Sunflower cake in the diet of semi heavy weight laying hen

This paper describes two experiments testing the effects of rations containing different sunflower meal (SFM) levels on laying hens’ performance and egg quality. In the first experiment a total of 240 animals were divided in groups (n = 6) of 10 hens each, balanced by age and live weight and at rand...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSemina. Ciências agrárias : revista cultural e científica da Universidade Estadual de Londrina Vol. 34; no. 6Supl2; pp. 3959 - 3970
Main Authors João Waine Pinheiro, Nilva Aparecida Nicolao Fonseca, Caio Abércio da Silva, Alexandre Oba, Mara Regina Stipp Balarin, Sandra Regina Brunelli
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Universidade Estadual de Londrina 01.02.2014
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This paper describes two experiments testing the effects of rations containing different sunflower meal (SFM) levels on laying hens’ performance and egg quality. In the first experiment a total of 240 animals were divided in groups (n = 6) of 10 hens each, balanced by age and live weight and at random allocated to four isocaloric rations with 0, 7, 14 and 21% of SFM. There was no effect (P> 0.05) of SFM levels on hens’ live weight, feed intake, feed conversion, metatarsus length, triglycerides and plasma cholesterol levels. In the second experiment a total of 192 animals were divided in groups (n = 6) of 8 hens each, balanced by age and live weight and at random allocated to four isocaloric rations with 0, 7, 14 and 21% of SFM. There was no effect (P>0.05) of SFM levels on eggs’ production, specific gravity, percentage of shell and yolk color index. However, eggs of hens fed on 21% of SFM showed reduced (P<0.05) Haugh units compared to eggs of animals fed on rations without SFM. These results indicate that there are no deleterious effects on performance and egg’s quality of lying hens fed on rations containing up to 21% of SFM.
ISSN:1676-546X
1679-0359
DOI:10.5433/1679-0359.2013v34n6Supl2p3959