| Literature DB >> 27047042 |
Priyanka Konwar1, S P Tiwari1, M Gohain1, Kiran Kumari1.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of dietary supplementation with different levels of protein on fecal egg counts and hematological parameters in goat kids with subclinical nematodosis under semi-intensive condition.Entities:
Keywords: fecal egg count; goat kids; hematological parameter; nematodosis; protein dietary supplementation
Year: 2015 PMID: 27047042 PMCID: PMC4774750 DOI: 10.14202/vetworld.2015.1351-1355
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vet World ISSN: 0972-8988
The effect of protein supplementation on fecal egg count in goats.
| Parameters | Period (day) | Treatments | Significance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||
| EPG | 0 | 1520±73.48 | 1480±73.48 | 1520±37.42 | 1500±70.71 | NS |
| 15 | 1860±50.99[ | 1720±58.31[ | 1680±37.42[ | 1620±73.48[ | ||
| 30 | 2240±67.82[ | 1920±58.31[ | 1820±37.42[ | 1840±81.24[ | ||
| 45 | 2580±48.99[ | 2080±58.31[ | 1920±37.42[ | 2020±96.95[ | ||
| 60 | 2920±58.31[ | 2320±58.31[ | 2040±50.99[ | 2220±86.02[ | ||
Means within a row with different superscripts are significantly different
p<0.05,
p<0.01).
NS=Not significant
The effect of protein supplementation on hematological parameters in goats.
| Parameters | Period (days) | Treatments | Significance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||
| Hb (g/dl) | 0 | 12.58±0.63 | 11.28±0.31 | 11.32±0.27 | 11.44±0.27 | NS |
| 15 | 10.56±0.70 | 10.38±0.33 | 10.46±0.20 | 10.64±0.27 | NS | |
| 30 | 8.82±0.49 | 9.36±0.26 | 9.80±0.19 | 9.88±0.26 | NS | |
| 45 | 7.08±0.39[ | 8.52±0.38[ | 9.24±0.17[ | 9.10±0.23[ | ||
| 60 | 5.72±0.25[ | 7.18±0.27[ | 8.66±0.16[ | 8.30±0.26[ | ||
| TLC (103/mm3) | 0 | 7.14±0.11 | 7.17±0.16 | 7.18±0.11 | 7.27±0.16 | NS |
| 15 | 7.25±0.12 | 7.37±0.17 | 7.56±0.12 | 7.59±0.17 | NS | |
| 30 | 7.39±0.09[ | 7.61±0.17[ | 7.98±0.12[ | 7.92±0.16[ | ||
| 45 | 7.51±0.07[ | 7.83±0.18[ | 8.39±0.12[ | 8.22±0.16[ | ||
| 60 | 7.65±0.06[ | 8.03±0.19[ | 8.80±0.12[ | 8.51±0.15[ | ||
| TEC (106/mm3) | 0 | 12.34±0.14 | 12.48±0.18 | 12.36±0.15 | 12.42±0.19 | NS |
| 15 | 11.71±0.15 | 12.04±0.18 | 12.09±0.14 | 12.06±0.20 | NS | |
| 30 | 11.04±0.16[ | 11.58±0.18[ | 11.74±0.19[ | 11.66±0.19[ | ||
| 45 | 10.35±0.15[ | 11.08±0.17[ | 11.49±0.12[ | 11.26±0.20[ | ||
| 60 | 9.65±0.16[ | 10.56±0.19[ | 11.19±0.14[ | 10.85±0.20[ | ||
| PCV (%) | 0 | 33.26±0.35 | 32.74±0.30 | 32.92±0.40 | 32.66±0.38 | NS |
| 15 | 29.38±0.66[ | 29.86±0.21[ | 31.90±0.35[ | 30.42±0.47[ | ||
| 30 | 25.52±0.71[ | 26.68±0.26[ | 30.58±0.35[ | 28.40±0.44[ | ||
| 45 | 21.48±0.74[ | 23.58±0.23[ | 29.04±0.31d | 26.70±0.44[ | ||
| 60 | 17.88±0.76[ | 20.02±0.37[ | 27.52±0.21d | 24.26±0.46[ | ||
Means within a row with different superscripts are significantly different
p<0.05,
p<0.01).
