| Literature DB >> 35891670 |
Francois Djitie Kouatcho1, Razvan Mihail Radu Rusu2, Bachirou Mohamadou3, Bobga Aoudou3, Ioan Mircea Pop2, Marius Giorgi Usturoi2, Léonard S Ngamo Tinkeu3.
Abstract
Objective: Quail production is ranked as an important alternative animal protein source in Cameroon. One of the main constraints of this production is the quality of feed, which lacks protein that is regularly supplied by fish meal. To avoid disagreements due to the constant shortage of fish meal, alternative protein sources are needed, and among them are crickets (Acheta domesticus). The goal of this study was to find out how well Japanese quails could be raised if fish meal was replaced with cricket meal. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: Carcass; Sudano-Guinean zone; cricket flour; fish meal; growth; substitution
Year: 2022 PMID: 35891670 PMCID: PMC9298107 DOI: 10.5455/javar.2022.i598
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Adv Vet Anim Res ISSN: 2311-7710
Figure 1.Crickets (A. domesticus) dried and ready to be ground.
Average production performances of quails at 8 weeks of age as a function of the substitution level of fish meal with cricket meal.
| Characteristic | Average production performances | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental diets | FI (gm) | Body weight (gm) | AWG (gm) | FCR | |
| Male | T0 (00%) |
184.17 ± 3.11 |
30.34 ± 0.77 |
6.43 ± 0.42 | |
| T1 (15%) |
194.15 ± 3.91 |
32.84 ± 0.97 |
5.64 ± 0.20 | ||
| T2 (30%) |
199.65 ± 5.28 |
34.21 ± 1.32 |
5.68 ± 0.36 | ||
| T3 (45%) | 204.32 ± 5.69c | 35.38 ± 1.42c |
5.23 ± 0.17 | ||
| Average | 195.57 ± 8.78 | 33.19 ± 2.19 | 5.74 ± 0.52 | ||
| Female | T0 (00%) |
244.92 ± 6.07 |
45.53 ± 1.51 |
4.28 ± 0.17 | |
| T1 (15%) |
224.67 ± 5.94 |
40.47 ± 1.48 |
4.57 ± 0.16 | ||
| T2 (30%) |
253.80 ± 6.48 |
47.75 ± 1.62 |
4.07 ± 0.28 | ||
| T3 (45%) |
216.67 ± 6.49 |
38.47 ± 1.62 | 4.81 ± 0.21c | ||
| Average | 235.01 ± 16.42 | 43.05 ± 4.10 | 4.43 ± 0.34 | ||
| Combined | T0 (00%) |
780.71 ± 29.50 |
214.55 ± 32.77 |
37.94 ± 8.19 |
5.36 ± 1.18 |
| T1 (15%) |
740.54 ± 6.00 |
209.41 ± 16.96 |
36.65 ± 4.24 |
5.11 ± 0.59 | |
| T2 (30%) |
776.37 ± 31.22 |
226.72 ± 29.45 |
40.98 ± 7.36 |
4.87 ± 0.91 | |
| T3 (45%) |
740.40 ± 9.92 |
210.50 ± 8.69 |
36.92 ± 2.17 |
5.02 ± 0.28 | |
| Average | 759.51 ± 28.69 | 215.29 ± 23.86 | 38.12 ± 5.96 | 5.09 ± 0.79 | |
in the same column and for the same sex, values with the same superscript are similar (p> 0.05).
Figure 2.Weekly evolution of FI according to the experimental diets.
Figure 3.Weekly evolution of the body weight of quails as a function of experimental diets. (a) Combined live weight. (b) Male. (c) Female.
Figure 4.Evolution of the AWG (gm) of quails according to the experimental diets. (a) Male. (b) Female.
Figure 5.Weekly evolution of the FCR according to the experimental diets.
