| Literature DB >> 29654246 |
Sahil Kalia1, Vijay K Bharti2, Arup Giri1, Bhuvnesh Kumar3, Achin Arora1, S S Balaje1.
Abstract
Extremes of climate and hypobaric hypoxia cause poor growth performance in broiler chickens at high altitude. The present study examined the potential of Hippophae rhamnoides extract as phytogenic feed additive for broilers reared at 3500 m above mean sea level (MSL). Higher content of phytomolecules were recorded during characterization of the extract. Immunomodulatory activity of extract was observed in chicken lymphocytes through in-vitro studies. Thereafter, for in vivo study, 105 day old Rhode Island Red (RIR) Cross-bred chicks were randomly distributed in to control and treatments T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, and T6 which were supplemented with H. rhamnoides aqueous extract along with basal diet, at level of 100, 150, 200, 300, 400, and 800 mg/kg body weight of chicken, respectively. Among the experimental groups, birds in the T3 group represent the highest body weight. Furthermore, treatment group birds had shown better physio-biochemical indices as compared to control group birds. Interestingly, lower mortality rate due to ascites and coccidiosis was recorded in treatment groups and therefore, higher net return was observed. Hence, present investigation demonstrated the beneficial effect of H. rhamnoides extract (@200 mg/kg) at high altitude and therefore, may be used in formulation of feed additive for poultry ration.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29654246 PMCID: PMC5899143 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-24409-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Ingredients and chemical composition of basal diet.
| Ingredients (% diet) | Starter diet (0–21 day) | Finisher diet (22–42 day) |
|---|---|---|
| Maize | 59.00 | 58.00 |
| Soyabean (Solvent extracted) | 33.18 | 21.12 |
| Soyabean (Full fat) | — | 9.58 |
| Soyabean oil | 2.00 | 2.55 |
| Fish Meal | 2.15 | — |
| Wheat bran | — | 5.08 |
| Salt (Nacl) | 0.15 | 0.15 |
| Limestone | 1.50 | 1.50 |
| Dicalcium phosphate | 1.50 | 1.50 |
| Lysine | 0.13 | 0.13 |
| Methionine | 0.19 | 0.19 |
| Vitamin & Mineral premix* | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Total | 100 | 100 |
| Calculated composition | ||
| Protein (%) | 21.56 | 19.31 |
| ME (MJ/Kg) | 12.97 | 13.38 |
| Calcium (%) | 1.02 | 0.94 |
| Phosphorus (%) | 0.48 | 0.42 |
*Vitamin and mineral premix supplied per kilogram of diet: 14000 IU of vitamin A, 70 mg of vitamin E, 3000 IU of vitamin D3, 4 mg of vitamin K, 3 mg of thiamine, 10 mg of vitaminB2, 8 mg of vitamin B6, 0.04 mg of vitamin B12, 48 mg of niacin, 20 mg of calcium d-pantothenate, 500 mg of choline chloride, 0.20 mg of biotin, 1.8 mg of folic acid, 80 mg of manganese, 70 mg of zinc, 50 mg of iron, 10 mg of copper, 3 mg of iodine, 0.4 mg of selenium, and 0.2 mg of cobalt.
Free radical scavenging activity of extract.
| Inhibition (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DPPH radical scavenging capacity | ABTS radical scavenging capacity | |||
| Concentration (µg/ml) | Ascorbic acid | Ascorbic acid | ||
| 20 | 31.85 ± 0.65 | 39.57 ± 0.76 | 15.63 ± 0.40 | 21.36 ± 1.12 |
| 40 | 32.01 ± 0.78 | 45.40 ± 0.89 | 19.27 ± 0.25 | 29.37 ± 0.45 |
| 60 | 35.89 ± 0.81 | 49.80 ± 0.63 | 24.41 ± 0.39 | 35.86 ± 0.54 |
| 80 | 38.25 ± 0.67 | 53.98 ± 0.57 | 30.40 ± 0.63 | 41.18 ± 0.71 |
| 100 | 39.47 ± 0.90 | 60.59 ± 1.08 | 35.25 ± 0.84 | 55.94 ± 0.96 |
Scavenging capacity of aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides was determined against DPPH and ABTS radical. Ascorbic acid was used as a reference standard. Values are given as mean ± S.E.
Figure 1In vitro efficacy of H. rhamnoides extract. (a) Effect of aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides on chicken PBL proliferation. Cells were treated with different concentrations of extract (100 ng/mL-400 µg/mL) and concanavalin A (positive control) for 24 hrs. Each value was compared with untreated control cells as well as with in different dose concentrations. (b) Cytoprotective activity of extract against H2O2 induced toxicity in chicken PBL. Cells were incubated simultaneously with different concentrations of extract (100 ng/mL-400 µg/mL) and H2O2 for 2 hrs. Each value was compared with H2O2 stimulated cells as well as with in different dose concentrations. Bars having different superscript (a, b, c, d, e, f, g) differ significantly (P < 0.05).
Effect of aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides on growth performance of broiler chickens.
| Treatments | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | Control | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | T6 |
| Initial average body weight (gm/chick) | 38.86 ± 0.60 | 39.60 ± 0.58 | 39.93 ± 0.57 | 38.20 ± 0.52 | 38.53 ± 0.58 | 38.20 ± 0.51 | 39.33 ± 0.54 |
| Average weight at 21 day (gm/chick) | 192.80a ± 3.50 | 194.26a ± 1.97 | 192.46a ± 3.45 | 222.13b ± 5.26 | 190.26a ± 3.82 | 189.20a ± 5.99 | 191.06a ± 8.41 |
| Average weight at 42 day (gm/chick) | 356.75a ± 10.06 | 410.70b ± 10.38 | 402.53b ± 12.32 | 470.33c ± 12.68 | 394.26b ± 6.69 | 409.20b ± 6.78 | 392.14b ± 5.55 |
| Cumulative feed intake up to 42 day (gm/chick) | 1519.20 ± 9.65 | 1521.08 ± 9.54 | 1520.37 ± 8.70 | 1530.27 ± 14.59 | 1544.58 ± 16.48 | 1518.62 ± 11.63 | 1527.50 ± 11.39 |
| Feed conversion ratio at 42 day | 4.78d ± 0.08 | 4.10b ± 0.06 | 4.19b,c ± 0.02 | 3.54a ± 0.08 | 4.34c ± 0.06 | 4.09b ± 0.05 | 4.33c ± 0.04 |
| Cumulative water intake up to 42 day (ml/chick) | 2138.76 ± 17.37 | 2140.71 ± 11.67 | 2145.69 ± 12.92 | 2140.39 ± 11.39 | 2155.02 ± 16.36 | 2150.71 ± 11.86 | 2155.43 ± 11.96 |
Chickens in the control group were fed the basal diet whereas the six treatment groups, in addition of basal diet received aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides in drinking water @ 100 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T1), @ 150 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T2), @ 200 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T3), @ 300 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T4), @ 400 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T5), and @ 800 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T6), respectively from days 0 to 42. Results are presented as mean ± S.E. Experimental unit 3 replicates pen (5 broiler chickens per replicate pen). Means bearing the different superscripts (a, b, c, d) in a row differ significantly (P < 0.05).
Economics and mortality rate (%) in chickens supplemented with H. rhamnoides extract.
| Description | Control | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | T6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total mortality (%) | 26.67 | 13.30 | 13.30 | 6.67 | 13.30 | 13.30 | 13.30 |
| Mortality by ascites (%) | 13.30 | 6.67 | 6.67 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6.67 |
| Mortality by coccidiosis (%) | 6.67 | 0.00 | 6.67 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6.67 | 0.00 |
| Mortality by other reasons (%) | 6.67 | 6.67 | 0.00 | 6.67 | 13.33 | 6.67 | 6.67 |
| Cost of extract/chicken (Rs.) | Nil | 0.69 | 1.02 | 1.58 | 1.96 | 2.74 | 5.40 |
| Cost of feed/chicken (@25/Kg Rs.) | 37.98 | 38.02 | 38.00 | 38.26 | 38.61 | 37.97 | 38.18 |
| Total feed cost/bird (Rs.) | 37.98 | 38.71 | 39.02 | 39.84 | 40.57 | 40.71 | 43.58 |
| Sale of chicken at 42 day (@Rs. 200/Kg live weight)* | 71.35 | 82.14 | 80.50 | 94.06 | 78.85 | 81.84 | 78.43 |
| Loss due to mortality (Rs.) | 285.40 | 164.28 | 161.00 | 94.06 | 157.70 | 163.69 | 156.87 |
| Total benefit per group (Rs.) | — | 121.12 | 124.40 | 191.34 | 127.70 | 121.70 | 128.53 |
*Due to limited availability of fresh chickens at high altitude the rates are very high. Loss due to mortality = Sale cost per chicken × total mortality. Total benefit per group = Loss from mortality in control – loss from mortality in treatment.
Effect of H. rhamnoides extract on total protein, albumin, globulin, and A/G ratio in broiler chickens.
|
| 0 day | 21st day | 42nd day |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Control | 3.36 ± 0.18 | 3.51a ± 0.07 | 3.57a ± 0.13 |
| T1 | 3.31 ± 0.15 | 4.72b ± 0.09 | 5.64c ± 0.08 |
| T2 | 3.35 ± 0.13 | 4.76b ± 0.14 | 5.23b ± 0.09 |
| T3 | 3.33 ± 0.13 | 4.89b ± 0.12 | 5.77d ± 0.11 |
| T4 | 3.40 ± 0.14 | 4.65b ± 0.13 | 5.30b ± 0.27 |
| T5 | 3.37 ± 0.17 | 4.74b ± 0.10 | 5.12b ± 0.21 |
| T6 | 3.34 ± 0.14 | 4.60b ± 0.14 | 5.51c ± 0.13 |
| Control | 2.08 ± 0.12 | 2.18a ± 0.08 | 2.23a ± 0.15 |
| T1 | 2.05 ± 0.12 | 2.88b ± 0.10 | 3.10b ± 0.08 |
| T2 | 2.04 ± 0.11 | 2.87b ± 0.11 | 2.98b ± 0.06 |
| T3 | 2.03 ± 0.16 | 2.91b ± 0.21 | 3.05b ± 0.19 |
| T4 | 2.06 ± 0.15 | 2.78b ± 0.17 | 3.02b ± 0.06 |
| T5 | 2.07 ± 0.12 | 2.80b ± 0.11 | 2.89b ± 0.08 |
| T6 | 2.06 ± 0.13 | 2.79b ± 0.15 | 3.00b ± 0.14 |
|
| |||
| Control | 1.28 ± 0.08 | 1.33a ± 0.15 | 1.34a ± 0.20 |
| T1 | 1.26 ± 0.10 | 1.84b ± 0.18 | 2.54b ± 0.19 |
| T2 | 1.31 ± 0.14 | 1.89b ± 0.16 | 2.25b ± 0.13 |
| T3 | 1.30 ± 0.19 | 1.98b ± 0.23 | 2.72c ± 0.28 |
| T4 | 1.34 ± 0.11 | 1.87b ± 0.21 | 2.28b ± 0.23 |
| T5 | 1.30 ± 0.09 | 1.94b ± 0.15 | 2.23b ± 0.23 |
| T6 | 1.28 ± 0.09 | 1.81b ± 0.18 | 2.51b ± 0.16 |
|
| |||
| Control | 1.63 ± 0.10 | 1.64c ± 0.12 | 1.66d ± 0.14 |
| T1 | 1.63 ± 0.08 | 1.57b ± 0.09 | 1.22b ± 0.10 |
| T2 | 1.56 ± 0.07 | 1.52b ± 0.11 | 1.32c ± 0.08 |
| T3 | 1.56 ± 0.09 | 1.47a ± 0.10 | 1.12a ± 0.11 |
| T4 | 1.54 ± 0.08 | 1.49a ± 0.09 | 1.32c ± 0.09 |
| T5 | 1.59 ± 0.11 | 1.44a ± 0.11 | 1.30c ± 0.10 |
| T6 | 1.61 ± 0.13 | 1.54b ± 0.12 | 1.20b ± 0.08 |
Chickens in the control group were fed the basal diet whereas the six treatment groups, in addition of basal diet received aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides in drinking water @ 100 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T1), @ 150 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T2), @ 200 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T3), @ 300 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T4), @ 400 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T5), and @ 800 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T6), respectively from days 0 to 42. Results are presented as mean ± S.E. Experimental unit 3 replicates pen (3 broiler chickens per replicate pen). Means bearing the different superscripts (a, b, c, d) in a columns differ significantly (P < 0.05).
