2012
DOI: 10.1590/s1516-35982012000800022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of cysteamine associated with different energy patterns in diets for broiler chickens

Abstract: -This experiment was conducted with the objective of evaluating cysteamine (CS) supplementation in broiler chick diets with different energy density patterns. A total of 980 chicks of the Cobb 500 strain at one day of age were allocated into 28 plots. A completely randomized design in a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement, with 7 replications, was adopted. The factors under study were the supplementation (or absence) of cysteamine (60 mg/kg and 80 mg/kg of feed in the starter and growth/finishing phases, respectively)… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
10
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A low dose of cysteamine increases the ADFI, while the higher doses of cysteamine have no effect on growth performance, or they may even have a negative impact . In many studies, the positive correlation between cysteamine and growth performance and FE has been found in fishes, rats, pigs, and broilers . In our study, no significant difference was found in feed conversion ratio, thus corroborating the study by Liu et al ., who also found no significant difference in FE between treatments with 0.070 g kg −1 cysteamine and control in finishing pigs.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…A low dose of cysteamine increases the ADFI, while the higher doses of cysteamine have no effect on growth performance, or they may even have a negative impact . In many studies, the positive correlation between cysteamine and growth performance and FE has been found in fishes, rats, pigs, and broilers . In our study, no significant difference was found in feed conversion ratio, thus corroborating the study by Liu et al ., who also found no significant difference in FE between treatments with 0.070 g kg −1 cysteamine and control in finishing pigs.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Others have reported similar responses in broiler chickens fed different energy levels (Nunes et al 2012; Kim et al 2012). In contrast, higher energy and protein diets increased yield of breast (Marcu et al 2013), weight of carcass and yields of breast and thigh muscle; whereas drumsticks, wings and other carcass components (head, neck, back and legs) were reduced (Marcu et al 2012b).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…A preliminary study (Waldroup et al 1990) found no effect of energy concentration of diets on growth performance or abdominal fat, although higher energy density increased dressing percentage in females, but not in males. Similarly, others found no effect of dietary energy level on carcass yield or abdominal fat (Nunes et al 2012; Duarte et al 2014). In contrast, Marcu et al (2012a) reported improved growth performance and carcass yield for the main cuts of broiler chickens fed diets with high energy and protein levels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The present results with male chickens are consistent with that of the previous study. Others [31,32], similarly, found no effect of dietary energy density on carcass yield and abdominal fat. In contrast, Zhao et al [33] found that dressing percentage, breast and thigh muscles, and abdominal fat content were greater with dietary energy and lysine levels higher than those in their controls.…”
Section: Carcass Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 95%