J. Appl. Poult. Res.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J APPL POULT RES 2008. 17:446-453. doi:10.3382/japr.2008-00007
© 2008 Poultry Science Association
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zaghari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Moravej, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Zaghari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Moravej, H.

Research Reports

Estimation of Nutrient Equivalency Values of Natuzyme and Its Effects on Broiler Chick Performance1

M. Zaghari, M. Majdeddin, R. Taherkhani2 and H. Moravej

Department of Animal Science, University of Tehran, Karaj 31587-1116, Iran

2 Corresponding author: rtaher{at}ut.ac.ir


   SUMMARY
TOP
 SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Two experiments were carried out to estimate nutrient equivalency of a commercial multi-enzyme (Natuzyme) and its effects on broiler chick performance. Experiment 1 was carried out using a completely randomized design to evaluate the response of chicks to Natuzyme (with different equivalency values assigned by the producer) in corn-soybean meal-based diets. Dietary treatments 1 and 6 were negative and positive controls, respectively. Diets 2 through 5 were graded levels of nutrient equivalency values of Natuzyme. Each diet was offered to 5 replicates of 16 chicks (n = 480). In experiment 2, a total of 480 male Ross 308 broiler chicks were used in a completely randomized design. Treatment 1 to 4 varied in ME, CP, and nonphytate P content, but in all cases, the ratio between these nutrients remained constant, and treatments 5 to 8 included graded levels of Natuzyme from 0.1 to 0.4 g/kg. Results of experiment 1 show that multi-enzyme supplementation could not restore chick performance to the levels equal to positive control. Equivalency values of Natuzyme for ME, nonphytate P, and CP obtained were 195,180 kcal/kg and 188.45 and 1,170%, respectively. As obtained in the first experiment, performance of chicks in the second experiment showed that Natuzyme did not liberate nutrient equivalency values recommended by the producer for broiler chicks when fed corn-soybean meal-based diets.

Key Words: nutrient equivalency • multi-enzyme • broiler


   DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
The use of enzymes to enhance nutrient availability of animal feed has been reported as far back as 1925 [1]. Commercial application of feed enzyme as a feed additive, however, has a history of less than 20 yr. Broiler feed is based primarily on corn and soybean meal (SBM), which supplies the majority of energy and protein in the diet. Utilization of the nutrients contained in corn by broilers is generally considered to be high. However, nutritive value of SBM is limited by the presence of several antinutritive factors, including the indigestible nonstarch polysaccharides (NSP) [2–5]. The major NSP components found in SBM are pectic polysaccharides, which include rhamnogalacturonan with associated side chains consisting of arabinose, galactose, and xylose residues [6]. These sugars can occur in short or long complex side chains containing neutral pectic polymers, such as arabinans, galactans, or arabinogalactans [7, 8]. Other polysaccharides of SBM, corn meal, and peas include cellulose, xylans, arabinoxylans, and xyloglucans, which are predominantly found in the hull fraction.

The addition of a commercial multi-enzyme containing xylanase, amylase, and protease activities to a corn-SBM broiler diet results in a significant improvement in BW gain (1.9%) and feed-to-gain ratio (2.2%) as a result of increased ileal digestibility of protein and AME [9]. By using the same enzyme product, however, Douglas et al. [10] did not observe an improvement in growth performance of broilers fed a similar diet, although the ileal energy digestibility was significantly improved. In some other studies, the inclusion of commercial enzyme complexes containing multicarbohydrase activities did not produce an improvement in growth performance of birds fed SBM-based diets, although a significant increase in protein and NSP digestibilities and AME content was observed [11, 12]. The objective of the first study was to examine the responses of broiler chicks to a commercial multi-enzyme (Natuzyme, containing phytase, β-glucanase, {alpha}-amylase, cellulase, pectinase, amyloglycosidase, xylanase, and protease) in corn-SBM-based diets. Different equivalency values were used for Natuzyme as recommended by the producer. Because chicks that received enzyme-supplemented diets couldn’t restore their performance to the control group level, the second experiment was conducted to estimate nutrient equivalency values for Natuzyme in corn-SBM-based diets.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Two experiments were carried out to estimate nutrient equivalency of Natuzyme [13] and its effects on broiler chick performance. In experiment 1, a total of 480 male and female Ross 308 broiler chicks [14] were used in a completely randomized design to evaluate the response of broiler chicks to corn-SBM-based diets supplemented with Natuzyme. One-day-old broilers were randomly distributed to 30 floor pens (200 x 100 cm; 0.125 m2/bird). Each pen was equipped with 1 pan feeder, 1 bell waterer, and fresh pine shavings. Dietary treatments 1 and 6 were negative [2,521 kcal of ME/kg, 21.06% CP, and 0.23% nonphytate P (NPP)] and positive (2,845 kcal of ME/kg, 23% CP, and 0.5% NPP) controls, respectively. Diets 2 through 5 were different levels of nutrient equivalency values for Natuzyme assigned by the producer (Table 1Go). Each diet was offered to 5 replicate of 16 (8 male and 8 female) chicks. Ingredient and diet composition are presented in Table 2Go (only feed specifications of starter diet are presented). Starter (0 to 10 d of age), grower (10 to 28 d of age), and finisher (28 to 42 d of age) diets were provided in mash form. Chicks received dietary treatment from 1 through 42 d of age. Weight gain, feed intake, FCR (adjusted for mortality), and livability were measured on d 10, 28, and 42. Chicks had free access to water and feed, and a 24-h photoschedule was applied. Data were analyzed using GLM procedure of SAS software [15]. Means were separated by Duncan’s multiple range test.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Nutrient equivalency values recommended by producer (experiment 1)
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Ingredients and nutrient composition of experimental diets (0 to 10 d of age, experiment 1)
 
A total of 480 male Ross 308 broiler chicks [14] were used in experiment 2 to estimate nutrient equivalency of Natuzyme. Chicks were allotted to 32 floor pens (200 x 100 cm, 0.133 m2/bird). Feeder, waterer, and litter were similar with those used in the first experiment. The experiment was carried out using a completely randomized design. Treatment 1 to 4 varied in ME, CP, and NPP content, but in all cases, the ratio between these nutrients remained constant. Treatments 5 to 8 included graded levels of Natuzyme from 0.1 to 0.4 g/kg of diet that were added to the basal diet [i.e., diet 1 (Table 3Go)]. Birds received the same mash diet from 1 to 28 d of age. Each dietary treatment had 4 replicates of 15 chicks each. Chicks had free access to water and feed, and a 24-h photoschedule was applied. The experiment duration was from 1 to 28 d of age. Weight gain, feed intake, FCR, and livability of chicks were measured on 7, 14, 21, and 28 d of age. Excreta samples were taken at the termination of the experiment and were analyzed for N, P, and Ca according to AOAC methods [16]. At the end of the experimental period, 3 birds per each replicate were selected randomly and were slaughtered by neck cutter. The left middle toes of the birds within a pen were pooled after removing the soft tissue, and then fat content of the samples was extracted (in a Soxtec System HT1043 [17]) by ether for 4 h and dried to a constant weight at 100°C. Pooled toe samples were ashed in a furnace (Heraeus M 110 [18]) at 550°C for 4 h. The ash from toe samples was solubilized with nitric and perchloric acid, and then Ca and P content were analyzed by spectrophotometer and atomic absorption spectrophotometer, respectively. Linear and nonlinear function were derived for graded levels of ME, CP, and NPP (diets 1 through 4) and for Natuzyme concentration (diets 5 through 8). With the linear model, Y = a + bX, Y = the response measurements (weight gain and FCR), and X = graded levels of ME, CP, and NPP or 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4 g/kg of Natuzyme. The derived regression equations for CP, NPP, and AMEn (treatments 1 to 4) were set equal with those obtained for Natuzyme (treatments 5 to 8) and were solved; nutrient equivalency values for each nutrient were calculated by subtracting obtained values from nutrient content of basal diet.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3. Ingredients and nutrient composition of experimental diets (0 to 28 d of age, experiment 2)
 
