2012
DOI: 10.1590/s0103-84782012000300025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exigência de lisina digestível e planos de nutrição para frangos de corte machos mantendo as relações metionina + cistina e treonina digestível na proteína ideal

Abstract: IIIExigência de lisina digestível e planos de nutrição para frangos de corte machos mantendo as relações metionina + cistina e treonina digestível na proteína ideal

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
1
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
(9 reference statements)
2
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The following equation predicted lysine intake: LI = −0.42202 + 7.44780*LYS (R 2 = 0.95). A linear increase of LI as a function of increasing levels of dietary lysine was also observed in previous studies (Siqueira et al, 2007;Haese et al, 2012 andOliveira et al, 2013).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The following equation predicted lysine intake: LI = −0.42202 + 7.44780*LYS (R 2 = 0.95). A linear increase of LI as a function of increasing levels of dietary lysine was also observed in previous studies (Siqueira et al, 2007;Haese et al, 2012 andOliveira et al, 2013).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 86%
“…These Likewise, in other studies, dietary digestible lysine levels did not influence the feed intake of naked-neck chickens between 1 and 28 days of age (Nascimento et al, 2009) or of Cobb chickens between 8 and 21 days of age (Haese et al, 2012). On the other hand, feed intake and final body weight reductions were observed in naked-neck chickens between 1 and 28 days of age when dietary digestible lysine levels increased (Oliveira et al, 2013).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
“…When evaluating the digestible lysine requirement for conventional chickens, several authors have identified that adequate values provide greater weight gain and better feed conversion (Goulart et al, 2008;Cella, Murakami;Franco 2009;Hease et al, 2012), higher carcass yield, higher breast yield (Amarante Junior et al, 2005), and lower abdominal fat deposition (Trindade Neto et al, 2009). When studying different values of digestible lysine in feed rations for slow growth chickens ISA Label, Nascimento et al (2009) identified higher weight gain, better feed conversion and lower abdominal fat deposition, while Rosa et al (2014) did not identify significant differences for feed conversion; however, they identified an increase in weight gain and greater weight of the carcass and breast.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Entretanto, para a fase inicial a discordância entre a dieta de fêmea e a dieta recomendada dos autores foi bastante, tendo apenas similaridade na PB. Haese et al (2012) avaliaram os planos nutricionais que melhor atenderam as exigências nutricionais de frangos de corte no período de 1 a 21 e recomendaram para a fase de 1 a 7 dias, dietas com 2950 kcal/kg de EM, 21,74% de PB; 1,30% de Lisina; 0,92% Met+Cis digestível e 0,85% Treonina digestível. Na fase de 8 a 21 dias: 3000 kcal de EM /kg, 19,63% de PB; 1,15% de Lisina; 0,82% Met+Cis digestível e 0,75% Treonina digestível.…”
Section: Fatoresunclassified