Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/25111 |
Resumo: | The effects of the combination of enzymes in commercial laying hens need to be more explored in literature. To determine if the type of protease affects performance, egg quality, nutrient intake, and morphometry of intestinal mucosa of laying hens in peak egg production and fed with phytase, 780 25-weeks Hy-Line W36 hens were assigned to a completely randomized design composed of five treatments/diets (one positive control, two negative controls, and negative controls plus protease A or B), with 12 replicates of 13 birds each. There was no effect of treatments (P > 0.05) on egg production, egg mass and feed conversion, even though the nutritional restriction imposed by the negative controls reduced egg weight (P = 0.02), albumen height (P < 0.01), and Haugh unit (P < 0.01). Although inclusion of proteases in negative controls did not cause the calculated intake of protein and amino acids to return to the same amount consumed by positive-control hens, egg quality parameters returned to positive control standards with protease A. Intestinal mucosa responded to treatment only at jejunum, where birds fed with protease B showed greater (P < 0.01) villus height and crypt depth than those treated with protease A. These findings suggest that different proteases and phytases interact distinctly and, in consequence, induce different responses on the birds. Moreover, the behavior of egg quality parameters after protease A inclusion in the diet indicates that the nutritional contribution of the combination of this protease with phytase is greater than the contribution of protease alone. |
id |
UEL-11_8165131a07f7441f392fb8aff430ace7 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/25111 |
network_acronym_str |
UEL-11 |
network_name_str |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg productionSuplementação de fitase e protease para galinhas em pico de produçãoAmino acidEgg productionEgg qualityEnzymeNutritional restriction.AminoácidoEnzimaProdução de ovoQualidade de ovoRestrição nutricional.The effects of the combination of enzymes in commercial laying hens need to be more explored in literature. To determine if the type of protease affects performance, egg quality, nutrient intake, and morphometry of intestinal mucosa of laying hens in peak egg production and fed with phytase, 780 25-weeks Hy-Line W36 hens were assigned to a completely randomized design composed of five treatments/diets (one positive control, two negative controls, and negative controls plus protease A or B), with 12 replicates of 13 birds each. There was no effect of treatments (P > 0.05) on egg production, egg mass and feed conversion, even though the nutritional restriction imposed by the negative controls reduced egg weight (P = 0.02), albumen height (P < 0.01), and Haugh unit (P < 0.01). Although inclusion of proteases in negative controls did not cause the calculated intake of protein and amino acids to return to the same amount consumed by positive-control hens, egg quality parameters returned to positive control standards with protease A. Intestinal mucosa responded to treatment only at jejunum, where birds fed with protease B showed greater (P < 0.01) villus height and crypt depth than those treated with protease A. These findings suggest that different proteases and phytases interact distinctly and, in consequence, induce different responses on the birds. Moreover, the behavior of egg quality parameters after protease A inclusion in the diet indicates that the nutritional contribution of the combination of this protease with phytase is greater than the contribution of protease alone.Os efeitos da utilização em conjunto de enzimas exógenas para aves de postura precisam ser mais explorados na literatura. No intuito de determinar se o tipo de protease, em dietas suplementadas com fitase, interfere no desempenho, qualidade do ovo, ingestão de nutrientes e morfometria da mucosa intestinal de galinhas em pico de postura, 780 galinhas Hy-Line W36 de 25 semanas foram distribuídas em um delineamento inteiramente casualizado composto por cinco tratamentos/dietas com 12 repetições de 13 aves cada. Os cinco tratamentos foram: 1) controle positivo: dieta formulada de acordo com as recomendações nutricionais da Hy-Line, sem proteases, 2) controle negativo A: dieta controle positivo reduzida em energia, proteína e aminoácidos conforme a matriz nutricional da protease A, sem proteases, 3) controle negativo B: dieta controle positivo reduzida em energia, proteína e aminoácidos conforme a matriz nutricional da protease B, sem proteases, 4) controle negativo A com inclusão da protease A, 5) controle negativo B com inclusão da protease B. Não houve efeito dos tratamentos (P > 0,05) sobre produção de ovos, massa de ovos e conversão alimentar; porém, a restrição nutricional imposta pelos controles negativos diminuiu o peso do ovo (controle negativo A, P = 0,02), a altura do albúmen (P < 0,01) e a unidade Haugh (P < 0,01). Embora a inclusão das proteases em seus respectivos controles negativos não tenha garantido o mesmo consumo de proteína e aminoácidos observado no grupo controle positivo, a adição da protease A reverteu os efeitos adversos da restrição nutricional sobre o peso do ovo, a altura do albúmen e a unidade Haugh. O efeito dos tratamentos sobre a morfometria da mucosa intestinal foi detectado somente no jejuno (P < 0,01), porém, o consumo dos controles negativos não alterou a altura de vilosidades e a profundidade de criptas em relação ao controle positivo. Aves suplementadas com a protease B, no entanto, apresentaram maior profundidade de criptas que o controle positivo. Em conclusão, quando utilizadas em dietas suplementadas com fitase, o tipo de protease interfere no desempenho, qualidade do ovo, ingestão de nutrientes e morfometria da mucosa intestinal de galinhas em pico