performance of growing pullets fed cassava peel meal diet supplemented with cashew nut reject meal

Arch. Zootec. 58 (221): 23-31. 2009.Recibido: 16-2-07. Aceptado: 1-10-07.

PERFORMANCE OF GROWING PULLETS FED CASSAVA PEELMEAL DIET SUPPLEMENTED WITH CASHEW NUT REJECT MEAL

RENDIMIENTO DE POLLOS EN CRECIMIENTO ALIMENTADOS CON HARINA DEPELADURAS DE MANDIOCA Y HARINA DE RESIDUOS DE SEMILLA DE ANACARDO

Sogunle,O.M.1*, A.O. Fanimo1, S.S. Abiola1 and A.M. Bamgbose2

1Department of Animal Production and Health. University of Agriculture. Abeokuta. Ogun State. Nigeria.2Department of Animal Nutrition. University of Agriculture. Abeokuta. Ogun State. Nigeria.*Corresponding author: [email protected]

ADDITIONAL KEYWORDS

Growing pullets. Haemoglobin concentration.

PALABRAS CLAVE ADICIONALES

Pollos en creciomiento. Concentración de hemo-globina.

SUMMARYThe performance and blood constituents of

growing pullets fed cassava (Manihot esculentaCrantz) peel meal (CPM) diet supplemented withcashew nut (Anacardium occidentale Linn) rejectmeal (CNM) were studied for 13 weeks using fourhundred and thirty-two 9 weeks old Yaafa Brownpullet chicks. The birds were maintained on agrower diet consisting of 3 levels of CPM (0, 10 and20%) each supplemented with 4 levels of CNM (0,10, 20 and 30%) in a 3 x 4 factorial experimentallayout. The highest weight gain of 7.96 g/bird/daywas obtained in diet 3 (0% CPM and 20%CNM)while the highest feed intake of 107.29 g/bird/dayand cost of 1 kg feed of $0.31 were obtained in diet12 (20% CPM and 30% CNM). CPM inclusion in thediets significantly (p<0.05) influenced thehaemoglobin concentration and the serum totalprotein. The growing pullets performed poorlywith increasing CPM in the diets but had an improvedperformance, as CNM was included. It was thenconcluded that the combination of 10% CPM and30% CNM was appropriate for enhanced perfor-mance of growing pullets.

RESUMENEl rendimiento y contituyentes sanguíneos de

pollos en crecimiento alimentados con harina depeladuras de mandioca (Manihot esculentaCrantz) (CPM) suplementados con harina de resi-duos de semilla de anacardo (Anacardium

occidentale Linn) (CNM), fue estudiado durante13 semanas empleando 432 pollitos Yaafa Brownde nueve semanas. Las aves fueron mantenidascon una dieta de crecimiento consistente en tresniveles de CPM (0, 10 y 20%), cada uno de ellossuplementado con cuatro niveles de CNM (0, 10,20 y 30%), en un diseño factorial 3 x 4. La mayorganancia de peso fue de 7,96 g/ave/día obtenidacon la dieta 3 (0% CPM y 20% CNM) mientras quela mayor ingestión de alimento de 107,29 g/ave/díay coste de 1 kg de alimento de $0,31, se registrócon la dieta 12 (20% CPM y 30% CNM). La inclusiónde CPM en las dietas influyó significativamente(p<0,05) sobre la concentración de hemoglobinay proteína sérica total. El rendimiento de los pollosen crecimiento se empobreció al aumentar laproporción de CPM en las dietas, aunque el rendi-miento mejoró al incluir CNM. Se concluyó que lacombinación de 10% de CPM y 30% de CNM, fueapropiada para mejorar el rendimiento de pollos encrecimiento.

INTRODUCTION

In view of high poultry feed costresulting from the cost of maize andvegetable protein sources such as soyabeanmeal, it is almost never profitable to feedprotein at a level which will maximize animalperformance. Hence, there is a need to find

Archivos de zootecnia vol. 58, núm. 221, p. 24.

