Comparison of Different Forms of Dietary Selenium Supplementation on Growth Performance, Meat Quality, Selenium Deposition, and Antioxidant Property in Broilers

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the effects of different sources of dietary selenium (Se) supplementation on growth performance, meat quality, Se deposition, and antioxidant property in broilers. A total of 600 one-day-old Ross 308 broilers with an average body weight (BW) of 44.30 ± 0.49 g were randomly allotted to three treatments, each of which included five replicates of 40 birds. These three groups received the same basal diet containing 0.04 mg Se/kg, supplemented with 0.15 mg Se/kg from sodium selenite (SS) or from L-selenomethionine (L-Se-methionine (Met)) or from D-selenomethionine (D-Se-Met). The experiment lasted 42 days. Both Se source and time significantly influenced (p < 0.01) drip loss of breast muscle. Supplementation with L-Se-Met and D-Se-Met were more effective (p < 0.05) in decreasing drip loss than SS. Besides, the pH value of breast muscle was also significantly influenced (p < 0.05) by time. The SS-supplemented diet increased more (p < 0.05) liver, kidney, and pancreas glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) activities than the D-Se-Met-supplemented diet. In addition, L-Se-Met increased more (p < 0.01) liver and pancreas GSH-Px activities than D-Se-Met. The antioxidant status was greatly improved in broilers of L-Se-Met-treated group in comparison with the SS-treated group and was illuminated by the increased glutathione (GSH) concentration in serum, liver, and breast muscle (p < 0.05); superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity in liver (p < 0.01); total antioxidant capability (T-AOC) in kidney, pancreas, and breast muscle (p < 0.05) and decreased malondialdehyde (MDA) concentration in kidney and breast muscle (p < 0.05) of broilers. Besides, supplementation with D-Se-Met was more effective (p < 0.01) in increasing serum GSH concentration and decreasing breast muscle MDA concentration than SS. L-Selenomethionine supplementation significantly increased GSH concentration in liver and breast muscle (p < 0.05); SOD activity in liver (p < 0.01); and T-AOC in liver, pancreas, and breast muscle (p < 0.05) of broilers, compared with broilers fed D-Se-Met diet. The addition of L-Se-Met and D-Se-Met increased (p < 0.01) Se concentration in serum and different organs studied of broilers in comparision with broilers fed SS diet. Therefore, dietary L-Se-Met and D-Se-Met supplementation could improve antioxidant capability and Se deposition in serum and tissues and reduce drip loss of breast muscle in broilers compared with SS. Besides, L-Se-Met is more effective than D-Se-Met in improving antioxidant status in broilers.

Effects of Dietary Supplementation of Inorganic, Organic and Nano Selenium on Antioxidant Status of Giriraja Chicken

“…Chen et al, (2014) noted significantly higher liver GPx activity in selenium yeast supplemented group than that sodium selenite supplemented group, while Wang et al, (2011), in line with current study, observed similar activity in these two groups. In contrary, Edens, (2002) reported a steady state release of selenium from organic selenium for incorporation into the glutathione peroxidase antioxidant system which resulted in increased GPx activity.…”

“…But enzyme activity was similar between inorganic and organic selenium supplemented groups which were in line with the current study. Earlier studies by Wang et al, (2011), Ozkan et al, (2007, Jiang et al, (2009), Zoidis et al, (2010), Upton et al, (2009), Chen et al, (2013, Rajashree et al, (2014), Edens and Sefton (2016), Gogmen et al, (2016) and Bakhshalinejad et al, (2018) observed increased glutathione peroxidase activity in various tissues of broiler such as liver, breast muscle, blood and serum as influenced by supplementation of organic sources of selenium.…”

Meta-analysis of selenium accumulation and expression of antioxidant enzymes in chicken tissues

“…For example, in a study examining different Se sources, activity of GPx in the liver was greater in hens fed selenite or Se yeast but was higher in plasma in hens fed selenite compared with B-Traxim Se or Se yeast (Leeson et al, 2008). In contrast, no differences were detected with respect to GPx activities in the serum and tissues between the sodium selenite and the L-SeMet groups (Wang et al, 2011b). It therefore seems that many factors may be involved in tissue Se retention and GPx activity.…”

“…Regarding nano-materials, nano-Se has been reported to exhibit high-specific surface area, small particle size and good intestinal absorption because of the formation of nanoemulsion droplets (Hu et al, 2012). Similarity between SeMet and Met allows the body to use them interchangeably in protein synthesis because the tRNAMet cannot discriminate between Met and SeMet (Wang et al, 2011b). This makes it possible to build Se reserves in the body.…”

“…Se in the layer's diet can also be deposited into the egg. The Se content in eggs depends on its concentration in the hen's diet and also on the form of dietary Se used, as organic Se is more efficiently deposited in the egg yolk compared with selenite (Wang et al, 2011b). Se originating from B-Traxim accumulates to a greater extent in lipid-associated components such as yolk (Leeson et al, 2008).…”