| Literature DB >> 29372052 |
Ahmed Mohamed Fouad1,2, Dong Ruan1, Shuang Wang1, Wei Chen1, Weiguang Xia1, Chuntian Zheng1.
Abstract
The demand for duck meat, duck eggs, and associated products is increasing each year. Classic and modern selection programs have been applied to enhance the economic traits of ducks to satisfy the requirements of consumers and enhance the incomes of producers. The nutritional requirements of unselected ducks may not be adequate, however, to fulfill the potential productivity performance of modern birds, including both meat-type and egg-type ducks. In particular, an imbalanced diet is associated with low productive performance and signs of nutritional deficiency (if insufficient nutrients are supplied), as well as with high feed costs and manure problems that reflect flock health and welfare (if excessive nutrients are supplied). Thus, the main aim of this review is to summarize the results of previous studies that estimated the nutrient requirements of meat-type and egg-type ducks in order to evaluate current knowledge and to identify further issues that need to be addressed. In addition, the results obtained in previous studies are compared in order to understand how to lower commercial feed costs, fulfill the genetic potential of selected ducks, protect the environment from pollution, and satisfy the welfare and health needs of ducks.Entities:
Keywords: Ducks; Nutritional requirements
Year: 2018 PMID: 29372052 PMCID: PMC5769293 DOI: 10.1186/s40104-017-0217-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Anim Sci Biotechnol ISSN: 1674-9782
Nutritional requirements of meat-type (White Pekin ducks) and egg-type ducks (Longyan ducks) in commercial production
| Nutrient | 1–21 d | 22–42 d | Laying period |
|---|---|---|---|
| Metabolizable energy, kcal/kg | 2,900 | 3,000 | 2,500 |
| Protein, % | 20 | 18 | 17 |
| Methionine, % | 0.48–0.50 | 0.47–0.50 | 0.40 |
| Lysine, % | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.80 |
| Threonine, % | 0.70–0.80 | 0.70–0.80 | 0.60 |
| Tryptophan, % | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| Calcium, % | 0.83 | 0.89 | 3.60 |
| Available phosphorus, % | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.35 |
| Manganese, mg/kg | 80–100 | 80–100 | 90 |
| Zinc, mg/kg | 60 | 60 | 90 |
| Iron, mg/kg | 60 | 60 | 50 |
| Copper, mg/kg | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Iodine, mg/kg | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.50 |
| Selenium, mg/kg | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.40 |
| Vitamin A, IU | 10,000 | 8,000 | 12,000 |
| Vitamin D3, IU | 3,000 | 3,000 | 2,000 |
| Vitamin E, mg/kg | 20.0 | 20.0 | 38.0 |
| Vitamin K, mg/kg | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.0 |
| Thiamine, Vitamin B1, mg/kg | 2.0 | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Riboflavin, Vitamin B2, mg/kg | 10.0 | 8.0 | 9.6 |
| Pyridoxine, Vitamin B6, mg/kg | 4.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 |
| Cyanocobalamin, Vitamin B12, mg/kg | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| Choline, mg/kg | 1,000 | 750 | 500 |
| Pantothenic acid, mg/kg | 20.0 | 10.0 | 28.5 |
| Folic acid, mg/kg | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.6 |
| Biotin, mg/kg | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.15 |
| Niacin, mg/kg | 50.0 | 50.0 | 25.0 |
Fig. 1Impacts of nutritional requirements on productive performance, feed cost, manure problems, and duck welfare and health