SOGUNLE, FANIMO, ABIOLA AND BAMGBOSE

an appropriate alternative feed resourcewhich can replace a certain proportion ofmaize and vegetable protein sources in thediets of growing pullets at a lower cost ofproduction. Many research efforts wereinvested in the search for alternative energysources for poultry (Aina, 1990; Eruvbetineet al., 2003). One of such alternatives iscassava. Though it is a staple food forhumans, there is increasing interest in itsuse as a substitute for maize in feedinglivestock. The renewed interests in cassavaare because of availability throughout theyear, efficient production of cheap energy(Hahn and Keyser, 1985), drought toleranceand ability to thrive on marginal soils.

It is noteworthy that the protein contentof cassava is of poorer quality (Agunbiadeet al., 2001) compared to that of cereal grain.When utilized in replacing cereals in diet formonogastric animals, it becomes imperativeto balance for protein deficiencies, whichare sometimes expensive. Hence, cashewnut reject meal finds an excellent supplementas both protein and energy source in thediets of poultry (Sogunle et al., 2005). Theprocessing of the raw nut carried out inmany of the producing countries revealedthat 60-65% are of commercial value while35-40% of the processed nuts are oftendiscarded either as broken or scorchedkernels (Fetuga et al., 1974). The discardednut is said to contain a significant quantityof high protein material, which is parti-cularly useful for feeding monogastricanimals. The inclusion of full-fat cashewnut rejects and cassava peel meal in thediets of the growing pullets was studied todetermine the effects of the combination onthe bird's performance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

EXPERIMENTAL SITEThe experiment was carried out in 2006 at

the poultry unit (deep litter pen) of theTeaching and Research Farm, University of

Agriculture, Abeokuta, Nigeria (7° 15' N, 3°25' E). The period of the experiment wasearly dry season (i.e. September-Novem-ber).

EXPERIMENTAL BIRDS AND MANAGEMENTFour hundred and thirty two (432), 9

weeks-old Yaafa Brown pullet chicks wereused for the study that lasted for 13 weeks.The birds were divided into 12 treatmentgroups with 3 replications of 12 birds eachand were managed intensively in a deeplitter pen containing wood shavings (6 cmdeep) as litter material. The diets consistedof three levels (0, 10 and 20%) of cassavapeel meal with each level supplemented withfour levels (0, 10, 20 and 30%) of cashew nutreject meal (table I).

CHEMICAL ANALYSISThe proximate compositions of the test

ingredients and diets were determined bythe method of AOAC (1995). The moisturecontent was determined by oven- dryingthe diets and faeces to constant weight at65°C for 26 hours.

BIOCHEMICAL AND HAEMATOLOGICAL ANA-LYSES

At the 13th week blood samples (2 mleach) were collected via the wing veins of 3birds per replicate group into ethylenediamine tetra acetate (EDTA) bottles forserum biochemical analysis (total protein,albumin, globulin, uric acid, creatinine ,andglucose) and haematological (packed cellvolume, haemoglobin, red blood cell, whiteblood cell and platelet) analyses. Packedcell volume (PCV), haemoglobin concen-tration (Hb) and red blood cell (RBC) weredetermined using Wintrobes microhaema-tocrit, colorimetry cyanomethaemoglobinmethod, and improved Neubauer haemo-cytometer, respectively (Jain, 1986). Serumtotal protein, albumin and globulin wereanalyzed colorimetrically using diagnosticreagent kit (Reanal Diagnosztikai Reagents,Keszlet, Hungary) (Varley et al., 1980).


FEEDING PULLETS WITH CASSAVA PEEL AND CASHEW NUT REJECT MEALS

DATA COLLECTIONData were collected daily on the birds'

body temperature (°C) which was measuredvia the wing web using a digital clinicalthermometer. The prevailing market prices($) of the ingredients at the time of the studywere used to calculate the cost of 1kg feedconsumed and the cost of 1kg feedconsumed/weight gain (Naira 127.00= $1.00).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND STATISTICALANALYSIS

The experimental layout was a 3x4 facto-rial arrangement. The data obtained weresubjected to analysis of variance using SAS

(1999). Significant means among variableswere separated using Duncan MultipleRange Test (Duncan, 1955) at 5% level ofsignificance.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table II showed that cassava peel meal(% air-dry basis) contained: 80.95, dry matter;5.50, crude protein; 21.36, crude fibre; 0.67,ether extract; 66.49, nitrogen-free extract;21.95, hydrocyanic acid content (mg/kg);while, cashew nut reject meal contained:95.40, dry matter; 21.20, crude protein; 2.15,crude fibre; 46.21, ether extract; 3.68, ash;

Table I. Composition of growers' mash. (Composición del pienso de crecimiento).

Diets 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Ingredients (%)Cassava peel meal 0 0 0 0 10 10 10 10 20 20 20 20Cashew nut meal 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30Maize 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0Soyabean meal 10.5 8.5 6.5 4.5 12.5 10.5 8.5 6.5 15.5 13.5 11.5 8.5Wheat offal 48.0 40.0 32.0 24.0 36.0 28.0 20.0 12.0 23.0 15.0 7.0 0.0Fish meal 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Bone meal 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0Oyster shell 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0*Vit./Min. premix 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Salt 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Determined analysis (%)Dry matter 88.00 85.00 87.00 85.00 87.00 87.00 87.50 84.00 88.50 83.50 83.00 85.00Crude protein 15.01 15.24 15.68 15.76 15.37 15.55 15.40 15.39 15.45 15.53 15.61 15.22Crude fibre 3.17 3.19 2.91 2.86 4.01 3.91 3.65 3.42 4.21 4.07 4.18 4.23Ether extract 4.50 3.50 4.00 5.00 4.50 3.00 5.00 4.50 5.00 3.00 4.00 3.00Ash 23.77 23.12 23.32 23.71 23.94 22.79 23.29 23.90 23.86 23.98 23.45 23.33NFE 53.55 54.95 54.09 52.67 52.18 54.75 52.66 52.79 50.98 53.42 52.76 54.22**Calcium 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36 1.36**Phosphorus 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68ME(MJ/kg) 12.60 12.61 12.62 12.63 12.10 12.11 12.13 12.14 11.58 11.59 11.60 11.64

*Vit./Min. Premix contained: Premix (Embavit No 90) contained Vit. A, 10 000000 iu; D3 , 2 000000 iu ; E,12500 iu; K, 1.30 g; B1, 1.30; B2, 4.00 g; D Calcium-Pantothenate, 1.30 g; B6, 1.30 g; B12, 0.01 g; nicotinicacid, 15.00 g; folic acid, 0.05 g; biotin, 0.02 g; Co, 0.20 g; Cu, 5.00 g; Fe, 25.00 g; I, 0.06 g; Mn, 48.00g; Se, 0.10 g; Zn, 45.00 g; choline chloride, 200.00 g; BHT, 50.00 g. **Calculated.NFE: Nitrogen-free extract.



and 26.76% nitrogen-free extract. The CPMcyanide content (21.95 mg/kg) was lowerthan the optimum tolerable level of 100 mg/kg reported by Tewe (1975; 1983). Hence,the variety used in the study was a lowcyanide variety (IITA, 1994). In addition theproximate composition of CNM agreed withthe values reported by Sogunle et al. (2005).

The single effect of CPM inclusion levelson the performance of growing pulletsshown in table III revealed significant(p<0.05) differences in all the parametersconsidered except in the mortality and thecost of 1kg feed. The average bodytemperature of the birds was highest (41.5°C)in 10% CPM inclusion comparable to thevalues obtained at 0% CNM inclusion. Thevalues, though increased with increasingCPM in the diets were within the reportedvalues of 41-42°C recorded for birds(Marsden and Morris, 1987). The final weight(g/bird) and the weight gain (g/bird/day),feed efficiency and protein efficiency ratiodecreased with increasing CPM inclusion inthe diets. However, the cost of feedconsumed per weight gain and the mortalityincreased with increasing CPM inclusion inthe diets.

Moreover, the single effect of CNM onperformance showed depressed significan-ce (p>0.05) in all the parameters considered

except in the cost of feed consumed and thecost of feed consumed per weight gain. Theaverage body temperature of the birds (°C)decreased with increasing CNM inclusionin the diets. The cost of 1kg feed, cost offeed consumed ($) and the cost of feedconsumed per weight gain ($/g) increasedwith increasing CNM inclusion levels. Thehighest values of $0.03 and $0.01/g wereobtained in the cost of feed consumed andthe cost of feed consumed per weight gain,respectively, at the 30% CNM inclusionlevels. Mortality decreased with increasingCNM inclusion in the diets therebyconfirming the reports of Onifade et al.(1999) that CNM is an excellent feedresource.

CPM inclusion in the diets significantly(p<0.05) influenced the haemoglobinconcentration (g/dl) and the serum totalprotein (g/dl). The highest value of 11.55g/dl was obtained at the 10% CPM inclusionlevel for haemoglobin while 51.87g/dl wasobtained at 20% CPM inclusion level com-parable only to 51.63 g/dl at 10% CPMinclusion level were obtained for the serumtotal protein. The red blood cell (RBC) andserum albumin increased with increasingCPM inclusion levels in the diets, but thewhite blood cell (WBC) decreased withincreasing CPM inclusion levels in the diets.On the other hand, increase in CNM inclusionlevels significantly (p<0.05) reduced thepacked cell volume whereas it showedvarying effects on the serum glucose,though, the highest value of 68.21 g/dl wasobtained at 30% CNM inclusion.

The interactive effect of CPM and CNMinclusion in the diets on the performancecharacteristics and cost benefits of growingpullets (table IV) showed no significant(p>0.05) differences in all the parametersacross treatments. The average bodytemperature (°C) of the birds ranged from41.1 in diets 1 (0% CPM and 0% CNM) and11 (20% CPM and 20% CNM) to 41.7 in diet5 (10% CPM and 0% CNM). Hence, thehighest body temperature was obtained in

Table II. Proximate composition (%) of CPMand CNM (air-dry basis). (Composición nutri-tiva de CPM y CNM, % sobre material seco al aire).

CPM CNM

Dry matter 80.95 95.40Crude protein 5.50 21.20Crude fibre 21.36 2.15Ether extract 0.67 46.21Ash 5.98 3.68Nitrogen-free extract 66.49 26.76Hydrocyanic acid (mg/kg) 21.95 ND

CPM= Cassava peel meal; CNM= Cashew nutreject meal; ND= Not determined.



diet 5 (10% CPM and 0% CNM). The highestweight gain of 7.96 g/bird/day was obtainedin diet 3 (0% CPM and 20% CNM) while thehighest feed intake of 107.29 g/bird/day andcost of 1kg feed of $0.31 were obtained indiet 12 (20% CPM and 30% CNM). Thenature of the feed could probably confersome astringency on them and thereby re-duce their palatability and consumption.This could result to a reduced availability ofnutrients for growth purposes, hence, the

relatively reduced performance of thegrowing pullets (Ologhobo and Balogun,1987).

The results of the interactive effects ofCPM and CNM diets on the haematologicalparameters, nitrogen utilization and nutrientdigestibility of growing pullets (table V)revealed statistical similarities (p>0.05) inall the parameters considered on hema-tology across treatments. However, therange of values obtained was within normal

Table III. Single effect of CPM and CNM diets on the performance, cost benefits andhaematological parameters (9 birds/treatment) of growing pullets. (Efecto aislado de las dietascon CPM y CNM sobre el rendimiento, coste-beneficio y parámetros hematológicos (9 aves portratamiento) de pollos en crecimiento).

CPM inclusion levels CNM inclusion levels0% 10% 20% SEM 0% 10% 20% 30% SEM

PerformanceAve. bird body temp. °C 41.4b 41.5a 41.4a 0.18 41.5 41.4 41.4 41.4 0.18Initial wt. (g/bird) 671.69a 606.60b 608.55b 20.49 632.15 636.57 624.54 622.52 17.75Final wt. (g/bird) 1364.65a 248.11b 1228.99b 44.98 1276.21 1292.91 1281.16 1272.05 38.96Wt. gain (g/bird/day) 7.59a 7.05b 6.82b 0.33 7.08 7.18 7.21 7.14 0.29Feed intake (g/bird/day) 99.97b 98.31b 103.58a 2.17 101.86 100.51 99.17 100.95 1.88Feed efficiency 0.08b 0.07a 0.07a 0.004 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.003Protein intake (g/bird) 15.41b 15.17b 16.00a 0.33 15.56 15.52 15.45 15.59 0.29Mortality (%) 2.08 2.78 5.56 3.11 5.55 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.69

Cost of feed ($)1 kg ($) 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.002 0.25 0.27 0.29 0.31 0.20consumed ($) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00consumed/wt.gain ($/g) 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.00

HaematologyPacked cell volume (%) 32.65 34.33 34.11 2.45 35.35a 34.27b 33.33b 33.21b 1.01Haemoglobin (g/dl) 10.02c 11.55a 11.33b 0.15 11.34 11.23 11.40 11.27 0.26Red blood cell (g/dl) 4.25 4.36 4.40 0.17 3.92 3.97 3.85 3.70 0.17White blood cell (x 103/l) 5.95 5.76 5.45 0.23 5.72 5.62 5.39 5.48 1.11Platelet (g/dl) 152.30 158.00 154.33 13.11 152.13 155.38 158.66 153.32 5.13Serum total protein (g/dl) 50.38b 51.63a 51.87a 0.84 52.65 51.53 52.65 51.91 1.33Serum albumin (g/dl) 29.10 29.45 29.52 0.48 30.10 29.70 30.36 30.00 0.68Serum globulin (g/dl) 21.28 22.18 22.35 1.32 22.55 21.83 22.29 21.91 1.12Serum uric acid (mg/dl) 3.40 3.39 3.42 0.04 3.51 3.58 3.57 3.50 1.02Serum creatinine (mg/dl) 1.54 1.55 1.52 0.03 1.40 1.37 1.35 1.34 0.08Serum glucose (g/dl) 61.23 61.41 61.37 1.31 65.30b 63.00c 63.00c 68.21a 1.27

abcMeans in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05); CPM= cassava peelmeal; SEM= standard error of mean; CNM= cashewnut reject meal: Naira 127.00= $1.00.



Tabl

e IV

. Int

erac

tive e

ffect

s of C

PM an

d CN

M di

ets o

n the

perf

orm

ance

char

acte

rist

ics a

nd co

st be

nefit

s of g

row

ing p

ulle

ts. (

Efe

ctos

inte

ract

ivos

de

las

diet

as c

on C

PM

y C

NM

sob

re c

arac

terís

ticas

del

ren

dim

ient

o y

cost

e-be

nefic

io d

e po

llos

en c

reci

mie

nto)

.

Die

ts 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10

11

12

SEM

Cas

sava

pee

l mea

l0

00

010

1010

1020

2020

20C

ashe

w n

ut m

eal

010

2030

010

2030

010

2030

Av.

Bod

y te

mp.

°C

41.1

41.4

41.5

41.5

41.7

41.4

41.5

41.5

41.6

41.4

41.1

41.3

0.13

Initi

al w

t. (

g/bi

rd)

657.

667

0.8

709.

764

8.6

625.

061

8.1

573.

660

9.7

613.

962

0.8

590.

360

9.2

14.4

8Fi

nal w

t. (g

/bird

)13

33.0

1386

.314

33.7

1305

.512

56.9

1244

.212

21.4

1269

.912

38.7

1248

.211

88.4

1240

.731

.81

Wt.

gain

(g/

bird

)67

5.4

715.

572

4.0

656.

963

1.9

626.

264

7.8

660.

262

4.8

627.

459

8.1

631.

514

.32

Wt.

gain

(g/

bird

/day

)7.

47.

88.

07.

27.

06.

97.

17.

36.

96.

96.

66.

90.

23Fe

ed in

take

(g/

bird

/day

)10

3.0

99.6

99.3

98.0

99.4

98.0

98.3

97.6

103.

210

4.0

99.9

107.

31.

53Fe

ed e

ffici

ency

0.07

0.08

0.08

0.07

0.07

0.07

0.08

0.07

0.07

0.07

0.06

0.06

0.00

3P

rote

in in

take

(g/b

ird)

15.4

715

.18

15.5

715

.44

15.2

715

.23

15.1

415

.02

15.9

416

.14

15.6

016

.33

0.23

Mor

talit

y (%

)2.

780.

002.

782.

785.

552.

780.

002.

788.

335.

565.

552.

782.

19C

ost

of1

kg fe

ed (

$)0.

240.

270.

290.

310.

250.

270.

290.

310.

260.

280.

300.

310.

001

feed

con

sum

ed (

$)0.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

030.

00fe

ed c

onsu

med

/wt.g

ain

($/g

)0.

003

0.00

30.

003

0.00

40.

003

0.00

40.

004

0.00

40.

004

0.00

40.

004

0.00

50.

02

CP

M=

cass

ava

peel

mea

l; C

NM

= ca

shew

nut

reje

ct m

eal;

SE

M=

stan

dard

err

or o

f mea

n; N

aira

127

.00=

$1.

00.


FEEDING PULLETS WITH CASSAVA PEEL AND CASHEW NUT REJECT MEALSTa

ble V

. Int

erac

tive e

ffect

s of C

PM a

nd C

NM

die

ts o

n th

e hae

mat

olog

ical

par

amet

ers,

nitr

ogen

util

izat

ion

and

nutr

ient

dig

estib

ility

(9 b

irds

/ tre

atm

ent)

of g

row

ing

pulle

ts. (

Efe

ctos

inte

ract

ivos

de

las

diet

as c

on C

PM

y C

NM

sob

re lo

s pa

rám

etro

s he

mat

ológ

icos

y la

util

izac

ión

del n

itróg

eno

y di

gest

ibili

dad

de lo

s nu

trien

tes

para

pol

los

en c

reci

mie

nto

(9 a

ves

por

trata

mie

nto)

.

Die

ts 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10

11

12

SEM

Cas

sava

pee

l mea

l (C

PM

)0

00

010

1010

1020

2020

20C

ashe

w n

ut m

eal (

CN

M)

010

2030

010

2030

010

2030

Hae

mat

olog

yP

acke

d ce

ll vo

lum

e (%

)31

.51

31.1

232

.12

31.2

433

.05

31.7

630

.05

31.0

032

.17

32.0

332

.06

32.2

52.

33H

aem

oglo

bin

(g/d

l)9.

779.

7610

.15

10.3

511

.01

10.3

810

.21

9.93

10.4

310

.32

10.3

810

.21

0.26

Red

blo

od c

ell (

g/dl

)3.

403.

373.

563.

503.

613.

623.

573.

253.

673.

683.

253.

250.

24W

hite

blo

od c

ell (

x 10

3 /l)

5.50

4.89

5.57

4.83

4.92

4.95

4.77

5.46

5.63

5.40

4.92

5.43

0.94

Pla

tele

t (g/

dl)

152.

0014

7.63

151.

3315

0.92

150.

0315

2.76

153.

1414

9.13

150.

6715

0.23

153.

1015

0.33

12.1

1S

erum

Tot

al p

rote

in (g

/dl)

51.2

350

.33

52.1

752

.33

52.6

151

.37

50.3

349

.67

51.6

751

.33

51.1

751

.33

2.18

Ser

um a

lbum

in (g

/dl)

31.6

731

.33

31.7

631

.12

32.1

731

.67

30.3

329

.97

30.3

329

.79

30.3

531

.33

2.51

Ser

um g

lobu

lin (g

/dl)

19.5

619

.00

20.4

121

.21

20.4

419

.70

20.0

019

.70

21.3

421

.54

20.8

220

.00

1.79

Ser

um u

ric a

cid

(mg/

dl)

3.10

3.33

3.37

3.32

3.40

3.35

3.31

3.11

3.12

3.40

3.41

3.33

0.47

Ser

um c

reat

inin

e (m

g/dl

)1.

471.

431.

531.

491.

551.

531.

491.

471.

561.

551.

551.

490.

18S

erum

glu

cose

(g/

dl)

61.0

061

.33

65.0

066

.37

66.3

566

.23

61.7

661

.52

62.3

362

.91

63.0

065

.33

2.81

Nitr

ogen

inta

ke (

g/da

y)6.

766.

706.

906.

926.

506.

906.

826.

697.

036.

926.

907.

000.

08N

itrog

en o

utpu

t (g/

day)

2.46

a2.

36b

2.00

cd1.

93d

1.76

f2.

47a

1.86

e1.

82e

1.95

d2.

05c

2.01

cd1.

98d

0.03

Nitr

ogen

ret

aine

d (g

/day

)4.

29e

4.33

e4.

90b

4.99

ab4.

75c

4.43

d4.

96ab

4.94

b5.

07a

4.88

b4.

90b

5.02

a0.

06N

itrog

en r

eten

tion

(%)

63.5

8e64

.71d

71.0

4bc72

.12ab

72.9

7a64

.23d

72.7

1a72

.73a

72.2

2ab70

.43c

70.9

1b71

.78b

0.36

Dig

estib

ledr

y m

atte

r(%

)47

.02

46.7

646

.85

46.6

150

.98

47.0

948

.11

49.3

351

.25

51.1

649

.80

48.8

50.

63cr

ude

prot

ein

(%)

63.5

7e64

.68d

71.0

5b72

.10ab

72.9

4a64

.24d

72.7

5a72

.74a

72.2

5ab70

.04c

70.9

5b71

.77b

0.36

crud

e fib

re (

%)

65.5

1a62

.70b

56.6

9f59

.31d

51.4

2c55

.80g

55.6

7g56

.17f

57.4

1e61

.21c

54.5

2h52

.28i

0.61

ethe

r ex

tract

(%

)82

.01c

61.0

2i72

.02f

72.8

4f82

.63c

63.0

2h73

.15e

88.5

6a85

.86b

74.8

5d86

.38b

64.6

2g0.

33ni

troge

n-fre

e ex

tract

(%

)51

.60

55.2

950

.06

51.4

953

.91

56.8

952

.70

52.7

653

.67

58.4

054

.55

56.0

60.

54To

tal d

iges

tible

nut

rient

(%

)57

.61c

57.0

0d56

.35e

58.3

7bc59

.77a

57.5

7cd59

.21b

59.9

3a61

.74a

59.6

8b59

.92a

57.9

0c0.

40

abc M

eans

in t

he s

ame

row

with

diff

eren

t su

pers

crip

ts a

re d

iffer

ent

(p<0

.05)

; S

EM

= st

anda

rd e

rror

of

mea

n.



limits for avian species (Fraser and Mays,1986). In addition, the results showedsignificant (p<0.05) increase in the nitrogenretention values with increasing inclusionof CPM and CNM in the diets.

From the performance of the growingpullets, it could be adduced that theproportion of dietary energy obtained fromfats versus carbohydrates exerted an effecton appetite through a physiological appetitecontrol center responsible to the bloodlevels of certain nutrients such as glucoseand amino acids as reported by Mcleod(1982). Jensen et al. (1970) corroboratedthese findings that such an effect mightinvolve an increased ability of the chicks toconvert dietary energy from fat into storedenergy, thereby ensuring a greater increase

in dietary intake. Whitehead and Fisher(1975) observed that dietary fat improvedefficiency of feed utilization of poultry dietsand the improvement was attributed to thehigh energy concentration of fats, whileHomer and Schiable (1980) attributed it toboth increased density and improvedpalatability. The latter observation wasevident from the use of CNM as a dietary fatsupplement in the present study whichresulted from a higher energy density of theCNM supplemented diets. Thereby, itconfirmed the suggestions of Stockstad etal. (1983) that fats might also increase energyutilization of other dietary constituents. Itwas then concluded that the combination of10% CPM and 30% CNM was appropriatefor enhanced performance of growing pullets.

REFERENCESAgunbiade, J.A., O.A. Adeyemi, O.E. Fasina and

S.A. Bagbe. 2001. Fortification of cassava peelmeal in balanced diets for rabbits. Nig. J. Anim.Prod., 28: 167-173.

Aina, A.B.J. 1990. Replacing maize with cassavapeels in finisher rations for cockerels: Theeffects on cut-up pieces of eviscerated carcass.Nig. J. Anim. Prod., 17: 17-22.

