Tumbool Camel Research Centre (TCRC), Animal Resources Research Corporation, Ministry of Animal Resources and Fishers, Khartoum–Sudan.

THE EFFECT OF ADDITION OF PEANUT OIL TO BROILER Chick DIETS

(With 9 Tables)

By

M.H.M. Elbashir; Amir M. Salih*;

Khadiga A. Abdel Atti*

and Husna M. ELBasheir

* Department of Animal Nutrition, Faculty of Animal Production,

University of Khartoum.

(Received at 18/5/2011)

SUMMARY

An experiment was conducted to study the effect of varying levels of peanut oil supplementation for broiler diet, to assess feed intake, growth rate and feed conversion of broilers. The study also evaluated some of the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of meat produced from the broiler chicks. Oil was supplemented at 0.0, 1, 3 and 5% levels of the diet and formulated to meet nutrient requirements for broiler birds throughout the experimental period (47 days). Each diet was fed to 4 replicates of 8 birds each (128 birds). Addition of oil at 5% level had good effect on broiler performance, especially weight gain and feed conversion which was markedly improved. Abdominal fat accumulation was significantly increased with the diet containing 5% oil. The carcass composition (DM, ash, crude protein) were not increased among the treatments except ether extract which increased with increased level of oil supplementation.

Key words: Broiler, supplementation, oils, performance.

INTRODUCTION

The greatest part of the cost of a balanced poultry diet is incurred in providing energy. To discover the relative economy of using different energy sources an accurate and valid energetic evaluation system of poultry feeds is essential to compose the most economical rations. In modern poultry feed formulation, where an increasing demand is made on linear programming techniques, the exact knowledge of the available energy content is of considerable importance. The inclusion or rejection of a particular feeding stuff in the least – cost ration is greatly dependent on the used energy values. (DeGroote et al., 1970).

The use of fats and oils as important raw materials in the formulation of compound feeds for poultry has become firmly established throughout the animal feed industry, particularly with the interest in diets of high nutrient concentration employed in intensive system. Generally, it is recognized that they have approximately 2 to 2.5 times the energy yielding potential of carbohydrates. It is appreciated, however, that they are extremely variable commodities in terms of their dietary energy-yielding value, as a consequence of chemical structure of the constituent fatty acid and triglycerides. Furthermore, there is a considerable amount of confusion and misinformation relating to fats, particularly regarding the methodology employed in their evaluation. Interactions between them, such that it is often difficult to draw any firm conclusions relating to their nutritive value. With the increasing reliance on sophisticated linear programming packages in the feed industry, it is essential that reliable information relating to the nutritive value of available raw materials is at hand. Specifically, the dietary energy value is of considerable importance as this is usually the most expensive component of a compound feed. (Wiseman and Salvador, 1989).

MATERIALS and METHODS

A total of 200 broiler chicks (one day old) were used in this study. They are unsexed commercial (Hubbard) brought from coral company farms at soba- Khartoum and the experiment was conducted at poultry premises at the Animal Production Research Centre. The pens were cleaned and disinfected with formalin before the commencement of the experiment. The room temperature ranged between 25-42°C. Upon arrival, all chicks were selected, weighed, their mean body weight (42g).

Four iso-nitrogenous, isocaloric diets were formulated. Analysis of the experimental diets were calculated and determined at the Animal Production Research Centre (Kuku) and shown in Table (1, 2 and 3).  Diet A contained no fat (NF) and provided to all chicks for 6 days as an adaptation period. Then 128 healthy chicks were selected, with body weight ranged between 76-81gm. The 16 pens (8birds each) were randomly allocated to the experimental diets A, B, C, and D with addition of peanut oil at 0%, 1%, 3% and 5%, respectively. The assumed ME values were 8800 kcal/kg for peanut oil according to NRC (1994). Each diet was randomly assigned to 4 replicate groups of 8 chicks.

Vitamins and antibiotics were administrated in the water for four consecutive days during the fifth week. Feed intake and body weight gain were calculated on a weekly basis. Mortality rate and the ambient temperatures were recorded throughout the experimental period. At the end of experiment, birds were fasted for overnight. Two birds from each replicate were randomly selected, leg labled, individually weighed and slaughtered. One hundred grams of thigh meat were obtained from different experimental birds for analysis purposes.

Statistical Analysis:

This experiment was conducted using a complete randomized design. The data obtained (feed intake, body weight gain and feed conversion ratio) were subjected to analysis of variance (one – way ANOVA) using computer programme (SPSS). The significance between treatment means was determined using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT).

RESULTS

Inclusion of 1% peanut oil in broiler diet significantly (P<0.05) improved feed intake during the third and sixth weeks compared with those receiving 3% peanut oil- supplemented diet (Table 4). During the fourth week, 1% peanut oil – supplemented diet significantly (P<0.05) improved feed intake compared to the control diet.