Hb=Hemoglobin, PCV=Packed cell volume, TEC=Total erythrocyte count, TLC=Total leukocyte count, NS=Not significant
The effect of protein supplementation on DLCs in goats.
| Parameters | Period (days) | Treatments | Significance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||
| Monocytes (%) | 0 | 1.60±0.75 | 1.80±0.80 | 1.40±0.98 | 1.40±0.98 | NS |
| 15 | 1.40±0.60 | 1.40±0.98 | 1.40±0.87 | 1.20±0.97 | NS | |
| 30 | 1.60±0.81 | 1.20±0.97 | 1.40±1.40 | 1.40±0.98 | NS | |
| 45 | 1.20±0.73 | 1.20±1.20 | 1.60±1.03 | 1.60±1.17 | NS | |
| 60 | 2.00±0.89 | 1.20±0.97 | 1.40±1.40 | 1.40±1.17 | NS | |
| Lymphocytes (%) | 0 | 51.60±0.93 | 51.40±0.93 | 51.60±1.03 | 51.60±0.75 | NS |
| 15 | 50.80±0.80d | 48.00±0.55[ | 44.40±0.60[ | 46.20±0.37[ | ||
| 30 | 48.80±0.37d | 46.20±0.37[ | 42.00±0.45[ | 44.20±0.37[ | ||
| 45 | 45.80±0.58d | 44.20±0.37[ | 40.20±0.37[ | 42.00±0.32[ | ||
| 60 | 43.20±0.58[ | 42.20±0.37[ | 38.20±0.37[ | 39.80±0.37[ | ||
| Neutrophils (%) | 0 | 41.80±0.80 | 42.00±0.55 | 41.80±0.80 | 41.60±0.75 | NS |
| 15 | 42.00±0.84 | 41.00±0.89 | 41.00±1.05 | 41.00±0.89 | NS | |
| 30 | 42.00±0.84 | 40.00±0.71 | 40.40±0.75 | 40.20±0.66 | NS | |
| 45 | 42.20±1.02 | 39.00±0.89 | 39.80±1.07 | 39.40±0.93 | NS | |
| 60 | 42.20±1.02 | 38.40±0.93 | 39.40±0.93 | 38.60±0.81 | NS | |
| Eosinophils (%) | 0 | 5.20±0.37 | 5.40±0.24 | 5.00±0.32 | 5.20±0.20 | NS |
| 15 | 9.20±0.37[ | 8.40±0.24[ | 7.00±0.32[ | 7.40±0.24[ | ||
| 30 | 13.20±0.37d | 11.40±0.24[ | 8.20±0.37[ | 9.40±0.24[ | ||
| 45 | 16.20±0.37d | 13.80±0.49[ | 9.40±0.24[ | 11.40±0.24[ | ||
| 60 | 19.20±0.37d | 16.40±0.24[ | 10.80±0.20[ | 13.60±0.24[ | ||
Means within a row with different superscripts are significantly different
p<0.01). NS=Not significant, DLC=Differential leukocyte count
The effect of protein supplementation on red blood cell indices in goats.
| Parameters | Period (days) | Treatments | Significance | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | |||
| MCV (fl) | 0 | 26.96±0.29 | 26.24±0.28 | 26.64±0.55 | 26.31±0.57 | NS |
| 15 | 25.08±0.53 | 24.81±0.29 | 26.38±0.47 | 25.25±0.68 | NS | |
| 30 | 23.12±0.59[ | 23.04±0.27[ | 26.08±0.69[ | 24.39±0.64[ | ||
| 45 | 20.76±0.64[ | 21.29±0.43[ | 25.28±0.47[ | 23.72±0.61[ | ||
| 60 | 18.51±0.67[ | 18.98±0.56[ | 24.61±0.41[ | 22.38±0.62[ | ||
| MCH (pg) | 0 | 10.21±0.57 | 9.05±0.30 | 9.17±0.32 | 9.23±0.27 | NS |
| 15 | 9.03±0.63 | 8.63±0.31 | 8.65±0.23 | 8.83±0.28 | NS | |
| 30 | 8.00±0.46 | 8.09±0.25 | 8.35±0.24 | 8.48±0.28 | NS | |
| 45 | 6.85±0.39[ | 7.70±0.38[ | 8.04±0.20[ | 8.09±0.27[ | ||
| 60 | 5.94±0.35[ | 6.81±0.32[ | 7.75±0.21[ | 7.66±0.29[ | ||
| MCHC (g/dl) | 0 | 37.83±1.89 | 34.47±1.04 | 34.40±0.86 | 35.03±0.78 | NS |
| 15 | 35.93±2.16 | 34.76±1.07 | 32.80±0.65 | 34.98±0.70 | NS | |
| 30 | 34.55±1.58 | 35.09±1.01 | 32.06±0.75 | 34.79±0.84 | NS | |
| 45 | 33.00±1.60 | 36.09±1.33 | 31.84±0.75 | 34.12±1.04 | NS | |
| 60 | 32.30±2.34 | 35.82±0.75 | 31.48±0.76 | 34.27±1.33 | NS | |
Means within a row with different superscripts are significantly different
p<0.05,
p<0.01).
NS=Not significant, MCV=Mean corpuscular volume, MCH=Mean corpuscular hemoglobin, MCHC=Mean cell hemoglobin concentration