of rapid and multiple changes in level of distillers dried grain with solubles (DDGS) in broiler diets on performance and carcass characteristics. International J. Poult. Sci. 6:10, 725-731.
  24. Wang Z, Cerrate S, Coto C, Yan F and Waldroup PW 2007b. Utilization of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) in broiler diets using a standardized nutrient matrix. International J. Poult. Sci. 6:7, 470-477.
  25. Whitney MH, Shurson GC, Johnston LJ, Wulf DM and Shanks BC 2006. Growth performance and carcass characteristics of grower-finisher pigs fed high-quality corn distillers dried grains with solubles originating from a modern Midwestern ethanol plant. J. Anim. Sci. 84:3356-3363.
Full Text Read : 1454 Downloads : 254
Previous Next

Open Access Policy

Close