Effect of probiotic and Moringa oleifera extract on performance, carcass yield, and mortality of Peking duck

Autor: Widya Paramita Lokapirnasari, Bodhi Agustono, Mohammad Anam Al Arif, Lilik Maslachah, Evania Haris Chandra, Andreas Berny Yulianto
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2022
Předmět:
Zdroj: Veterinary World, Vol 15, Iss 3, Pp 694-700 (2022)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 0972-8988
2231-0916
DOI: 10.14202/vetworld.2022.694-700
Popis: Background and Aim: Antibiotics have been used as growth promoters in poultry. However, continuous and long-term antibiotics can cause resistance, suppress the immune system, and accumulate toxic residue. To overcome these problems, feed additives that are safe for livestock and health for humans are needed, including probiotics. Therefore, the study aimed to determine the effect of probiotics (Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus lactis, and Bifidobacterium spp.) and Moringa oleifera extract on performance (body weight gain, body weight, feed intake, feed efficiency, and feed conversion ratio [FCR]), carcass yield (carcass weight and percentage of carcass) and mortality of Peking duck. Materials and Methods: This study used 48 Peking ducks, divided into four treatments and six replications. Each replication consisted of two ducks. The treatments were as follows: T0=control, T1=4 mL containing 1.2×108 CFU/mL of probiotic in drinking water, T2=4 mL containing M. oleifera extract in drinking water, and T3=2 mL containing 1.2×108 CFU/mL of probiotic in drinking water+2 mL containing M. oleifera extract in drinking water. The probiotics consist of L. acidophilus, L. casei, L. lactis, and Bifidobacterium spp. The data were statistically analyzed through analysis of variance. For the follow-up test, a multiple range test was conducted. Results: There was no significant difference (p>0.05) between body weight, feed intake, and mortality treatments. By contrast, control and treatment showed a significant difference (p0.05) between T0 and T1, but T0 and T1 showed a significant difference with T2 and T3. The results of the feed efficiency statistic showed no significant difference (p>0.05) between T0, T1, and T2, but there was a significant difference between T0, T1, and T3. Feed efficiency at T2 showed no significant difference with T3, T1, and T0. The results of the FCR statistic showed no significant difference (p>0.05) between T0, T1, and T2, but there was a significant difference between T0, T1, and T3. FCR at T2 showed no significant difference with T3, T1, and T0. The carcass weight statistic showed no significant difference (p>0.05) between T0, T1, and T3, but there was a significant difference between T0 and T2. T2 showed no significant difference with T1 and T3. The carcass percentage statistic showed no significant difference (p>0.05) between T0 and T1, but T0 and T1 showed a significant difference (p
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Externí odkaz: