Phytobiotic Growth Promoter in Broiler Diets
Phytogenic growth promoters as replacement for AGPs in broiler diets
Published: April 27, 2010
By: Sudipto Haldar
Antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) have been an integral part of the poultry feed industry for more than fifty years. However, a search for the alternatives to the AGPs has been initiated since their prolonged use has precipitated some problems such as development of resistant strains within groups of primary pathogens or opportunistic bacteria and break down of the symbiosis between the animal and desirable flora. The search is therefore on for an economically viable alternative to the AGPs. A wide variety of substances are used in conjunction with, or as alternatives to, AGPs in poultry diets. Probiotics, prebiotics and organic acids have all shown promising results in controlling a wide array of bacteria including Salmonella, Campylobacter, Clostridium and E. coli. The phytogenic feed additives are a more recent addition in this list and are composed of plant extracts (microencapsulated essential oils, bitter substances, and pungent substances and may also include an acid substance and saponin). These preparations have been shown to activate digestion, strengthen the immune system and have antibacterial properties.
The efficacy of a phytogenic growth promoter or phytobiotic (Digstarom, Microplus Konzentrate GmbH, Germany), containing natural and artificial aromatics, including natural herbs and drugs as well as natural essential oils, was tested in a broiler trial. The objective was to test the efficacy of the phytogenic growth promoter compared to an AGP (Bacitracin methylene disalicylate, BMD 10%) and to optimize its dose level in broiler diets. A flock of Cobb 400 birds (mean live weight 44.2 ±0.91 g, obtained 6 h post hatch from a commercial hatchery) were put under test for 39 days. The three dietary treatments were a basal diet without AGP or phytobiotic (negative control), basal diet + AGP (BMD 10%, 250 g/tonne) and phytobiotic (Digestarom) at graded levels viz. 50 (DG 50), 100 (DG 100) and 150 (DG 150) g/tonne.
An initial slaughter was performed on d 0 with a sub-flock of 25 birds. On day 1 the birds were weighed and placed randomly in pens (1.5 m x 1.5 m) on litter floors. The pens, each housing 10 birds (after adjusting the mortality), were the replicates and there were 6 replicates in each treatment group. The starter (d 1 to 20) and the finisher diets (d 21 to 39) were formulated to meet the requirements of the Cobb 400 broiler chickens. Feed and water was supplied for ad libitum consumption. Temperature inside the broiler room was maintained at 30 - 32°C during the initial two weeks and subsequently was reduced to 26°C towards the end of the experiment. Initial (pre-experiment) and final (after 39 days feeding) body weights were recorded before offering the morning feed. Total pen feed consumption was measured everyday.
The birds were harvested after 39 days for carcass evaluation (carcass yield, yield of the breast, frame and legs, and meat protein and fat contents).
Gut health was assessed through measuring the pH, enumeration of the common commensals and pathogens of the gastrointestinal tract and measurement of the crypt depth and villi height in the ileum. Samples were obtained at the time of harvesting. The entire gastrointestinal tract was segmented into crop, proventriculus, gizzard, duodenum and ileum. The pooled digesta was subjected to pH measurement and enumeration of bacteria like Lactobacillus, Salmonella, and Escherichia coli.
Table 1: Ingredients and chemical composition of the basal diet (as fed) 1
|
Ingredients g/kg
|
Starter
|
Grower
|
Composition
|
Starter
|
Grower
|
|
Corn
|
550
|
625
|
ME Kcal/kg2
|
3057
|
3138
|
|
Soybean meal
|
390
|
320
|
Crude protein g/kg
|
224.4
|
199
|
|
Palm oil
|
30
|
31
|
Calorie: Protein2
|
136.4
|
157.1
|
|
Di-calcium phosphate
|
12
|
10
|
Crude fi bre, g/kg
|
36.9
|
3.43
|
|
DL methionine
|
1.2
|
1.1
|
Amino acids %2
|
|
|
|
Lysine hydrochloride
|
0.7
|
0.7
|
Lysine
|
1.36
|
1.16
|
|
Sodium bicarbonate
|
0.3
|
0.3
|
Methionine
|
0.49
|
0.45
|
|
Vitamin mineral premix
|
3
|
3
|
Cysteine
|
0.25
|
0.23
|
|
Vitamin B complex
|
0.25
|
0.25
|
Methionine + Cysteine
|
0.74
|
0.68
|
|
Mycotoxin binder
|
1
|
1
|
Arginine
|
1.69
|
1.45
|
|
Salt
|
1
|
1
|
Calcium%
|
1.21
|
1.31
|
|
Chromium yeast
|
1
|
1
|
Total P, g/kg
|
0.81
|
0.75
|
|
Filler material
|
9.3
|
5.4
|
Available P g/kg2
|
0.41
|
0.39
|
1 Starter and grower diets were fed from d 1-20 and d 21 - 39 respectively
2 Calculated values, 3 Contained 3000 mg elemental chromium per kg
Live performance and carcass traits
Addition of the phytogenic growth promoter in diet improved the live performance of the broilers significantly in a dose dependent manner (Table 2). Live weight at harvest, total gain and FCR at 39 days was higher (P < 0.05) in the DG 150 dietary group than those in the birds supplemented with BMD. These results indicated that the birds responded in a dose dependent linear manner to the level of supplemental phytobiotic (y = 51.5x + 1804.7, R2 = 0.757). Overall, the DG 150 dietary group had ~ 5% higher live weight than that in the BMD dietary group. At lower dose levels the phytobiotic (DG 50 and DG 100 dietary groups) yielded live responses similar to those obtained with the BMD group, which were in turn greater than that from the basal diet.
The phytobiotic growth promoters had few effects on carcass traits. The hot carcass weight was higher when the birds received BMD (P < 0.01). Weight of the breast, frame and legs, expressed as a percentage of harvest weight was similar across the dietary groups.
Table 2: Effects of treatments on live performance and carcass traits
|
Response variable
|
Negative control
|
+BMD
|
+DG 50
|
+DG 100
|
+DG 150
|
SE
|
Significance
|
|
Live weight g
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Day 1
|
52.5
|
53.7
|
52.1
|
51.9
|
53.7
|
|
|
|
Day 39
|
1457c
|
1886b
|
1873b
|
1847b
|
1976a
|
5.97
|
***
|
|
Total gain g
|
1404.4c
|
1832.1b
|
1821b
|
1822b
|
1922b
|
5.93
|
***
|
|
ADFI g
|
82.6
|
82.5
|
82.5
|
82.7
|
82.4
|
0.03
|
NS
|
|
Total intake kg
|
3.22
|
3.21
|
3.20
|
3.23
|
3.21
|
0.03
|
NS
|
|
FCR
|
2.29c
|
1.76b
|
1.77b
|
1.77b
|
1.67a
|
0.012
|
***
|
Different superscripts within a row are different (*** at P<0.01). NS not significant
Gastrointestinal tract health and milieu
Dietary supplementation of antibiotic and phytobiotic growth promoters has significant effects on gut microbiology, particularly with regards to the counts of the Lactobacilli spp (Table 3). E. coli and Salmonella were not detected in the crop, proventriculus, gizzard and small intestine in the birds receiving antibiotic or phytobiotic supplementations. The phytobiotic growth promoter stimulated proliferation of Lactobacilli in the gastrointestinal tract in a dose dependent linear fashion (P < 0.001). Therefore, it may be inferred that an increment in supplemental dose level the phytobiotic growth promoter may facilitate establishing a healthy flora in the gut. It was interesting that Lactobacilli vanished altogether in the proventriculus and gizzard when the diet was supplemented with BMD. The deleterious effect of the AGPs on gut flora was brought into the fore by the Lactobacillus count in the crop which was significantly lower in the BMD supplemented birds than that enumerated even in the negative control group of birds. Overall, the findings indicated the beneficial effects of phytobiotic growth promoters on the beneficial microbes of the gut flora and concomitantly bolstered the deleterious effect of AGPs on the favorable microbes present in the small intestine. The BMD or the phytobiotics did not influence the pH of the gastrointestinal tract (Table 4). However, the phytobiotic growth promoter appeared to sustain the crypt depth and the villi height in a much better way than did the BMD (P < 0.001).
