| Literature DB >> 35458228 |
Ambrogina Albergamo1, Rossella Vadalà1, Vincenzo Nava1, Giovanni Bartolomeo2, Rossana Rando1, Nadia Colombo3, Roberto Gualtieri3, Massimiliano Petracci4, Giuseppa Di Bella1, Rosaria Costa1, Nicola Cicero1,2.
Abstract
The effect of dietary enrichment with flaxseed, selenium and vitamin E, and market class on the nutritional and functional value of breast meat was evaluated. A completely randomized block design was set up, where the experimental unit (n = 6000 birds) received conventional or enriched diet and was slaughtered at 37 (light class), 47 (medium class), or 57 (heavy class) days of life. Hence, functional and standard Pectoralis major muscles from every market class were analyzed for FA composition, inorganic elements and vitamin E. Lipid metabolism indices and health lipid indicators were assessed along with the nutritional value. A multiple linear model revealed that in breasts, the dietary treatment significantly influenced (p < 0.05) the FA profile, lipid metabolism and health lipid indices, while the slaughtering weight was related (p < 0.05) to most of elements (e.g., Na, Mg, K, Mn, and Se) and vitamin E. The interdependence of the two factors had strong relations (p < 0.05) with total PUFAs, including linolenic acid, desaturase activities, health lipid indices, trace essential elements and vitamin E. Consequently, enriched meat from heavy chickens showed the best functional and nutritional traits. Overall, the study pointed out that both market class and dietary manipulation are two relevant factors to consider for producing breast meat with higher nutritional and functional value.Entities:
Keywords: FA composition analysis; chicken meat; dietary enrichment; element analysis; functional meat; n-3 PUFAs; selenium; vitamin E
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35458228 PMCID: PMC9024534 DOI: 10.3390/nu14081666
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 6.706
Experimental plan of the study. In each of the 72 flocks, n = 500 birds were allocated, and n = 60 breast samples were collected for a given market class intended for a given feeding program. In every case, the total of samples was split in three replicates, each consisting of n = 20 units.
| Feeding Program | Market Class | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | |||
|
| 12 | 12 | 12 | 36 | |
| 60 | 60 | 60 | 180 | ||
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | ||
|
| 12 | 12 | 12 | 36 | |
| 60 | 60 | 60 | 180 | ||
| 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | ||
|
| 24 | 24 | 24 |
| |
| 120 | 120 | 120 |
| ||
| 6 | 6 | 6 |
| ||
Ingredients (%) and proximate composition (%) of control and functional diet. AME = Apparent Metabolizable Energy.
| Starter | Grower 1 | Grower 2 | Finisher | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Corn | Control | 45.70 | 48.53 | 55.27 | 56.88 |
| Functional | 46.45 | 51.38 | 55.56 | 57.69 | |
| Soybean meal | Control | 36.93 | 32.10 | 27.70 | 25.92 |
| Functional | 36.40 | 32.22 | 27.73 | 25.65 | |
| Wheat middlings | Control | 5.90 | 8.35 | 6.00 | 6.08 |
| Functional | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | |
| Sunflower meal | Control | 1.25 | 1.25 | 1.90 | 2.00 |
| Functional | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
| Oil, fat | Control | 4.20 | 5.15 | 5.70 | 5.95 |
| Functional | 3.50 | 4.30 | 5.03 | 5.20 | |
| Corn gluten meal | Control | 1.25 | 0.70 | - | - |
| Functional | 1.32 | 0.55 | - | - | |
| Extruded linseed meal | Control | - | - | - | - |
| Functional | 2.50 | 2.50 | 3.13 | 3.13 | |
| Vitamin E | Control | - | - | - | - |
| Functional | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.23 | |
| Selenium | Control | - | - | - | - |
| Functional | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | |
| Premix (Min. + Vit. + Enz. + Amin.) | Control | 4.77 | 3.92 | 3.43 | 3.17 |
| Functional | 4.60 | 3.81 | 3.33 | 3.09 | |
|
| |||||
| Volume | Control | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Functional | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
