Research Article

Effect of Fermented Rice Bran and Maize by Saccharomycess cerevisiae on Carcass Characteristis and Amino Acid Contents of Chickens

Duong Thanh Hai1*, Phan Thi Hang1, Nguyen Thi Thuong2, Zábranský Luboš3

1Faculty of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, University of Agriculture and Forestry, Hue University, Vietnam; 2Faculty of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Nong Lam University - Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; 3Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Studentska 1668, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic.

Received | February 16, 2024; Accepted | May 06, 2024; Published | May 31, 2024

*Correspondence | Duong Thanh Hai, Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Animal Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, University of Agriculture and Forestry, Hue University, Vietnam; Email: duongthanhhai@hueuni.edu.vn, duongthanhhai@huaf.edu.vn

Citation | Hai DT, Hang PT, Thuong NT, Luboš Z (2024). Effect of fermented rice bran and maize by Saccharomycess cerevisiae on carcass characteristis and amino acid contents of chickens. Adv. Anim. Vet. Sci., 12(7):1404-1409.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.aavs/2024/12.7.1404.1409

ISSN (Online) | 2307-8316

Copyright: 2024 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

INTRODUCTION

The production of poultry meat accounts 36% of the total meat in the global, and meat of chicken is 89% of the production of poultry (Gálvez et al., 2020; FAO, 2020). Previous studies shown that chicken production is short cycle, the meat is high quality and cheap protein source (Biesek et al., 2020; Marangoni, et al., 2015). Therefore, the consumptions of chicken meat are increasing in the world. In addition, meat quality is influenced by several factors such as body weight, age, growth performance and feed (Gálik et al., 2023). To improve growth performance, utilization of feed and condition of the health, the antibiotics have been supplemented in poultry production (Gollnisch, 2001). However, using antibiotic induce inbalance of dynamics of microbial system in the poultry intestine (Sorum and Sunde, 2001), and antibiotic residues in meat (Imik et al., 2006). Thus, many studies in the last decade have been conducted to found some replacements to improve the health and the performance of the poultry. Probiotics is one of the greatest alternatives.

Probiotics are the live micro-organisms. It have been shown that using porbiotics in the poultry diet improved growth performance, feed utilizations, health condition and meat quality (Popova, 2017; Zhang et al., 2021; Mohammed et al., 2021; Malematja et al., 2022). Besides, the feed fermented with probiotics plays an important role in the improvement of feed nutrition (Hasaan et al., 2015). Fermentation yields the bioactive peptides resulted from protein cleavage and therefore it increases the biological value of the feedstuff (Steinkaus, 2002). Futhermore, the production of fermented feed are high quality of peptides and amino acids source (Rajapakse et al., 2005), increase nutritional values and feed utilization in poultry, reduce crude fiber (Susi, 2012), increase fat and crude protein digestibility (Sukaryana et al., 2011), and improve the balance of amino acid (Ari et al., 2012).

It is well known that Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) is one of the type of probiotics. Its have been shown that supplement of SC to the chicken diets improves growth performance, feeds digestibility, feed convertion ratio and meat quality (Lutful-Kabir, 2009; Haldar et al., 2011; Cheng et al., 2014; Popova, 2017). In addition, fermentation of feeds with SC increased antioxidant properties and mineral availability (Dordevic et al., 2010), reduced fat deposition in animal (Santoso et al., 2000), improves protein, phosphorus, Methionine and Lysine content (Arzinnahar et al., 2021), increased digestibility of dry matter, protein and improved the height of villus in duodenum (Hang et al., 2020). However, effects of feed fermetation on carcass characteristics, meat quality and amino acid contents remain unknown. The present study was conducted to examinate the effects of fermented rice bran and maize with SC on carcass characteristics, meat quality and contents of amino acids of crossbred Ri chicken.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The current study was approved by the protocal of Ethics Committee, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice (code: 22036/2019-MZE-18134).

Feed preparation

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (SC) was obtained from ICFOOD Company (Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam). Fermented feeds were prepared as follows: Maize and rice bran from the basal diet (Table 1) were mixed with SC powder at 0.5g/kg of feed (a concentration of 107cf/g) and 40% water and kept for aerobic fermentation at 27 - 30 oC (room temperature) in 5 hours, following by put into polythene bag in an anaertobic conditions at room temperature for 3 days. Then, the fermented matter was mixed with the other ingredients of the diet (Table 1). Chemical composition of the basal diet (control) is presented in the Table 1.

 

Table 1: Ingredients and chemical composition of the basal diet.

Ingredients (%)	Age of chickens (weeks)
	5 – 7	8 – 13
Yellow maize	59.5	65
Rice bran	15	15
Concentration	25	19.5
Premix	0.5	0.5
Chemical composition
Crude protein (%)*	19.9	17.9
True protein (%)*	16.6	14.5
Lipids (%)*	5.2	5.1
Crude fiber (%)*	2.7	2.8
Total ash (%)*	6.7	5.7
Metabolic energy (ME, kcal/kg)**	3142.4	3154.5

 

*Analysed composition at the laboratory of Faculty of Animal Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, University of Agriculture and Forestry, Hue University. **Calculated composition.

 

Chickens, management and experimental design

Two hundred forty crossbred Ri chickens (Ri x Luong Phuong) 4 weeks old were randomly divided into 2 groups as control group and fermented group with four replicates (30 chickens/replicate). They were housed in cages (2m x 2m) for each replicate from the age of 4 to 13 weeks. The control group fed a basal diet (Control), while the treatment group (Fermented) fed a maize and rice brain fermentation mixed with the other ingredients of the diet. The water and feed have been provided ad-libitum.

Sampling and laboratory analyses

At the end of experiment, eight chickens (Fours males and four females) with body weight closest to the average were slaughted for each of the replicates. From the carrcass, the breast muscles have been cut to determine carcass, meat quality and amino acids contents. The pH of breast muscles at 15 min and 24h postmortem was estimated by pH metter (model HI99163, Gemany). The color of the breast muscle was determined at 24h postmortem using the Minola Chroma Meter (Model CR400, Japan) according to method discribed by Wanner et al. (1997). The CIE system was L* (lightness), a* (redness), b* (yellowness). The cooking and drip loss of the breast muscles were dementrated by using the method described by Schilling et al. (2012). Drip loss was evaluated at 48h postmortem based on percentage loss of the breast muscle weight during 24h thawed at 4 ºC. To evaluate cooking loss, the meat placed individually in the plastic bags and cooked in the water bath at 80ºC in 15 minutes. Cooking loss was determined by measuring the weight of the cooked and uncooked samples.

Dry matter, protein, ash and lipid contents of the feed were analysed at the laboratory of Faculty of Animal Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, University of Agriculture and Forestry, Hue University according the proximateanalysis methods (AOAC,1990). The concentration of amino acid composition in breast muscle was analysed according to the (AOAC, 2000; procedure ID994.12).

Statistical analysis

The data was analysed using SPSS soft ware progam (version 20.0, IBM Corp., NY, USA). The values were given in term of mean and standard error of the mean (SEM). The significance of differences between treatment group and control group were evaluated by the Student’s t-Test.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Carcass characteristics

The carcass characteristics of control and fermented groups are presented in the Table 2. The results showed that fermentation of rice bran and maize with SC did not affect carcass chatacteristics (p>0.05). These results agree with previous reports that using of SC did not affect the carcass yield of chickens (Chumpawadee et al., 2008; Karaoglu and Durdag, 2005). In addtion, SC supplementation in poultry production improved health condition, increased in weight gain, and reduced in mortality rates. Therefore, SC has been suggested to use as probiotic agent to replace the function of antibiotics (Malematja et al., 2022; Zhang et al., 2016, 2021). However, Fathi et al. (2012) demonstrated that using of 1.5 g/kg SC in the feed has increased yield of breast. In addition, Kidd et al. (2013) and Aristides et al. (2018) reported that the supplementation SC fermentation product increase the thigh and breast meat. The carcass yeild increase in the previous studies may be relevance to supplement of SC that can improve the nutrients digestibility such as DM and protein (Sukaryana et al., 2011; Hang et al, 2020). These above different findings may be affected by the kind or concentration of yeast used, strain of chickens, basal diet or environmental conditions.

 

Table 2: Effect of fermented feed on carcass characteristics.

Parameter	Control	Fermented	SEM	p
Live weight (g/bird)	1432.0	1463.5	32.2	0.68
Dressed weight (g/bird)	960.4	1006.5	25.4	0.42
Dressing percentage (%)	67.0	68.8	0.5	0.10
Breast meat (%)	17.5	17.8	2.2	0.19
Thigh meat (%)	25.0	25.2	3.4	0.12
Abdominal fat (%)	2.4	1.9	0.3	0.31
Organs (%)	7.3	6.8	0.4	0.50

 

Breast muscle quality

The breast muscle quality obtained from control and fermented groups is provided in the Table 3. There was not any significant difference in the level of pH, drip loss, cooking loss, and the color (lightness, redness and yellowness) of the breast muscle between the control group and fermented group (p>0.05). It is wellknown that the glycogen concentration in the meat related to pH and the meat colors (lightness, redness and yellowness) are most importance product standard for the dicision of the consumers. Therefore, these parameters change replexed on meat quality. These results in current study demonstrated that using SC to fermented feed for chickend did not affect on the meat quality (p>0.05). These findings agree with previous report that supplementation of SC is not affect on the cooking loss, water holding capacity, texture and colour of breast muscle of broiler (Pelicano et al., 2005).

 

Table 3: Effect of fermented feed on breast muscle quality.

Parameter	Control	Fermented	SEM	p
pH 15min	6.0	6.1	0.1	0.65
pH 24h	5.7	5.8	0.0	0.23
Drip loss 24h (%)	1.0	0.9	0.2	0.86
Cooking loss 24h (%)	21.9	21.4	0.9	0.82
L* (lightness)	53.8	54.2	1.2	0.88
a* (red)	2.8	2.3	0.4	0.58
b* (yellow)	7.7	8.9	0.5	0.29

 

Amino acid contents

Amino acids (AA) content in the breast muscle of control and fermented groups are presented in the Table 4. The results shown that the contents of essential amino acids (EAA: Arg, His, Meth, Phe, Thr, Val) and non-essential amino acid (NEAA: Asp, Cys, Glu, Ser, Tyr) of the breast meat were significantly higher in the fermented group than in the control group (p<0.05). Furthermore, total AA in the fermented group were higher than in the control group (p<0.05). However, no effect was observed on Ile, Leu, Lys, Ala, Gly and Pro (p>0.05). These results show that rice bran and maize fermented with SC changed almost AA contents of crossbred Ri chicken meat.

It is well-known that AA are the main precursors of the substances for meat flavour (Bachmanov et al., 2016; Delompré et al., 2019). Accordingly, Glu is the most importance AA effection on the taste of chicken meat. In addition, Asp, Phe, Thr, Tyr and Ser also are an important AA for umami taste (Ali et al., 2019; Huang et al., 2011). Furthermore, Meth, His, Ile, Leu, Cys, Phe, Tyr, Try, Thr, Lys, and Val are EAA for human (FAO, 2013). Therefore, improvement of EAA such as Arg, His, Meth, Phe, Thr, Val and NEAA such as Asp, Cys, Glu, Ser, Tyr in the chickens breast meat in the present study would be benefitial for humans such as promoting immune system function, the synthesis of proteins and hormones, muscle growth; stimulating the pancreas to synthesize insulin, and transporting oxygen from the lungs to the various parts, (Wu, 2009, 2013). These findings are similar to previous studies that supplement of probiotics effect on AA content of broiler muscle (Podolian, 2017; Santoso et al., 2015; Abdulwahab and Horniakova, 2013; Liu et al., 2012; Mahmood et al., 2005). In addition, supplement of synbiotic improved some EAA (Leu, Ile, Lys, Meth and His) and NEAA (Arg and Tyr) in the both breast and thigh muscles (Salah et al., 2019). These results may induced by the improving of the solubation of the protein and ability of the emulsifying of sarcoplasmic protein of muscles in chickens (Kim et al., 2017). Based on aboved findings mention that fermentation of maize and rice bran by SC increased the almost AA contents in the breast muscle, especially, AA related to the aroma and tasty of meat.