Carcass characteristics of quails as a function of the substitution rate of fish meal with cricket meal.
| Characteristics (%) | Gender | Experimental diets (level of substitution) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 (00%) | T1 (15%) | T2 (30%) | T3 (45%) | ||
| Carcass yields | Male |
69.52 ± 1.10 |
70.71 ± 3.33 |
72.00 ± 1.21 |
70.57 ± 1.85 |
| Female |
62.15 ± 0.26 |
65.47 ± 3.23 |
63.15 ± 6.62 |
69.30 ± 1.57 | |
| Combined |
65.83 ± 4.10 |
68.09 ± 4.10 |
67.58 ± 6.45 |
69.93 ± 1.68 | |
| Chest | Male |
25.64 ± 0.95 |
25.97 ± 2.41 |
26.89 ± 1.70 |
25.80 ± 1.39 |
| Female |
22.59 ± 2.04 |
23.17 ± 1.73 |
23.07 ± 3.81 |
26.22 ± 3.77 | |
| Combined |
24.11 ± 2.19 |
24.57 ± 2.43 |
24.98 ± 3.37 |
25.80 ± 1.39 | |
| Thigh | Male |
15.69 ± 0.13 |
16.28 ± 0.75 |
17.38 ± 1.21 |
16.61 ± 1.04 |
| Female |
14.82 ± 0.35 |
16.06 ± 1.29 |
14.70 ± 1.51 |
16.39 ± 1.95 | |
| Combined |
15.26 ± 0.53 |
16.17 ± 0.96 |
16.04 ± 1.91 |
16.50 ± 1.40 | |
| Wings | Male |
5.38 ± 0.62 |
5.99 ± 0.31 |
5.92 ± 0.48 |
5.37 ± 0.49 |
| Female |
4.89 ± 0.36 |
5.34 ± 0.57 |
5.13 ± 0.40 |
6.06 ± 0.42 | |
| Combined |
5.13 ± 0.52 |
5.67 ± 0.54 |
5.52 ± 0.59 |
5.72 ± 0.56 | |
| Head | Male |
3.06 ± 0.19 |
3.46 ± 0.19 |
3.34 ± 0.18 |
3.05 ± 0.17 |
| Female |
2.51 ± 0.21 |
2.62 ± 0.13 |
2.63 ± 0.14 |
3.10 ± 0.20 | |
| Combined |
2.79 ± 0.35 |
3.04 ± 0.48 |
2.98 ± 0.41 |
3.08 ± 0.17 | |
| Leg | Male |
1.46 ± 0.06 |
1.59 ± 0.22 |
1.53 ± 0.12 |
1.55 ± 0.19 |
| Female |
1.46 ± 0.12 |
1.46 ± 0.11 |
1.37 ± 0.24 |
1.54 ± 0.29 | |
| Combined |
1.46 ± 0.08 |
1.53 ± 0.17 |
1.45 ± 0.19 |
1.54 ± 0.219 | |
| Neck | Male |
6.75 ± 0.68 |
7.39 ± 1.08 |
6.91 ± 1.53 |
5.97 ± 0.99 |
| Female |
6.35 ± 0.49 |
7.66 ± 0.73 |
6.69 ± 0.98 |
6.37 ± 0.89 | |
| Combined |
6.55 ± 0.58 |
7.52 ± 0.84 |
6.80 ± 1.16 |
6.17 ± 0.87 | |
| Back | Male |
16.06 ± 1.05 |
14.37 ± 1.59 |
13.96 ± 0.93 |
13.86 ± 0.50 |
| Female |
13.49 ± 2.03 |
12.35 ± 0.19 |
12.72 ± 2.26 |
13.86 ± 0.50 | |
| Combined |
14.77 ± 2.02 |
13.36 ± 1.50 |
13.34 ± 1.69 |
13.86 ± 0.50 | |
in the same line, values with the same superscript are not significantly different (p > 0.05).