A.O.A.C. 1995. Official methods of analysis. 16th

edition, Washington, D.C.Duncan, D.B. 1955. Multiple range and F tests.

Biometrics, 11: 1-42.Eruvbetine, D., I.D. Tajudeen, A.T. Adeosun and

A.A. Oloyede. 2003. Cassava (Manihot esculen-ta) leaf and tuber concentrate in diets for broilerchickens. Bioresource Tech., 86: 277-281.

Fetuga, B.L., G.M. Babatunde and V.A. Oyenuga.1974. Composition and nutritive value of cashewnut to rats. J. Agric. Fd. Chem., 22: 678-682.

Fraser, C.M. and A. Mays. 1986. The Merckveterinary manual: A handbook of diagnosis.Therapy and disease prevention and control forthe veterinarian. 6th edition. Merck and Co., Inc.Rahway, New Jersey, U.S.A. p. 1613-1614.

Hahn, S.K. and J. Keyser. 1985. Cassava as abasic food of Africa. Outlook on Agriculture, 4:95-100.

Homer, A. and J. Schiable. 1980. Poultry feeds and

nutrition. 2nd Edition, Avi Pub Company. NewYork. p. 73.

IITA. 1994. International Workshop on CassavaSafety. Acta Horticulture, ISHC. No 373. 1-4March. IITA. Ibadan. Nigeria.

Jain, N.C. 1986. Schalm's veterinary haematology.4th Edition. Lea and Febiger. Philadelphia.

Jensen, L.S., G.W. Shumair and J.D. Latshaw.1970. “Extra caloric” effect of dietary fat fordeveloping turkeys as influenced by calorie toprotein ratio. Poult. Sci., 49: 1697-1704.

Marsden, A. and T.R. Morris. 1987. Quantitativereview of the effects of environmentaltemperatures on food intake, egg output andenergy balance in laying pullets. Br. Poult. Sci.,28: 693-704.

Mcleod, J.A. 1982. Nutritional factors influencingcarcass fat in broilers -A review. World's Poult.Sci. J., 38: 194-200.

Ologhobo, A.D. and A.M. Balogun. 1987. The valueof dried fish silage for pullets and the layer hen.Nig. J. Anim. Prod., 14: 67-76.

Onifade, A.A., O.O. Tewe, O. Okunola and A.O.Fanimo. 1999. Performance of laying pullets fedon cereal free dietary based on maize offal,cassava peels and reject cashewnut meal. Brit.Poult. Sci., 40: 84-87.

SAS Institute. 1999. SAS User's Guide: Statistics.



Inc. Cary, N.C. p. 923.Sogunle, O.M., A.O. Fanimo, W.O. Biobaku and

A.M. Bamgbose. 2005. The feeding value of full-fat cashew nut (Anacardium occidentale Linn)rejects and low cereal diets for broiler chickens.Nig. J. Anim. Prod., 32: 46-53.

Stockstad, E.L.R., T.M. Jukes and W.L. Williams.1983. Growth promoting effects of aureomycinon various types of diets. Poult. Sci., 32: 1054-1058.

Tewe, O.O. 1983. Thyroid cassava toxicity inanimals. In: Cassava toxicity and thyroid:Research and public health issues (F. Delangeand R. Ahluwalia, eds.). Proc. of International

Workshop on Cassava Toxicity. Ottawa,Canada. IDRC-207e. Ottawa. p. 114-118.

Tewe, O.O. 1975. Implications of cyanogenicglucoside of cassava in the growth andreproductive performance of rats and pigs. PhDthesis, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. 517 p.

Varley, H., A.H. Gowelock and M. Bell. 1980.Determination of serum urea using the acetylmonoxide method. Practical biochemistry. 5th

Edition. William Heinemann Medical Books Ltd.London.

Whitehead, C.C. and C. Fisher. 1975. The utilizationof various fats by turkeys of different ages. Br.Poult. Sci., 16: 481-485.

performance of growing pullets fed cassava peel meal diet supplemented with cashew nut reject meal

Documents