Replacement of Vegetable Protein Sources with Marine By-Product on Nutrient Utilization, Protein
Digestibility, Meat Quality and Economics in Ross-308 Broilers
Najam-Us-Sahar1, Muhammad Shoaib1*,
Muhammad Aslam Mirza1, Shahzad Ashraf1, Shaukat Ali
Bhatti1, Muhammad Saif ur Rehman1 and Muhammad Farooq1,2
1Institute of Animal and Dairy
Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad 38040, Pakistan
2Production Manager, Ittefaq Feeds,
Karachi, Pakistan
*For correspondence: shoaib.imtiaz43@gmail.com
Received 07
April 2022; Accepted 26 July 2022; Published 25 August 2022
Abstract
The objective
of this experiment to study the effect of replacement of vegetable protein
with marine by-product (fish meal) sources on nutrient utilization
and economics in broilers fed on low protein diet. Five diets (CP 18%; ME 2950
kcal/kg); (R1) control: vegetable protein ingredients whereas in R2, R3, R4 and
R5, 25, 50, 75 and 100% of total dietary protein was replaced with a Hi-Pro
fish meal on a protein-equivalent basis. Four hundred and twenty-five (n=425)
day-old Ross-308 broiler chicks were divided into 5 treatments having 5
replicates (17 birds in each). Feed intake, weight gain, FCR and dressing
percentage were improved (P < 0.05)
in birds fed diet R3 in which fish meal contributed 50% of the dietary protein
compared to those on all-vegetable protein (Control-diet R1) and those in which
25% (diet R2), 75% (diet R4) or 100% (diet R5) of the dietary protein was
replaced with fish meal till day 21. Digestibility of CP was the highest (P < 0.05) in birds fed diet R3 in
which fish meal replaced 50% of the dietary protein. Production cost/kg live
weight was lesser in birds fed diet containing 25 and 50% replacement of fish
meal with vegetable protein sources. In conclusion, vegetable protein
ingredients can be replaced with fish meal at 50% in broiler diet. © 2022
Friends Science Publishers
Keywords: Fish meal, Soybean meal, Protein efficiency ratio, Protein
utilization, Economics
Introduction
Vegetable
protein sources like SBM, canola and sunflower meal have been traditionally
used in poultry diets. These ingredients have high protein content and high
digestibility of essential amino acids. Several factors including the physical
nature and presence of anti-nutritional factors affect the utilization of plant
protein sources by poultry. Vegetable protein ingredients (oilseed meals) have
low digestibility and are in general, deficient in Lysine, methionine and
cystine (Cyrino et al. 2010). Raw Full fat soybean causes a higher weight of
the pancreas and higher trypsin activity that leads to pancreas hypertrophy,
due to an overstimulation of the pancreas to secrete protease (Rada et al.
2017). Animal protein sources naturally contain biogenic amines, which
are synthesized from amino acids. Polyamines have the potential to support
growth, particularly when intestinal integrity is compromised, which may be of
importance immediately post-hatch when rapid growth and development are taking
place and the birds are particularly susceptible to pathogens and bacteria.
This is likely true during times of disease challenge (Smith 2001). These compounds are typically created in feed
ingredients due to the action of microorganisms. Bioactive compounds obtained
from synthesis within the body or from the consumption of animal protein appear
to have a positive impact on poultry production at low levels (Michiels et al.
2012).
Rendered animal products for example, feather meal, fish meal, poultry
by-product meal are alternative protein sources (Meeker
and Hamilton 2006). Fish meal (FM) is reported to have a high
nutritional profile but has some other associate quality issues. It is high in
Lysine, methionine and cystine which are often deficient in plant-based protein
sources (Hall 1992). Fish meal contains 60–70% CP (NRC 1994; Smith 2001). It has high nutrient digestibility and
biological value (Médale and Kaushik 2009)
and is rich in water-soluble vitamins (B12, choline, niacin,
pantothenic acid and riboflavin). The protein of fish meal has over 90%
digestibility (Zhou et al. 2004). Fish meal is low in fiber. Macrominerals and
trace minerals are present in an excellent amount in FM. Diets containing 2.5%
fish meal to broiler starter and grower rations have a significant linear
increase in intake of feed and body weight gain (Karimi
2009). Bhuiyan et al. (2012) reported a 10% reduction in feed intake of
broilers fed vegetable protein compared to animal protein diets. Vieira and Lima (2005) reported that broiler
birds fed diets containing animal or vegetable protein sources did not affect
production performance.
Fish meal is scarce in most developing countries, thus expensive for
use in poultry feeds (Smith 2001). Fish
meal is produced from non-edible oily fish or inedible portion of edible fish.
Research that establishes the threshold levels of biogenic amines that cause
negative effects in poultry is not available. Guidelines are available for
maximum histamine levels acceptable in fish for human consumption, with the
Canadian food inspection agency (CFIA) and the European Union stating a maximum
of 100 mg/100 kg of fish (Karovicova and
Kohajdova 2003). It is a useful feed ingredient for replacing vegetable
protein sources especially SBM in the broiler diet. This study determined the
response of commercial Ross-308 broilers to dietary protein contributed by fish
meal and vegetable protein sources in different proportions. The response of
birds was measured as growth performance, nutrient digestibility, efficiency of
protein utilization and carcass characteristics.
Materials and
Methods
Trial
location
The experimental trial was conducted at R&D
house at Institute of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Agriculture,
Faisalabad, Pakistan.
House preparation and management
One week before, the shed was ready for chicks the
arrival of chicks. Wood shaving was used as litter material that was raked on
daily basis. The experimental birds were raised under standard environmental
conditions. Drinkers were washed on daily basis.
Four hundred and twenty-five (n = 425) day-old Ross-308 chicks were procured from Jadeed Farms
& Hatchery Ross 308 breeder. Chicks were randomly distributed into 25
experimental units of 17 birds each. Pelleted diets were prepared in separate
batches for each treatment. Five diets (CP 18%; ME 2950 kcal/kg) were
formulated. Diet R1 control (FM 0) was formulated with all vegetable protein
sources (SBM, canola meal and sunflower meal) whereas in diet R2 (FM 25), R3
(FM 50), R4 (FM 75) and R5 (FM 100) marine by-product (Hi-pro
Fish meal) replaced 25, 50, 75 and 100% of the dietary protein on protein
equivalent basis. The control diet (R1) contains all-vegetable protein-based
sources without any contribution from fish meal, the diet R2 having a protein
share of 25% from fish meal and 75% from vegetable meals, diet R3 having an
equal share of protein that is 50:50 while the R4 diet having 75%
contribution of protein from fish meal and only 25% from vegetable sources.
Diet R5 of the experiment accounts total share of protein from fish meals which
means 100% protein coming from fish meals (Table 1–2).
Vaccines for ND + IB, IBD, IBD and ND were administrated
on day 3rd, 8, 18 and 25th, respectively.
Feed
Intake = Feed Offered – Feed Refusal
FCR
= Feed Intake (g) / Weight gain (g)
Protein
Efficiency ratio (PER) = Weight gain / Protein intake
European
Production Efficiency Factors (EPEF) = Livability/FCR × live weight (kg)/Age
(days) × 100
Protein utilization= Total body protein/protein consumed
× 100
On day 1,
four birds were picked randomly, fasted for 24 h and killed by cervical
dislocation for baseline whole body composition. On day 7, 14 and 21, two birds
from each replicate were kept off-feed for 6 h and killed by cervical
dislocation. Dead birds were stored in air-tight (polythene zipper) plastic
bags at -20°C. Thawing and drying of stored birds were done in a hot air oven
at
Digestibility trial was conducted on day 21st
through indirect marker method (Dourado et al. 2010). Celite® (a source of acid-insoluble
ash) was added to the diet @ 1.0% in feed and fed from day 1 to day 21st.
An adaptation period of 48 h was allocated before collection of excreta.
Polythene sheets were spread over the bedding to prevent contamination and
contact of fecal material with litter. Fresh fecal samples were collected into
zipper bags. Two representative samples from every replicate were collected and
dried at 65oC. Coefficient of digestibility was determined using the
following relationship (AOAC 2000).
Digestibility (%) = 100 - (100 × % maker in feed / %
marker in feces × % nutrient in feces / % nutrient in feed)
On day 21, two birds from each pen/replicate were
randomly selected and weighed. The birds
were slaughtered, de-feathered, eviscerated and processed for carcass response.
Dressing percentage (%) and organs weight were measured.
Table 1: Ingredient
composition of experimental diets when fish meal replaced vegetable proteins
Ingredients (%) |
Experimental diets1 |
||||
R1: FM 0 (Control) VM100 |
R2: FM 25 VM75 |
R3: FM 50 VM50 |
R4: FM 75 VM25 |
R5: FM 100 VM0 |
|
Rice hulls, ground |
0 |
2.7 |
4.3 |
9.7 |
11.1 |
Corn starch* |
41.1 |
42.7 |
46.9 |
49.4 |
52.7 |
Soybean meal (44%) |
25.9 (11.31)1 |
19.2 (8.4) |
13.9 (6.1) |
9.9 (4.3) |
0 |
Canola meal (35.5%) |
9.0 (3.1) |
7.1 (2.5) |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Sunflower meal (25.5%) |
11.0 (2.8) |
8.0 (2.0) |
10 (2.5) |
0 |
0 |
Fish meal (61%) |
0 |
7.2 (4.3) |
14.3 (8.7) |
21.5 (13.1) |
28.6 (17.4) |
Molasses |
1.0 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
3.0 |
Vegetable oil |
5.1 |
4.5 |
2.8 |
2.6 |
1.6 |
Limestone |
1.7 |
1.4 |
1.1 |
0.8 |
0.4 |
Mono-Calcium phosphate |
2.5 |
1.8 |
1.1 |
0.4 |
0 |
Salt |
0.3 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
Sodium bicarbonate |
0.18 |
0.22 |
0.24 |
0.26 |
0.13 |
Potassium carbonate |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0.16 |
0.41 |
L-Lysine sulphate, 56% |
0.54 |
0.46 |
0.38 |
0.24 |
0.20 |
DL-Methionine |
0.35 |
0.35 |
0.35 |
0.37 |
0.34 |
L-Threonine |
0.17 |
0.16 |
0.15 |
0.15 |
0.14 |
Celite® |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
Premix |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
Total |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
“*Corn starch
was supplied by the courtesy of Rafhan Maize products, Faisalabad.