| AME (Kcal/Kg) | Control | 2996 | 3094 | 3187 | 3214 |
| Functional | 2991 | 3095 | 3184 | 3215 | |
| Dry matter | Control | 89.34 | 89.20 | 89.00 | 89.00 |
| Functional | 89.30 | 89.20 | 89.00 | 89.00 | |
| Crude Protein | Control | 23.32 | 21.30 | 19.10 | 18.40 |
| Functional | 23.30 | 21.30 | 19.20 | 18.40 | |
| Crude Fiber | Control | 3.12 | 3.10 | 3.00 | 2.90 |
| Functional | 3.20 | 3.10 | 2.90 | 2.90 | |
| Ether extract | Control | 6.75 | 7.80 | 8.40 | 8.70 |
| Functional | 6.90 | 7.70 | 8.70 | 8.90 | |
| Ash | Control | 6.77 | 5.90 | 5.40 | 5.20 |
| Functional | 6.80 | 6.10 | 5.50 | 5.30 | |
| Lysine (digest) | Control | 1.28 | 1.15 | 1.02 | 0.96 |
| Functional | 1.28 | 1.15 | 1.02 | 0.96 | |
| Metionine + Cysteine (digest) | Control | 0.95 | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.75 |
| Functional | 0.95 | 0.87 | 0.80 | 0.75 | |
| Threonine (digest) | Control | 0.87 | 0.78 | 0.69 | 0.64 |
| Functional | 0.87 | 0.78 | 0.69 | 0.64 | |
| Calcium | Control | 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.80 | 0.70 |
| Functional | 1.00 | 0.90 | 0.80 | 0.70 | |
| Phosphorus | Control | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| Functional | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.50 | |
| Selenium (mg/Kg feed) * | Control | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 |
| Functional | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.40 | |
| Vitamin E (mg/Kg feed) | Control | 84 | 70 | 70 | 70 |
| Functional | 299 | 300 | 300 | 300 | |
* Selenium: 67% sodium selenite + 33% selenomethionine.
Total fat (g/100 of fresh breast meat) and fatty acid composition (g/100 of total fat) of the breast fillet of broiler according to the market class and the dietary treatment. For every market class, data are reported in terms of mean ± standard deviation of n = 120 representative breasts from broilers intended for conventional (n = 60) and supplemented (n = 60) feeding. For the dietary treatment, data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of n = 180 representative breast muscles from light (n = 60), medium (n = 60) and heavy (n = 60) broilers.
| % | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Source of Variation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | Standard | Enriched | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Market Class × Dietary Treatment | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C14:0 | 0.84 ± 0.03 a | 0.70 ± 0.04 b | 0.59 ± 0.06 c | 0.74 ± 0.10 | 0.68 ± 0.12 | * | NS | * |
| C16:0 | 26.91 ± 2.18 | 26.50 ± 2.74 | 25.45 ± 1.77 | 28.33 ± 1.05 | 24.25 ± 0.93 | NS | * | * |
| C18:0 | 8.55 ± 0.52 | 8.51 ± 0.51 | 8.11 ± 0.32 | 8.57 ± 0.57 | 8.21 ± 0.32 | NS | NS | NS |
| C20:0 | 0.17 ± 0.07 | 0.22 ± 0.04 | 0.21 ± 0.08 | 0.15 ± 0.04 | 0.26 ± 0.04 | * | * | NS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C16:1n-7 | 3.66 ± 0.71 | 3.66 ± 0.62 | 4.07 ± 0.53 | 4.26 ± 0.42 | 3.33 ± 0.44 | NS | NS | NS |
| C18:1n-7 | 31.30 ± 0.77 | 31.40 ± 0.35 | 32.02 ± 0.62 | 31.40 ± 0.84 | 31.70 ± 0.88 | NS | NS | NS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| C18:2n-6 | 19.79 ± 2.89 | 19.16 ± 1.19 | 18.26 ± 1.76 | 20.08 ± 1.08 | 18.06 ± 1.64 | NS | NS | * |
| C18:3n-6 | 0.52 ± 0.40 | 0.51 ± 0.39 | 0.60 ± 0.50 | 0.13 ± 0.03 | 0.95 ± 0.11 | NS | NS | NS |
| C18:3n-3 | 4.90 ± 3.14 a | 4.96 ± 2.90 a | 6.54 ± 2.54 a | 2.77 ± 1.09 | 8.18 ± 0.70 | * | * | * |
| C20:2n-6 | 0.28 ± 0.04 | 0.36 ± 0.10 | 0.31 ± 0.09 | 0.38 ± 0.07 | 0.25 ± 0.04 | NS | * | NS |
| C20:4n-6 | 0.62 ± 0.19 | 0.65 ± 0.20 | 0.80 ± 0.27 | 0.89 ± 0.13 | 0.49 ± 0.05 | NS | * | NS |
| C20:5n-3 | 0.30 ± 0.24 | 0.29 ± 0.23 | 0.44 ± 0.29 | 0.11 ± 0.05 | 0.58 ± 0.12 | NS | * | NS |
| C22:6n-3 | 0.44 ± 0.24 | 0.44 ± 0.26 | 0.50 ± 0.27 | 0.23 ± 0.03 | 0.69 ± 0.15 | NS | * | NS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a, b, c in the same row indicate significantly different values among breast muscles from different market classes (p < 0.05, by post hoc Tukey’s HSD test); * Statistically significant (p < 0.05) and NS = non-significant by multiple linear model.
