By:M. M. Bhuiyan 1, Cadogan, D.J 2 and Assoc. Prof. Paul Iji 1 (1 University of New England, 2 Feedworks Pty Ltd)
Spray-dried blood plasma is a highly digestible protein source containing immunoglobulins, growth factors, biologically active peptides, enzymes and other factors that are biologically active in the gut. Bovine SDP has been shown to produce improved growth rate, feed intake, feed efficiency and produce superior breast yield in broilers. Porcine SDP has been used in piglet starter diets to improve feed intake, growth rate and feed efficiency. There is limited information on the use of PSDP in broiler feed.
An experiment was conducted to compare performance of broilers fed diets supplemented with 2 levels of both plasmas. Two hundred and forty d-old male Ross 308 broiler chicks were divided equally among five treatments with six replications consisting of eight birds in each cage as an experimental unit. A wheat- soy based basal diet with an AME of 2880 kcal/kg, d. lys 1.25 g/kg and d. m+c 9.4 g/kg was prepared and supplemented with 5g/kg and 10 g/kg of each plasmas to make five treatment diets as shown in Table 1.
The treatment diets were offered for the first 10 d, after which the birds were transferred on to commercial grower (11-24 d) and finisher (25-35 d) diets. Results are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1. Inclusion of both plasmas at both levels up to 10 d had no significant impact on feed intake and bodyweight gain in broilers at various stages of growth (p>0.05). However Porcine plasma supplementation at both levels during the starter phase improved FCR (p<0.05) by 5 and 3 points respectively and by 8-10 points at d 35. Inclusion of Bovine plasma at both levels improved FCR by 11-14 points at d 35.
This study showed it is possible to gain 8-14 points FCR in finishing broilers through inclusion of plasma in broiler starter diets. While plasma is high cost, it was used for the first 10 days only, and the large FCR improvements are likely to make this practice economic.
Further, the higher inclusion level did not give a better response than the lower level and therefore 5 g/kg would appear to be a more economic inclusion level to use.
This revised version appears in the Asian Poultry Magazine, May 2014. Engormix thanks for this contribution.
The first 7-10 days represent a period of rapid development of the gastrointestinal tract. We have assessed this as part of our studies on SDPP. The product positively affects this development, which then tends to have an effect on subsequent growth and FCR. It is therefore worthwhile including SDPP in starter or pre-starter diets, a period during which feed consumption is also low. I do not think it will be economical feeding it throughout the production cycle, and in any case, does not seem to be necessary.
I would add that our studies were on a small scale and in cages. One study that was conduced on litter (also small-scale) did not show such extensive improvement in response. I think it will be worthwhile testing different dietary formulations and also a larger study on litter.
Thanks for all the comments. Dr Santander is right, SDPP would be safer than most other animal products in view of its preparation. There have been issues with pigs, now being linked to a viral infection in piglets. This is likely because some SDPP is of porcine origin. I think this will be of benefit to the poultry industry - if the pig industry does not use SDPP, then the price will drastically reduce. Currently, it sells for about $A8000 per tonne in Australia. We have done several other experiments, to be published soon. We found that it could be fed at 0.05 % rather than 1 % and can be fed for 5 rather than 10 days, to achieve the same benefits. The cost of feed per unit BWG is also lower with SDPP than without it.
In commercial layers, we'd be targeting 2% inclusion in the first diet, and in the critical phases (18th week on wards? to 22?) and 0,5% during lay. It is a reference value, as environmental pressure /climate/ density feeding factors / raw materials used would challenge these doses up- or downwards.
Dear Prof El-Sheikh,
I just popped into this conversation. Spray Dried Animal Plasma is produced in different sites across Europe, but also in other areas of the World. The pure bovine source would possibly the ideal one, and Paul Iji's research shows performance with this ingredient. Profitability, we have seen in European settings, can reach around 4:1 , consistently via improved feed conversion, and seeing a trend in improved daily gain, but it will all depend on the stress factors in the specific production settings. If you want, we can share further information.
Best regards,
Victor
poultry production has become a highly developed business all over world and there is no world wide board to accept the ingredients for poultry production or cattle production. In my opinion when we are approaching a stage where the safe food is widely promoted with certification for world wide trade reasons , i feel one board consisting technical persons need to say which are the products we can feed to animal when human food production is involved.My opinion veg feed for all animal would be appropriate when animal products are getting more attraction from bacterial growth as compered to corn soya diet feed ingredients.
It might be doing good in cold environment but not suitable in hot and humid climate and use of antibiotics as protective line would get in to disadvantage due to safe food criteria. However small markets can make any decision at their levels but we have to know that converting protein and fat from ingredient need good acceptable base of ingredients with acceptable aroma and sustainability to moisture contents of the ingredients. Thank you for a wonderful discussion on spray plasma protein for immunity of chick? dr rathm
I wonder how do you explain the significant differences in FCR among five treatments at day 10 when weight gain as well as feed intake showed no treatment effects. Please show the CV's and test for treatment variance homogeneity.
Hi El-Sheikh, I have seen some interesting trials with soluble plasma in poultry, the application was in drinking water (like medicines), however the application of plasma powder in poultry feed could to have some losses of product (feed remaining after feeding). I think you have to consider a additional economic cost for these possible losses of plasma powder into the feed.
Recommend
Reply
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)
