994 archives

Contents

Research

Land Management Essential in Managing Volatility and Food Security

Reducing Competition between Livestock and Humans for Food

OFC What strategies are needed to feed a growing population?

4

International News

IPPE: Essential Oils Key to Reducing Antibiotics in Poultry

IPPE: How Does a Farm Become Infected with Avian Influenza?

7

8

Features

Importance of Vitamins in Poultry Production

Ammonia Concentration versus Ventilation Rate

Maximum Phytate Destruction

Chicken And eggs Best source of proteins

For that we should know the power of protein

Metabolizable energy content of glycerin:

Glycerine: A better alternative for energy source in poultry

Chairman & Editor In ChiefRai Mansab Ali Kharl

Executive Editor:Major (R) Syed Javaid Hussain Bukhari

Editor:Areeba Safdar

Members:Dr. F.M Sabir, Dr. Anwar Mehmood Randhawa,Mr. Abdul Haye Mehta, Mr. Khalid Saleem Malik,Rai Mansab Ali kharl, Muhammad Azmat Ch.

Designer & Photographer :Mr. Tahir NadeemCell:[email protected]

Publisher:Maj (R) Syed Javaid Hussain Bukhari24-R (Poultry House), Johar Town, LahoreNote:Articles are published for knowledge/guidance of poultry community. All rights reserved. No reproduction is permitted unless priorpermission of Editor/Editorial Board.

Feedback:[email protected]

Price per copy: Rs. 300/- PKR Annual Subscription Pakistan: Rs. 2,500/- PKR (Ordinary Mail)Pakistan: Rs. 3,000/- PKR (Courier Mail)Foreign: 300$

EDITORIAL BOARD

Tech Advisors:Dr. Hassan Sarosh Akram,

Dr. Mustafa Kamal,

Dr. Abdul Kareem Bhatti,

Dr. Arshad Hanif Ch., Dr. Hanif Nazir,

Dr. Bashir Mehmood Bhatti,

Dr. Muhammad Akram (UVAS),

Dr. Syed Ali Raza Haider.

Honorary Advisors:

Haji Muhammad Bashir,

Dr. Muhammad Alsam,

Dr. Muhammad Sadiq,

Mr. Khalil Sattar,

Mr. Abdul BasitMr. Raza Mehmood Khursand

13

Pakistan Poultry Mag - February 2016, Monthly Urdu/English

7

INTERNATIONAL NEWS


8

INTERNATIONAL NEWS


RESEARCH

10

Reducing Competition between Livestock


RESEARCH

11

OFC - What Strategies are needed to Feed


FEATUREFEATURE

13

However, the presence of the gizzard

and the physiological functions

afforded by reverse peristalsis makes

it obvious that the chicken did not

evolve to consume only fine particles.

The lack of adequate gizzard function,

and resultant reduced GIT retention

time, has a negative impact on live

performance.

Thus, interest in coarse particle

inclusion has grown recently.

There are many variables that come

into play that can acoarse cornentuate

or diminish the impact of feed particle

size manipulation on animal live

performance.

For example, litter type (size and

texture) and management strategies

will determine the acoarse corness to

non-feed coarse material. Also,

differences in animal age, production

stage, and purpose (e.g. meat vs.

offspring production) must be

considered.

Recent research on feed particle

size

Dr Adam Fahrenholz and Dr John Brake presented

some recent work focused on

the manipulation of feed particle size, in

the presence of the aforementioned

variables, and the overall impact on

animal live performance as well as feed

milling characteristics.

Chewning

et al. (2012) conducted an

experiment where corn particle size

averaged 270 or 570 microns, and diets

were fed to broilers as mash or pellets.

The finer grind did lead to an improved

body weight at 21 days, but not at 35

days and 44 days.

Smaller particle sizes led to improved

feed conversion ratio

in the mash diets,

but there was no observed difference in

the pelleted diets over the course of the

experiment.

It was concluded that reduced particle

size did not improve live performance in

a pelleted diet.

On average, pellet durability did

improve with the finer grind (88 per

cent vs. 84 per cent).

While statistically significant, the

decrease in pellet quality (and a

corresponding increase in fines in the

feeder) was apparently not large

enough to have a negative effect on

performance in comparison with the diet

containing the finely ground corn.

The upshot of these results is that bird

performance was equal, while grinding

costs would have been diminished. The

next step was to begin including

coarsely ground grains as a component

in the overall diet.

This would generally be done by

combining two product streams, a fine

grind corn and a coarsely ground corn

at a substantially higher particle size. Xu

et al. (2013) fed broilers two dietary

treatments, with coarse corn (maize)

making up 0 or 50 per cent of the total

dietary corn. Fine corn (hammer mill

ground to 270 microns) and coarse corn

(roller mill ground to 1,150 microns)

were blended prior to pelleting to create

the dietary treatments.

The inclusion of coarse corn led to

improved body weight and feed

conversion ratio. In order to evaluate

the impact of litter availability, birds in

this study were raised on multiple floor

types, including netting as well as new

and old litter.

Birds on new wood chip litter had

improved performance even in the

absence of coarse corn, reinforcing the

theory that coarse material

consumption aids GIT function.

A following study by Xu

et al. (2015)

evaluated three coarse corn inclusions

(0, 25, 50 per cent) in a cage study.

Feed was fed as crumbles and pellets,

with pellets having been screened to

remove the fines. Fine corn was

approximately 295 microns, coarse corn

was approximately 1360 microns, and

the

mash diets containing 0, 25, and 50

However, other ingredients, such as

oilseeds and by-products, may also

enter the grinding stream, especially in

post-batch grind operations.

In general, the reduction in particle size

leads to increased ingredient surface

area, leading to more intimate

interaction with digestive acids and

enzymes in the GIT.

During the 2015 Midwest Poultry

Federation Convention in Minnesota, Dr

Adam Fahrenholz and Dr John Brake,

from the Prestige Department of Poultry

Science at North Carolina State

University, presented recent findings.

Interest has been driven by the

juxtaposition of classic theory (i.e. finer

grinds lead to improved digestion) with

the relatively modern idea that coarse

ingredients are necessary to

complement the natural design and

function of the gastro-intestinal tract

(GIT).

As with most animal performance

research, evaluating the impacts of feed

particle size largely concerns live

performance criteria such as feed

intake, body weight, and feed

conversion.

Additionally, questions of particle size

manipulation must also take into

account the impact on feed

manufacturing methodology. This

impacts both feed mill efficiency (e.g.

energy consumption and throughput)

and finished feed characteristics, most

specifically pellet quality and feed

ingredient segregation.

Particle size reduction is the second-

most common feed manufacturing

process (mixing is first), and thus has a

substantial performance impact in the

global sense. Grinding is most typically

associated with the size reduction of

cereal grains.

Is Poultry Performance Affected By Feed Particle Size?

Feed particle size manipulation has recently become a hot topic as a means to improve the

efficiency of poultry live performance.


FEATUREFEATURE

14

per cent mixer-added fat produced

poorer feed conversion ratio. Neither

factor had an effect on body weight

and, by 35 days, there was no coarse

corn or post-pellet fat effect on feed

conversion ratio.

Overall, with 3 per cent mixer-added

fat, feed conversion ratio was poorer

with coarse corn inclusion compared to

diets with fine corn. This likely

demonstrates a pellet quality effect, as

both coarse corn and mixer-added fat

led to reduced pellet durability.

The data also demonstrated that, while

805 micron corn was sufficient to obtain

the coarse corn effect in younger birds

(

FEATUREFEATURE

16


FEATUREFEATURE

17


FEATUREFEATURE

20


FEATUREFEATURE

22


FEATUREFEATURE

24


FEATUREFEATURE

27


FEATUREFEATURE

28


FEATUREFEATURE

29


FEATUREFEATURE

30


FEATUREFEATURE

31

Chicken and Eggs Best Source of Proteins


FEATUREFEATURE

32


FEATUREFEATURE

35


FEATUREFEATURE

36


FEATUREFEATURE

37


FEATUREFEATURE

38


FEATUREFEATURE

39


FEATUREFEATURE

40


64

59

61

64

55

49

]m,m9n]m;m9

Zt

:+] / Jm]

eZZuzlZx

Cell:[email protected]

41

52

Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Page 8Page 9Page 10Page 11Page 12Page 13Page 14Page 15Page 16Page 17Page 18Page 19Page 20Page 21Page 22Page 23Page 24Page 25Page 26Page 27Page 28Page 29Page 30Page 31Page 32Page 33Page 34Page 35Page 36Page 37Page 38Page 39Page 40Page 41Page 42Page 43