Veterinary Research Forum
Vet Res Forum

Effects of feeding with broiler litter in pellet-form diet on Qizil fattening lambs’ performance, nutrient digestibility, blood metabolites and husbandry economics

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Mohammad Reza Rahimi 1
Younes Alijoo 2
Rasoul Pirmohammadi 1
Masoud Alimirzaei 1

1 Department of Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

2 Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

https://doi.org/10.30466/vrf.2018.32081
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the feeding of Qizil fattening lambs with different levels of broiler litter (BL) on their weight gain, dry matter intake (DMI), nutrient digestibility, selected blood metabolites and husbandry economics. During an eight-weeks experimental period, 28 male lambs (an average of 42.21 ± 5.63 kg and ages of 7-8 months) were allocated randomly to one of four dietary treatments, including; control diet with no litter (NL, n = 7), diet containing 5% BL (LL, n = 7), diet with 10% BL (ML, n = 7) and diet containing 15.00% BL (HL, n = 7) as dry matter (DM) basis. The lambs were kept in individual pens and had free access to feed and water (ad libitum) throughout the study. In this research, DMI and feed conversion ratio were not influenced significantly by the dietary treatments, while average daily gain (ADG) was found to be significant. The lambs which consumed LL diet (5.00% BL) had the greatest ADG. The DM digestibility significantly influenced by dietary treatments, as the HL diet (15.00% BL) had the least DM digestibility. There were also significant differences in the crude protein and acid detergent fiber digestibility among the treatments. Blood urea nitrogen and glucose levels were significantly affected by the treatments. Low litter treatment had the least FCR and the highest economical advantage. In conclusion, feeding male Qizil lambs with BL can reduce production cost without any negative effects on performance.

Keywords

Broiler litter
Economics
Growth performance
Qizil breed

Subjects

  1.  

    1. El-Sabban FF, Bratzler Jw, long TA, et al. Value of processed poultry waste as a feed for ruminants. J Anim Sci 1970; 31: 107-111.
    2. Nadeem MA, Ali A, Azim A, et al. Effect of feeding broiler litter on growth and nutrient utilization by Barbari goat. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 1993; 6:73-77.
    3. Boda K. Non-conventional Feedstuffs in the nutrition of farm animals. New York, USA: Elsevier 1999; 13-15.
    4. Eliasi G. Evaluating beta- lactoglobulin gene polymorphism in the five sheep breeds through PCR-RELP. MSc Thesis. Agricultural Faculty of Tabriz University, Tabriz: 2002.
    5. Daniel J, Olson KC. Feeding poultry litter to beef cattle, MU Guide. MU Extension, University of Missouri-Columbia, 2005: G2077.
    6. Goetsch AL, Aiken GE. Broiler litter in ruminant diets implications for use as a low-cost by-product feedstuff for goats. In: Merkel RC, Adebe G, Goetach AL (Eds). The opportunity and challenged of enhancing goat production in East Africa. Langston, OK: Langston University Press 2000; 58-69.
    7. Fontenot JP, Hancock JW. Utilization of poultry litter as feed for beef cattle. Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia, USA: 2001.
    8. Areghore EM. Chemical composition and nutritive value of some tropical by products feedstuffs for small ruminant’s in vivo and in vitro digestibility. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2000; 85:99-109.
    9. Jordon DJ, Klopfenstein TJ, Adams DC. Dried poultry waste for cows grazing low-quality winter forage. J Anim Sci 2002; 80(3):818-824.
    10. Animut G, Merkel RC, Abede G, et al. Effects of level of broiler litter in diets containing wheat straw on performance of Alpine doelings. Small Ruminant Res 2002; 44: 125-142.
    11. NRC. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: Sheep, goats, cervide, and new world camelids. National Academy of Science. Washington, USA. 2007;1-384.
    12. Johansson MS. Chewing behaviour of growing cattle. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Animal Environment and Health Section of Production Systems. Skara, Sweden; 2011. Student report 279.
    13. Church DC. Taste, appetite and regulation of energy balance and control of food intake. I. Appetite, taste and palatability. In: Church DC (Ed). Digestive physiology and nutrition of ruminants. Oregon, USA: Oxford Press 1979; 281-290.
    14. Pond WG, Church DC, Pond KR, et al. Basic animal nutrition and feeding. 5th ed. New York, USA: Wiley 2005; 23-25.
    15. AOAC: Official methods of analysis. 15th ed. Washington, USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists 1990.
    16. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991; 74(10):3583-3597.
    17. Van Keulen J, Young BA. Evaluation of acid-insoluble ash as a natural marker in ruminant digestibility studies. J Anim Sci 1977; 44, 282-287.
    18. Obeidat BS, Awawdeh MS, Abdullah AY, et al. Effect of feeding broiler litter on performance of Awassi lambs fed finishing diets. Anim. Feed Sci Technol 2011; 165, 15-22.
    19. Knowlton KF, Wilkerson VA, Casper DP, et al. Manure nutrient excretion by Jersey and Holstein cows. J Dairy Sci 2010;93(1):407-412.
    20. Fontenot JP. Feeding poultry wastes to cattle. Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, Virginia, USA: 1996; 38.
    21. Mavimbela DT, van Ryssena JBJ, Last R. The effect of high broiler litter diets as survival ration on the health of sheep. J S Afr Vet Assoc 1997; 68 (4):121-124.
    22. Cullison AE. Use of poultry manures in steer finishing rations. J Anim Sci 1976; 42(1):219-228.
    23. Elemam MB, Fadelelseed AM, Salih AM. Growth performance, digestibility, N-balance, and rumen fermentation of lambs fed different levels of deep-stack broiler litter. Res J Anim Vet Sci 2009; 4: 9-16.
    24. Talib NH, Ahmed FA. Digestibility, degradability and dry matter intake of deep-stacked poultry litter by sheep and goats. J Anim Vet Adv 2008; 7(11): 1474-1479.
    25. Negesse T, Patra AK, Dawson LJ, et al. Performance of Spanish and Boer × Spanish doelings consuming diets with different levels of broiler litter. Small Rumin 2007; 69:187-197.
    26. Van Soest PJ, Mason VC. The influence of the Maillard reaction upon the nutritive value of fibrous feeds. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1991; 32(1-3): 45-53.
    27. Chaudhry SM, Naseer Z. Silages of citrus pulp-poultry litter-corn forage for sheep. Pak J Agri Sci 2006; 43: 173-179.
    28. Corrêa DS, Magalhães RT, Siqueira DCB. Ruminal dry matter and fiber fraction degradability from two stylos cultivars. Arq Bras Med Vet Zootec 2014; 66: 1155-1162.
    29. Mertens DR. Creating a system for meeting the fiber requirements of dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 1997; 80:1463-1481.
    30. National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. Washington DC, USA: The National Academies Press 2001; 72-74.
    31. D’Mello JPF. Amino acids in animal nutrition. Edinburgh, UK: CABI Publishing 2003; 265-291.
    32. Paul BN, Gubta BS, Srivastava JP. Influence of feeding unconventional cakes and poultry manure mixture on growth and feed efficiency in crossbred calves. Ind J Anim Nutr 1993; 10: 169-171.
Veterinary Research Forum
Volume 9, Issue 3
Summer 2018
Pages 245-251

  • Receive Date 15 August 2018

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us