The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of sumac and turmeric on performance, egg quality traits, and blood parameters of laying hens. Forty Lohman Brown hens at 30 weeks of age were distributed into four groups, consisting of five replicates with two hens in each. The experiment lasted for 42 days. Laying hens were fed different basal diets in treatment groups and control groups. The groups consisted of hens fed a basal diet with 0.5% sumac, a basal diet with 0.5% turmeric, and a basal diet with 0.25% sumac + 0.25% turmeric. Hens were given ad libitum access to feed and water during the experiment. The results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in terms of final body weight, egg production, egg weight, and feed intake after the groups were fed according to the diets as 0.5% sumac, 0.5% turmeric, and 0.25% sumac + 0.25% turmeric. Addition of turmeric increased egg production and egg weight, but reduced the feed conversion ratio compared with the control group. On the other hand, dietary supplementation with sumac decreased egg weight. Shape index, yolk index, albumen index, Haugh unit, and yolk color parameters were also not affected by dietary supplementation of turmeric and sumac. When layers were fed the 0.25% sumac + 0.25% turmeric-supplemented diet, yolk index was higher in number, but Haugh unit and albumen index were lower. Dietary addition of sumac and turmeric does not have any negative influence on performance and egg quality traits of laying hens. Dietary treatments do not significantly affect blood serum cholesterol, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels. With the supplementation of turmeric, AST and ALT levels are higher in number among all the groups. Dietary sumac and turmeric can be added at 0.5% level to laying hen rations without changing animal performance.

-The influence of different levels of expanded perlite on the performance and egg quality traits was studied in laying hens. Forty Lohmann Brown females at 30 weeks of age were randomly assigned to four groups consisting of five replicates with two hens in each. Four diet groups were supplemented with 0% (control group), 1%, 2%, and 3% perlite, respectively. Feed and water were provided ad libitum. There were no significant differences in final body weight, feed intake, egg yield, and egg weight. Feed conversion ratio and egg weight decreased with addition of 2% perlite. Dietary perlite supplementation has no significant effects on shape, yolk, and albumen index. Haugh unit was affected significantly by addition of 2% perlite. Fecal pH, dry matter, and NH 3 -N did not significantly differ among treatments. Dietary perlite has no negative effect on performance and egg quality traits except 2% perlite group. Dietary expanded perlite can be added at 1% level in laying hen rations without changing the animal performance.Key Words: egg, performance, perlite, poultry Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of probiotics on ruminal pH, ammonia nitrogen, production of short chain fatty acids (SCFA) and number of Ruminococcus albus and Ruminococcus flavefaciens. The probiotics blend was tested in vitro for 48 h incubation using "Hohenheim Futterwert Test" (HFT). There was no interaction effect of the treatment and incubation time on the ruminal pH and ammonia-nitrogen concentration. A supplemental probiotics blend tended to increase the total SCFA concentration in comparison to the non-supplemented control fermenter fluids (P> 0.05). There was a significant interaction effect of the treatment groups and incubation time on butyrate (P=0.042), valerate (P=0.045) and isovalerate (P= 0.028) concentrations. Total protozoa and total bacteria numbers were higher in probiotics supplemented fluid than in non-supplemented control fluid (P<0.001 and P<0.01, respectively). Dietary supplementation of a probiotics blend to the fermenters did not influence (P>0.05) the number of copies of R. albus. However, the population of R. flavafaciens was lower (P<0.01) in the probiotic supplemented group as compared with the non-supplemented control group. Our results showed that the probiotics blend might modulate both microbial metabolic activity and the population of ruminal microorganisms.

No abstract

No abstract