| Literature DB >> 29642669 |
Ramasamy Selvam1, Marimuthu Saravanakumar1, Subramaniyam Suresh1, C V Chandrasekeran2, D'Souza Prashanth3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study was designed to establish choline deficiency model (CDM) in broilers for evaluating efficacy of polyherbal formulation (PHF) in comparison with synthetic choline chloride (SCC).Entities:
Keywords: Chickens; Choline Chloride; Choline Deficiency Model; Polyherbal Formulation
Year: 2018 PMID: 29642669 PMCID: PMC6212757 DOI: 10.5713/ajas.18.0018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian-Australas J Anim Sci ISSN: 1011-2367 Impact factor: 2.509
Experiment 1: Ingredients and chemical composition of starter feed (g)
| Ingredients | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 | G5 | G6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maize | 620.00 | 621.00 | 620.00 | 635.00 | 640.00 | 647.00 |
| Deoiled rice bran | 0.00 | 0.00 | 42.15 | 68.65 | 96.90 | 129.30 |
| Soybean meal | 294.00 | 294.00 | 220.50 | 147.00 | 73.50 | 0.00 |
| Soy protein isolate | 0.00 | 0.00 | 42.30 | 84.50 | 126.80 | 169.10 |
| Calcite | 13.00 | 13.00 | 13.00 | 13.00 | 14.00 | 14.00 |
| DCP | 5.00 | 5.00 | 5.00 | 5.00 | 5.00 | 5.00 |
| Oil | 15.00 | 15.00 | 15.00 | 15.00 | 17.00 | 18.00 |
| Maize gluten meal | 40.00 | 40.00 | 30.00 | 20.00 | 15.00 | 6.00 |
| Methionine | 2.40 | 2.40 | 2.40 | 2.40 | 2.40 | 2.40 |
| Lysine | 2.50 | 2.50 | 2.30 | 2.10 | 1.80 | 1.60 |
| Threonine | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.90 |
| Betaine | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| NSP enzyme | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Phytase 2500 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Sodium bicarbonate | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Salt | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 |
| Potassium chloride | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Vitamin premix | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Choline chloride 60% | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| AGP | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Coccidiostat | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| TM premix | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Nutrient composition (calculated value) | ||||||
| CP (%) | 21.10 | 21.11 | 21.09 | 20.98 | 21.12 | 21.09 |
| ME (Mcal/kg) | 3.12 | 3.12 | 3.10 | 3.10 | 3.10 | 3.10 |
| Lysine (%) | 1.22 | 1.22 | 1.21 | 1.20 | 1.19 | 1.18 |
| Methionine (%) | 0.69 | 0.69 | 0.69 | 0.68 | 0.69 | 0.69 |
| Threonine (%) | 0.87 | 0.87 | 0.87 | 0.87 | 0.88 | 0.88 |
| Calcium (%) | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0.77 | 0.80 | 0.79 |
| Available phosphorus (%) | 0.41 | 0.41 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 |
| Choline (ppm) | 1,655.29 | 1,205.90 | 1,036.83 | 863.52 | 687.29 | 514.70 |
DCP, dicalcium phosphate; NSP, non-starch polysaccharide; AGP, antibiotic growth promoters; TM, trace minerals; CP, crude protein; ME, metabolisable energy.
G2 & G3 feed were used for normal and choline deficiency model control group in experiment 2 and 3.
The vitamin premix supplied the following per kilogram of vitamin premix: vitamin A, 25 MIU; vitamin D3, 5 MIU; vitamin E, 24 IU; vitamin K, 3 g; vitamin B1, 3 g; vitamin B2, 10 g; vitamin B6, 4 g; vitamin B12, 0.015 g; niacin, 30 g; pantothenic acid, 20 g; folic acid, 1g.
The mineral premix supplied the following per kilogram of TM premix: Fe, 40 g; Cu, 10 g; Mn, 100 g; Zn, 100 g; Se, 0.25 g; and I, 1.5 g.
Experiment 1: Ingredients and chemical composition of finisher feed (g)
| Ingredients | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 | G5 | G6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maize | 665.20 | 666.00 | 671.00 | 674.00 | 684.00 | 689.30 |
| Deoiled rice bran | 0.00 | 0.00 | 26.10 | 53.90 | 74.20 | 100.00 |
| Soybean meal | 235.30 | 235.00 | 176.30 | 117.50 | 58.80 | 0.00 |
| Soy protein isolate | 0.00 | 0.00 | 33.80 | 67.60 | 101.30 | 135.10 |
| Calcite | 12.00 | 12.00 | 12.00 | 12.00 | 12.00 | 12.00 |
| DCP | 3.00 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 4.40 | 4.00 |
| Meat and bone meal | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 8.00 | 8.00 |
| Oil | 25.00 | 25.00 | 26.00 | 27.00 | 27.00 | 28.00 |
| Maize gluten meal | 36.00 | 36.00 | 29.00 | 22.50 | 18.00 | 11.50 |
| Methionine | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 |
| Lysine | 2.70 | 2.70 | 2.60 | 2.30 | 2.20 | 2.00 |
| Threonine | 1.20 | 1.20 | 1.10 | 1.10 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Betaine | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| NSP enzyme | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Phytase 2500 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Sodium bicarbonate | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 |
| Salt | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.20 | 2.20 |
| Potassium chloride | 0.00 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 |
| Vitamin premix | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Choline chloride 60% | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| AGP | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Coccidiostat | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| TM premix | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Nutrient composition (calculated value) | ||||||
| CP (%) | 19.00 | 18.99 | 18.98 | 19.00 | 19.01 | 19.01 |
| ME (Mcal/kg) | 3.22 | 3.23 | 3.22 | 3.22 | 3.22 | 3.22 |
| Lysine (%) | 1.10 | 1.10 | 1.09 | 1.08 | 1.07 | 1.06 |
| Methionine (%) | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 | 0.62 |
| Threonine (%) | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.89 |
| Calcium (%) | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.80 | 0.79 | 0.76 | 0.78 |
| Available phosphorus (%) | 0.399 | 0.399 | 0.397 | 0.396 | 0.393 | 0.401 |
| Choline (ppm) | 1,538.37 | 1,088.14 | 950.11 | 812.36 | 670.20 | 531.00 |
DCP, dicalcium phosphate; NSP, non-starch polysaccharide; AGP, antibiotic growth promoters; TM, trace minerals; CP, crude protein; ME, metabolisable energy.
G2 and G3 feed were used for normal and choline deficiency model control group in experiment 2 and 3.
The vitamin premix supplied the following per kilogram of vitamin premix: vitamin A, 25 MIU; vitamin D3, 5 MIU; vitamin E, 24 IU; vitamin K, 3 g; vitamin B1, 3 g; vitamin B2, 10 g; vitamin B6, 4 g; vitamin B12, 0.015 g; niacin, 30 g; pantothenic acid, 20 g; folic acid, 1 g.
The mineral premix supplied the following per kilogram of TM premix: Fe, 40 g; Cu, 10 g; Mn, 100 g; Zn, 100 g; Se, 0.25 g; and I, 1.5 g.
Study design
| Groups | Major protein source | SCC (g/ton feed) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| SBM (%) | SPI (%) | |||
| Experiment 1: Effect of CDM on zootechnical parameters in Cobb 430 broiler chickens | ||||
| G1 | 100 | 0 | 1,000 | |
| G2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | |
| G3 | 75 | 25 | 0 | |
| G4 | 50 | 50 | 0 | |
| G5 | 25 | 75 | 0 | |
| G6 | 0 | 100 | 0 | |
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
|
| ||||
| Experiment 2: Comparative evaluation of PHF and SCC in Cobb 430 broiler CDM | ||||
| G1, Normal control | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| G2, CDM control | 75 | 25 | 0 | 0 |
| G3, CDM+SCC | 75 | 25 | 1,000 | 0 |
| G4, CDM+PHF | 75 | 25 | 0 | 500 |
| G5, CDM+PHF | 75 | 25 | 0 | 1,000 |
| Experiment 3: Dose-response evaluation of PHF in Cobb 430 broiler CDM | ||||
| G1, Normal control | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| G2, CDM control | 75 | 25 | 0 | 0 |
| G3, CDM+SCC | 75 | 25 | 400 | 0 |
| G4, CDM+PHF | 75 | 25 | 0 | 200 |
| G5, CDM+PHF | 75 | 25 | 0 | 400 |
| G6, CDM+PHF | 75 | 25 | 0 | 500 |
CDM, choline deficiency model; SBM, soybean meal; SPI, soy protein isolate; SCC, synthetic choline chloride; PHF, polyherbal formulation.