Fatty acid metabolism indices in breast fillet of broiler according to the market class and the dietary treatment. For every market class, data are reported in terms of mean ± standard deviation of n = 120 representative breasts from broilers intended for conventional (n = 60) and supplemented (n = 60) feeding. For the dietary treatment, data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of n = 180 representative breasts from light (n = 60), medium (n = 60) and heavy (n = 60) broilers. Δ9-DIC16 and Δ9-DIC18: Δ9-desaturase indices for C16 and C18 FAs; total Δ9-DI: total Δ9-desaturase index; Δ5 + Δ6-DI: Δ5 + Δ6-desaturase index.
| Metabolic Indices | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Source of Variation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | Standard | Enriched | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Market Class × Dietary Treatment | |
| Thioesterase index | 32.12 ± 1.94 a | 37.58 ± 2.40 b | 43.27 ± 2.32 c | 38.58 ± 4.30 | 36.73 ± 5.76 | * | NS | NS |
| Elongase index | 0.32 ± 0.03 | 0.32 ± 0.03 | 0.32 ± 0.02 | 0.30 ± 0.02 | 0.34 ± 0.02 | NS | NS | NS |
|
| 11.98 ± 1.35 | 12.11 ± 1.54 | 13.75 ± 1.09 | 13.09 ± 1.36 | 12.07 ± 1.59 | NS | NS | NS |
|
| 78.52 ± 1.41 | 78.66 ± 1.11 | 79.80 ± 0.73 | 78.57 ± 1.42 | 79.42 ± 0.84 | NS | * | NS |
|
| 39.45 ± 1.82 | 39.91 ± 2.29 | 41.55 ± 1.76 | 38.65 ± 1.44 | 41.96 ± 1.48 | NS | NS | * |
|
| 6.10 ± 1.74 | 6.60 ± 1.60 | 7.50 ± 2.36 | 5.03 ± 0.54 | 8.44 ± 1.22 | NS | * | * |
a, b, c in the same row indicate significantly different values among breast muscles from different market classes (p < 0.05, by post hoc Tukey’s HSD test); * Statistically significant (p < 0.05) and NS = non-significant by multiple linear model.
Functional indices of breast meat according to the market class and the dietary treatment of broilers. For each market class, data are reported in terms of mean ± standard deviation of n = 120 representative breast muscles from broilers intended for conventional (n = 60) and supplemented (n = 60) feeding. For the dietary treatment, data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of n = 180 representative breast muscles from light (n = 60), medium (n = 60) and heavy (n = 60) broilers S/P: saturation index; h/H: hypocholesterolemic and hypercholesterolemic FA ratio; AI: atherogenicity index; TI: thrombogenicity index.
| Functional Indices | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Source of Variation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | Standard | Enriched | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Market Class × Dietary Treatment | |
| S/P | 0.59 ± 0.08 | 0.59 ± 0.07 | 0.54 ± 0.05 | 0.63 ± 0.04 | 0.52 ± 0.03 | NS | * | * |
| h/H | 2.04 ± 0.29 | 2.06 ± 0.29 | 2.19 ± 0.20 | 1.87 ± 0.13 | 2.33 ± 0.13 | NS | * | * |
| AI | 1.77 ± 0.25 | 1.75 ± 0.25 | 1.62 ± 0.17 | 1.91 ± 0.13 | 1.51 ± 0.09 | NS | * | * |
| TI | 0.85 ± 0.26 | 0.84 ± 0.25 | 0.69 ± 0.16 | 1.00 ± 0.13 | 0.58 ± 0.04 | NS | * | * |
| n-6/n-3 | 5.83 ± 3.74 | 5.42 ± 3.29 | 3.25 ± 1.57 | 7.52 ± 2.24 | 2.15 ± 0.25 | NS | * | * |
* Statistically significant (p < 0.05) and NS = non-significant by multiple linear model.
Contents of minerals (mg/100g, fw), trace essential elements (mg/100g and µg/100g, fw) and potentially toxic elements (µg/100g, fw) in breast muscles according to the market class and the dietary treatment of broilers. For each market class, data are reported in terms of mean ± standard deviation of n = 120 representative breasts from broilers intended for conventional (n = 60) and supplemented (n = 60) feeding. For the dietary treatment, data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of n = 180 representative breast muscles from light (n = 60), medium (n = 60) and heavy (n = 60) broilers. LOD (limit of detection) of As: 0.015 µg/100g.
| Analyte | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Source of Variation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | Standard | Enriched | ||||
| mg/100g | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Market Class × Dietary Treatment | |||||
| Na | 14.93 ± 8.94 | 15.88 ± 10.08 | 27.44 ± 22.05 | 6.52 ± 0.43 | 32.32 ± 12.34 | * | NS | NS |
| Mg | 245.10 ± 179.27 | 250.01 ± 196.40 | 328.46 ± 280.02 | 66.84 ± 5.96 | 482.20 ± 91.99 | * | NS | * |
| K | 424.29 ± 406.09 | 411.27 ± 396.41 | 473.36 ± 390.72 | 40.21 ± 9.21 | 799.06 ± 49.22 | * | NS | NS |
| Fe | 1.36 ± 0.88 | 1.49 ± 1.09 | 2.21 ± 1.46 | 0.62 ± 0.19 | 2.75 ± 0.72 | NS | * | NS |
| Zn | 0.27 ± 0.17 | 0.40 ± 0.20 | 0.60 ± 0.15 | 0.31 ± 0.23 | 0.54 ± 0.11 | NS | NS | * |
|
| ||||||||
| Mn | 22.48 ± 16.25 | 26.92 ± 21.73 | 31.19 ± 28.98 | 6.33 ± 4.56 | 48.06 ± 9.89 | * | * | NS |
| Se | 8.35 ± 3.64 | 10.34 ± 6.19 | 20.11 ± 17.84 | 5.33 ± 1.11 | 20.53 ± 13.10 | * | * | * |
| As | <LOD | 0.10 ± 0.00 | 0.40 ± 0.25 | 0.18 ± 0.25 | 0.18 ± 0.15 | NS | NS | NS |
| Cd | 0.92 ± 0.47 | 1.22 ± 0.52 | 1.65 ± 0.44 | 0.98 ± 0.47 | 1.55 ± 0.48 | * | * | * |
| Pb | 1.12 ± 0.73 | 1.03 ± 0.66 | 0.54 ± 0.27 | 0.49 ± 0.18 | 1.30 ± 0.66 | * | * | NS |
* Statistically significant (p < 0.05) and NS = non-significant by multiple linear model.
Level of vitamin E (mg/100g, fw), in breast meat according to the market class and the dietary treatment of broilers. For each market class, data are reported in terms of mean ± standard deviation of n = 120 representative breast muscles from broilers intended for conventional (n = 60) and supplemented (n = 60) feeding. For the dietary treatment, data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of n = 180 representative breasts from light (n = 60), medium (n = 60) and heavy (n = 60) broilers.
| Analyte | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Source of Variation | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | Standard | Experimental | Market Class | Dietary Treatment | Market Class × Dietary Treatment | |
| Vitamin E | 1.57 ± 0.42 | 1.61 ± 0.45 | 2.20 ± 1.04 | 1.23 ± 0.55 | 2.36 ± 0.65 | * | NS | * |
* Statistically significant (p < 0.05) and NS = non-significant by multiple linear model.
Coverage (%) of adequate intake (AI), and population reference intake (PRI) of certain nutrients derived from the daily consumption of control and functional breast meats from chickens of various commercial categories. Data were calculated with respect to the nutritional requirements of an adult male (30–59 y/o).
| Nutrient and Relative AI or PRI | Light Broiler | Medium Broiler | Heavy Broiler | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| EPA + DHA | AI: 250 mg/die | Control | 0.89 | 3.64 | 5.52 |
| Functional | 3.59 | 13.08 | 28.84 | ||
| Mg | PRI:240 mg/die | Control | 2.71 | 2.61 | 2.90 |
| Functional | 9.80 | 10.61 | 20.03 | ||
| K | AI:39 g/die | Control | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.22 |
| Functional | 1.12 | 1.21 | 1.51 | ||
| Fe | PRI:10 mg/die | Control | 5.22 | 4.81 | 8.52 |
| Functional | 22.0 | 24.92 | 35.61 | ||
| Zn | AI:2.7 mg/die | Control | 7.04 | 8.25 | 14.11 |
| Functional | 15.92 | 17.8 | 24.46 | ||
| Mn | PRI:12 mg/die | Control | 0.10 | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| Functional | 0.35 | 0.36 | 0.48 | ||
| Se | PRI: 55µg/die | Control | 9.40 | 9.40 | 10.32 |
| Functional | 20.92 | 28.25 | 62.85 | ||
| Vitamin E | AI: 13 mg/die | Control | 13.84 | 9.46 | 9.85 |
| Functional | 15.00 | 15.39 | 24.08 | ||