Effect of different probiotics on broiler carcass and meat quality

Abstract

The present work evaluated the effect of different probiotics on carcass and meat quality of broilers. One thousand and fifty male Cobb chicks were distributed at one day of age in a randomized design with 3 x 2 + 1 factorial arrangement (3 probiotics, 2 levels of probiotics in drinking water and 1 negative control group), using 5 replications with 30 birds. Carcass yield was higher (p<0.05) in control birds. Nevertheless, the groups fed with probiotics showed higher (p<0.01) leg yield at 45 days of age. There was a significant decrease in color (lightness) and increase in pH of breast muscle 5 hours after slaughter in the probiotics treated birds. In the sensory analysis, meat flavor and general aspect 72 hours after slaughter were better when probiotics were added in both water and diet. There were no differences in water holding capacity, cooking loss and shearing force among different probiotics or between them and the control. Thus, meat quality was better when probiotics were fed in the water and diet instead of only in the diet. Nevertheless, carcass and meat quality showed no alteration when the control group was compared to birds fed with probiotics, except for leg yield improvement in the latter

Effect ofBacillus SubtilisSpore (GalliPro®) Nutrients Equivalency Value on Broiler Chicken Performance

“…The results indicated that GalliPro ® nutrients did not affect carcass characteristics (Table 6). These results are in agreement with Pelicano et al (2003Pelicano et al ( , 2005 who reported that, carcass and meat quality did not show alteration when the control group was compared to birds fed probiotics, except for leg yield improvement in the latter. Also, study of Toghyani et al (2011) indicated that carcass yield and relative organ weights were not influenced by dietary probiotic and prebiotic.…”

Carcass and cut yields and meat qualitative traits of broilers fed diets containing probiotics and prebiotics

“…The cut yields were also not affected (p>0.05) by the different additives that were used, similarly to the Pelicano et al (2003) evaluated different probiotics and reported leg yields significantly higher when the products were added to the diet. Therefore, it is suggested that such promoters might be used in broiler diets, since they do not interfere, or interfere positively, on the yield of the most commercialized edible cuts (breast, legs and wings).…”

“…Therefore, the different additives might be used since they did not affect meat color, which is an extremely important parameter that is related to the choice made by the consumer. Pelicano et al (2003) added probiotics both to the drinking water and to the diet of broiler chickens and observed L* values significantly smaller at 45 minutes and 5 hours after slaughter. The values reported by Pelicano et al (2003) for L*, a* and b* were, respectively, from 49.95 to 48.10; from 4.80 to 4.24 and from 4.98 to 3.80, which are considerably higher than the values found in the present study.…”

“…Pelicano et al (2003) added probiotics both to the drinking water and to the diet of broiler chickens and observed L* values significantly smaller at 45 minutes and 5 hours after slaughter. The values reported by Pelicano et al (2003) for L*, a* and b* were, respectively, from 49.95 to 48.10; from 4.80 to 4.24 and from 4.98 to 3.80, which are considerably higher than the values found in the present study. Quadros et al (2001), who did not find significant differences in pH values measured 45 min and 24 hours after slaughter in pork from swine fed diets containing growth promoters.…”

“…In fact, many unclear results exist on this issue. Some authors consider that feeding such products has been advantageous as a means to improve meat quality and carcass quality (Burkett et al, 1977;Jensen & Jensen, 1992;Maruta, 1993;Stanley et al, 1996;Jin et al, 1998 andSantos et al, 2002), whereas others have described discordant results (Owings et al, 1990, Loddi et al, 2000, Quadros et al, 2001, Vargas Jr. et al, 2002and Pelicano et al, 2003.…”