| Literature DB >> 33357704 |
Xingyong Chen1, Tao Li2, Kaiqin He1, Zhaoyu Geng1, Xiaochun Wan3.
Abstract
Dietary supplementation of green tea changes the antioxidative capacity of chickens. However, the effect of green tea supplementation in the diet on egg quality and the consequent change in processing capacity is still not well known. The aim of this study was to determine whether green tea powder (GTP) supplementation could affect egg quality, egg antioxidant capacity, and sensory and egg processing characteristics. Huainan partridge chickens (1,080) at 20 wk old were divided into 2 groups, one group fed a basal diet (control) and one group fed a basal diet plus 10 g kgˆ-1 GTP for 12 wk. After the levels of yolk cholesterol had been determined, chickens from the control group were further divided into low- and high-cholesterol groups and were fed a basal diet or a diet with 10 g kgˆ-1 GTP by orthogonal design. After 4 wk, the egg processing characteristics were investigated. Egg specific gravity, shell strength, shell thickness, albumin height, Haugh unit (HU) and cholesterol content were significantly lower in the GTP group than in the control group (P < 0.05). Egg weight, albumin height, yolk color, and HU increased in a time-dependent manner in both the control and GTP groups (P < 0.01). The yolk C16:0, C20:0, C18:1, C18:2, and polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) contents were higher in the GTP group than in the control group (P < 0.05). Egg whites from the GTP group showed increased radical scavenging activity (P < 0.05). Egg appearance and texture from the GTP group were more preferred than those of the control group (P < 0.05). Eggs from the GTP group had lower hardness, chewiness, and water retention capacity than those of eggs from the control group (P < 0.05). Eggs from the GTP group with high yolk cholesterol showed lower chewiness than those from the basal diet group (P < 0.05). The results suggested that GTP supplementation could enrich the PUFA content in egg yolks, improve the overall taste, and change processing characteristics.Entities:
Keywords: Huainan partridge chickens; consumer taste; egg quality; fatty acid composition; green tea powder
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33357704 PMCID: PMC7772676 DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2020.10.001
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Poult Sci ISSN: 0032-5791 Impact factor: 3.352
Feed ingredients and nutrient composition.
| Composition % | Group | |
|---|---|---|
| Control group (Con) | Experimental group (GTP) | |
| Soybean | 22.40 | 22.40 |
| Corn | 66 | 66 |
| Bran | 4.50 | 3.50 |
| Lime powder | 2 | 2 |
| Premix | 5 | 5 |
| Green tea powder | 1 | |
| Nutritional level | ||
| Crude fat % | 4.67 | 4.96 |
| Total energy MJ/kg | 13.07 | 12.99 |
| Crude protein % | 16.49 | 16.48 |
| Ca % | 2.0–3.2 | 2.0–3.2 |
Premix provided per kg of diet: Fe, 65 mg; Cu, 8 mg; Zn, 80 mg; Mn, 105 mg; I, 1 mg; Se, 0.3 mg; vitamin A, 9,800 IU; vitamin D3, 3,100 IU; vitamin E, 26 IU; vitamin B1, 2.5 mg; vitamin B2, 7 mg; vitamin B12, 0.018 mg; vitamin K, 2.2 mg; biotin, 0.09 mg; folic acid, 1 mg; pantothenic acid, 11 mg; niacin, 38 mg.
Effect of green tea powder and feeding time on egg quality.
| Treatment | Feeding time | Egg weight/g | Egg specific gravity g/cm3 | Egg shape index | Eggshell strength/N | Egg yolk/g | Eggshell thickness/mm | Albumin height/mm | Yolk color | Haugh unit | Cholesterol mg/egg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Con | 0 | 32.08 | 1.131 | 1.303 | 39.62 | 8.45 | 0.348 | 2.45 | 4.7 | 59.20 | 157.9 |
| 2 | 31.94 | 1.129 | 1.356 | 34.51 | 8.56 | 0.347 | 2.87 | 7.1 | 62.41 | 232.8 | |
| 4 | 38.57 | 1.128 | 1.303 | 43.97 | 10.95 | 0.374 | 3.10 | 7.7 | 61.30 | 191.9 | |
| 6 | 43.18 | 1.129 | 1.297 | 42.16 | 12.13 | 0.372 | 3.57 | 8.2 | 61.89 | 197.3 | |
| 8 | 44.49 | 1.126 | 1.258 | 37.96 | 12.72 | 0.376 | 4.00 | 8.0 | 70.28 | 213.9 | |
| 10 | 47.77 | 1.124 | 1.307 | 44.64 | 13.81 | 0.395 | 4.10 | 8.5 | 67.91 | 169.5 | |
| 12 | 46.89 | 1.132 | 1.297 | 47.14 | 14.32 | 0.405 | 4.28 | 7.4 | 67.50 | 164.1 | |
| GTP | 0 | 30.39 | 1.130 | 1.324 | 38.00 | 7.67 | 0.346 | 3.14 | 5.3 | 66.59 | 167.6 |
| 2 | 33.32 | 1.130 | 1.345 | 35.43 | 10.00 | 0.353 | 2.73 | 7.1 | 59.51 | 189.9 | |
| 4 | 36.81 | 1.120 | 1.315 | 33.20 | 10.52 | 0.328 | 3.35 | 7.7 | 64.33 | 146.7 | |
| 6 | 42.39 | 1.119 | 1.279 | 32.77 | 12.11 | 0.347 | 3.83 | 7.0 | 65.12 | 161.4 | |