1Numbers in brackets shows actual contribution of protein
(CP) by vegetable and fish meal source”
Table 2: Nutrient composition of experimental diets when fish meal replaced
vegetable proteins
Nutrients
(%) |
Experimental diets |
||||
R1: FM 0 (Control) VM100 |
R2: FM 25 VM75 |
R3: FM 50 VM50 |
R4: FM 75 VM25 |
R5: FM 100 VM0 |
|
Calculated |
|
|
|
|
|
CP |
18 |
18 |
18 |
18 |
18 |
ME, Kcal/kg |
2950 |
2950 |
2950 |
2950 |
2950 |
EE |
5.99 |
6.0 |
5.0 |
5.4 |
5.0 |
CF |
5.0 |
4.95 |
5.12 |
4.85 |
4.97 |
Calcium |
1.3 |
1.3 |
1.3 |
1.3 |
1.3 |
Phosphorus, available |
0.65 |
0.65 |
0.65 |
0.65 |
0.66 |
Sodium |
0.2 |
0.21 |
0.25 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
Potassium |
0.75 |
0.67 |
0.58 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
Chloride |
0.25 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
0.2 |
DEB |
202.6 |
202.9 |
200 |
200.5 |
201.4 |
Dig. Lysine |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
1.2 |
Dig Meth + Cys |
0.88 |
0.88 |
0.88 |
0.88 |
0.88 |
Dig. Threonine |
0.78 |
0.78 |
0.78 |
0.78 |
0.78 |
Dig. Tryptophan |
0.22 |
0.2 |
0.19 |
0.17 |
0.15 |
Analyzed |
|||||
DM |
89.5 |
90.2 |
88.5 |
89.5 |
89.7 |
CP |
17.4 |
17.5 |
17.1 |
17.3 |
17.4 |
EE |
4.9 |
5.1 |
5.1 |
4.9 |
5.3 |
Ash |
7.3 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
7.3 |
7.1 |
The pH of ground breast (1 g) blend
in 10 mL distilled water was measured (Jeacocke
1977). About 15 gm chopped breast sample was centrifuged at 4ºC for 10
to 15 min at 5000 rpm to measure water holding capacity (Pearson and Dutson 1995). Cooking loss is the loss in weight of
breast portion boiled at 80ºC for half hour (Ahmed
et al. 2015).
Meat samples from breast fillet were prepared for
chemical analysis to determine DM, CP, EE and crude ash according to AOAC (2000). Dry matter was performed by drying
the sample in a hot air oven. Crude protein was done by the micro Kjeldahl
method. Ether extract was analyzed by n-hexane extraction and crude ash by
burning the sample in a Muffle furnace.
Economics
Cost of production per live weight was recorded on the
basis of feed cost and live bird weight.
Statistical analysis
“Data collected were analyzed using analysis of variance
technique under CRD and Tukey’s test was used to compare treatment means (Steel et al.
1997)”.
Table 3: Growth
performance of broiler birds fed different ratio of fish meal to vegetable
protein sources
Parameters |
Fish meal/vegetable meal ratio |
|
|
||||
R1: FM 0
(Control) VM100 |
R2: FM 25 VM75 |
R3: FM 50 VM50 |
R4: FM 75 VM25 |
R5: FM 100 VM0 |
SEM |
P value |
|
Weight gain (g) |
709.38d |
808.19ab |
833.50a |
769.66bc |
727.73cd |
13.5 |
0.0001 |
Feed intake (g) |
1142.01b |
1210.29ab |
1229.25a |
1207.62ab |
1147.44b |
17.3 |
0.004 |
FCR |
1.62a |
1.50bc |
1.47c |
1.57ab |
1.58ab |
0.02 |
0.001 |
Protein intake (g) |
161.85b |
208.54a |
226.67a |
228.46a |
221.61a |
9.94 |
0.001 |
Protein efficiency ratio |
3.00b |
3.44ab |
3.62a |
3.67a |
3.48ab |
0.15 |
0.034 |
Protein utilization |
40.65ab |
44.79a |
46.50a |
44.99a |
38.22b |
1.42 |
0.003 |
Livability (%) |
96.47 |
97.65 |
96.47 |
92.94 |
91.76 |
2.00 |
0.208 |
EPEF |
220.81ab |
264.80a |
270.54a |
230.01ab |
194.93b |
13.3 |
0.003 |
“SEM: Standard error of mean; P > 0.05 (Non-Significant), P
< 0.05 (Significant)
FM: Fish meal, VM: Vegetable Meals, FCR: Feed conversion
ratio, EPEF: European production
efficiency factor
* Treatments: Replacement of FM with VM at 0, 25, 50, 75
and 100% on a protein equivalent basis”
Table 4: Carcass response of broiler birds fed different ratio of
fish meal to vegetable protein sources
Parameters |
Ratios of Fish meal Vegetable meal |
|
|
||||
R1: FM 0
(Control) VM100 |
R2: FM 25 VM75 |
R3: FM 50 VM50 |
R4: FM 75 VM25 |
R5: FM 100 VM0 |
SEM |
P value |
|
Dressing percentage (%) |
53.5ab |
55.7ab |
56.4a |
54.7ab |
52.7b |
0.711 |
0.039 |
Breast meat yield (%) |
31.0 |
30.1 |
30.2 |
29.7 |
29.1 |
0.554 |
0.090 |
Thigh meat yield (%) |
19.9b |
23.2ab |
23.8a |
22.5ab |
21.2ab |
0.814 |
0.043 |
Neck weight (%) |
2.49 |
2.39 |
2.40 |
2.53 |
2.40 |
0.094 |
0.085 |
Liver weight (%) |
2.67 |
2.78 |
2.89 |
3.16 |
2.92 |
0.145 |
0.124 |
Heart weight (%) |
0.75 |
0.66 |
0.60 |
0.63 |
0.63 |
0.045 |
0.083 |
Gizzard weight (%) |
1.53 |
1.36 |
1.56 |
1.58 |
1.60 |
0.082 |
0.253 |
Abdominal fat (%) |
1.50 |
1.32 |
1.67 |
1.40 |
1.73 |
0.136 |
0.094 |
“SEM: Standard error of mean; P > 0.05 (Non-Significant), P
< 0.05 (Significant)
FM: Fish meal, VM: Vegetable Meals
* Treatments: Replacement of FM with VM at 0, 25, 50, 75
and 100% on a protein equivalent basis”
Results
Growth performance
Data on weekly weight gain, weekly feed intake, weekly
FCR and EPEF is shown in Table 3. Higher weight gain (P < 0.05) was recorded in birds fed diet containing blend of 50%
fish meal as an animal protein source and 50% vegetable protein (SBM, CM and
SFM) sources on protein equivalent basis while lower weight gain was noted in
birds fed diet having 0% fish meal as an animal protein source. Birds fed diet
containing blend of 50% fish meal as protein source and 50% vegetable protein
sources on protein equivalent basis had higher feed intake (P < 0.05) and those fed 0 and 100%
fish meal-based diet had lower feed intake. Further, better FCR (P < 0.05) was recorded in birds fed
diet having 50% share of protein from fish meal and 50% from vegetable protein
sources; however, it was poor in birds fed diet formulated solely from
vegetable protein sources. Higher (P <
0.05) European production efficiency factor was recorded in birds fed diet
containing 25 and 50% protein share from fish meal on protein equivalent basis
while lower was noted in group fed diet containing 100% protein from fish meal
on protein equivalent basis.
Nutrients
utilization
Protein intake and PER were not affected (P > 0.05) by various ratios of animal
to vegetable protein sources. However, higher (P < 0.05) protein utilization was found in birds fed containing
blend of 50% vegetable and 50 fish meal as protein source of protein equivalent
basis in broiler diet. When the protein share of fish meal exceeded 50%, the
protein utilization was reduced significantly in 75 and 100% treatment group
(Table 3).
Carcass characteristics
Highest (P < 0.05)
dressing percentage (%) of live weight and thigh meat was observed in birds fed
diet having blend of 50% fish meal and 50% vegetable protein source (50FM) on
protein equivalent basis. However, breast meat yield, neck weight, liver
weight, gizzard weight, heart weight and abdominal fat pad were similar (P > 0.05) affected by dietary
treatments (Table 4).
Meat
quality and proximate composition
Water holding capacity, pH and cooking loss were
measured. Results showed that different ratios of animal to vegetable protein
sources caused no significant (P > 0.05)
effects on meat quality parameters. A similar finding was noted in breast meat
proximate with no significant effect (P >
0.05) on CP, EE, Ash and Moisture percentages due to different ratios of FM
to vegetable sources (Table 5).
Crude
protein digestibility
Crude
protein digestibility was significantly (P
< 0.05) higher in broilers fed having a blend of 50% fish meal and 50% Table 5: Meat quality and breast proximate of
broiler birds fed different ratio of fish meal to vegetable protein sources
Parameters |
Ratios of Fish meal Vegetable meal |
|
|
||||
R1: FM 0 (Control) VM100 |
R2: FM 25 VM75 |
R3: FM 50 VM50 |
R4: FM 75 VM25 |
R5: FM 100 VM0 |
SEM |
P value |
|
Meat quality parameters |
|
|
|
|
|
||
WHC (%) |
58.8 |
59.0 |
61.2 |
56.7 |
60.9 |
2.38 |
0.69 |
PH |
6.1 |
6.1 |
6.1 |
6.2 |
6.1 |
0.05 |
0.72 |
Cooking loss (%) |
27.0 |
27.2 |
25.3 |
27.7 |
33.1 |
2.12 |
0.18 |
Breast meat proximate (%) |
|
|
|
|
|
||
Moisture |
74.4 |
74.0 |
74.3 |
73.8 |
73.6 |
0.92 |
0.969 |
Ash |
3.7 |
3.6 |
3.3 |
3.6 |
3.1 |
0.26 |
0.529 |
CP |
18.3 |
19.2 |
20.3 |
20.1 |
20.1 |
0.66 |
0.227 |
EE |
1.6 |
1.9 |
1.9 |
2.0 |
1.9 |
0.12 |
0.33 |
“SEM: Standard error of mean; P > 0.05 (Non-Significant), P
< 0.05 (Significant)
FM: Fish meal, VM: Vegetable Meals
* Treatments: Replacement of FM with VM at 0, 25, 50, 75
and 100% on a protein equivalent basis”
Table
6: Production
cost per kg live weight of broiler birds fed different ratio of fish meal to
vegetable protein sources
|
Ratios of Fish meal Vegetable meal |
|
|
||||
Production Cost (Rs.) |
R1: FM 0 (Control) VM100 |
R2: FM 25 VM75 |
R3: FM 50 VM50 |
R4: FM 75 VM25 |
R5: FM 100 VM0 |
SEM |
P value |
Bird cost |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
25 |
- |
- |
Feed cost / bird |
75.04 |
80.86 |
81.07 |
79.72 |
84.95 |
4.23 |
0.599 |
Miscellaneous1 |
20 |
20 |
20 |
20 |
20 |
- |
- |
Production cost / bird2 |
120.04 |
125.86 |
126.07 |
124.72 |
129.95 |
4.23 |
0.599 |
Av. body weight (g) |
749.94b |
843.38a |
864.78a |
803.60ab |
765.94b |
16.4 |
0.0001 |
Production cost / kg |
160.07ab |
149.23b |
145.78b |
155.21ab |
169.66a |
4.79 |
0.017 |
“1 Miscellaneous cost include vaccination cost, farm
preparation and brooding expenditures
2 Production
cost per bird = Bird cost + Feed cost per bird + Miscellaneous
a-b values of superscript different in row differ significantly”
Fig. 1: Effect of
different vegetable to animal protein ratios on crude protein digestibility in
broiler
vegetable protein source diet (50FM) on protein
equivalent basis. A lower (P < 0.05)
CP digestibility was noted in birds fed diet containing no fish meal (Control)
and 100% fish meal (Fig. 1).
Economics
efficiency
Production cost per kg live weight was lower in birds
fed diet containing 25 and 50% replacement of fish meal with vegetable protein
sources (Table 6).
Discussion
When fish meal
contributed 50% of the dietary protein in broilers’ diet, it resulted in higher
feed intake, higher BWG and showed the best FCR. Fish meal has been demonstrated to have high biological
value, high CP content, high amino acid quality (Médale
and Kaushik 2009) and is reported to contain unidentified growth
factors. Results are in according with Frempong et al. (2019) who showed that
replacing FM with SBM resulted in higher BW and FI. Shabani et al. (2018)
demonstrated the similar results who reported that the use of fish byproduct
meal improved BW and FCR. Findings of Mikulec et al. (2004) showed that birds
of control group fed FM had higher weight gain and better FCR than those fed
SBM. Birds can be shifted from animal sources to vegetable sources or vegetable
source to animal sources without compromising their performance (Hossain et al.
2014). Results support
a study that reported animal and plant protein (50:50) were the most
effective in improving live body weight and FCR (Abro
et al. 2012). It was further
demonstrated that feed intake and BWG increased
as fish meal level increased from 0 to 2.5% (Karimi
2009). Higher body weight gain and
better FCR was reported for birds fed diet containing 50:50 ratios of blood
meal and cassava leaf meal (Adeyemi et al. 2012). Wang et al.
(2012) reported that feed cost was decreased and FCR improved by
replacing high-protein ingredients like FM, corn gluten meal and SMB with
fermented SBM in diet of broiler birds.
Carcass response was higher in birds fed diet containing
50% protein from fish meal and 50% from that vegetable protein sources. Breast
yield, neck weight, liver, gizzard, heart and relative abdominal fat weights
were not influenced by different ratio of animal to vegetable protein sources.
Results are in according with Abro et al. (2012) who showed that
carcass weight was higher in birds when fed diet containing animal and plant
protein (50:50), however, weight of edible and non-edible organ was
non-significant. Shifting from animal to vegetable protein sources or vice versa reported no effect on carcass
response or individual organ weights (Mikulec et al. 2004; Hossain et al. 2014).
Crude protein digestibility was higher in birds fed diet
containing higher fish meal content. This might be due to higher digestibility
coefficient of fish meal that is over 90% (Zhou et al. 2004). Results are
in according with the findings of Sahar et al. (2021) who reported that
addition of protease in fish meal based diet had improved protein
digestibility. Results are
consistent with the outcome of Agbede and Aletor (2003) who showed that 50% ratio of fish meal and
Glyricidia leaf protein concentrate showed higher nitrogen (N) retention. Improved
digestibility of CP and ether extract and reduced excreta ammonia concentration
in birds fed fish meal based diets (Shabani et al. 2018). The broiler
chickens fed PBM based diets improved digestibility for nitrogen
compared with corn-soya diets (Mahmood et al. 2017).
Conclusion
The dietary protein contributed by vegetable protein ingredients
like SBM, canola meal and sunflower meal when substituted on protein equivalent
basis with fish meal at 25–75% in broiler starting diets (day 1–21) improved
feed intake, BWG, FCR, PER, protein digestibility and net protein utilization.
So the blend of protein sources FM/VM was generally better than either
vegetable protein or fish meal alone.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the material support provided by
Mr. Usman Qayum (Chief Executive and Managing Director), Rafhan Maize Products
Co. Ltd. for supplying corn starch. Also, the authors acknowledge the
fellowship provided by the Higher Education Commission Pakistan (HEC) to
Najam-us-Sahar under the framework of HEC Indigenous Ph.D. Fellowship Program.
Author Contributions
NS did experimental
work, MS write manuscript, MAM,
SA and SAB performed experimental designing, SAB and MF performed data
analysis, MS and MSR did finalize the manuscript.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts
of interest.
Data Availability
Data are available on a reasonable request.
Ethics Approval
All the experimental protocols were reviewed and
approved by the Departmental Scrutiny Committee of the University of
Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan via letter No. 34693-96.
References
Hossain MA, AF Islam, PA Iji (2014). Effect of
production phase on growth, enzyme activities and feed selection of broilers
raised on vegetable protein diet. Asian-Aust
J Anim Sci 27:1593‒1599
Karovicova J, Z Kohajdova (2003). Biogenic amines in
food. Chem Pap 59:70‒79
Médale F, S Kaushik (2009). Protein sources in feed for
farmed fish. Cahiers Agric 18:103‒111
Meeker DL, CR Hamilton (2006). An overview of the
rendering industry. Essent Rend 1:1‒16