Although weight gain increases weekly yet, 1% and 5% peanut oil – supplemented diet had higher (P<0.05) body weight gain at the end of the second week compared to the control diet, whereas, 3% supplementation significantly improved body weight gain by the end of the fourth week (Table 5). Body weight during the third week up to the end of the experiment tended to increase with 5% peanut oil – supplemented diet, but it did not reach significant level (Table 5).

All oil – supplemented diets improved feed conversion ratio as compared to the control diet during the first four weeks (Table 6). In the second week, control diet had poor conversion ratio (P<0.05) compared to that supplemented with 1 and 5% peanut oil. Whereas, inclusion of 5% peanut oil in the diet tended to decrease feed conversion during the fourth week up to the end of the experiment.

Although all groups receiving oil exhibited higher dressing percentage, the differences were not statistically significant (p>0.05) except in group fed 1% peanut oil compared to that fed the control diet (Table7).

Dressing percentage and accumulation of the abdominal fat tended to increase with increasing level of oil.

Inclusion of 5% peanut oil in broiler diet significantly increased (p<0.05) the accumulation of abdominal fat compared to the control diet.

The chemical composition of the thigh meat presented that the addition of oil has no noticeable effect on dry matter, ash and crude protein percentages (Table 8). The ambient temperature through the experimental period are recorded in Table 9.

Table 1: Ingredient composition of experimental diet on percent basis.

*Super concentrate contains (%): CP 40; lysine 12; methionine 3; Ca 10; P4; methionine + cysteine= 2 and ME 2100kcal/kg.

**  Vitamin and primex minerals provided per kg of diet: vit. A, 15000 IU; vit D3, 3000 IU; vit.

B1, 2 mg; viit. 5.5 mg; vit. B12 0.01 mg; D-calsium panthenate, 10 mg; vit. E, 5mg; vit. k 31 mg; Niacin, 25 mg; Choline chloride, 120mg; Ethoxyquine, 10 mg; Manganese oxide, 32.26mg; potassium oxide, 0.706 mg; Copper sulphate, 0.57mg; Zink oxide, 2.5mg; Copper oxide, 2.5mg and Ferrocabonate, 40.64mg.

Table 2: Calculated chemical composition (%) of the experimental diets.

*: Calculation based on analytical data of Sudanese feed obtained by Central Animal Nutrition Research    Laboratory-Kuku.  

Table 3: Determined chemical composition (%) of the experimental diet.

Table 4: Weekly feed intake (g/bird/day) as affected by adding of peanut oil¹:

¹ : Values are means of 4 replicates of 8 birds.

² : SEM: Standard error of the means.

a-b: Values within rows with different superscript differ significantly (P<0.05).

Table 5: Weekly weight gain (g/bird/day) as affected by adding of peanut oil¹.

¹ :Values are means of 4 replicates of 8 birds.

² :SEM: Standard error of the means.

a-b: Values within rows with different superscript differ significantly (P<0.05).

Table 6: Weekly feed conversion ratio (kg feed/kg body weight gain) as affected by adding of peanut oil¹.

  ¹ : Values are means of 4 replicates of 8 birds.

  ² : SEM: Standard error of the means.

 a-b: Values within rows with different superscript differ significantly (P<0.05).

Table 7: Effect of peanut oil supplementation on dressing percentage and the abdominal fat accumulation¹.

      ¹ : Values are means of 4 replicates of 2 birds.

      ² : SEM: Standard error of the means.

    a-b: Values within columns with different superscript differ significantly (P<0.05).

 Table 8: Chemical composition (%) of thigh meat.

      ¹ :Values are means of 4 samples tested.

Table 9: Average weekly values of maximum (Max) and minimum (Min) ambient temperature during the experimental period

DISCUSSION

The birds received dietary oil supplementation showed better performance in term of feed consumption, live weight gain and feed conversion than the control diet. Results showed that, during the first three weeks, birds that received the control diet consumed less feed than those received oil supplemented diets. The result is similar to the data presented by Serafin and Neshein (1970), which stated that young birds utilized fat less efficiently than the mature ones this is explained by inadequacy of bile salt in young birds. As the birds grow older, the addition of oil increases feed intake and thus consumed more energy than those received the control diet. These results were in line with Fuller and Mario (1977), who stated that the energy and nutrients intake were higher for all diets containing fats.

Inclusion of 1% and 3% peanut oil in broiler diet significantly (P< 0.05) increased body weight gain during the second and fourth weeks respectively, when compared to the control diet. These results confirm the data presented by Peebles et al. (1999) that the addition of 1.5 or 3% corn oil to the breeder diets increased body weight gain. Body weight gain was affected significantly (P< 0.05) by addition of oil at 5% during the second week. It tended to increase also the body weight from the third week up to the end of the experiment. Similarly Moran (1982); Brake (1989); Bohnsack et al. (2002), revealed that the addition of graded levels of fat in the diet improved body weight gain of the chicken.