| 8 | 44.74 | 1.113 | 1.278 | 34.86 | 13.20 | 0.362 | 5.3 | 7.6 | 77.92 | 159.4 | |
| 10 | 43.64 | 1.124 | 1.320 | 42.12 | 12.82 | 0.374 | 4.89 | 7.8 | 75.35 | 149.4 | |
| 12 | 48.13 | 1.129 | 1.315 | 38.68 | 14.40 | 0.381 | 4.99 | 7.2 | 73.65 | 141.3 | |
| SEM | 0.952 | 0.001 | 0.015 | 1.425 | 0.197 | 0.004 | 0.179 | 0.241 | 1.672 | 4.576 | |
| Treatment | 0.266 | <0.01 | 0.38 | <0.01 | 0.834 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.166 | <0.01 | <0.01 | |
| Feeding time | ANOVA | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Linear | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.64 | <0.001 | 0.71 | 0.005 | <0.001 | 0.03 | 0.131 | |
| Quadratic | 0.004 | <0.001 | 0.005 | 0.1 | <0.001 | 0.055 | 0.28 | <0.001 | 0.55 | 0.005 | |
| Treatment × feeding time | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.775 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.131 | 0.401 | 0.316 | 0.005 | |
Abbreviations: Con, control; GTP, green tea powder.
Significant differences among groups (P < 0.05).
Significant differences among groups (P < 0.01).
Fatty acid composition of egg yolk from chickens fed a diet with or without GTP.
| Fatty acid | Treatment | Feeding time (wk) | SEM | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 | 12 | Treatment | Feeding time | Treatment × feeding time | |||||
| ANOVA | Linear | Quadratic | ||||||||||||
| C14:0 | Con | 0.10 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.15 | 0.10 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.007 | 0.560 | <0.01 | 0.015 | 0.001 | 0.056 |
| GTP | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.09 | |||||||
| C16:0 | Con | 22.4 | 23.1 | 24.3 | 26.4 | 26.0 | 26.0 | 27.0 | 0.243 | 0.030 | <0.01 | <0.001 | 0.002 | 0.804 |
| GTP | 23.7 | 23.2 | 24.7 | 26.5 | 26.2 | 26.5 | 27.5 | |||||||
| C18:0 | Con | 11.1 | 10.2 | 10.0 | 10.5 | 10.9 | 10.0 | 11.1 | 0.331 | 0.049 | 0.336 | 0.035 | 0.043 | 0.080 |
| GTP | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.6 | 9.1 | 9.6 | 9.8 | 9.9 | |||||||
| C20:0 | Con | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.16 | 0.18 | 0.007 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.001 | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| GTP | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0.24 | 0.20 | 0.17 | 0.25 | |||||||
| C16:1 | Con | 3.05 | 3.3 | 3.58 | 3.27 | 3.49 | 3.04 | 2.89 | 0.148 | 0.606 | 0.122 | 0.45 | 0.23 | 0.587 |
| GTP | 3.13 | 3.37 | 3.56 | 3.23 | 3.16 | 3.05 | 3.39 | |||||||
| C18:1 | Con | 39.8 | 43.3 | 43.9 | 37.9 | 37.8 | 37.8 | 37.88 | 0.711 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.53 | 0.65 | 0.021 |
| GTP | 40.6 | 43.4 | 42.6 | 41.4 | 42.4 | 41.1 | 41.19 | |||||||
| C18:2 | Con | 8.37 | 8.86 | 8.93 | 9.39 | 9.14 | 9.90 | 9.90 | 0.321 | 0.005 | <0.01 | 0.09 | 0.57 | 0.366 |
| GTP | 9.2 | 9.19 | 8.57 | 10.95 | 10.44 | 10.46 | 10.63 | |||||||
| C18:3 | Con | 4.28 | 3.84 | 3.16 | 2.60 | 2.80 | 3.08 | 3.69 | 0.239 | 0.126 | 0.106 | 0.029 | 0.08 | 0.011 |
| GTP | 4.10 | 3.60 | 3.50 | 3.84 | 3.59 | 4.08 | 2.80 | |||||||
| DPA | Con | 1.09 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 1.02 | 0.77 | 1.06 | 1.20 | 0.086 | 0.127 | 0.004 | 0.264 | 0.040 | 0.485 |
| GTP | 1.00 | 0.89 | 0.99 | 1.06 | 1.05 | 1.41 | 1.30 | |||||||
| SFAs | Con | 33.7 | 32.9 | 34.5 | 37.2 | 34.3 | 36.2 | 38.3 | 0.663 | 0.956 | <0.01 | 0.56 | 0.55 | 0.831 |
| GTP | 34.7 | 33.3 | 34.8 | 35.90 | 35.0 | 35.0 | 37.7 | |||||||
| MUFA | Con | 42.9 | 46.7 | 47.5 | 41.2 | 41.0 | 40.8 | 40.8 | 0.748 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.61 | 0.54 | 0.026 |
| GTP | 43.7 | 46.8 | 46.2 | 44.6 | 45.6 | 44.0 | 44.6 | |||||||
| PUFA | Con | 13.7 | 13.4 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 12.5 | 13.9 | 14.1 | 0.483 | 0.038 | 0.411 | 0.98 | 0.74 | 0.114 |
| GTP | 14.3 | 13.2 | 12.9 | 15.5 | 15.0 | 14.2 | 14.0 | |||||||
| TUFA | Con | 56.6 | 60.0 | 60.5 | 54.2 | 52.2 | 54.8 | 54.8 | 0.724 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.34 | 0.97 | <0.01 |
| GTP | 58.0 | 60.0 | 59.1 | 60.1 | 60.3 | 58.1 | 58.5 | |||||||
Abbreviations: C14:0, myristic acid; C16:0, palmitic acid; C18:0, stearic acid; C20:0, arachidic acid; C16:1, palmitic acid; C18:1, oleic acid; C18:2, g-linolenic acid; C18:3, linolenic acid; Con, control; DPA, docosahexaenoic acid; GTP, green tea powder; MUFA, monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA, polyunsaturated fatty acids; SFAs, saturated fatty acids; TUFA, total unsaturated fatty acids.
