Feed Ingredients and Additives for Swine and Poultry

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal Nutrition".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 October 2024 | Viewed by 1706

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Animal Science and Technology, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Republic of Korea
Interests: swine nutrition; trace minerals; enzyme additives; amino acids; novel feed ingredients
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Nutritional values of feed ingredients should be accurately evaluated for sustainable livestock production. As non-conventional feed ingredients are widely being used in swine and poultry diets, an accurate evaluation of feed ingredients is critical. In addition, feed additives to improve the nutritional value of the ingredients are important. The scope of the current Special Issue includes the utilization of energy and nutrients in novel feed ingredients by pigs and poultry, effects of feed ingredients on growth performance, and equations for predicting the utilization of energy and nutrients in feed ingredients fed to pigs and chickens. Data from in vitro digestibility experiments for feed ingredients are also welcome. Additionally, novel methods for determining or improving the nutritional values of feed ingredients or diets for non-ruminants are included in the scope of this Special Issue. We invite you to submit original research papers and reviews to expand our knowledge on the nutritional values of feed ingredients and additives for swine and poultry.

Prof. Dr. Beob Gyun Kim
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • chicken
  • pig
  • in vitro assay
  • digestibility
  • feed additives
  • feed ingredients
  • growth performance
  • nutrient utilization
  • prediction equation

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Related Special Issue

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

11 pages, 828 KiB  
Article
Brazilian Corn Ethanol Coproducts for Pigs: Feeding Value and Blood Parameters
by Anderson Corassa, Igor Willian Wrobel Straub, Maicon Sbardella, Ana Paula Silva Ton, Charles Kiefer, Claudson Oliveira Brito, Vivian Luana Rothmund and Leonardo Willian Freitas
Animals 2024, 14(14), 2108; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14142108 - 19 Jul 2024
Viewed by 350
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the values of net energy (NE), digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) and digestibility coefficients of corn ethanol coproducts produced in Brazil and their effects on the nitrogen balance and blood parameters of pigs. Ten barrows were [...] Read more.
This study aimed to determine the values of net energy (NE), digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) and digestibility coefficients of corn ethanol coproducts produced in Brazil and their effects on the nitrogen balance and blood parameters of pigs. Ten barrows were housed in metabolic study cages for total collection and fed a reference diet (RD) or 800 g/kg RD + 200 g/kg of a coproduct of corn ethanol. Distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS), corn bran with solubles (CBS), distiller’s dried grains (DDG) and high-protein distiller’s dried grain (HPDDG) were evaluated. The experimental design was randomized blocks with three repetitions per period, totaling six repetitions per diet. Diets containing the HPDDG had greater DE and ME than those containing CBS and DDGS and greater DE than those containing the DDG (p < 0.05). HPDDG, DDG, CBS and DDGS showed 4498, 3419, 3029 and 3335 kcal/kg DE; 4366, 3305, 2934 and 3214 kcal/kg ME; and 2515, 1938, 1649 and 1725 kcal/kg NE, respectively. Pigs fed diets containing HPDDG and CBS showed greater nitrogen retention efficiency than pigs fed DDGS (p < 0.05). Pigs fed diets containing HPDDG had higher blood urea levels than pigs fed CBS and RD, while triglyceride levels in animals that received the CBS diet were greater than those in animals that received all other diets. The HPDDG had the highest energy levels and the best digestibility coefficients. The chemical composition of coproducts influences the nitrogen balance and circulating levels of urea and triglycerides in pigs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feed Ingredients and Additives for Swine and Poultry)
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 258 KiB  
Article
Effects of Micellar Quercetin Supplementation on Growth Performance, Nutrient Digestibility, Fecal Microbiota, Meat Quality, and Physiological Status in Broiler Chickens
by Golam Sagir Ahammad and In Ho Kim
Animals 2024, 14(13), 1918; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14131918 - 28 Jun 2024
Viewed by 366
Abstract
This study investigated the impacts of micellar quercetin (MQ) supplementation on growth performance, meat stability, excreta gas emissions, and physiological status. During a 35-day trial, 640 Ross 308 broilers were utilized. These birds were one day old, with an average initial body weight [...] Read more.
This study investigated the impacts of micellar quercetin (MQ) supplementation on growth performance, meat stability, excreta gas emissions, and physiological status. During a 35-day trial, 640 Ross 308 broilers were utilized. These birds were one day old, with an average initial body weight of 43.34 ± 1.43 g. They were randomly distributed across four experimental diets, each consisting of 10 replicate pens with 16 chicks per pen. The diets included the following: control (CON) with 0% micellar quercetin (MQ), TRT1 with 0.025% MQ, TRT2 with 0.050% MQ, and TRT3 with 0.100% MQ. The results indicate that broilers fed diets with increasing levels of MQ exhibited significantly higher body weight gains (BWGs) compared to the control group (p < 0.05). There was a clear linear increase in the breast muscle percentage with higher levels of quercetin supplementation (p < 0.05), while the breast color remained consistent across all groups (p > 0.05). Both cooking loss and drip loss exhibited a linear decrease as MQ levels in the diet increased (p < 0.05). The level of aspartate aminotransferase (AST) tended to decrease with higher MQ levels. Thyroxine (T4) and lymphocyte levels also showed a linear increase with increasing MQ dosage in the diet (p < 0.05). However, no significant effects were observed on nutrient digestibility, gas emissions, or fecal microbial components (Lactobacillus, E. coli, and Salmonella) with higher levels of MQ supplementation (p > 0.05). In conclusion, augmenting quercetin levels in the diet positively influenced the BWG, breast muscle development, and meat quality parameters such as cooking loss and drip loss, with beneficial effects on blood profiles. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feed Ingredients and Additives for Swine and Poultry)

Other

Jump to: Research

28 pages, 1732 KiB  
Systematic Review
Unlocking Phytate with Phytase: A Meta-Analytic View of Meat-Type Chicken Muscle Growth and Bone Mineralization Potential
by Emmanuel Nuamah, Utibe Mfon Okon, Eungyeong Jeong, Yejin Mun, Inhyeok Cheon, Byungho Chae, Frederick Nii Ako Odoi, Dong-wook Kim and Nag-Jin Choi
Animals 2024, 14(14), 2090; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14142090 - 17 Jul 2024
Viewed by 574
Abstract
The inclusion of exogenous phytase in P- and Ca-deficient diets of broilers to address the growing concern about excessive P excretion into the environment over the years has been remarkably documented. However, responses among these studies have been inconsistent because of the several [...] Read more.
The inclusion of exogenous phytase in P- and Ca-deficient diets of broilers to address the growing concern about excessive P excretion into the environment over the years has been remarkably documented. However, responses among these studies have been inconsistent because of the several factors affecting P utilization. For this reason, a systematic review with a meta-analysis of results from forty-one studies published from 2000 to February 2024 was evaluated to achieve the following: (1) quantitatively summarize the size of phytase effect on growth performance, bone strength and mineralization in broilers fed diets deficient in P and Ca and (2) estimate and explore the heterogeneity in the effect size of outcomes using subgroup and meta-regression analyses. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s SYRCLE risk of bias checklists for animal studies. Applying the random effects models, Hedges’ g effect size of supplemented phytase was calculated using the R software (version 4.3.3, Angel Food Cake) to determine the standardized mean difference (SMD) at a 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to further explore the effect size heterogeneity (PSMD ≤ 0.05, I2 > 50%, n ≥ 10). The meta-analysis showed that supplemental phytase increases ADFI and BWG and improves FCR at each time point of growth (p < 0.0001). Additionally, phytase supplementation consistently increased tibia ash, P and Ca, and bone strength (p < 0.0001) of broilers fed P- and Ca-deficient diets. The results of the subgroup and meta-regression analyses showed that the age and strain of broiler, dietary P source, and the duration of phytase exposure significantly influence the effect size of phytase on growth and bone parameters. In conclusion, phytase can attenuate the effect of reducing dietary-available phosphorus and calcium and improve ADFI, BWG, and FCR, especially when added to starter diets. It further enhances bone ash, bone mineralization, and the bone-breaking strength of broilers, even though the effects of bone ash and strength can be maximized in the starter phase of growth. However, the effect sizes of phytase were related to the age and strain of the broiler, dietary P source, and the duration of phytase exposure rather than the dosage. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feed Ingredients and Additives for Swine and Poultry)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop