统糠和大豆皮对47～67日龄马岗鹅生长性能、养分代谢率及肠道消化酶活性的影响
|
摘要
本试验旨在研究统糠和大豆皮对马岗鹅生长性能、养分代谢率及肠道消化酶活性的影响。试验选取47日龄、体重均匀、健康的马岗鹅240只,随机分为3个组(Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组),每组4个重复,每个重复20只。Ⅰ组饲喂统糠+大豆皮纤维饲粮,Ⅱ组饲喂统糠纤维饲粮,Ⅲ组饲喂大豆皮纤维饲粮。饲养试验为期20 d。饲养试验结束后,从每组中选取8只体重较均匀一致的马岗鹅进行为期14 d的代谢试验。结果表明:1)Ⅲ组平均日采食量、平均日增重显著高于Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅰ组平均日增重显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅰ组、Ⅲ组料重比显著低于Ⅱ组(P<0.05)。2)Ⅲ组半净膛率、全净膛率显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅲ组腿肌率显著高于Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅰ组、Ⅲ组胸肌率显著高于Ⅱ组((P<0.05)。3)Ⅲ组十二指肠、空肠、回肠绒毛高度显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅲ组十二指肠隐窝深度显著低于Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅲ组空肠隐窝深度显著低于Ⅰ组、Ⅱ组(P<0.05);各组间回肠隐窝深度差异均不显著(P>0.05);Ⅰ组、Ⅲ组十二指肠、空肠、回肠绒毛高度/隐窝深度均显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05)。4)Ⅲ组十二指肠、空肠、回肠α-淀粉酶、脂肪酶、胰蛋白酶活性均显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05);除空肠α-淀粉酶外,Ⅰ组十二指肠、空肠、回肠α-淀粉酶、脂肪酶、胰蛋白酶活性均显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05)。5)Ⅲ组代谢能、粗蛋白质代谢率均显著高于Ⅱ组(P<0.05);Ⅲ组酸性洗涤纤维、中性洗涤纤维代谢率显著低于Ⅱ组(P<0.05)。综上,大豆皮在提高47～67日龄马岗鹅的生长性能、屠宰性能、肠道消化酶活性和养分代谢率以及改善肠道组织结构等方面是优质的纤维源;与统糠纤维源混合使用对肉鹅作用效果及养分代谢有利。
The study aimed to investigate the effects of unite bran and soybean hulls on growth performance,nutrient metabolic rates and intestinal digestive enzyme activities of Magang geese.A total of 240 healthy Magang geese(47-day-old) with similar body weight were randomly allocated into 3 groups with 4 replicates per group and 20 Magang geese per replicate.Geese in groups Ⅰ,Ⅱ and Ⅲ were fed mixed fiber diet,unite bran fiber diet and soybean hulls fiber diet,respectively.The feeding experiment lasted for 20 days.After the feeding experiment,8 geese with similar weight were selected from each group for a 14-day metabolic experiment.The results showed as follows:1) the average daily feed intake(ADFI),average daily gain(ADG) of groupⅢ were significantly higher than those of groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ(P<0.05).The ADG of group Ⅰ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The feed/gain(F/G) of group Ⅱ was markedly higher than that of groups Ⅰ and Ⅲ(P< 0.05).2) The eviscerated percentage,semi-eviscerated percentage of group Ⅲ were significantly higher than those of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The leg muscle percentage of group Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ(P<0.05).The breast muscle percentage of groups Ⅰ and Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).3) The villus height of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of groupⅢ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The crypt depth of duodenum of group Ⅲ was significantly lower than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The crypt depth of jejunum of group Ⅲ was significantly lower than that of groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ(P<0.05).The villus height/crypt depth of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of groups Ⅰ and Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).4) The intestinal α-amylase,lipase and trypsin activities of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of group Ⅲ were significantly higher than those of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The intestinal α-amylase,lipase and trypsin activities of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of group Ⅰ were significantly higher than those of group Ⅱ(P<0.05),except for α-amylase of jejunum.5)The metabolic rate of metabolic energy,crude protein of group Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of groupⅡ(P<0.05),while the metabolic rate of acid detergent fiber and neutral detergent fiber of group Ⅲ was substantially lower than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).In conclusion,soybean hull fiber is a high quality fiber source in improving the growth performance,slaughter performance,intestinal tissue structure,intestinal enzyme activity and nutrient metabolism rates of Magang geese.Moreover,it is benefit for improving effects and nutrient metabolic rates of Magang geese when feeding mixed with unite bran.
The study aimed to investigate the effects of unite bran and soybean hulls on growth performance,nutrient metabolic rates and intestinal digestive enzyme activities of Magang geese.A total of 240 healthy Magang geese(47-day-old) with similar body weight were randomly allocated into 3 groups with 4 replicates per group and 20 Magang geese per replicate.Geese in groups Ⅰ,Ⅱ and Ⅲ were fed mixed fiber diet,unite bran fiber diet and soybean hulls fiber diet,respectively.The feeding experiment lasted for 20 days.After the feeding experiment,8 geese with similar weight were selected from each group for a 14-day metabolic experiment.The results showed as follows:1) the average daily feed intake(ADFI),average daily gain(ADG) of groupⅢ were significantly higher than those of groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ(P<0.05).The ADG of group Ⅰ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The feed/gain(F/G) of group Ⅱ was markedly higher than that of groups Ⅰ and Ⅲ(P< 0.05).2) The eviscerated percentage,semi-eviscerated percentage of group Ⅲ were significantly higher than those of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The leg muscle percentage of group Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ(P<0.05).The breast muscle percentage of groups Ⅰ and Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).3) The villus height of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of groupⅢ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The crypt depth of duodenum of group Ⅲ was significantly lower than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The crypt depth of jejunum of group Ⅲ was significantly lower than that of groups Ⅰ and Ⅱ(P<0.05).The villus height/crypt depth of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of groups Ⅰ and Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).4) The intestinal α-amylase,lipase and trypsin activities of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of group Ⅲ were significantly higher than those of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).The intestinal α-amylase,lipase and trypsin activities of duodenum,jejunum and ileum of group Ⅰ were significantly higher than those of group Ⅱ(P<0.05),except for α-amylase of jejunum.5)The metabolic rate of metabolic energy,crude protein of group Ⅲ was significantly higher than that of groupⅡ(P<0.05),while the metabolic rate of acid detergent fiber and neutral detergent fiber of group Ⅲ was substantially lower than that of group Ⅱ(P<0.05).In conclusion,soybean hull fiber is a high quality fiber source in improving the growth performance,slaughter performance,intestinal tissue structure,intestinal enzyme activity and nutrient metabolism rates of Magang geese.Moreover,it is benefit for improving effects and nutrient metabolic rates of Magang geese when feeding mixed with unite bran.
引文
[1]周惠,曾晓虹.2017年国内稻米市场形势分析及2018年展望[J].农业展望,2018,14(3):4-9.
[2]王辽卫.2017年我国饲料原料市场回顾与展望[J].猪业科学,2018,35(2):49-51.
[3]杨家晃,何仁春,麦伟虹,等.统糠在鹅饲料中的应用研究[J].西南农业学报,2006,19(2):305-309.
[4]胡金杰,肖凯,姜时保.大豆皮的营养价值及在猪饲料中的应用[J].广东饲料,2015,24(3):38-40.
[5]刘萍,白云峰,刘建,等.大豆皮替代饲粮中稻草对波杂山羊生长性能、营养成分消化率和血液生化指标的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2017,53(10):84-88.
[6]杨晋青,党文庆,焦福林,等.大豆皮在繁育母猪生产中的应用研究[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2017,38(8):20-23.
[7]陈宽维,高玉时,王志跃,等.中华人民共和国农业行业标准家禽生产性能名词术语和度量统计方法[J].中国禽业导刊,2006,23(15):45-46.
[8]张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].2版.北京:中国农业大学出版社,2003.
[9]HSU J C,LU T W,CHIOU P W S,et al.Effects of different sources of dietary fibre on grow th performance and apparent digestibility in geese[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,1996,60(1/2):93-102.
[10]YU B,TSAI C C,HSU J C,et al.Effect of different sources of dietary fibre on grow th performance,intestinal morphology and caecal carbohydrases of domestic geese[J].British Poultry Science,1998,39(4):560-567.
[11]史莹华,王成章,姚惠霞,等.不同类型粗纤维饲料对四川白鹅生产性能的影响[J].动物营养学报,2010,22(6):1752-1756.
[12]陈五湖,王志跃,施寿荣,等.日粮纤维源对扬州鹅生长性能及部分生理指标的影响[J].江苏农业学报,2008,24(1):65-70.
[13]和立文,孟庆翔,张亚伟,等.不同纤维源对灰雁生长性能和屠宰性能的影响[J].畜牧兽医学报,2014,45(7):1196-1201.
[14]WANG Z Y,YANG H M,LIU J,et al.Influence of whole hulled rice and rice husk feeding on the performance,carcass yield and digestive tract development of geese[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2014,194:99-105.
[15]谢燕娟,杨海明,盛东峰,等.不同纤维源对成年鹅肠道组织形态变化的影响[J].中国畜牧兽医,2016,43(4):960-966.
[16]李青竹,李润航,郑艳秋,等.不同纤维源对吉林白鹅肠道形态学发育的影响[J].畜牧兽医学报,2014,45(4):596-602.
[17]尹喜海,姜夙,王伟杰.米糠中的抗营养因子及消除方法研究进展[J].吉林畜牧兽医,2012,33(5):29-32.
[18]MCDONALD D E,PETHICK D W,MULLAN B P,et al.Increasing viscosity of the intestinal contents alters small intestinal structure and intestinal grow th,and stimulates proliferation of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli in new ly-weaned pigs[J].British Journal of Nutrition,2001,86(4):487-498.
[19]刘长忠,刘兴友,胡建和,等.发酵棉仁粕对生长鹅生长性能和消化酶活性的影响[J].中国家禽,2015,37(11):27-31.
[20]CALVERT R,SCHNEEMAN B O,SATCHITHANANDAMS,et al.Dietary fiber and intestinal adaptation:effects on intestinal and pancreatic digestive enzyme activities[J].The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,1985,41(6):1249-1256.
[2]王辽卫.2017年我国饲料原料市场回顾与展望[J].猪业科学,2018,35(2):49-51.
[3]杨家晃,何仁春,麦伟虹,等.统糠在鹅饲料中的应用研究[J].西南农业学报,2006,19(2):305-309.
[4]胡金杰,肖凯,姜时保.大豆皮的营养价值及在猪饲料中的应用[J].广东饲料,2015,24(3):38-40.
[5]刘萍,白云峰,刘建,等.大豆皮替代饲粮中稻草对波杂山羊生长性能、营养成分消化率和血液生化指标的影响[J].中国畜牧杂志,2017,53(10):84-88.
[6]杨晋青,党文庆,焦福林,等.大豆皮在繁育母猪生产中的应用研究[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2017,38(8):20-23.
[7]陈宽维,高玉时,王志跃,等.中华人民共和国农业行业标准家禽生产性能名词术语和度量统计方法[J].中国禽业导刊,2006,23(15):45-46.
[8]张丽英.饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术[M].2版.北京:中国农业大学出版社,2003.
[9]HSU J C,LU T W,CHIOU P W S,et al.Effects of different sources of dietary fibre on grow th performance and apparent digestibility in geese[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,1996,60(1/2):93-102.
[10]YU B,TSAI C C,HSU J C,et al.Effect of different sources of dietary fibre on grow th performance,intestinal morphology and caecal carbohydrases of domestic geese[J].British Poultry Science,1998,39(4):560-567.
[11]史莹华,王成章,姚惠霞,等.不同类型粗纤维饲料对四川白鹅生产性能的影响[J].动物营养学报,2010,22(6):1752-1756.
[12]陈五湖,王志跃,施寿荣,等.日粮纤维源对扬州鹅生长性能及部分生理指标的影响[J].江苏农业学报,2008,24(1):65-70.
[13]和立文,孟庆翔,张亚伟,等.不同纤维源对灰雁生长性能和屠宰性能的影响[J].畜牧兽医学报,2014,45(7):1196-1201.
[14]WANG Z Y,YANG H M,LIU J,et al.Influence of whole hulled rice and rice husk feeding on the performance,carcass yield and digestive tract development of geese[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology,2014,194:99-105.
[15]谢燕娟,杨海明,盛东峰,等.不同纤维源对成年鹅肠道组织形态变化的影响[J].中国畜牧兽医,2016,43(4):960-966.
[16]李青竹,李润航,郑艳秋,等.不同纤维源对吉林白鹅肠道形态学发育的影响[J].畜牧兽医学报,2014,45(4):596-602.
[17]尹喜海,姜夙,王伟杰.米糠中的抗营养因子及消除方法研究进展[J].吉林畜牧兽医,2012,33(5):29-32.
[18]MCDONALD D E,PETHICK D W,MULLAN B P,et al.Increasing viscosity of the intestinal contents alters small intestinal structure and intestinal grow th,and stimulates proliferation of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli in new ly-weaned pigs[J].British Journal of Nutrition,2001,86(4):487-498.
[19]刘长忠,刘兴友,胡建和,等.发酵棉仁粕对生长鹅生长性能和消化酶活性的影响[J].中国家禽,2015,37(11):27-31.
[20]CALVERT R,SCHNEEMAN B O,SATCHITHANANDAMS,et al.Dietary fiber and intestinal adaptation:effects on intestinal and pancreatic digestive enzyme activities[J].The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,1985,41(6):1249-1256.