This study compared the effects of sodium selenite and selenium yeast and their combination on laying performance, egg quality, antioxidant capacity, and selenium (Se) contents in tissues and eggs. Two-hundred-eighty-eight Jing Hong layers that were similar in laying rate (87.5 ± 0.38%) and body weight (1.70 ± 0.02 kg) were randomly distributed into 4 treatments for 11 wk (from 203 d old to 279 d old) with 9 replicates of 8 hens per replicate. The diets (corn-soybean meal diet) were supplemented with 0 [blank control (BC)], 0.3 mg/kg Se from sodium selenite (SS), 0.15 mg/kg Se from sodium selenite and 0.15 mg/kg Se from Se yeast (SS+SY), or 0.3 mg/kg Se from Se yeast (SY). Results showed that the laying rate of the SS+SY group increased significantly (P < 0.05) compared to the BC and SY groups. There were no differences (P > 0.05) in egg quality between the Se-supplemented diets and the BC diet. The serum glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) activity was increased (P < 0.01) in hens fed Se-supplemented diets compared to the BC diet. The liver superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity of the SY group was increased significantly (P < 0.05) compared to the BC group. Significant increase (P < 0.01) due to SY supplementation was noted in the serum vitamin E content compared to BC and SS. Layers fed Se-supplemented diets had higher (P < 0.01) contents of Se in the serum, liver, and kidney compared to the BC diet. Compared to BC, Se content in eggs was significantly increased (P < 0.05) by feeding supplementary Se. In conclusion, the effects of SS and Se yeast were approximately equal in promoting antioxidant capacity of laying hens, while Se yeast is easier to deposit into eggs and tissues. The diet with added equal amounts of the 2 sources of Se was more cost effective and affordable than a comparable amount of Se yeast to obtain the promising production performance and nearly similar Se deposition.

No abstract

No abstract

The ban on the use of antibiotic feed additives as growth promoters compelled the researchers for exploring the future utility of other alternatives. This experiment was designed to evaluate the effect of acidified drinking water on growth performance, gastrointestinal pH, digestive enzymes, intestinal histomorphology, and cecum microbial counting of the broiler chicken. A total of 540 one-day-old male broilers (Arbor Acre) were randomly assigned to 5 treatments, with 6 replicates of 18 chicks per replicate. Broilers received diets and water as follows: NC (negative control, basal diet, normal water), PC (positive control, basal diet + 8 ppm colistin sulfate + 8 ppm enduracidin, normal water), A1 (basal diet, continuous supply of acidified water during whole experiment period), A2 (basal diet, intermittent acidification of water during 0 to 14 d, 22 to 28 d, and 36 to 42 d), and A3 [basal diet, intermittent acidification of water (24 h/d from 0 to 14 d and from 10:00 am to 4:00 pm on d 15 to 42)]. During the entire period, the acidified groups (A1, A2, and A3) and PC group showed improve on weight gain, average daily gain and feed conversion ratio compared to NC group (P < 0.05). The pH in crop, proventriculus and ileum at 43 d declined by 0.04, 1.03, 1.23; 0.55, 0.69, 0.70; and 0.63, 0.74, 1.21 in A1, A2, and A3 group, respectively. There was a significant decline of lipase activity in the PC and acidified groups compared to NC group. The A2 group had higher villus height in jejunum than NC group. The PC and acidified groups reduced (P < 0.05) the total aerobic bacteria count of cecum when contrasted to NC group. Therefore, we conclude that acidified drinking water can improve growth performance, compensate for gastric acidity, and control pathogenic bacteria in broilers and may be considered as a potential alternative to improve production parameters. Discontinuous supply of acidified water had the same or even better influence on broilers compared to continuous supply.

No abstract