Poultry industry is largely based on cereals for energy component in poultry ration. However, certain anti-nutritional factors hamper the bioavailability of nutrients and need to be addressed to avoid compromised birds’ performance. The present study assessed the impact of phytase on enhancing the nutrient retention and phosphorus utilization in two different sorghum cultivars fed to broiler. In an open sided house, a total of 160, 14-days-old broilers were allotted to four dietary bioassay treatments and fed mash red and white sorghum grain with or without phytase enzyme (500 FTU/kg) for 12 days (including 4 days adaptation period). Standard lab protocols were adapted to measure proximate analysis, minerals and phytate content in grain and fecal samples. Sorghum cultivars were different in nutrient profile with red higher in protein content (11.41%). It was observed that phytase inclusion in grain increased the availability of all nutrients except crude lipids. Total tract nitrogen retention was increased by 3% in red sorghum compared to white. Minerals absorption was increased but differently in different cultivars with higher degradation of phytate in both red and white sorghum. Apparent metabolizable energy was significantly enhanced both in red and white sorghum by 5.9 and 4.5%, respectively. From these findings, it can be deduced that phytase is effective in improving the utilization of nutrients of sorghum by broilers at day-21 and also reduces the losses of nutrients into the litter.
Short Communication · Volume 51, Issue 3, 27 April 2019 · Open Access
Nutritional Evaluation of Two Sorghum Varieties in Broiler Fortified with Phytase
· · · · ·
Affiliations & Notes ⌄
- 1Department of Poultry Science, Faculty of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar Department of Animal Health, Faculty of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar 3Civil Veterinary Hospital, Dera Ismail Khan, Khyber Pukhtunkhwa , * Corresponding author: rifatullahkhhan@gmail.com
Article Info ⌄
- Journal:
- Pakistan Journal of Zoology
- Published:
- 27 April 2019
Abstract
Materials and methods
Two sorghum varieties (red and white) were obtained from the market and grounded to mesh form. The E. coli derived Phytase enzyme (500 FTU/kg) was procured from supplier in Pakistan and mixed well in the grains. The feed was made isocalerious and isonitrogenous to meet or exceed the energy and protein levels as recommended by the NRC (1994) as shown in Supplementary Tables I and II.
A total of 160 broiler birds were divided into two groups according to the sorghum varieties. Birds were further divided into 16 replicates. The trials lasted for 7 days.
During the last eight days, fresh feces were collected daily, weighed and stored in labeled plastic bags and stored at -20oC. Apparent metabolizable energy (AME) of the diet and gross energy (GE) of the diets and excreta were determined according to the method described by Khan et al. (2016). Calcium and P content of grains and feces samples were measured using acid digestion method and were detected using atomic absorption and spectrophotometer, respectively.
Nutrient digestibility coefficients were calculated by the difference between the nutrients consumed and voided by the broilers in feces.
The experiment was conducted in a 2×2×4 factorial design in a completely randomized design. Two levels of the varieties and enzyme were considered. The data was arranged in Microsoft Excel 2007. The effect of sorghum and their varieties were determined by using PROC MIXED procedure of Statistical Analysis System (SAS, 2003). P values equal or less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results and discussion
Digestibility coefficient values of DM, OM, nitrogen, crude fat, AME, retention of ash, CF, Ca, P and phytate of the two varieties of grains affect by the addition of the enzymes are shown in Table I. The results showed that addition of the enzyme significantly (P<0.05) increased DM, OM, ash, CF, Ca, P, Phytate and AME in both varieties.
Sorghum have great importance for its less cost and one of the best substitute of maize. According to production, sorghum is fifth most important crop (Mwithigaa and Sifuana, 2006). Hickks et al. (2002) observed that the chemical profile of sorghum is consisted of 12.5% crude protein and about 37% of fat. The fat and protein contents are in line and comparable to the results of the current study. In poultry, skeletal strength is important for growth and performance and mainly depends upon on phosphorous content in the nutrition. Ravindran et al. (1995) found that in cereal grains 50 to 85% of the P is bound to molecules known as phytic acid or phytate. Using exogenous phytase has considerably increased the availability of Ca and P , which is comparable to the present investigation that enzyme supplementation improved calcium retention by 4.0% in both varieties of sorghum. In addition, P digestibility improved by 4.7% in red sorghum and 1.6% in white sorghum. Consuming phytase in feed increased the availability of P resulting in decrease P excretion to the environment .
It has been reported that using high concentration of phytase resulting in increased growth performance of birds . It is pertinent to mention that in the presence of phytase, nutrients were more available to birds resulting in improved profile of digestibility of broiler. Several studies have shown that adding phytase
Table I.- Apparent total tract digestibility co-efficient of dry matter retention, organic matter, nitrogen, fat, ash, crude fiber, calcium phosphorus phytate and apparent metabolizable energy of red and white sorghum in broilers at day 21.
| Digestibility co-efficient | Sorghum | Pooled SEM | Probability of greater F-values in ANOVA | ||||||
| Red | White | Red | White | Sorghum type | Phytase | Sorghum type × phytase | |||
| E + | E - | E + | E - | ||||||
| Dry matter | 0.811a | 0.783b | 0.791a | 0.776b | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.08 |
| Organic matter | 0.831a | 0.813b | 0.841a | 0.823b | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 0.07 |
| Nitrogen | 0.611a | 0.593b | 0.591b | 0.586b | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.09 |
| Fat | 0.711 | 0.703 | 0.711 | 0.706 | 0.50 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.10 |
| Ash | 0.611a | 0.583b | 0.591a | 0.576b | 0.03 | 0.01 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.08 |
| Crude fiber | 0.641a | 0.623b | 0.631a | 0.619b | 0.04 | 0.2 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.08 |
| Calcium | 0.607a | 0.583b | 0.611a | 0.587b | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.03 | 0.09 |
| Phosphorus | 0.568a | 0.542b | 0.558a | 0.549b | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.09 |
| Phytate | 0.341a | 0.192b | 0.338a | 0.198b | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 0.01 | 0.09 |
| AME | 14.2a | 13.4b | 13.7a | 13.1b | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.09 |
to poultry ration increased the utilization of nutrients including energy and amino acids ; ; , which justify the present study. It has been reported that nitrogen retention has been improved by supplementation of phytase enzyme in broiler . The improved digestibility in the current study in response to phytase is well in line with the findings of some of the previous studies .
Conclusion
From this study, it can be concluded that phytase is an effective enzyme in improving the digestibility of sorghum in broilers. Sorghum varieties responded differently to phytase enzymes.
Supplementary material
There is supplementary material associated with this article. Access the material online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/2019.51.3.sc2
Statement of conflict of interest
Authors have no conflict of interest.
References
- Abd El-Hack, M., Alagawany, M., Arif, M., Emam, M., Saeed, M., Arain, M.A., Siyal, F.A., Patra, A., Elnesr, S.S. and R.U. Khan. 2018. Annl. Anim. Sci., 18: 639-658.
- Ali, H., Khan, E. and Sajad, M.A., 2013. Chemosphere, 91 :869-881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.12.050[CrossRef]
- Cowieson, A.J., Acamovic, T. and Bedford, M.R., 2006. Poult. Sci., 85: 1389-1397. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.8.1389[CrossRef]
- Farrell, D.J., Martin, E.A., Du Preez, J.J., Bongarts, M., Betts, M., Sudaman, A. and Thomson, E., 1993. J. Anim. Physiol. Nutr., 69:278–283
- Frost, T.J. and Roland, Sr. D.A., 1991. Poult. Sci., 70: 1640-1643. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0701640[CrossRef]
- Hicks, C., Tuinstra, M.R., Pedersen, J.F., Dowell, F.E. and Kofoid, K.D., 2002. Euphytica, 127: 31-40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019943805514[CrossRef]
- Liu, S.Y., Cadogan, D.J., Péron, A., Truong, H.H. and Selle, P.H., 2014. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 197: 164-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.08.005[CrossRef]
- Lott, J.N., Bojarski, M., Kolasa, J., Batten, G.D. and Campbell, L.C., 2009. Int. J. Agric. Res. Gov. Ecol., 8: 351-370.
- Khan, S., Khan, R.U., Sultan, A., Khan, M., Hayat, S.U. and Shahid, S., 2016. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr., 100: 649-656. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12419[CrossRef]
- Khan, R.U., Naz, S., Javadani, M., Nikousefat, Z., Selvaggi, M., Tufarelli, V. and Laudadio, V., 2012a. World’s Poult. Sci. J., 68: 97-103. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004393391200030X[CrossRef]
- Khan, R.U., Naz, S., Tufarelli, V. and Laudadio, V., 2012b. World’s Poult. Sci. J., 68: 245-252. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004393391200030X[CrossRef]
- McDonough, C.M. and Rooney, L.W., 2000. In: Handbook of cereal science and technology (eds. K. Kulp and J.G. Ponte Jr.). Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 177-201.
- Mondal, M.K., Panda, S. and Biswas, P., 2007. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 6: 201-206. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2007.201.206[CrossRef]
- Mwithiga, G. and Sifuna, M.M., 2006. J. Fd. Engin., 75: 480-486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.04.053[CrossRef]
- NRC, 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals and Poultry. 9th Ed., National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
- Ravindran, V., Cabahug, S., Ravindran, G. and Bryden, W.L., 1999. Poult. Sci., 78: 699-706. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/78.5.699[CrossRef]
- SAS Institute, 2003. SAS User’s Guide. Release 6.12 ed. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC
- Selle, P.H., Ravindran, V., Caldwell, R.A. and Bryden, W.L., 2000. Nutr. Res. Rev., 13: 255-278. https://doi.org/10.1079/095442200108729098[CrossRef]
- Ravindran, V., Bryden, W.L. and Kornegay, E.T., 1995. Poult. Avian Biol. Rev., 6: 125-143.
- Selle, P.H. and Ravindran, V., 2007. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 135: 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.06.010[CrossRef]
- Serna-Saldivar, S. and Rooney, L.W., 1995. In: Structure and chemistry of sorghum and millets (ed. D.A.V. Dendy). Am. Assoc. Cereal Chem., St. Paul, MN, USA, pp. 69-124.
- Sharlie, H.M.S., 2005. Phytase: Improving performance and digestibility. Hubbard Feeds Inc., Nutr. Manage. Guides.
- Subramanian, V. and Metta, V.C., 2000. In: Technical and Institution Options for Sorghum Grain Mold Management. Proc. International Consultation (eds. A. Chandrasher, R. Bandyopadhayi and A.J. Hall). International Crop Research for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Patacheru 502–504, Andhra Pradesh, India, pp. 242-247.
- Um, J.S., Lim, H.S., Ahn, S.H. and Paik, I.K. 2000. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci., 13: 824-829.
Supplementary material
Services
Article usage statistics
Loading…