Effect of H. rhamnoides extract on cholesterol, triglyceride, HDL and LDL level in broiler chickens.
| Groups | 0 day | 21st day | 42nd day |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Control | 178.25 ± 05.23 | 169.67c ± 04.92 | 165.32d ± 03.88 |
| T1 | 177.50 ± 08.42 | 158.00b ± 04.30 | 138.50b ± 02.59 |
| T2 | 179.50 ± 10.96 | 155.17b ± 04.78 | 139.67b ± 02.19 |
| T3 | 177.50 ± 13.24 | 142.50a ± 04.98 | 128.50a ± 03.30 |
| T4 | 180.00 ± 07.56 | 147.57a ± 06.16 | 131.67a ± 02.24 |
| T5 | 175.25 ± 07.92 | 158.67b ± 06.47 | 137.00b ± 02.64 |
| T6 | 178.00 ± 07.39 | 158.00b ± 05.81 | 143.67c ± 02.71 |
|
| |||
| Control | 138.87 ± 05.49 | 130.25 ± 07.15 | 123.25 ± 06.96 |
| T1 | 136.63 ± 06.16 | 127.38 ± 05.68 | 120.50 ± 05.48 |
| T2 | 131.93 ± 04.94 | 123.97 ± 05.05 | 120.00 ± 05.96 |
| T3 | 135.21 ± 06.83 | 128.17 ± 09.83 | 121.00 ± 08.22 |
| T4 | 132.48 ± 05.81 | 121.33 ± 08.96 | 118.75 ± 08.11 |
| T5 | 134.87 ± 05.19 | 123.94 ± 07.11 | 119.25 ± 06.04 |
| T6 | 135.92 ± 05.94 | 127.16 ± 06.37 | 123.00 ± 04.91 |
|
| |||
| Control | 19.81 ± 0.80 | 20.06a ± 0.77 | 20.40a ± 0.84 |
| T1 | 19.70 ± 0.73 | 27.16b ± 0.80 | 31.64b ± 1.04 |
| T2 | 20.04 ± 0.69 | 26.19b ± 0.75 | 31.56b ± 0.82 |
| T3 | 19.50 ± 0.86 | 30.56c ± 0.85 | 44.17d ± 1.02 |
| T4 | 20.16 ± 0.71 | 27.49b ± 0.81 | 38.12c ± 0.90 |
| T5 | 19.71 ± 0.81 | 26.83b ± 0.85 | 37.89c ± 0.91 |
| T6 | 19.39 ± 0.71 | 27.07b ± 0.80 | 32.23b ± 0.85 |
|
| |||
| Control | 53.35 ± 1.07 | 51.86c ± 0.96 | 50.43c ± 0.88 |
| T1 | 53.91 ± 0.90 | 44.80b ± 1.01 | 41.05b ± 0.92 |
| T2 | 54.12 ± 1.15 | 46.04b ± 1.21 | 40.59b ± 1.10 |
| T3 | 53.80 ± 1.01 | 42.70a ± 0.89 | 36.24a ± 0.95 |
| T4 | 53.26 ± 0.91 | 42.91a ± 1.03 | 37.12a ± 1.07 |
| T5 | 54.07 ± 1.10 | 45.77b ± 1.04 | 40.25b ± 0.90 |
| T6 | 53.90 ± 0.97 | 45.90b ± 0.90 | 41.18b ± 0.83 |
Chickens in the control group were fed the basal diet whereas the six treatment groups, in addition of basal diet received aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides in drinking water @ 100 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T1), @ 150 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T2), @ 200 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T3), @ 300 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T4), @ 400 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T5), and @ 800 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T6), respectively from days 0 to 42. Results are presented as mean ± S.E. Experimental unit 3 replicates pen (3 broiler chickens per replicate pen). Means bearing the different superscripts (a, b, c, d) in a columns differ significantly (P < 0.05).
Effect of H. rhamnoides extract on glucose, creatinine, AST and ALT level in broiler chickens.
| Groups | 0 day | 21st day | 42nd day |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Control | 322.75 ± 12.45 | 311.75d ± 9.85 | 309.50d ± 6.11 |
| T1 | 324.00 ± 13.63 | 291.25c ± 6.30 | 280.25c ± 4.28 |
| T2 | 321.75 ± 13.02 | 274.00b ± 9.05 | 260.00b,c ± 9.46 |
| T3 | 324.25 ± 14.41 | 249.25a ± 6.79 | 213.00a ± 3.87 |
| T4 | 326.50 ± 12.41 | 266.25b ± 6.32 | 253.00b ± 4.43 |
| T5 | 324.25 ± 13.77 | 294.25c ± 7.16 | 300.75d ± 6.23 |
| T6 | 327.00 ± 12.94 | 297.25c ± 7.25 | 302.25d ± 9.91 |
|
| |||
| Control | 0.20 ± 0.05 | 0.30 ± 0.04 | 0.26 ± 0.03 |
| T1 | 0.20 ± 0.04 | 0.27 ± 0.03 | 0.25 ± 0.02 |
| T2 | 0.20 ± 0.06 | 0.30 ± 0.04 | 0.27 ± 0.02 |
| T3 | 0.22 ± 0.05 | 0.28 ± 0.04 | 0.25 ± 0.04 |
| T4 | 0.23 ± 0.03 | 0.31 ± 0.03 | 0.27 ± 0.03 |
| T5 | 0.22 ± 0.02 | 0.27 ± 0.04 | 0.25 ± 0.05 |
| T6 | 0.21 ± 0.02 | 0.31 ± 0.07 | 0.28 ± 0.05 |
|
| |||
| Control | 80.75 ± 7.58 | 60.00b ± 2.79 | 75.00b ± 4.67 |
| T1 | 81.50 ± 6.39 | 62.25b ± 3.70 | 74.00b ± 6.48 |
| T2 | 79.25 ± 4.64 | 53.25a,b ± 7.71 | 67.00a,b ± 5.47 |
| T3 | 79.50 ± 7.96 | 45.25a ± 4.19 | 54.75a ± 4.05 |
| T4 | 80.00 ± 7.49 | 45.25a ± 4.62 | 56.75a ± 5.32 |
| T5 | 79.00 ± 6.27 | 58.00b ± 3.81 | 61.25a ± 4.11 |
| T6 | 79.75 ± 6.81 | 57.25a,b ± 3.25 | 63.75a,b ± 4.93 |
|
| |||
| Control | 18.25 ± 1.25 | 12.00 ± 0.40 | 12.25 ± 0.62 |
| T1 | 18.75 ± 1.65 | 11.75 ± 1.03 | 11.00 ± 1.08 |
| T2 | 18.50 ± 0.64 | 13.25 ± 0.62 | 10.75 ± 0.62 |
| T3 | 17.75 ± 2.65 | 11.25 ± 0.62 | 09.75 ± 0.85 |
| T4 | 18.00 ± 1.35 | 12.75 ± 1.65 | 11.00 ± 0.81 |
| T5 | 17.75 ± 0.75 | 11.75 ± 0.85 | 10.25 ± 1.03 |
| T6 | 18.25 ± 0.85 | 12.75 ± 1.03 | 10.00 ± 1.08 |
Chickens in the control group were fed the basal diet whereas the six treatment groups, in addition of basal diet received aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides in drinking water @ 100 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T1), @ 150 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T2), @ 200 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T3), @ 300 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T4), @ 400 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T5), and @ 800 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T6), respectively from days 0 to 42. Results are presented as mean ± S.E. Experimental unit 3 replicates pen (3 broiler chickens per replicate pen). Means bearing the different superscripts (a, b, c, d) in a columns differ significantly (P < 0.05).
Effect of H. rhamnoides extract on MDA, TAC, and DPPH free radical-scavenging activity in broiler chickens.
| Groups | 0 day | 21st day | 42nd day |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Control | 8.61 ± 0.58 | 8.31c ± 0.30 | 8.06c ± 0.18 |
| T1 | 8.58 ± 0.68 | 6.05a ± 0.26 | 5.81b ± 0.12 |
| T2 | 8.59 ± 0.64 | 6.32a ± 0.24 | 5.67b ± 0.14 |
| T3 | 8.61 ± 0.67 | 5.91a ± 0.13 | 4.04a ± 0.32 |
| T4 | 8.63 ± 0.63 | 6.47a,b ± 0.16 | 5.49b ± 0.18 |
| T5 | 8.59 ± 0.70 | 6.94b ± 0.14 | 5.47b ± 0.13 |
| T6 | 8.97 ± 0.48 | 6.93b ± 0.16 | 5.50b ± 0.08 |
|
| |||
| Control | 1122.43 ± 12.11 | 1139.66a ± 17.60 | 1186.32a ± 17.35 |
| T1 | 1120.59 ± 10.15 | 1328.63d ± 17.18 | 1547.37b ± 18.34 |
| T2 | 1121.31 ± 07.20 | 1339.49d ± 18.08 | 1665.58c ± 18.80 |
| T3 | 1119.32 ± 07.47 | 1414.76e ± 20.30 | 1698.53d ± 20.99 |
| T4 | 1118.33 ± 08.89 | 1254.24c ± 15.79 | 1613.26c ± 20.71 |
| T5 | 1123.83 ± 06.35 | 1266.81c ± 16.50 | 1649.61c ± 20.29 |
| T6 | 1119.82 ± 05.62 | 1213.81b ± 18.58 | 1605.79b ± 20.25 |
|
| |||
| Control | 41.24 ± 0.83 | 42.17a ± 2.01 | 44.88a ± 1.99 |
| T1 | 41.77 ± 0.80 | 51.59b ± 1.61 | 62.83c ± 3.25 |
| T2 | 41.11 ± 0.57 | 52.29b ± 0.96 | 62.17b,c ± 0.90 |
| T3 | 41.60 ± 0.98 | 57.44c ± 0.80 | 65.37c ± 1.74 |
| T4 | 42.02 ± 0.74 | 50.24b ± 0.87 | 60.55b,c ± 2.39 |
| T5 | 41.29 ± 1.03 | 51.38b ± 0.81 | 58.91b ± 2.46 |
| T6 | 41.34 ± 0.69 | 49.07b ± 2.29 | 55.78b ± 0.80 |
Chickens in the control group were fed the basal diet whereas the six treatment groups, in addition of basal diet received aqueous extract of H. rhamnoides in drinking water @ 100 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T1), @ 150 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T2), @ 200 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T3), @ 300 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T4), @ 400 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T5), and @ 800 mg/kg body weight of chicken (T6), respectively from days 0 to 42. Results are presented as mean ± S.E. Experimental unit 3 replicates pen (3 broiler chickens per replicate pen). Means bearing the different superscripts (a, b, c, d) in a columns differ significantly (P < 0.05).