The improved feed conversion ratio in the oil- supplemented diets during the second week supported the work of Gomez et al. (1987) who reported that vegetable oils improved feed conversion ratio in the starter period 0 – 28 days. However, in the last two weeks, it was not affected by the addition of oil.

This result agreed with Peebles et al. (1999) who found that feed conversion ratio was reduced with addition of corn oil to breeder diets at 22-42 days. Inclusion of 5% peanut oil in the diet tended to decrease feed conversion ratio throughout the experiment period. These results were in line with Pesti et al. (2002) who showed that increasing fat level from 3 to 6% decreased feed conversion ratio.

In this study, dressing percentage was increased by the addition of oil in the broiler diets but the differences were not statistically significant. These results agree with Jonkey et al. (1976); Harms et al. (1957) who proved that the dressing percentage of broiler was significantly increased as the energy level of the diet increased. Inclusion of different levels of oil (1, 3 and 5%) in broiler diet increased the accumulation of abdominal fat compared to the control diet. Similar results were obtained by Baladinic and Haris (1957) who found that the addition of fat to broiler diets increases the abdominal fat deposition.

The chemical composition of the thigh meat presented that the addition of oil has no noticeable effect on dry matter, ash and crude protein percentages. This result confirms the data reported by Carew     et al. (1964); Freeman (1983) that the dietary energy level alone has no effect on the broiler body composition. This was not in agreement with Olomu and Baracos (1989) findings.

REFERENCES

Baldini, J.T. and Haris, R.R. (1957): The effect of caloric source in a chick diet on growth, feed utilization and body composition. Poultry Sci. 36: 432 – 434.

Bohnsack, C.R.; Harms, R.H.; Harms, Merkel, W.D. and Russell, G.B. (2002): Performance of commercial layers when fed diets with four levels of corn oil or poultry fat. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 11: 68–76.

Brake, J. (1989): The effect of dietary fat on broiler breeder performance. Poultry Sci., 68 (Suppl. 1), 173 (Abstr.).

Carew, L.B.Jr.; Hopkins, D.T. and Nesheim, M.C. (1964): Influence of amount and type of fat on metabolic efficiency of energy utilization by the chicks. J. Nutr. 83: 300–306.

Degroote, G.; Reyntens, N. and Amich-Gall, J. (1970): The metabolic efficiency of energy utilization of glucose, soybean oil and different animal fats by gowint chicks. Scientific Publication No. 165 of the Government Research Station for Small Stock Husbandry.

Freeman, C.P. (1983): Fat supplementation in animal production – mono gastric animals. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 42: 351–359.

Fuller, H.L. and Mario (1977): Energetic efficiency of different dietary fats for growth of young chicks. Poultry Sci. 56: 459–557.

Gomeze, G.; Telleze, G. and Caicedo, J. (1987): Effect of addition of vegetable oil or animal tallow to broiler diets containing cassava root meal. Poult. Sci. 66: 725–731.

 Harms, R.H.; Hochreich, H.J. and Meyer, B.H. (1957): The effect of feeding three energy levels upon dressing percentage and cooking losses of white rock broiler fryers. Poultry Sci. 36:    420–425.

Janky, D.M.; Riley, P.K. and Harms, M.H. (1976): The effect of dietary energy level on dressing percentage of broiler. Poultry Sci. 55: 2388–2390.

Moran, E.T.Jr. (1982): Production and carcass quality responses of early and late marketed large toms to added fat during finishing period. Poultry Sci. 61: 919–924.

National Research Council (1994): The nutrient requirements of farm livestock, No. 1 Poultry. 2^nd ed. London, Her Majesty, Stationery Office.

Oloumn, J.M. and Baracos, V.E. (1989): The influence of dietary fat level and source on the performance of broiler chickens. Poultry Science, 68 (Suppl. 1). 108 (Abstr.).

Peebles, E.D.; Doyle, S.M.; Pansky, T.; Gerard, P.D.; Latour, M.A.; Boyle, C.R. and Smith, T.W. (1999): Effect of breeder age and dietary fat on subsequent broiler performance, 2. Slaughter yield.

Pesti, G.M.; Bakalli, R.I.; Qiao, M. and Sterling, K.G. (2002): A composition of eight grades of fat as broiler feed ingredient. Poultry Science, 81: 382–390.

Serfin, J.A. and Nesheim, M.C. (1970): Influence of dietary at Labile Factors in soybean meal upon bile acid pool turnover in chicks. J. Nut. 100: 786–795.

Wiseman, J. and Salvador, F. (1989): British Poultry Science, 30, 653.