de postura.UEL2016-12-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionPesquisa Empírica de Campoapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/2511110.5433/1679-0359.2016v37n6p4285Semina: Ciências Agrárias; Vol. 37 No. 6 (2016); 4285-4294Semina: Ciências Agrárias; v. 37 n. 6 (2016); 4285-42941679-03591676-546Xreponame:Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELenghttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/25111/20083Copyright (c) 2016 Semina: Ciências Agráriashttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessVieira, Bruno SerpaBarbosa, Silvana Alves Pedrozo VitalinoTavares, João Marcos NovaisBeloli, Inês Gameiro ColvaraSilva, Guilherme Moreira de MelloLima Neto, Hélio RezendeCaramori Júnior, João GarciaCorrêa, Gerusa Silva Salles2022-11-29T16:18:38Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/25111Revistahttp://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrariasPUBhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/oaisemina.agrarias@uel.br1679-03591676-546Xopendoar:2022-11-29T16:18:38Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production Suplementação de fitase e protease para galinhas em pico de produção |
title |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production |
spellingShingle |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production Vieira, Bruno Serpa Amino acid Egg production Egg quality Enzyme Nutritional restriction. Aminoácido Enzima Produção de ovo Qualidade de ovo Restrição nutricional. |
title_short |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production |
title_full |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production |
title_fullStr |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production |
title_full_unstemmed |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production |
title_sort |
Phytase and protease supplementation for laying hens in peak egg production |
author |
Vieira, Bruno Serpa |
author_facet |
Vieira, Bruno Serpa Barbosa, Silvana Alves Pedrozo Vitalino Tavares, João Marcos Novais Beloli, Inês Gameiro Colvara Silva, Guilherme Moreira de Mello Lima Neto, Hélio Rezende Caramori Júnior, João Garcia Corrêa, Gerusa Silva Salles |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Barbosa, Silvana Alves Pedrozo Vitalino Tavares, João Marcos Novais Beloli, Inês Gameiro Colvara Silva, Guilherme Moreira de Mello Lima Neto, Hélio Rezende Caramori Júnior, João Garcia Corrêa, Gerusa Silva Salles |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Vieira, Bruno Serpa Barbosa, Silvana Alves Pedrozo Vitalino Tavares, João Marcos Novais Beloli, Inês Gameiro Colvara Silva, Guilherme Moreira de Mello Lima Neto, Hélio Rezende Caramori Júnior, João Garcia Corrêa, Gerusa Silva Salles |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Amino acid Egg production Egg quality Enzyme Nutritional restriction. Aminoácido Enzima Produção de ovo Qualidade de ovo Restrição nutricional. |
topic |
Amino acid Egg production Egg quality Enzyme Nutritional restriction. Aminoácido Enzima Produção de ovo Qualidade de ovo Restrição nutricional. |
description |
The effects of the combination of enzymes in commercial laying hens need to be more explored in literature. To determine if the type of protease affects performance, egg quality, nutrient intake, and morphometry of intestinal mucosa of laying hens in peak egg production and fed with phytase, 780 25-weeks Hy-Line W36 hens were assigned to a completely randomized design composed of five treatments/diets (one positive control, two negative controls, and negative controls plus protease A or B), with 12 replicates of 13 birds each. There was no effect of treatments (P > 0.05) on egg production, egg mass and feed conversion, even though the nutritional restriction imposed by the negative controls reduced egg weight (P = 0.02), albumen height (P < 0.01), and Haugh unit (P < 0.01). Although inclusion of proteases in negative controls did not cause the calculated intake of protein and amino acids to return to the same amount consumed by positive-control hens, egg quality parameters returned to positive control standards with protease A. Intestinal mucosa responded to treatment only at jejunum, where birds fed with protease B showed greater (P < 0.01) villus height and crypt depth than those treated with protease A. These findings suggest that different proteases and phytases interact distinctly and, in consequence, induce different responses on the birds. Moreover, the behavior of egg quality parameters after protease A inclusion in the diet indicates that the nutritional contribution of the combination of this protease with phytase is greater than the contribution of protease alone. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-12-14 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Pesquisa Empírica de Campo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/25111 10.5433/1679-0359.2016v37n6p4285 |
url |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/25111 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5433/1679-0359.2016v37n6p4285 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/25111/20083 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2016 Semina: Ciências Agrárias http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2016 Semina: Ciências Agrárias http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Semina: Ciências Agrárias; Vol. 37 No. 6 (2016); 4285-4294 Semina: Ciências Agrárias; v. 37 n. 6 (2016); 4285-4294 1679-0359 1676-546X reponame:Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) instacron:UEL |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
instacron_str |
UEL |
institution |
UEL |
reponame_str |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
collection |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
semina.agrarias@uel.br |
_version_ |
1799306075720122368 |