Table 3: Microbiological counts (log10 CFU/ g) in gastrointestinal tract contents
|
Part of the GI tract
|
Diet
|
E. coli
|
Lactobacillus
|
Salmonella
|
|
Crop
|
Negative control
|
36
|
182b
|
28
|
|
|
BMD
|
Not detected
|
62.8a
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 50
|
Not detected
|
703.6c
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 100
|
Not detected
|
710.1c
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 150
|
Not detected
|
714.4c
|
Not detected
|
|
|
SE
|
-
|
9.2
|
-
|
|
|
Significance
|
-
|
P < 0.001
|
-
|
|
Proventriculus
|
Negative control
|
Not detected
|
0a
|
Not detected
|
|
|
BMD
|
Not detected
|
0a
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 50
|
Not detected
|
51.8b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 100
|
Not detected
|
59.7b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 150
|
Not detected
|
64.6b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
SE
|
-
|
1.94
|
-
|
|
|
Significance
|
-
|
P < 0.001
|
-
|
|
Gizzard
|
Negative control
|
Not detected
|
0a
|
Not detected
|
|
|
BMD
|
Not detected
|
0a
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 50
|
Not detected
|
118b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 100
|
Not detected
|
120.3b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 150
|
Not detected
|
126.6b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
SE
|
-
|
4.54
|
-
|
|
|
Significance
|
-
|
P < 0.001
|
-
|
|
Small intestine
|
Negative control
|
4
|
0a
|
8
|
|
|
BMD
|
Not detected
|
211.6b
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 50
|
Not detected
|
590c
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 100
|
Not detected
|
610.3c
|
Not detected
|
|
|
DG 150
|
Not detected
|
654c
|
Not detected
|
|
|
SE
|
-
|
15.12
|
-
|
|
|
Significance
|
-
|
P < 0.001
|
-
|
* Statistical analyses not performed
Dissimilar superscripts within column indicate signifi cant variation (*** at P < 0.0001)
Summary
A phytobiotic product was found to improve weight gains and FCR over that of birds supplemented with an AGP. Counts of the Lactobacilli spp. E. coli and Salmonella were reduced to zero in the crop, proventriculus, gizzard and small intestine of birds receiving antibiotic or phytobiotic supplementations. The phytobiotic growth promoter stimulated proliferation of Lactobacilli in the gastrointestinal tract. These findings confirmed the beneficial effects of a phytobiotic growth promoter on the beneficial microbes of the gut flora. The phytobiotic growth promoter sustained the crypt depth and the villi height to a greater degree than did the AGP.
The article was published in the June 2009 issue of the Asian Poultry Magazine
Related topics
Authors:
Join to be able to comment.
Once you join Engormix, you will be able to participate in all content and forums.
* Required information
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
Create a post
18 de febrero de 2011
Here is an excellent book on phytogenics in animal nutrition , you can download it for free
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/34778263/Phytogenics-in-Animal-Nutrition
Nadir Alloui
DVM- Ph D Animal Science
Batna-University
Algeria
18 de febrero de 2011
Recent studies on its compounds have shown some positive impact on the domestic animals performance, such as the antimicrobial effects, antioxidant and regulator of the intestinal flora of poultry. This indicates that plant extracts can be classified as growth promoter, but the approach to the efficacy and safety of their use as food additive remains to be seen.
17 de febrero de 2011
There is no international system currently available to sufficiently characterise and quantify biological properties of plants, and finally standardise their use as antimicrobial, antiparasitic, antiprotozoal or antioxidant agents (Ilias G, 2008). However, Oregano is the plant which is known to have the most potent content of phenolic compounds and direct antimicrobial action against pathogenic bacteria. Oregano, is also well known for its’ antioxidant properties (Sivropoulou et al., 1996). When an effective commercially available phytogenic feed additive is used, unlike AGP’s, intestinal pathogenic bacteria cannot develop resistance due to the unique mode of action on the cell membrane.
Waldenstedt (2003) compared the difference between the use of a live attenuated coccidiostat vaccine and OEO in organic chicken broiler production. Numbers of Clostridium perfringens in caeca were significantly lower in chickens given OEO at 31 days (log10 cfu 4.1 vs. 6.1, p<0.05), and chickens given OEO had a significantly higher live weight up to 48 days.
Fukayama 2005 found that an oregano based phytogenic feed additive in comparison with antibiotic feed additives had similar results of growth performance, carcass quality, anatomical and physiological analysis of the GI tract, and intestinal bacterial composition.
Several commercial trials which have not been published for reasons of proprietary protection have demonstrated that phytogenic feed additives are able to increase final harvest weights, reduce FCR and protect against problematic poultry pathogens. The fact that phytogenic feed additives are being so widely used in commercial production of poultry shows that they are a commercial success as well as scientific curiosity.
Sanluc International nv
13 de febrero de 2011
I would agree with the comment of Dr. Zahid Nasir that there must have been something wrong with the control group, as the Daily Weight Gain is only about 36.01 grams per day and the FCR is at the level for growing pigs. Even the performance by the treatment groups (about 46 grams) is far below the Cobb 400 Standard. Its also strange that there is a 10 points and significant difference in FCR between 100 ppm and 150 ppm of the product. It is generally recognised that the effect of AGPs on FCR is about 2-4 points only. We would also suggest to use larger pens (minimum 30-40 birds instead of 10) and more replicates (10 instead of 6). From this study we could tend to conclude that the phytogenic product works opposite to the traditional antibiotic growth promoters, since it increases the Lactobacillus population, where-as AGPs normally slow down lactobacilli and their activity, since they are high nutrient consumers (WPSA-Brisbane). Trials in EU under well controled and semi-optimal conditions confirm above and the higher FCR. We wonder how the effect on villi and crypt parameters (data not in the article) were obtained and whats the explanation for such effect is.
28 de abril de 2010
This is an interesting article showing the effects of a mixture/cocktail of different feed additives on broiler performance. But there is no information available in the article about composition of the tested product and either these effects were due to one of these additives or is there some synergy.
Composition of basal diet show availability of nutrients in sufficient amount but it is unclear why growth performance of control birds was also very less. Were there some other stress factors ?
Islamabad Group
8 de abril de 2011
It is a good effort to replace antibiotics because antibiotics are banned in some countries due to their side effects in humans (residue of antibiotics in eggs and meat). I will not agree with the comments of Mr. Nitin about the article. I reviewed some parts of the article to under stand their theme.
Probiotics, prebiotics and organic acids have all shown promising results in controlling a wide array of bacteria including Salmonella, Campylobacter, Clostridium and E. coli. The phytogenic feed additives are a more recent addition in this list and are composed of plant extracts (microencapsulated essential oils, bitter substances, and pungent substances and may also include an acid substance and saponin). These preparations have been shown to activate digestion, strengthen the immune system and have antibacterial properties.
The efficacy of a phytogenic growth promoter or phytobiotic (Digstarom, Microplus Konzentrate GmbH, Germany), containing natural and artificial aromatics, including natural herbs and drugs as well as natural essential oils, was tested in a broiler trial.
A phytobiotic product was found to improve weight gains and FCR over that of birds supplemented with an AGP. Counts of the Lactobacilli spp. E. coli and Salmonella were reduced to zero in the crop, proventriculus, gizzard and small intestine of birds receiving antibiotic or phytobiotic supplementations. The phytobiotic growth promoter stimulated proliferation of Lactobacilli in the gastrointestinal tract. These findings confirmed the beneficial effects of a phytobiotic growth promoter on the beneficial microbes of the gut flora. The phytobiotic growth promoter sustained the crypt depth and the villi height to a greater degree than did the AGP.
Although the in sufficient availability of nutrients in composition of basal diet and other unknown stress factors effects the growth but overall this article will be opened the new window for the researchers to eliminate the antibiotics from the feed.
Thanks,
7 de abril de 2011
dear sir ;
the artical is very good, and i agree with dr.Nasir about the your results , i see from my reaseach about the medical plant , it's can increase body weight ,FRC , ...etc and it's good antibacterial ...
Assist.Prof. Dr.arkan braa mohameed
Avian Physiology
Guybro Chemical
7 de abril de 2011
I appreciate the work done by the author.
Phytobiotic growth promoters like Essential Oils are found to be much effective in large intestinal & caecal region of poultry. Among EOs, role of Oregano Essential Oil to reduce numbers of Clostridium perfringens have been well documented.
Now a days AGP are mostly replaced by other non-antibiotic growth promoters.
7 de abril de 2011
the article doesnot revieve much of technical possibilities. use of probiotics ,ezymes ,etc has shown its efficacy on field farming.why not incoporate HOMEOPATHIC drugs and carry the research, rather than hitting stick in water.
17 de febrero de 2011
Very good article. There are large numbers of medicinal plants which can be used in broiler rations to replace AGP’s; like garlic, ginger, black cumin seeds, neam leaves etc.
.jpg&w=3840&q=75)