Relative weight of some organs in relation to the body weight of quails.
| Characteristics | Gender | Experimental diets (level of substitution) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 (00%) | T1 (15%) | T2 (30%) | T3 (45%) | ||
| Liver | Male |
1.45 ± 0.39 |
2.10 ± 0.44 |
2.06 ± 0.46 |
1.71 ± 0.12 |
| Female |
3.05 ± 0.63 |
3.06 ± 0.45 |
2.75 ± 0.23 |
1.93 ± 0.12 | |
| Combined |
2.24 ± 0.99 |
2.58 ± 0.60 |
2.40 ± 0.50 |
1.82 ± 0.16 | |
| Heart | Male |
0.91 ± 0.04 |
0.86 ± 0.08 |
0.83 ± 0.09 |
0.80 ± 0.16 |
| Female |
0.77 ± 0.11 |
0.79 ± 0.11 |
0.71 ± 0.15 |
0.77 ± 0.04 | |
| Combined |
0.84 ± 0.11 |
0.83 ± 0.09 |
0.77 ± 0.13 |
0.78 ± 0.11 | |
| Guizard | Male |
1.76 ± 0.37 |
1.95 ± 0.30 |
1.77 ± 0.18 |
2.22 ± 0.38 |
| Female |
1.63 ± 0.20 |
2.00 ± 0.32 |
1.32 ± 0.04 |
2.68 ± 0.70 | |
| Combined |
1.70 ± 2.27 |
1.97 ± 0.28 |
1.55 ± 0.27 |
2.45 ± 0.56 | |
| Abdominal fat | Male |
1.00 ± 0.53 |
0.44 ± 0.40 |
0.89 ± 0.65 |
1.13 ± 0.47 |
| Female |
2.16 ± 0.32 |
1.84 ± 0.50 |
1.37 ± 0.10 |
1.15 ± 0.52 | |
| Combined |
1.58 ± 0.74 |
1.14 ± 0.87 |
1.13 ± 0.49 |
1.14 ± 0.45 | |
in the same line, values with the same superscript are not significantly different (p > 0.05).
Testicular characteristics as affected by the substitution rate of fish meal with cricket meal.
| Characteristics | Experimental diets (substitution rate) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T0 (00%) | T1 (15%) | T2 (30%) | T3 (45%) | ||
| Weight | Left |
1.32 ± 0.01 |
0.72 ± 0.49 |
1.15 ± 0.40 |
0.89 ± 0.73 |
| Right |
1.36 ± 0.17 |
0.72 ± 0.50 |
1.02 ± 0.32 |
0.98 ± 0.81 | |
| Total |
2.69 ± 0.16 |
1.44 ± 0.99 |
2.17 ± 0.71 |
1.88 ± 1.54 | |
| Testicular left/right ratio |
0.98 ± 0.12 |
1.01 ± 0.13 |
1.12 ± 0.12 |
0.96 ± 0.10 | |
| Gonadosomatic index |
1.38 ± 0.16 |
0.81 ± 0.62 |
1.08 ± 0.46 |
0.83 ± 0.69 | |
| Height | Left |
22.47 ± 0.19 |
17.86 ± 4.64 |
22.22 ± 1.96 |
19.30 ± 9.83 |
| Right |
22.40 ± 2.07 |
17.47 ± 3.41 |
20.39 ± 2.90 |
18.30 ± 9.77 | |
| Average |
22.44 ± 1.13 |
17.67 ± 4.02 |
21.31 ± 2.43 |
18.8 ± 9.8 | |
| Diameter | Left |
12.49 ± 1.62 |
9.52 ± 1.76 |
12.12 ± 1.63 |
11.66 ± 6.18 |
| Right |
12.64 ± 1.35 |
10.03 ± 1.28 |
12.31 ± 1.13 |
12.92 ± 6.81 | |
| Average |
12.57 ± 1.49 |
9.78 ± 1.52 |
12.22 ± 1.38 |
12.29 ± 6.50 | |
| Shape index | Left |
0.55 ± 0.07 |
0.54 ± 0.05 |
0.55 ± 0.05 |
0.59 ± 0.04 |
| Right |
0.57 ± 0.11 |
0.58 ç± 0.10 |
0.61 ± 0.13 |
0.70 ± 0.06 | |
| Average |
0.56 ± 0.09 |
0.56 ± 0.07 |
0.58 ± 0.09 |
0.65 ± 0.05 | |
in the same line, values with the same superscript are not significantly different (p > 0.05).
Figure 6.Evolution of the laying rate of quails according to the experimental diets.