Pens were identified as an experimental unit. Data were analyzed using the GLM procedure of SAS software (PROC REG and PROC NLIN) [15]. Linear and nonlinear models used were Y = a + bX and Y = a(1 – be–kX), respectively, where Y = the response measurements; X = ME, CP, NPP (percentage), or Natuzyme added (units per kilogram of diet). Duncan’s multiple range test was used for means separation, and statistical significance was considered P < 0.05.


   RESULTS
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Experiment 1
Performances of chicks fed dietary treatment in experiment 1 are presented in Table 4Go. Negative control had significantly lower BW at 10 (P < 0.0001), 28 (P < 0.0001) and 42 (P < 0.0001) d of age compared with enzyme-supplemented diets 4 and 5 and positive control. It also had significantly greater FCR than the others (except supplemental diet 2). As recommended nutrient equivalency values increased, BW decreased significantly and chicks utilized their feed less efficiently. Even though chicks fed diets with the lowest recommended equivalency values (diets 4 and 5) had significantly superior performance than the negative control, they did not perform as well as the positive control group. Diets 2, 3, 4, and 5 had 4.5, 6.7, 9.1, and 11.3% lower ME content (without accounting ME content of enzyme) than the positive control diet, but their BW at 28 d of age were 12.1, 13.9, 32.2, and 36.5% lower than the positive control, respectively.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4. Effect of Natuzyme [13] on growth performance of broiler chicks (experiment 1)
 
Experiment 2
In the second experiment, we estimated nutrient equivalency values for Natuzyme using linear and nonlinear regression equation. Effects of different levels of nutrients and Natuzyme on BW, FCR, and livability at 7, 14, 21, and 28 d of age are presented in Table 5Go. Increased nutrient content of diets significantly increased BW at 14 (P < 0.025), 21 (P < 0.013), and 28 (P < 0.0002) d of age. Nutrient content of diet had no effect on FCR and livability. Body weight was affected only at 28 d of age by levels of Natuzyme (P < 0.04); greater inclusion of Natuzyme significantly improved BW. Addition of different levels of Natuzyme significantly affected FCR at 14 (P < 0.015), 21 (P < 0.003), and 28 (P < 0.005) d of age. As dietary levels of enzyme increased, chicks utilized their feed more efficiently. Different levels of enzyme addition had no significant effect on mortality rate. Analysis of excreta showed only significant effect of nutrient content on N content of excreta. Nitrogen content of excreta significantly increased (P < 0.0348) as dietary concentration of protein increased. Neither nutrient concentration nor enzyme level had a significant effect on toe ash P and Ca concentration (Table 6Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 5. Effects of Natuzyme [13] on BW, FCR, and livability of broiler chicks (experiment 2)
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 6. Effects of Natuzyme [13] on excreta N, P, Ca, and concentration of P and Ca in toe ash
 