Experiment 1: Effect of CDM on zootechnical parameters in Cobb 430 broiler chickens
| Parameters | Day | NC+SCC | NC–SCC | 75% SBM+ 25% SPI–SCC | 50% SBM+ 50% SPI–SCC | 25% SBM+ 75% SPI–SCC | 0% SBM+ 100% SPI–SCC | Pooled SEM | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BW (g), (n = 5) | 1 | 42 | 43 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 41 | 0.2 | 0.072 |
| 21 | 717 | 719 | 667 | 536 | 279 | 148 | 41.4 | 0.000 | |
| 42 | 2,334 | 2,360 | 2,219 | 1,958 | 1,413 | 674 | 116.2 | 0.000 | |
| BWG (g), (n = 5) | 21 | 675 | 676 | 625 | 494 | 237 | 107 | 41.3 | 0.000 |
| 42 | 2,292 | 2,317 | 2,177 | 1,916 | 1,371 | 633 | 116.1 | 0.000 | |
| FCR (n = 5) | 21 | 1.31 | 1.31 | 1.33 | 1.44 | 1.68 | 1.83 | 0.03 | 0.000 |
| 42 | 1.57 | 1.58 | 1.69 | 1.74 | 1.82 | 2.78 | 0.02 | 0.000 | |
| Feed intake (g), (n = 5) | 21 | 937 | 943 | 885 | 771 | 469 | 270 | 36.5 | 0.000 |
| 42 | 3,659 | 3,732 | 3,745 | 3,392 | 2,555 | 1,610 | 94.5 | 0.000 | |
| Mortality (%) | 2.0 | 1.3 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 3.3 | 2.7 | - | - | |
| Relative liver weight (g) (n = 10) | 1.6 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 0.03 | 0.000 | |
CDM, choline deficiency model; NC, normal control; SCC, synthetic choline chloride; SBM, soybean meal; SPI, soy protein isolate; SEM, standard error of the mean, BW, body weight; FCR, feed conversion ratio.
Means bearing different superscripts in a row differ significantly (p<0.05).
Experiment 2: Comparative evaluation of PHF and SCC in Cobb 430 broiler CDM
| Parameters | Day | NC | CDM control | CDM+SCC (1,000 g/ton) | CDM+PHF (500 g/ton) | CDM+PHF (1,000 g/ton) | Pooled SEM | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BW (g) (n = 5) | 1 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 46 | 0.2 | 0.996 |
| 21 | 666 | 645 | 674 | 659 | 693 | 7.1 | 0.295 | |
| 39 | 1,940 | 1,822 | 1,919 | 1,937 | 1,916 | 12.3 | 0.004 | |
| 42 | 2,169 | 2,035 | 2,146 | 2,168 | 2,123 | 14.5 | 0.008 | |
| BWG (g) (n = 5) | 21 | 620 | 599 | 627 | 612 | 647 | 7.1 | 0.300 |
| 39 | 1,893 | 1,776 | 1,873 | 1,890 | 1,870 | 12.3 | 0.004 | |
| 42 | 2,122 | 1,989 | 2,099 | 2,122 | 2,077 | 14.5 | 0.008 | |
| FCR (n = 5) | 21 | 1.56 | 1.58 | 1.45 | 1.47 | 1.48 | 0.01 | 0.000 |
| 39 | 1.63 | 1.72 | 1.64 | 1.62 | 1.68 | 0.01 | 0.000 | |
| 42 | 1.65 | 1.74 | 1.68 | 1.66 | 1.71 | 0.01 | 0.000 | |
| Feed intake (g) (n = 5) | 21 | 1,036 | 1,020 | 977 | 971 | 1,021 | 8.1 | 0.017 |
| 39 | 3,157 | 3,131 | 3,155 | 3,140 | 3,209 | 15.6 | 0.600 | |
| 42 | 3,582 | 3,545 | 3,597 | 3,599 | 3,631 | 16.6 | 0.620 | |
| Mortality (%) | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.00 | 1.3 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| Relative liver weight (g) (n = 10) | 1.9 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 0.03 | 0.501 | |
PHF, polyherbal formulation; SCC, synthetic choline chloride; CDM, choline deficiency model; NC, normal control; CDM, choline deficiency model; SEM, standard error of the mean; BW, body weight; FCR, feed conversion ratio.
Means bearing different superscripts in a row differ significantly (p<0.05).
Experiment 3: Dose-response evaluation of PHF in Cobb 430 broiler CDM
| Parameters | Day | NC | CDM control | CDM+SCC (400 g/ton) | CDM+PHF (200 g/ton) | CDM+PHF (400 g/ton) | CDM+PHF (500 g/ton) | Pooled SEM | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BW (g) (n = 5) | 1 | 42 | 41 | 42 | 41 | 42 | 42 | 0.2 | 0.691 |
| 21 | 781 | 693 | 706 | 684 | 688 | 690 | 7.1 | 0.000 | |
| 40 | 2,134 | 2,051 | 2,092 | 2,077 | 2,135 | 2,085 | 10.7 | 0.151 | |
| BWG (g) (n = 5) | 21 | 739 | 651 | 663 | 642 | 646 | 648 | 7.0 | 0.000 |
| 40 | 2,092 | 2,010 | 2,050 | 2,036 | 2,093 | 2,043 | 10.6 | 0.150 | |
| FCR (n = 5) | 21 | 1.30 | 1.47 | 1.45 | 1.46 | 1.46 | 1.44 | 0.02 | 0.000 |
| 40 | 1.67 | 1.71 | 1.68 | 1.67 | 1.64 | 1.65 | 0.01 | 0.004 | |
| Feed Intake (g) (n=5) | 21 | 1,017 | 1,018 | 1,025 | 1,001 | 1,007 | 995 | 5.6 | 0.533 |
| 40 | 3,553 | 3,503 | 3,508 | 3,466 | 3,503 | 3437 | 18.1 | 0.461 | |
| Mortality (%) | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.3 | 2.7 | - | - | |
| Relative liver weight (g) (n = 6) | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.1 | - | 2.1 | - | 0.05 | 0.870 | |
SEM, standard error of the mean; NC, normal control; CDM, choline deficiency model; SCC, synthetic choline chloride; PHF, polyherbal formulation.
Means bearing different superscripts in a row differ significantly (p<0.05).
Effect of PHF on carcass traits, lipid profile and liver function test in Cobb 430 broiler chickens
| Parameters | NC | CDM control | CDM+SCC (400 g/ton) | CDM+PHF (500 g/ton) | Pooled SEM | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carcass traits | Eviscerated carcass weight (g) | 1,476 | 1,443 | 1,434 | 1,470 | 22.6 | 0.901 |
| Liver weight (g) | 47 | 49 | 47 | 48 | 1.2 | 0.906 | |
| Gizzard weight (g) | 32 | 36 | 33 | 30 | 1.1 | 0.289 | |
| Abdominal fat weight (g) | 26 | 30 | 28 | 27 | 1.0 | 0.419 | |
| Heart weight (g) | 11 | 11 | 11 | 12 | 0.3 | 0.648 | |
| Dressing (%) | 70 | 70 | 69 | 70 | 0.3 | 0.232 | |
| Leg weight (g) | 448 | 472 | 476 | 462 | 7.6 | 0.562 | |
| Wing weight (g) | 150 | 153 | 154 | 152 | 2.3 | 0.944 | |
| Breast weight (g) | 434 | 370 | 372 | 404 | 10.1 | 0.062 | |
| Cooking loss (%) | 12 | 13 | 14 | 13 | 0.5 | 0.538 | |
| Breast muscle fat | Triglycerides (md/dL) | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0.2 | 0.363 |
| Cholesterol (md/dL) | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.04 | 0.032 | |
| Abdominal fat | Triglycerides (md/dL) | 11 | 17 | 20 | 12 | 0.9 | 0.000 |
| Cholesterol (md/dL) | 4 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 0.4 | 0.000 | |
| Liver enzyme | Serum AST (IU/L) | 4 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 0.6 | 0.012 |
PHF, poly herbal formulation; NC, normal control; CDM, choline deficiency model; SCC, synthetic choline chloride; SEM, standard error of the mean; n = 6; AST, aspartate aminotransaferase.
Means bearing different superscripts in a row differ significantly (p<0.05).
Figure 1Photomicrographs (optical microscopy) of haematoxylin and eosin-stained broiler liver sections from different treatments. Normal liver architecture in control (A) animals and mild vacuolar changes in hepatocytes of poly herbal formulation (D) treated chickens were observed. Obvious liver lesion such as moderate cell swelling, decreased sinusoidal spaces and mild vacuolar degeneration in hepatocytes were observed in choline deficiency model (B). Mild cell swelling and vacuolar changes with reduced sinusoidal spaces in hepatocytes were visible in synthetic choline chloride (C) treated chickens. Original magnification: 10× (n = 4).