Influence of SUB-PRO probiotic on meat productivity of broiler chickens

Cover Page

Abstract


We studied dynamics of live weight and morphological composition of carcasses in Ross 308 chickens at 1-, 21-, 28-, 34-, 38- and 42-day ages when SUB-PRO probiotic was included in the diet instead of Maxus G feed antibiotic in amount of 100 g/ton of feed. By the age of 42, chickens in the control group (I) reached a live weight of 2234 ± 28.4 g, chickens in the experimental group (II) - 2329 ± 27.3 g, and chickens who took feed antibiotic (III) - 2320 ± 33.4 g. Live weight of chickens of the II group by the age of 42 days exceeded the I group by 95 g or 4.25 % (P ≤ 0.05), the III group - by 86 g or 3.85 %. In terms of carcass weight, the experimental group exceeded the control group by 4.60 % (P ≤ 0.05), group III - by 4.53 %. The meat productivity of chickens taking antibiotic was not studied further, since that had no practical significance. Over the entire period of rearing, the average daily gain in live weight in control chickens was 52.20 g, in the experimental chickens - 54.46 g. The relative muscle weight in broiler carcasses of the experimental group increased from 55.34 to 66.37 %v from 1 to 42 days of age, while the relative bone weight decreased from 33.23 to 16.78 %. By the age of 42, absolute muscle and bone weight had 123.47- and 51.91-fold increase, respectively, in comparison with diurnal weight. The data of anatomical cutting of chicken carcasses showed that, in terms of muscle and bone content, the most valuable were: breast - 84.63 and 8.25 %, thigh - 75.66 and 12.54 %, respectively; less valuable: drumstick - 67.86 and 20.98 %, wing - 50.58 and 33.53 %, respectively. Diameter of muscle fibers of superficial pectoralis muscle in 42-day-old broilers was 55.20 μm; water content - 75.10 %, fat - 1.60 %, protein - 22.31 %. In terms of microbiological parameters, carcass meat meets the requirements of GOST 31468-2012 interstate standard. The inclusion of SUB-PRO probiotic in chicken diet instead of antibiotic does not reduce productivity, but excludes the negative consequences of antibiotic use.


About the authors

Dmitry V. Nikitchenko

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Author for correspondence.
Email: dvnikitchenko@mail.ru
8/2, Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Agrarian and Technological Institute

Vladimir E. Nikitchenko

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Email: v.e.nikitchenko@mail.ru
8/2, Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

Doctor of Veterinary Sciences, Professor, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Agrarian and Technological Institute

Darya V. Andrianova

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Email: 1042120201@rudn.ru
8/2, Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

PhD student, Agrarian and Technological Institute

Ekaterina O. Ristsova

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Email: rystsova-eo@pfur.ru
8/2, Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

Candidate of Agricultural Sciences, Associate Professor, Agrarian and Technological Institute

Ksenya M. Kondrashkina

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)

Email: 1032161257@rudn.ru
8/2, Miklukho-Maklaya st., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation

student, Agrarian and Technological Institute

References

  1. Nikitchenko DV, Nikitchenko VE, Andrianova DV, Seregin IG. Myopathies development problems in broilers raised on extensive industrial fatting. Poultry and Poultry Processing. 2020; (3):32—35. (In Russ). doi: 10.30975/2073-4999-2020-22-3-32-35
  2. Bobyleva GA, Goushchin VV. Vstupaya v novyj 2020 g. Enter a new 2020 taking stock and setting objectives for the future. Poultry and Poultry Processing. 2020; (4):4—6. (In Russ).
  3. Fedotov VA, Nikitchenko VE, Nikitchenko DV, Egorov IA, Egorova TV. A Phytobiotic for poultry nutrition. Ptitsevodstvo. 2018; (8):33—37. (In Russ).
  4. Bauer ND. Without antibiotics. Effektivnoe zhivotnovodstvo. 2018; (3):30—31. (In Russ).
  5. Dzhavadov ED, Vihreva IN, Papazyan TT, Shepetkina SV, Prokofeva NI, Tarlavin NV. Antibiotics in poultry farming: alternative methods of disease prevention and treatment of poultry. Ptitsevodstvo. 2017; (11):41—46. (In Russ).
  6. Hossain MD, Bulbul SM, Nishibori M, Islam MA. Effect of different growth promoters on growth and meat yield of broilers. The Journal of Poultry Science. 2008; 45(4):287—291. doi: 10.2141/jpsa.45.287
  7. Willer H, Lernoud J. (eds.) The world of organic agriculture. Statistics and emerging trends. 20th ed. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM — Organics International, Bonn. 2019.
  8. Yildyrym EA, Ilyina LA, Tiurina DG, Dubrovin AV, Filippova VA, Novikova NI, et al. How can we eliminate antibiotics in poultry production? Ptitsevodstvo. 2020; (9):41—46. (In Russ). doi: 10.33845/00333239-2020-69-9-41-46
  9. Egorov IA, Egorova TV, Krivoruchko LI, Brylin AP, Belyavskaya VA, Bolshakova DS. Probiotic in diets for broiler chicks. Ptitsevodstvo. 2019; (3):25—28. (In Russ). doi: 10.33845/0033-3239-2019-68-3-25-28
  10. Nemchinova EA. Raising poultry without feed antibiotics. In: Materialy XIX mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii VNAP [Proceedings of the Х1Х international VNAP conference. 2018. p.275—277. (In Russ).
  11. Khoroshevsky AP, Khoroshevskaya LV. Moving towards the green poultry production. Ptitsevodstvo. 2017; (11):27—29. (In Russ).
  12. Voronova EY. The use of different oils in diets for broilers (a review). Ptitsevodstvo. 2020; (5—6):51—56. (In Russ). doi: 10.33845/0033-3239-2020-69-5-6-51-56
  13. Lavrentiev AY, Sherne VS. The effect of plant-based feed additive on the broiler meat productivity and quality. Poultry and Poultry Processing. 2020; (1):30—33. (In Russ). doi: 10.30975/2073-4999-2020-221-30-33
  14. Egorov IA, Lenkova TN, Vertiprakhov VG, Manukyan VA, Egorova TA, Grozina AA, et al. Phytobiotic in diets for broiler parental lines at the Center for Genetics and Selection «Smena». Ptitsevodstvo. 2017; (12):15—19. (In Russ).
  15. Svishcheva MI. Poultry meat market in russia: current state and forecast. Poultry and Poultry Processing. 2020; (2):4—6. (In Russ).
  16. Seregin IG, Baranovich ES, Nikitchenko VE, Nikitchenko DV, Kozak YA. Changes in broiler and hog meat with PSE defect signs. Poultry and Poultry Processing. 2020; (4): 30—33. (In Russ). doi: 10.30975/20734999-2020-22-4-30-33
  17. Griffin JR, Moraes L, Wick M, Lilburn MS. Onset of white striping and progression into wooden breast as defined by myopathic changes underlying pectoralis P. major growth. Estimation of growth parameters as predictors for stage of myopathy progression. Avian Pathology. 2018; 47(1):2—13. doi: 10.1080/03079457.2017.1356908
  18. Nikitchenko VE, Nikitchenko DV, Plyuschikov VG, Seregin IG, Nikishov AA, Rystsova EO. Effect of complex phytobiotics on morphochemical characteristics of Cobb 500 cross mail broiler chicks. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science. 2019; 25(3):558—563.
  19. Kijowski J, Kupinska E. The evaluation of selected quality parameters of broiler chicken muscles with Deep Pectoral Myopathy (DPM) symptoms. Archiv fur geflugelkunde. 2013; 77(2):102—108.
  20. Astrakhancev AA. The productive performance in broiler chicks in different production systems. Ptitsevodstvo. 2019; (1):26—30. (In Russ). doi: 10.33845/0033-3239-2019-68-1-26-30
  21. Castellini C, Berri C, Le Bihan-Duval E, Martino G. Gualitative attributes and consumer perception of organic and free-range poultry meat. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 2008; 64(4):500—512. doi: 10.1017/ S0043933908000172
  22. Council of Europe. European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes (ETS123). Strasbourg: Council of Europe; 1986.
  23. Egorov IA, Manukyan VA, Okolelova TM, Lenkova TN, Andrianova EN, Shevyakov AN, et al. Rukovodstvo po kormleniyu sel’skokhozyaistvennoi ptitsy [Guidelines for feeding poultry]. Sergiev Posad: VNITIP Publ.; 2018. (In Russ).
  24. Shatskikh EV, Nufer AI, Galiev DM. The impact of natural alternative growth promoters on the productivity in broiler chicks. Ptitsevodstvo. 2020; (1):31—36. (In Russ). doi: 10.33845/0033-3239-2020-691-31-36
  25. Lukashenko VS, Ovseichik EA, Komarov AA. The productivity and quality of chicken meat of cage and free-range growing. Ptitsevodstvo. 2020; (1):53—55. (In Russ). doi: 10.30975/2073-4999-2020-22-1-53-55
  26. Bogosalvljevic-Boscovic S, Rakonjac S, Dosković V, Petrović MD. Broiler rearing systems: a review of major fattening results and meat quality traits. World’s Poultry Science Journal. 2012; 68(2):217—228. doi: 10.1017/S004393391200027X
  27. FAO Expert Consultation. Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition: Report of an FAO Expert Consultation, Auckland, New Zealand, FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 92. Rome: FAO; 2013.
  28. Burd NA, McKenna CF, Salvador AF, Paulussen KJ, Moore DR. Dietary protein quantity, quality, and exercise are key to healthy living: a muscle-centric perspective across the lifespan. Fronties in Nutrition. 2019; 6:83. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2019.00083

Statistics

Views

Abstract - 451

PDF (Russian) - 160

Cited-By


PlumX

Dimensions


Copyright (c) 2020 Nikitchenko D.V., Nikitchenko V.E., Andrianova D.V., Ristsova E.O., Kondrashkina K.M.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies