Abstract
This research was aimed to evaluate the effect of dietary supplementation of either powdered or encapsulated probiotic on relative carcass, giblet weight and intestinal morphometry of local duck. One hundred twenty male day old duck (DOD) were distributed to 6 different dietary groups, included 2 probiotic forms of either powdered (T1) or encapsulated (T2) and 3 levels: 0% (L0), 0.2% (L1), 0.4% (L2). They were reared using pen cages for 42 days (6 weeks). Observed variables were relative carcass, giblet weight (gizzard, heart, liver) and intestinal morphometry (villus height, villus width, crypt depth). Data were analyzed by Nested of Completely Randomized Design ANOVA and if there was significant effect followed by Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT). The result showed that there was no significant effect (p > 0.05) of the form of either powdered or encapsulated probiotic on relative carcass, giblet weight, and intestinal morphometry. However, increasing level of probiotic have significant effect (p < 0.05) on relative carcass, villus height, and villus width, but did not significantly affect giblet weight and crypt depth. In conclusion, supplementation of either powdered or encapsulated probiotic has similar result, but it is suggested to use 0.4% of encapsulated probiotic (4 kg ton-1 of feed) in local duck diet.
Highlights
Local duck serves animal protein source of human
Dietary synthetic feed additive has been used as an effective means to improve productivity, but it was banned by Indonesian government regulation through Permentan No 14/2017
Probiotics proposed as an alternative natural growth promoter due to probiotic is non-pathogenic livemicroorganism which gives many health benefits to the host
Summary
Local duck serves animal protein source of human. Nowadays, food safety and healthy from livestock products are the success key for sustainable livestock production system. Dietary synthetic feed additive has been used as an effective means to improve productivity, but it was banned by Indonesian government regulation through Permentan No 14/2017 This ban due to pathogenic contamination, bacterial resistant in the end product and an effort to create sustainable poultry farming. Several studies have shown that the use of probiotics in the feed could improve the performances, population of micro flora, white blood cells, cholesterol content (Bansal & Bilaspuri, 2011; Natsir, Sjofjan, Widodo, Ardiansah, & Widyastuti, 2019). Using synthetic materials, such as butylated hydroxyanisole and butylated hydroxytoluene, which have been widely used in feed, was prohibited due to safety reason. The cultured-supernatant, intact cells, and intracellular cell-free extracts of Bifidobacterium animals were found to scavenge hydroxyl radicals and superoxide anion in vitro while enhancing the anti-oxidase activities of mice as in vivo treatment (Shen et al, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