Significant differences among groups (P < 0.05).
Significant differences among groups (P < 0.01).
Figure 1The radical scavenging activity of egg whites from chickens fed diets with or without green tea powder (GTP).
Mean scores for overall consumer acceptability of eggs from chickens fed a diet with or without GTP.
| Item | Con | GTP | SEM | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 wk | 8 wk | 12 wk | 4 wk | 8 wk | 12 wk | Treatment | Feeding time | Interaction | ||
| Appearance | 7.325b | 7.418b | 7.418b | 7.476a,b | 7.512a | 7.512a | 0.426 | 0.049 | 0.414 | 0.289 |
| Aroma | 7.215 | 7.259 | 7.32 | 7.205 | 7.259 | 7.315 | 0.696 | 0.932 | 0.548 | 0.762 |
| Flavor | 7.45 | 7.465 | 7.45 | 7.425 | 7.444 | 7.425 | 0.821 | 0.608 | 0.995 | 0.812 |
| Texture | 7.325b | 7.259b | 7.355b | 7.425a | 7.371a,b | 7.435a | 0.323 | 0.043 | 0.739 | 0.175 |
| Overall acceptability | 7.475b | 7.407b | 7.415b | 7.575a | 7.482a,b | 7.550a | 0.341 | 0.050 | 0.389 | 0.431 |
a,bMeans with no common superscripts are different (P < 0.05).
Abbreviations: Con, control; GTP, green tea powder.
Effect of cholesterol and green tea powder on the gel properties of egg whites.
| Treatment | Con | GTP | SEM | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cholesterol | High | Low | High | Low | Treatment | Cholesterol | Interaction | |
| Hardness g | 799.3a | 710.1a | 361.9b | 468.9b | 23.58 | <0.001 | 0.861 | 0.071 |
| Cohesiveness | 0.59a | 0.55a,b | 0.57a,b | 0.55b | 0.005 | 0.401 | 0.022 | 0.852 |
| Chewiness | 421.14a | 328.19a,b | 179.30c | 247.77b,c | 16.42 | <0.001 | 0.703 | 0.021 |
| Gelling property | 467.7a | 394.1a | 207.9b | 256.5b | 10.18 | <0.001 | 0.68 | 0.06 |
| Springiness/% | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.2 | 0.18 | 0.003 | 0.66 | 0.204 | 0.97 |
| Water retention/% | 88.1a | 81.9a,b | 81.2a,b | 76.2b | 1.36 | 0.029 | 0.051 | 0.817 |
a–cMeans with no common superscripts are different (P < 0.05).
Abbreviations: Con, control; GTP, green tea powder.
Effect of cholesterol and green tea powder on the foaming properties of egg whites and the emulsification properties of egg yolks.
| Treatment | Con | GTP | SEM | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cholesterol | High | Low | High | Low | Treatment | Cholesterol | Interaction | ||
| Egg white | Foaming | 118.1b | 162.1a | 150.8a | 155.1a | 2.98 | 0.21 | 0.02 | 0.063 |
| Foaming stability | 95.1 | 90.3 | 93.8 | 90.5 | 0.92 | 0.78 | 0.061 | 0.712 | |
| Egg yolk | Emulsification | 0.684 | 0.644 | 0.66 | 0.687 | 0.035 | 0.594 | 0.729 | 0.071 |
| Emulsion stability | 8.03 | 8.13 | 8.16 | 7.93 | 0.28 | 0.847 | 0.697 | 0.356 | |
a,bMeans with no common superscripts are different (P < 0.05).
Abbreviations: Con, control; GTP, green tea powder.