 

Table 4: Effect of fermented feed on breast muscle amino acid contents.

Amino acid (μg/ml of sample)	Control	Fermented	SEM	p
EAA1
Arg	9.69a	20.76b	0.69	0.001
His	7.67a	12.04b	0.79	0,01
Ile	3.92	4.18	0.28	0,41
Leu	1.58	1.95	0,38	0,38
Lys	31.79	36.98	2.96	0,15
Meth	2.15a	3.79b	0.37	0,04
Phe	5.32a	3.94b	0.62	0,03
Thr	6.38a	10.51b	0.85	0,01
Val	4.34a	7.20b	0.49	0.001
NEAA2
Ala	42.63	45.62	5.26	0,6
Asp	20,5a	26.39b	1.70	0,03
Cys	1.99a	3.82b	0.53	0,03
Gly	2.09	2.66	0.26	0,1
Glu	8.13a	11.06b	0.67	0,01
Ser	3.77a	7.32b	0.52	0.001
Pro	167.49	181.93	6.89	0,1
Tyr	13.02a	16.70b	0.94	0,02
Total	332.52a	396.16b	9.08	0.001

 

1EAA: Essential amino acids, 2NEAA: Non-essential amino acids, Arg: Arginine, His: Histidine, Ile: Isoleucine, Leu: Leucine, Lys: Lysine, Meth: Methionine, Phe: Phenylalanine, Thr: Threonine, Val: Valine.Ala: Alanine, Asp: Aspartic acid, Cys: Cysteic acid, Gly: Glycine, Glu: Glutamic acid, Ser: Serine, Tyr: Tyrosine, Pro: Proline. a,b different superscripts in the same row are significantly different (p<0.05).

 

CONCLUSIONS

Fermented of rice bran and maize with SC at 0.5g/kg of feed (a concentration of 107cf/g) did not affect on carcass characteristics and muscle quality, but increased proportion of most EAA such as Arg, His, Meth, Phe, Thr, Val and NEAA such as Asp, Cys, Glu, Ser, Tyr in crossbred Ri chicken breast meat. Furthermore, using SC in poultry diet improved gut health, enhanced growth performance increase in growth rate. Therefore, SC has the potential as a agent of probiotic to replace the antibiotic function in poultry production. In further research, it would be appropriate to focus not only on the amino acid contents in the breast but also in the thight.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study was supported by National Agency for Agricultural Research (Code: NAZV QK1910438).

Novelty Statement

The results of this study demonstrated that fermentation of maize and rice bran by Saccharomyces cerevisiae increased the aroma and taste of chicken meat.

AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION

Duong T. Hai, Phan T. Hang, Nguyen T. Thuong, Zábranský Luboš: Conceptualization.

Duong T. Hai, Phan T. Hang: Methodology, investigation, formal analysis, writing original draft preparation.

Duong T. Hai, Nguyen T. Thuong, Zábranský Luboš: Writing review and editing.

Duong T. Hai: Project administration

Duong T. Hai, Zábranský Luboš: Funding acquisition.

All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

Abdulwahab AA, Horniakova E (2013). Effect of dietary Lactobacillus spp. And Enterococcus faecium supplementation on muscle amino acid profile and protein properties in broilers. Arch. Zoot., 16: 31–40.

Alexander AB, Natalia PB, John IG, Masashi I, Xia L, Satoshi M, Stuart AM, Yuko M, Danielle RR, Michael GT, Gary KB (2016). Genetics of amino acid taste and appetite. Adv. Nutr., 7: 806S–822S. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.115.011270

Ali M, Lee SY, Park JY, Jung S, Jo C, Nam KC (2019). Comparison of functional compounds and micronutrients of chicken breast meat by breeds. Food Sci. Anim. Resour., 39: 632-642. https://doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2019.e54

AOAC (1990). Official methods of analysis. 15th ed. Published by Association of Offcial Analytical Chemists, Inc, Arlintong - Virginia – USA. pp. 1233.

AOAC (2000). Official methods of analysis. 17th ed. Association of Offcial Analytical Chemists. Gaithersburg, MD.

Ari MM, Ayanwale BA, Adama TZ, Olatunji EA (2012). Effects of Different fermentation methods on the proximate composition, amino acid profile and some antinutritional factors (ANFs) In Soyabeans (Glycine Max). Ferment. Technol. Bioeng., 2: 6-13. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajar.2012.91.98

Aristides LGA, Venancio EJ, Alfieri AA, Otonel RAA, Frank WJ, Oba A (2018). Carcass characteristics and meat quality of broilers fed with different levels of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product. Poult. Sci., 97(9): 3337-3342. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey174

Azrinnahar M, Islam N, Shuvo AAS, Kabir AKMA, Islam KMS (2021). Effect of feeding fermented (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) de-oiled rice bran in broiler growth and bone mineralization. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci., 20(38): 476-481. doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2021.05.006

Bachmanov AA, Bosak NP, Glendinning JI, Inoue M, Li X, Manita S, McCaughey SA, Murata Y, Reed DR, Tordoff MG, and Beauchamp GK (2016). Genetics of Amino Acid Taste and Appetite. Adv. Nutri., 7(4): 806S-822S. doi: 10.3945/an.115.011270

Biesek J, Ku´zniacka J, Banaszak M, Kaczmarek S, Adamski M, Rutkowski A, Zmudzi´nska A, Perz K, Hejdysz M (2020). Growth performance and carcass quality in broiler chickens fed on legume seeds and rapeseed meal. Animals, 10: 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10050846

Cheng G, Hao H, Xie S, Wang X, Dai M, Huang L, Yuan Z (2014). Antibiotic alternatives: The substitution of antibiotics in animal husbandry. Front. Microbiol., 5: 217. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00217

Chumpawadee S, Chinrasri O, Somchan T, Ngamluan S, Soychuta S (2008). Effect of dietary inclusion of cassava yeast as probiotic source on growth performance, small intestine (Ileum) morphology and carcass characteristic in broilers. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 7: 246–250. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2008.246.250

Delompré T, Guichard E, Briand L, Salles C (2019). Taste perception of nutrients found in nutritional supplements: A review, Nutrients, 11: 2050. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11092050

Dordevic TM, Siler MSS and Dimitrijevic BSI (2010). Effect of fermentation on antioxidant properties of some cereals and pseudo cereals. Food Chem., 119: 957–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.07.049

FAO (2020). Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/ca9509en/ca9509en.pdf (accessed on 25 March 2021).

FAO (2013). Dietary protein quality, evaluation in human nutrion. Report of an expert consulttation, fao food and nutrion paper 92. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

FAO/WHO (2006). Probiotics in food: Health and nutritional properties and guidelines for evaluation. FAO food nutrition Pap. 85. Rome: World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Fathi MM, Al-Mansour S, Homidan AA, Khalaf AA, Damegh MA (2012). Effect of yeast culture supplementation on carcass yield and humoral immune response of broiler chicks. Vet. World, 5: 651–657. https://doi.org/10.5455/vetworld.2012.651-657

Gálik B, Hrnčár C, Gašparovič M, Rolinec M, Hanušovský O, Juráček M, Šimko M, Zábranský L, Kovacik A (2023). The effect of humic substances on the meat quality in the fattening of farm pheasants (Phasianus colchicus). Agriculture, 13(2): 295. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13020295

Gálvez F, Domínguez R, Maggiolino A, Pateiro M, Carballo J, De Palo P, Barba F, Lorenzo J (2020). Meat quality of commercial chickens reared in different production systems: Industrial, range and organic. Annls Anim. Sci., 20: 263–285. https://doi.org/10.2478/aoas-2019-0067

Gollnisch K, Wald C, Berk B (2001). The use of different essential oils in the breeding of piglets. In: Proceedings of the 6th German Society Quality Research Conference. Jena, Germany, pp. 259–262.

Haldar S, Ghosh TK, Toshiwati BMR (2011). Effects of yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and yeast protein concentrate on production performance of broiler chickens exposed to heat stress and challenged with Salmonella enteridis. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 168: 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.03.007

Hang PT, Hong TTT, Tao TS, Quan NH, Na TT, Thao LD, Yasuharu S, Hiroshi K, Hai DT (2020). Fermenting rice bran and maize with Saccharomyces cerevisiae and feeding the fermented product to chickens. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 32(2).

Hassaan MS, Soltan MA, Abdel-Moez AM (2015). Nutritive value of soybean meal after solid state fermentation with Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol., 20(1): 89–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2015.01.007

Huang A, Li J, Shen J, Tao Z, Ren J, Li G, Wang D, Tian Y, Yang F, Ding W, Wu T, Lu L (2011). Effects of crossbreeding on slaughter traits and breast muscle chemical composition in Chinese chickens. Braz. J. Poult. Sci., 13: 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-635X2011000400005

Imik H, Hayirli A, Turgut L, Lacin E, Celebi S, Koc F, Yildiz L (2006). Effects of additive on laying performance, metaboloic profile, and egg quality of hens fed a high level sorghum (Sorghum vulgare) during the peak layaing period. Asian-Austral. J. Anim. Sci., 19: 573–581. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2006.573

Karaoglu M, Durdag H (2005). The influence of dietary probiotic (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) supplementation and differenslaughter age on the performance, slaughter and carcass propeties of broilers. Int. J. Poult. Sci., 4: 309-316. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2005.309.316

Kidd MT, Araujo L, Araujo C, McDaniel CD, McIntyre D (2013). A study assessing hen and progeny performance through dam diet fortification with a Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product. J. Appl. Poult. Res., 22: 872–877. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2013-00774

Kim H, Cramer T, Ogbeifun OOE, Seo J, Yan F, Cheng H, Brad KYH (2017). Breast meat quality and protein functionality of broilers with different probiotic levels and cyclic heat challenge exposure. Meat Muscle Biol., 1: 81–89. https://doi.org/10.22175/mmb2017.01.0002

Lutful Kabir SM (2009). The Role of Probiotics in the Poultry Industry. Int. J. Mol. Sci.; 10: 3531-3546. Doi:10.3390/ijms10083531

Mahmood T, Anjum MS, Hussain I, Perveen R (2005). Effect of probiotic and growth promoters on chemical composition of broiler carcass. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 7: 1036–1037.

Malematja E, Mavasa NO, Manamela FC, Chitura T (2022). Gut health, morphometrics, and immunomodulation of poultry species in response to probiotic supplementation. Comp. Clin. Pathol., pp. 1-10.

Marangoni F, Corsello G, Cricelli C, Ferrara N, Ghiselli A, Lucchin L, Poli A (2015). Role of poultry meat in a balanced diet aimed at maintaining health and wellbeing: An Italian consensus document. Food Nutr. Res., 59: 27606. https://doi.org/10.3402/fnr.v59.27606

Mohammed AA, Zaki RS, Negm EA, Mahmoud MA, Cheng HW (2021). Effects of dietary supplementation of a probiotic (Bacillus subtilis) on bone mass and meat quality of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 100(3): 100906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2020.11.073

Pelicano E, Souza P, Souza H, Oba A, Boiago M, Zeola N, Scatolini A, Bertanha V, Lima T (2005). Carcass and cut yields and meat qualitative traits of broilers fed diets containing probiotics and prebiotics. Braz. J. Poult. Sci., 7: 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-635X2005000300006

Podolian JN. (2017). Effect of probiotics on the chemical, mineral, and amino acid composition of broiler chicken meat. Ukrainian J. Ecol., 7(1): 61–65. Doi: 10.15421/201707

Popova T (2017). Effect of probiotics in poultry for improving meat quality. Curr. Opin. Food Sci., 4: 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2017.01.008

Rajapakse N, Mendes E, Jung WK, Je JY, Kim SK (2005). Purification of radical scavenging peptide from fermented mussel sauce and its antioxidant properties. Food Res. Int., 38: 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2004.10.002

Salah AS, Ahmed-Farid OA, El-Tarabany MS (2019). Carcass yields, muscle amino acid and fatty acid profiles, and antioxidant indices of broilers supplemented with synbiotic and/or organic acids. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr., 103(1): 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12994

Santoso U, Fenita Y, Kususiyah, Bidura GNG (2015). Effect of fermented Sauropus androgynus leaves on meat composition, amino acid and fatty acid compositions in broiler chickens. Pak. J. Nutr., 14(11): 799-807. https://doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2015.799.807

Santoso U, Ishikawa M, Tanaka K (2000). Effects of fermented chub mackerel extract on lipid metabolism of rats fed a high-cholesterol diet. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci., 13: 516-520. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2000.516

Schilling MW, Radhakrishnan V, Thaxton YV, Christensen K, Joseph P, Williams JB, Schmidt TB (2012). The effects of low atmosphere stunning and deboning time on broiler breast meat quality. Poult. Sci., 91: 3214-3222. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02266

Sorum H, Sunde M (2001). Resistance to antibiotics in the normal flora of animals. Vet. Res., 32: 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1051/vetres:2001121

Steinkaus KH (2002). Fermentions in word food processing. Comprehen. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf., 1: 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2002.tb00004.x

Sukaryana Y, Atmomarsono U, Yunianto VD, Supriyatna E (2011). Improvement of crude protein and crude fiber digestibility of fermented product of palm kernel cake and rice bran mixture for broiler. J. Ilmu. Dan. Teknol. Petern., 1: 167-172.

Susi (2012). Chemical composition and amino acid composition of Nagara bean tempe (Vigna unguiculata ssp. cylindrica). Agroscientiae, 28: 36-36, (In Indonesian).

Warner RD, Kauffman RG, Greasern ML (1997). Muscle protein changes post mortem quality traits. Meat Sci., 45: 339-352. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(96)00116-7

Wu G (2009). Amino acids: Metabolism, functions, and nutrition. Amino Acids, 37: 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00726-009-0269-0

Wu G (2013). Functional amino acids in nutrition and health. Amino Acids, 45: 407–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00726-013-1500-6

Liu X, Yan H, Lv L, Xu Q, Yin C, Zhang K, Wang P, Hu J (2012). Growth performance and meat quality of broiler chickens supplemented with Bacillus licheniformis in drinking water. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci., 25: 682–689. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.11334

Zhang L, Zhang L, Zhan XA, Zeng X, Zhou L, Cao G, Chen AG, Yang C (2016). Effects of dietary supplementation of probiotic, Clostridium butyricum, on growth performance, immune response, intestinal barrier function, and digestive enzyme activity in broiler chickens challenged with Escherichia coli K88. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol., 7(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-016-0061-4

Zhang L, Zhang R, Jia H, Zhu Z, Li H, Ma Y (2021). Supplementation of probiotics in water beneficial growth performance, carcass traits, immune function, and antioxidant capacity in broiler chickens. Open Life Sci., 16(1): 311-322. https://doi.org/10.1515/biol-2021-0031