The regression equation between BW at 28 d of age and NPP, CP, AMEn, and Natuzyme levels are presented in Table 7Go. When the equations for NPP, CP, and AMEn were set equal to those for Natuzyme and obtained values were subtracted from nutrient content of basal diet, nutrient equivalency of NPP, CP, and AMEn for final BW were 188.45 and 1,170% and 195,180 kcal, respectively. No linear or nonlinear relationship was observed between enzyme levels and FCR or BW at 7, 14, and 21 d of age.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 7. Regression equations and estimated nutrient equivalency values of Natuzyme [13] (experiment 2)
 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 
Exogenous enzyme combinations (multi-enzymes) have the potential to increase the nutrient availability for nutritionally marginal diets, especially with regards to ME [19, 20], protein, and amino acids [9, 21]. Kocher et al. [22] and Onyango et al. [23] reported better performance in broiler chicks fed multi-enzyme-supplemented diets. Meng and Slominski [21] concluded that multicarbohydrase supplement of cell wall-degrading activities could improve nutrient utilization in corn-SBM diets. They believed that use of other enzyme activities (i.e., amylases and proteases) in addition to cell wall-degrading enzymes may be even more effective. In accordance to the mentioned reports, enzyme supplementation of basal diet (negative control group with deficiency in ME, CP, NPP, and AA) improved broiler chick performance in both experiments. Better performance of chicks fed enzyme-supplemented diets compared with negative control in both experiments suggest that Natuzyme has beneficial effects in corn-SBM diets. However, according to the nutrient equivalency values obtained in experiment 2 and lower performance of enzyme-supplemented diets compared with the positive control diet in experiment 1, it can be concluded that Natuzyme is not able to liberate even the lowest amounts of nutrient equivalency recommended by the producer in corn-SBM diets. The recommended values, however, may be true in diets with low digestible feedstuffs.

There is some contradiction in the responses of broiler chick to multi-enzyme supplementation of corn-SBM-based diets. Douglas et al. [10], and Vahjen et al. [24] reported that multi-enzyme supplementation of corn-SBM-based diet did not affect broiler performance. The observed contradiction may be partly due to differences in enzyme activity of multi-enzyme used in different studies. Furthermore, sex [25] and age [25, 26] of bird may have some effects on the responses of broiler chicks to the enzyme.

To our knowledge, there are no published data on the nutrient equivalency value of Natuzyme. Because of different enzyme activity of different commercial multi-enzymes, the nutrient equivalency of these enzymes cannot be compared with each other. Production performance of birds in experiment 1 supported the nutrient equivalency values obtained in the second experiment. However, because of limited range of changes in diet ME and CP content in experiment 2, the observed response (weight gain) and consequently obtained regression equation may be partly due to differences in NPP content of diets; the nutrient equivalency values derived, therefore, likely overestimated for those nutrients that did not play a role in the response (ME and CP) and underestimated for those that did.

Although we expected that, because of the enzyme activity of Natuzyme (especially protease and phytase activity), less N and P would be observed in excreta, enzyme supplementation had no effect on N, P, and Ca content of excreta. It also did not affect P and Ca content of toe ash (Table 6Go). Contrary to the results obtained in our study, Zanella et al. [9] reported a 1.9% improvement in overall CP digestibility, which could be associated with decreased N content of excreta.


   CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
REFERENCES AND NOTES
 

  1. Multi-enzyme supplementation of corn-SBM-based diets could improve performance of broiler chicks.
  2. The extent of enzyme beneficial effects and the nutrient equivalency values of multi-enzymes in corn-SBM diet may be somewhat lower than in diets with low digestible feedstuffs.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Tak Faravardehaye Aria Co. for financial support.


   FOOTNOTES
 
1 The use of trade names in this publication does not imply endorsement of the products mentioned or criticism of similar products not mentioned. Back


   REFERENCES AND NOTES
TOP
 SUMMARY
 DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS
 REFERENCES AND NOTES
 

  1. Clickner, F. H., and E. H. Follwell. 1926. Application of "protozyme" (Aspergillus orizae) to poultry feeding. Poult. Sci. 5:241–247.
  2. Slominski, B. A., and L. D. Campbell. 1990. Non-starch polysaccharides of canola meal: Quantification, digestibility in poultry and potential benefit of dietary enzyme supplementation. J. Sci. Food Agric. 53:175–184.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  3. Bell, J. M. 1993. Factors affecting the nutritional value of canola meal: A review. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 73:679–697.
  4. Castell, A. G., W. Guenter, and F. A. Igbasan. 1996. Nutritive value of peas for nonruminant diets. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 60:209–227.[CrossRef]
  5. Dale, N. 1996. Variation in feed ingredient quality: Oilseed meals. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 59:129–135.[CrossRef]
  6. Bacic, A., P. J. Harris, and B. A. Stone. 1988. Structure and function of plant cell walls. Pages 297–372 in The Biochemistry of Plants. Vol 14. J. Preiss, ed. Academic Press Inc., London, UK.
  7. Aspinall, G. O., and I. W. Cottrell. 1971. Polysaccharides of soybeans. VI. Neutral polysaccharides from cotyledon meal and chemistry of cell wall polysaccharides. Can. J. Chem. 49:1019–1022.[CrossRef]
  8. Daveby, Y. D., and P. Aman. 1993. Chemical composition of certain dehulled legume seeds and their hulls with special reference to carbohydrates. Swed. J. Agric. Res. 23:133–139.
  9. Zanella, I., N. K. Sakomura, F. G. Silversides, A. Fiqueirdo, and M. Pack. 1999. Effect of enzyme supplementation of broiler diets based on corn and soybeans. Poult. Sci. 78:561–568.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Douglas, M. W., C. M. Parsons, and M. R. Bedford. 2000. Effect of various soybean meal sources and Avizyme on chick growth performance and ileal digestible energy. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 9:74–80.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Marsman, G. J. P., H. Gruppen, A. F. B. van der Poel, A. F. Kwakkel, M. W. A. Verstegen, and A. G. J. Vogagen. 1997. The effect of thermal processing and enzyme treatments of soybean meal on growth performance, ileal nutrient digestibilities, and chyme characteristics in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 76:864–872.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Kocher, A., M. Choct, M. D. Porter, and J. Broz. 2002. Effects of feed enzymes on nutritive value of soybean meal fed to broilers. Br. Poult. Sci. 43:54–63.[Web of Science][Medline]
  13. Natuzyme, Sunnybank, Brisbane, Australia.
  14. Aviagen, Tehran, Iran.
  15. SAS Institute. 1990. SAS/STAT User’s Guide: Statistics. Release 6.04 ed. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
  16. AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis. 15th ed. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., Arlington, VA.
  17. Soxtec System HT1043, Tecator, Höganäs, Sweden.
  18. Heraeus M 110, Heraeus, Hanau, Germany.
  19. Yu, B., and T. K. Chung. 2004. Effects of multi-enzyme mixtures on growth performance of broilers fed corn-soybean meal diet. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 13:178–182.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Cowieson, A. J., and O. Adeola. 2005. Carbohydratase, protease, and phytase have additive beneficial effect on nutritionally marginal diets for broiler. Poult. Sci. 84:1860–1868.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Meng, X., and B. A. Slominski. 2005. Nutritive values of corn, soybean meal, canola meal, and peas for broiler chickens as affected by a multicarbohydrase preparation of cell wall degrading enzymes. Poult. Sci. 84:1242–1251.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Kocher, A., M. Choct, G. Ross, J. Broz, and T. K. Chung. 2003. Effects of enzyme combination on apparent metabolizable energy of corn-soybean meal-based diets in broilers. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 12:275–283.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Onyango, E. M., M. R. Bedford, and O. Adeola. 2005. Efficacy of an evolved Escherichia coli phytase in diets of broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 84:248–255.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Vahjen, W., T. Busch, and O. Simon. 2005. Study on the use of soybean polysaccharide degrading enzymes in broiler nutrition. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 120:259–276.[CrossRef]
  25. Ten Doeschate, R. A. H. M., C. W. Scheele, V. V. A. M. Schreurs, and J. D. Van Der Klis. 1993. Digestibility studies in broiler chickens: Influence of genotype, age, sex and method of determination. Br. Poult. Sci. 34:131–146.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  26. Zuprizal, M. Larbier, and A. M. Chagneau. 1992. Effect of age and sex on true digestibility of amino acids of rapeseed and soybean meals in growing broilers. Poult. Sci. 71:1486–1492.[Web of Science][Medline]




This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zaghari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Moravej, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Zaghari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Moravej, H.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS