Sie sind auf Seite 1von 77

Abstract

The application of feed restriction in the production of meat-type (broiler) chickens is controversial. Commercial broilers are invariably fed ad libitum. Fisher [1] noted that even a slight restriction of feed intake might affect the final body weight of broiler chickens adversely. Reece et al. [2] also observed that more adverse than favorable results have been achieved. However, recent research [3] shows that broiler performance may be improved by preventing chickens from feeding for short periods of time throughout the day. North [4] found that mature body weights of broiler chickens are not affected provided that feeding is not interrupted for more than 2 hours at a time. The demonstration of catchup growth in broiler chickens [5, 6, 7, 8] has also raised new possibilities. This paper examines new developments in feed restriction of broilers and evaluates the potential application of short-term feed restriction to broiler chicken production. The mechanisms responsible for catch-up growth, and the factors which influence this phenomenon, are also discussed.

Abstract
An experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of restricted feeding of a commercially available probiotic diet on production/processing performance, Campylobacter jejuni prevalence, and organ weights in broiler chickens. Five hundred forty 1-d-old broiler chicks were randomly assigned to a control or a direct-fed microbial (PrimaLac, DFM) diet and subjected to ad libitum full-fed (A), restricted 8-h (R), or skip-a-day (S) feeding regimens. Each of the 6 treatments was replicated 3 times with 15 male and 15 female chicks per pen for 49 d. Significant (P < 0.05) differences between BW in the control and DFM groups with regard to feed type were found at d 7 (A), female d 21 (R) male and females, and d 49 (A and S) male and females. Body weights of males in the control group were significantly higher than the DFM (A) and differed by regimens (A>R>S) at d 49, whereas weights of females did not differ in regimens A and S. Body weight in the control females of regimen R was significantly higher than those in regimens A and S. Carcass yield was significantly higher for males in the control regimen A, 78.1 vs. 74.6% for the DFM regimen A; however, females did not differ significantly in this regimen, but did so in regimen S with 72.6 vs. 69.0%. The gizzard weights were

significantly higher for broilers exposed to S and R regimens when compared with the A regimen. The prevalence of C. jejuni in the DFM-treated broilers regimen R was lower (33 vs. 60% positive) for the control group at 21 d. The weekly BW throughout the study reflected many variations, but broiler chickens receiving the control feed on regimen A performed better than those receiving the DFM feed. From the present results, it was concluded that supplementation of DFM reduced the presence of C. jejuni but had no significant effect on the growth performance of broilers; however, there were some significant trends regarding sex, feed, and feeding methods on the performance results.

Feed Restrictions of Broiler Breeds


Compassion in World Farming

Publish Date: 2003 Place of Publication: United Kingdom Printable Version

Feed Restrictions of Broiler Breeds


[ed. - this paper was written in support of a petition filed in British courts over the lack of regulations protecting the welfare of chickens. See Petition ] Introduction Broilers are the chickens reared for their meat. Through genetic selection, breeding companies have dramatically increased the growth rate of broilers over recent decades. Continued genetic selection is undertaken within the pedigree flock and these birds form the basis from which future commercial broilers (the ordinary broilers reared for their meat) are produced. Changes in the pedigree flock are passed through several generations of breeding flocks (Fig. 1), taking 4-5 years to reach the commercial broiler stage.

selection

Pedigree (Elite) stock

Great-grandparent stock

Grandparent stock

Parent stock

Commercial broilers Fig. 1: The structure of broiler breeding flocks in the UK. (original shows arrows pointing down to the next category)

The parent stock in the UK are usually reared from day-old to 18 weeks and then transferred to laying farms where they begin breeding at around 24 weeks. At any one time there are approximately 6 million broiler breeder hens in the UK producing fertile eggs to supply chicks for commercial broiler production. Up to about 60 weeks of age each of these hens will produce some 120 broiler chicks (FAWC, 1998). Why is feed restriction practised? As a result of the genetic selection of broilers for increased growth rate and lower (more efficient) feed conversion ratio it has become necessary to severely restrict the feed intake of the broilers intended for breeding to enable them to survive into adulthood and reproduce successfully.

If the breeding flocks were fed ad libitum they would become obese and suffer thermal discomfort, a high incidence of lameness, and high mortality due to skeletal disorders and heart failure (Katanbaf et al, 1989; Savory et al, 1993). Excessive body weight is also associated with reduced disease resistance (Han and Smyth, 1972; Hocking et al, 1996); increased incidence of multiple ovulations in females, resulting in lowered production of hatching eggs (Hocking et al, 1987; Hocking et al, 1989); poor egg shell quality (Robinson et al, 1993); and reduced fertility in males (Hocking and Duff, 1989). Compassion in World Farming (CIWF) believes that the proper approach to avoid the health problems that affect broiler breeders is not to restrict their feed, but to end the use of fast-growing genotypes. Instead, slower-growing genotypes should be used as these would not be vulnerable to a high incidence of leg and heart problems arising from fast growth rates, and so feed restriction would not be needed.

How severe is the feed restriction? The Farm Animal Welfare Network reported in 1996 that a female broiler breeder receives 52g of feed daily at 7 weeks of age, while a commercial broiler (intended for slaughter at around 6-7 weeks) will consume 182g of feed daily. The impact of this restriction can be seen in the fact that at 7 weeks of age a female breeder weighs 780g, while a female commercial broiler weighs around 2440g. Similarly, a male breeder receives 78g of feed daily at 7 weeks of age and weighs just 1100g, compared with a male commercial broiler of the same age that will consume 205g of feed and weigh around 2897g (FAWN, 1996). In the UK, broiler breeders are generally fed on restricted rations from the age of 15 days (FAWC, 1998). Feed allowances during the rearing period are typically 6080% less than the birds would consume ad libitum, and may be 25-50% less during the laying period (Yu et al, 1992; Savory et al, 1993). This results in a reduction in adult body weight to approximately 45-50% that of ad libitum fed birds (Katanbaf et al, 1989). The feed is usually supplied in a single daily feed, which is generally consumed in less than 10 minutes (Savory et al, 1993).

The pedigree flock are subjected to particularly extreme feed restriction. In order to be able to identify those birds that have the most desirable traits for increased production in future generations, they are reared to their maximum potential growth rate up to at least 6 weeks of age, at which point selection takes place. This creates birds that are very heavy and they are then severely feed restricted to ensure they are not overweight for the laying period.

Evidence that feed restriction seriously compromises welfare Fowls would naturally spend a considerable portion of their day engaged in activities associated with foraging, and when given the choice prefer to work for at least part of their daily feed intake rather than eating it all from a free supply (Duncan and Hughes, 1972). Feed restricted broiler breeders, however, consume their feed in a very short space of time and are chronically hungry. This is demonstrated by the fact that they are strongly motivated to consume feed at all times. Indeed, their level of feeding motivation is 3.6 times greater than that of ad libitum fed birds subjected to 72 hours of feed deprivation, and is just as high one hour after their daily meal as it is one hour beforehand (Savory et al, 1993). Feed restricted birds are hyperactive, and they show increased pacing before the expected feeding time and increased drinking and pecking at non-food objects afterwards, compared with ad libitum fed birds (Kostal et al, 1992; Savory et al, 1992). The expression of these activities is often stereotyped in nature, is characteristic of frustration of feeding motivation (Duncan and Wood-Gush, 1972), and is positively correlated with the level of feed restriction imposed (Savory and Maros, 1993). Also, feed restricted males are more aggressive than ad libitum fed males (Mench, 1988). In their 1993 paper, Savoryet al concluded that restricted fed broiler breeders are chronically hungry, frustrated and stressed and that the first of the Five Freedoms is being contravened (Savory et al, 1993). The Five Freedoms are a widely recognised approach to assessing animal welfare; the first freedom is freedom from hunger and thirst. There is also evidence that physiological indices of stress, such as herophil/lymphocyte ratio, basophil and monocyte frequencies, and plasma corticosterone concentration, are higher in feed restricted than in ad libitum fed birds (Maxwell et al, 1990, 1992; Hocking et al, 1993), and are positively correlated

with the level of feed restriction imposed (Hocking et al, 1996). According to a recent review broiler breeders show evidence of physiological stress as well as an increased incidence of abnormal behaviours, and are also chronically hungry (Mench, 2002). It has been suggested that qualitative feed restriction, such as dietary dilution to allow the birds to consume large amounts of feed without increasing their energy intake, could alleviate hunger. However, recent research demonstrates that broiler breeder welfare is not improved by using qualitative rather than quantitative feed restriction methods (Savory et al, 1996; Savory et al, 2000). CIWF believes that the severe feed restriction necessary to maintain health and fertility of broiler breeders results in unacceptable health and welfare problems, and that the need for feed restriction should be removed by ending the use of fastgrowing genotypes. This view is supported by the conclusions of the Farm Animal Welfare Council that the problem of hunger in broiler breeders is not easy to solve with present strains of birds and is likely to get worse if selection for fast growth continues. A long-term solution is to change the genetic strains but, in any case, breeders must avoid exacerbating the problem and reduce their demand for ever increasing growth rates (FAWC, 1998). The March 2000 report by the European Commissions Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare (SCAHAW) states that the chronic quantitative food restriction to which broiler breeders are routinely subjected leads to them being very hungry. The SCAHAW condemned this practice stating that the severe feed restrictionresults in unacceptable welfare problems and they insisted that the welfare of breeding birds must be improved (SCAHAW, 2000).

Feed Restriction in Broiler Chickens Production: A Review Mahmood Sahraei Member of Scientific Board in Agriculture and Natural Resources Center of Ardabil Province, Ardabil, Iran Abstract: The feed restriction programs is on of the main techniques in growth curve manipulation for

increasing production efficiency in broiler chicken. Quantities and qualitative feed restriction are procedures that can be used to manipulate the feeding strategies of poultry in order to decrease growth and metabolic rate to some extent and so alleviate the incidence of some metabolic diseases such as ascites, lameness, mortality and sudden death syndrome and so improving feed conversion and reducing feed cost. Also to produce a leaner bird and reduce the unfavorable effects of fat on human health and to reduce fat deposition in broiler carcasses using of feed restriction programs can be profitable in broiler chickens production. This article surveys new findings in feed restriction of broilers and evaluates the application of feed restriction methods to broiler chicken production. Key words: Broiler Chicken Feed Restriction Compensatory Growth Production Efficiency INTRODUCTION age, exhibited by mammals and birds after a period of Growth performance of broiler chickens has been expenditures involved in poultry production is feeding increased spectacularly over the last 30 years mainly due costs. As such ,the most reasonable phase in reducing to the genetic progress, improvements of nutrition and the cost of broiler chicken production would be find controlled environment so that it takes only 33 days to possible methods, which are cheap, adequate and readily reach finishing body weight of about 2 kg [1]. available for feeding livestock. One such method is Unfortunately this growth rate is accompanied by restricting the amount of daily feed offer for sometime [7]. increased body fat deposition, high mortality and high The main reason for controlling feed intake in broilers is incidence of metabolic diseases and skeletal disorders [2]. to prevent wastage of feed. Furthermore, a competition

These situations most commonly occur with broilers that between man and poultry for energy (cereal grains)has consume feed ad libitum [3,4]. Thus feed restriction has created a problem of shortage of these feed ingredients. been proposed to reduce these problems. Early feed The wastage of these feed sources through feeding the restriction programs used to reduce abdominal and birds in ad libitum [8]. Also, high fat deposition in broiler carcass fat in broiler chickens rely on the phenomenon chickens when feeding in extra of the broiler chickens called compensatory growth or catch up growth to requirements for maintenance and production is produce market body weight similar to control groups, converted to the fat [9] does affect the carcass quality [2]. Compensatory growth or catch-up growth is defined as Excessive fat is one of the main problems faced by the abnormally rapid growth relative to age. An enhanced rate broiler industry these days, since it not only reduces of growth, exceeding the normal rate of gain, occurs when carcass yield and feed efficiency but also causes rejection growth has been retarded by nutritional deprivation and of the meat by consumers [10] and causes difficulties in followed by ad libitum feeding. This phenomenon has processing [5]. For overcome in these problems almost in long been used as an effective methods to reduce growth many studies of feed restriction in broiler chickens have rates and changing body composition of most animals [5], been impacted on feed efficiency and body fat deposition. Also Wilson and Osbourn [6] said that compensatory Until very recently, feed restriction was thought to growth as being the stage of rapid growth, rather than increase feed efficiency and reduce body fat deposition nutritional deprivation. How over About 60-70 % of theGlobal Veterinaria, 8 (5): 449-458, 2012

450 [11,12]. The use of this concept to address problems of restriction of 75% and 50% of ad libitum intake to broiler high carcass fat requires more studies on the nutrition of chickens from day 5 to 11 days of age and could not find the broiler chicken during the period of growth any differences in proportional liver weight during the compensation. experiment. Compensatory Growth: In general, compensatory growth Feed Restriction Definition: Feed restriction is method of is defined as the abnormally rapid growth relative to age feeding that is time, duration and amount of feed were within a breed of an animal after early growth retardation. limited, have an impact on whether a bird is capable of The terms "catch-up growth" and "compensatory achieving the same body weight as unrestricted birds growth" are used in same concept. When is occurs catch [18,19]. In general, feed restriction included of quantitative up growth follows refeeding after a periods of under and qualitative restriction that is in quantitative to limiting nutrition or recovery from illness. The mechanisms of this the amount of feed daily given to the animals whereas a phenomena have been studied by a number of qualitative restriction is related to nutrient dilution in the investigators [6]. Two hypotheses have been put forward diet [15]. to explain the mechanisms that govern compensatory growth, the central control hypothesis and the peripheral Feed Restriction Methods: Quantitative and qualitative control hypothesis [2]. The central control hypothesis feed restriction are procedures that can be applied to suggests that the body has a set point for body size manipulate the feeding strategies of poultry in order to

appropriate for a particular age and that this control decrease growth and metabolic rate to some extent and so resides in the central nervous system [6]. Benschop [13] alleviate the incidence of some metabolic diseases as well indicated that the key mechanisms in compensatory as improving feed conversion in broiler chickens. growth are decreased maintenance costs, increased feed These methods include: physical feed restriction, limiting intake, increased efficiency of growth and in some the level of consumption of feed in time (skip-a-day instances increased digesta load. The reduction in feeding) or reducing the time of illumination of feeding maintenance costs would then allow for comparatively [20], diet dilution, chemical methods of feed restriction more energy for growth upon realimentation, thus and use of low protein or low energy diets [2]. contributing to the compensatory growth responses [14]. Increased feed intake has been demonstrated by many Physical Feed Restriction: This method is one of the researchers as the main mechanism that drives common procedure was used in controlling feed intake in compensatory growth. Leeson and Zubair [15] reported poultry. Physical feed restriction supply a calculated that restricted-refed broiler chickens have shown higher amount of feed per bird, which is often just enough to feed intake relative to body weight when compared to the meet maintenance requirements [21]. But practical ad libitum control. Hence, higher feed intake as related to application of physical feed restriction is not simple due body weight and its associated digestive adaptations to the problems of regularly weighing birds and seem to be important contributing factors to any growth calculating feed consumption on a daily basis. Moreover, compensation. Birds with retarded growth due to it is necessary to provide sufficient feeder space in order

undernutrition can achieve a growth rate higher than to prevent competition among restricted birds and to normal for chronological age after removal of the feed prevent unequal growth of birds within a flock. Also in restriction [16]. Owing to the increased efficiency of this method should be attention to educate consuming of protein deposition because of the concomitant water micronutrient , coccideoastat and etc. Physical feed deposition that results in more gain per gram protein restriction programs for broilers have been extensively deposited than lipid deposited, higher rates of protein studied [22,23]. Severity of feed restriction, length of deposition during realimentation would have a significant restriction and age at marketing are the main factors to impact on the overall growth rates [13]. Leeson and Zubair take into account in a feed restriction program for broilers. [15] showed that other adaptation observed by the Quantitative feed restriction has been observed to reduce restricted-refed broiler chickens is the relative enlargement mortality and culling [9,19], improve feed conversion ratio of digestive organs, especially the gizzard, crop, pancreas [24,11] and allow a complete recovery of body weight if and liver which enhance feed intake and help support the degree of restriction was not too severe and slaughter compensatory growth. But , this finding is not supported ages were extended beyond 6 weeks [24,25]. Dozier by the findings of Susbilla et al. [17], who applied food et al. [26], referred to feed restriction programs of yieldingGlobal Veterinaria, 8 (5): 449-458, 2012 451 inconsistent results in the literature and that variation death syndrome. The so called step-don and stepup

maybe partially attributed to differences in bird lighting programs [35] have attained popularity because management, lighting, strain and ventilation. Plavnik and of reduced incidence of leg abnormalities, sudden death Hurwitz [27] showed that full compensatory gain with syndrome and mortality while maintaining the same market males but not females after early feed restriction. From weight for age. Broilers under different reduced lighting their findings, it can be concluded that with females feed programs therefore, will reduce their feed intake and so restriction should be started from 5 to 7 days of age and this program can be included within the definition of feed the duration should not exceed 5 days to achieve restriction. However, broilers do learn to eat during complete recovery of final body weight and optimum feed darkness when hours of lighting are low [36]. Buyse et al. efficiency. Although the level of early feed restriction is [37] studied the effect of intermittent (step-up and an important factor influencing the broiler chicken step-down programs) and continuous lighting on the response, early feed restriction at 30% of ad libitum intake performance of female broilers. Lower cumulative feed was not able to influence broiler chicken performance at intake and significantly improved feed conversion was market age of 49 days[28]. observed in chickens under an intermittent program Skip-a-day Feeding: Skip-a-day deprivation of feed is a continuous lighting schedule (23 .SL:OSD or 23L: ID). technique for restricting early growth and has not been These results are in agreement with Buyse et al. [38], extensively studied in broiler chickens [26]. But this who showed improved feed conversion and programs providing limited allotments are commonly used compensatory growth in male broiler chickens at 41 days in broiler breeders growth restriction. Removing feed for with a light schedule from day 7 of 1L:3D repeated six

8-24 hour periods during the starter period reduces times daily. The use of lighting programs has the early rapid growth and meat yield in broiler chickens. advantage of reducing electricity costs, the incidence of Skip-a-day feed removal has been reported in other leg abnormalities and sudden death syndrome and of studies to decrease early growth and reduce the incident improving feed efficiency with no reduction of weight at of ascites without affecting final body weight market age. Genotype, sex, feeder space, diet composition [29,18].Oyedeji and Atteh [30] reported reduction in feed and stocking density are the main aspects that can intake after exposing the birds to fasting on every other interact with the lighting program [37] and affect the day. Oyedeji and Atteh [30] showed that skip-a day broiler's final performance. feeding for 3 weeks starting at day-old would improve carcass quality and reduce sudden death syndrome which Diet Dilution: The most problems form of physical feed is often associated with birds that are on ad libitum feed restriction is usually considered to be maintenance intake. allowance, described by Plavnik and Hurwitz [21] at 1.5 Lighting Programs: Birds are very sensitive to light. a very small quantity of feed is distributed daily and so Light allows the birds to establish rhythmcity and this leads to the alternate concept of diet dilution. synchronize many essential functions, including body Therefore many investigators have used diet dilution as temperature and various metabolic steps that facilitate an alternative method of nutrient restriction because of feeding and digestion [31]. Light intensity, color and the the advantage of attaining a more consistent growth photoperiodic regime can affect the physical activity of pattern within a flock. In this method diets are mixed with

broiler chickens [32]. In the common production methods, non-digestible ingredients such as fiber and so are of broiler chickens are raising under 23 h Light per day, reduce nutrient density. Jones and Farrell [12] used 50 to because it is thought that under this light regimen feed 65% diet dilution with rice hulls in order to retard early intake is greater and therefore growth rate is suitable. growth. This technique appeared to be successful and Although lighting programs are not categorized in the even though these birds ate more feed, adjustment was literature as a feed restriction method it has been applied. insufficient to normalize nutrient intake and so growth rate It is known that by changing Lighting periods by either was reduced. In many of these physical feed restriction or reducing the hours of light or developing intermittent diet dilution studies, there are reports of reduced body fat schedules feed utilization is improved [33,34] incidence of deposition, although this effect seems variable. The most leg abnormalities is also lowered by reducing the hours of consistent feature of all these studies, regardless of Light per day [35] as is mortality and specifically sudden method of implementation, is improved feed efficiency. (1L:3D from 8 to 49 days) compared with those under a kcal ME/gBW /d. But for very young birds, this means 0.67Global Veterinaria, 8 (5): 449-458, 2012 452 Griffiths et al. [39] lowered the energy of a broiler chicken [42] reported that diluting commercial broiler chicken diet to 2233 kcal ME/kg DM from 3087 kcal ME/kg DM of diets from 35 to 49 days of age with oat hulls and sand, feed by substituting ground yellow corn with oat meal which led to the diets deficient in energy content, caused

as the main ingredient. Chickens fed the low energy diet a significant reduction in body weight at 42 days of consumed significantly more feed than those fed the age, although the growth was compensated thereafter. high energy diet. When fed the low energy diet from Birds seemed to maintain energy intake, therefore 0 to 3 weeks of age, the chicks were not significantly there was increased feed intake with energy deficient different in body weight or in abdominal fat pad diet. Coon et al. [45] comparing the performance of male development from the ad libitum birds at 4 weeks of age. and female broiler chickens fed low or high energy Sahraei and Shariatmadari [8] was used of different levels rations for 56 days, found a significant improvement in of finisher diet diluted with sand and wheat bran (wt:wt) the feed conversion ratio using a diet with high energy (in levels 7, 14, 21 or 28%) of Arian strain. showed that level. feed intake in different levels was more than control birds. But live weight (at 45 ages), body weight gain only in 28% Feed Textures: Feed forms such as pellet, crumble, mash levels were less than control birds. Cabel and Waldroup and particle size also influences broiler growth and [40] observed that diluting the starter diet with sand from development [46,47]. Broilers fed crumblepellet diets 5 to 11 days of age moderately restricted growth, which show improved weight gain, feed intake and feed was completely recovered by 49 days of age. conversion ratio compared to birds fed mash [48]. Use of Low Protein or Low Energy Diets: For retardations broiler's growth may be employed as a method of limiting of growth rate in broiler chickens can be used of diets feed intake. Birds offered mash spend more time with low energy and protein concentrations. This method consuming their feed compare to birds fed pellets [49]

has an advantage in that it does not need any additional and therefore, expend more energy in this process. labor of weighing the feed and is accomplished by Andrews [50] suggested that the improvement in growth lowering the level of either protein or energy. In normal rate due to eating pellets is related to some extent to the conditions broilers are given 22%, 20% and 18% of crude increase in bulk density of pullets which in some protein in the starter, grower and finisher periods situations increases nutrient intake, which increases respectively and 3200 kcal ME kg diet [41]. When broilers nutrient intake in some situations. Nir et al. [51] are fed with low nutrient dense diets they will increase fed male and female broilers to 49 days with mash or their feed intake in an attempt to maintain nutrient intake crumble diets during the starter and grower periods and [42]. The study of Plavnik and Hurwitz [43] showed that mash or pellets for the finisher period. Males showed a broilers fed ad libitum with a 9.4% crude protein diet from significant increase in body weight and improved feed 8 to 14 days markedly reduced their feed intake and conversion when fed pelleted compared to mash diets. On weight gain by about 57% and 41% respectively. the other hand, the improvement in performance was not This reduction in feed intake may have been due to of a evident for females, which showed no significant protein and amino acid deficiency, since other nutrients difference either in body weight or feed conversion ratio were at normal levels. But Rosebrough and McMurtry [44] at 49 days of age. Mortality was higher in birds fed showed the effect of 6 days of d i e t energy restriction in pelleted diets. These results are in agreement with those

broiler chickens, the restriction period was from 6 to 12 of Jones et al. [47] and Hamilton and Proudfoot [52] days and was designed to only support the maintenance where an improved weight gain and feed conversion at 6 requirements for body weight. Body weight at 54 days weeks of age were obtained in birds fed pelleted compared was achieved for birds given feed ad libitum from day 13 to mash diets. The improvement in broiler performance to 54 and for those fed ad libitum from 21 days onward. with pelleted diets may be attributable to a greater Feed efficiency was not significantly different between digestibility of carbohydrates together with increased restricted and unrestricted birds. Leeson et al. [42] daily nutrient intake [52], better nutrient availability [51] utilized finisher diets varying in energy level from 2700 to and or less feed wastage [48,49]. Because chicks fed 3300 kcal ME kg and showed no significant difference in pelleted diets spend less time and energy feeding, they body weight at 49 days. There was increased feed intake were less active than mash-fed birds [51] and so spend by birds fed the lower energy level diets, Leeson et al. less energy for maintenance. Also, the consume of mash feed at different phases of theGlobal Veterinaria, 8 (5): 449-458, 2012 453 Chemical Methods: The other method that has been used poultry, following a period of growth retardation by early to reduce feed intake in broilers is the use of chemicals or feed restriction. weight compensation by 42 days of age. pharmacological agents. It has an advantage of equally Plavnik and Hurwitz [16,43], McMurtry et al. [5] and distributing the feed among flock and so decreasing the Pinchasov and Jensen [54] reported that birds subjected

variations in growth than can take place with physical to feed restriction compensated for BW upon resumption feed restriction. Restriction of feed intake of broiler of ad libitum feeding. On the other hand,Yu et al. [59] chickens by chemical methods was suggested by Fancher and Fattori et al. [60] indicated the ineffectiveness of feed and Jensen [53]. Also Pnchasov and Jensen [54] used 1.5 restriction in chickens. Yu et al. [59], in an experiment or 3% glycolic acid as an anorectic agent fiom 7 to 14 days conducted on chicks in which restriction started after 1wk in order to suppress the feed intake of chicks. Feed intake of age and through d 14, reported that after refeeding ad was severely reduced, resulting in 22% and 50% weight libitum, no compensatory growth was observed. Other reduction with 1.5% or 3.0% glycolic acid inclusion researchers [6,61] observed that even though feedrespectively. Oyawoye and Krueger[55] showed that 400 restricted birds had lower fat content in their carcass, they and 300 mg of phenylpropanolamine hydrochloride or showed similar feed efficiency as those birds fed ad monensin sodium per kg of diet, respectively, significantly libitum. Many contradictory results concerning body fat decreased body weight of the broiler chickens at 4 weeks deposition are also seen in the literature. Feed restricted of age. Pinchasov and Elmaliah [56] used of 1 or 3% of birds have been shown to have lower carcass fat content acetic and propionic acids in the diet and found that at market age than birds fed ad libitum [62,63]. weight gains of chemically restricted birds were close to However, in recent reports Fontana et al. [9] and those obtaining under a recommended program of Scheideler and Baughman [23] observed no effect of feed quantitative feed restriction for female broiler breeders restriction regimens on carcass fat content. Sizemore and

between 2 to 6 weeks of age. Savory et al. [57] used of Siegel [64] tested the effects of early energy restriction, 50g/kg of calcium propionate as an appetite suppressor while keeping protein and other nutrients constant, on and showed that weight gains of chemically restricted different female broiler crosses. According to study of birds were close to those obtaining under a recommended Zubair and Leeson [2], most weight loss during early feed program of quantitative feed restriction for female broiler restriction in birds can be normally compensated by 20 to breeders between 2 to 6 weeks of age. 25 d of the refeeding period. Zorrila et al. [65], observed Effect of Feed Restriction on Performance Parameters levels were increased. On the other hand, a linear decrease and Carcass Traits: The use of total feed restriction at an in carcass weight and breast meat yield was observed early age to elicit compensatory growth, improved feed with birds fed both protein and energy deficient diets. efficiency and reduced abdominal fat pad has received These results suggested that birds can grow quite well on considerable attention. Zubair and Leeson [58] low energy diet but a period of 7 days is necessary to suggested that physical feed restriction at early age of adjust their feed intake [42]. In contrast, Plavnick and birds for a short period stimulated compensatory growth Hurwitz [43] reported that broiler chickens fed low crude so that at the market age feed restricted birds performed protein diets gained the least body weight and did not similarly to those of the full fed groups. Novele et al. [7] recover the body weight as measured at 56 days of age. also reported that early period 75% ad libitum restriction Onbasilar et al. [66] observed that 4 h daily feed removal

feeding gave an economic advantage over ad libitum had no significant effects on body weight, feed intake, feeding mainly by enhancing feed utilization and able to feed efficiency and carcass characteristics. The study of attain. But feed restriction can exert negative effects on Fanooci and Torki [67] showed that no significant the body weight at marketing age [54] and on the relative difference in the overall FCR (9-49 d) between chicks fed weight of breast muscle [46]. Plavnik and Hurwitz [21] the restricted and non-restricted control diet, except for used a severe feed restriction program at 6 to 7 days of chicks fed on 20% restricted diet that had the highest FCR age for a one-week period in birds and indicated the birds during the experiment. It was concluded that dietary were much reduced in weight by two weeks of age, as inclusion of wood caracole up to 10% to restrict broiler compared to the control birds, but they body weights in diets would not have deleterious effect on performance of market age were equal, feed efficiency was improved. broiler chicks with no adverse effect on abdominal fat and Wilson and Osbourn [6] showed compensatory growth in visceral and carcass measurements. Improved meat a linear increase in body weight gain when diet energyGlobal Veterinaria, 8 (5): 449-458, 2012 454 quality attracts more and more attention from consumers condemnation or death. It is a consequence of and excessive fat deposition is one of the important cardiopulmonary insufficiency in rapidly growing broiler factors of poor meat quality of broilers. Some studies have chickens [74]. Changes in feeding and lighting regimens

shown that feed restriction could decrease fat content and can cause growth restriction [75,76]. The hypoxemia increase protein deposition in carcasses, thus resulting in related to a high metabolic rate in broilers can be partially the improved carcass composition [12,68]. However, a lot prevented by limiting the intake energy via feed of research has failed to reduce fat with feed restriction restriction [77]. [2,69]. Variability in response to a period of undernutrition likely relates to the vast range of techniques used to Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS): The important diseases impose growth regulation. Wilson and Osbourn [6] that in feed restriction researches had been interested, is conclude that compensatory growth following SDS, this problems is own of the costly factors in broiler undernutrition was influenced by duration, timing and chickens production industry. This syndrome mostly is severity of undernutrition, together with realimenation take placed in heavier birds in the flock. Sudden death nutrition. syndrome (SDS) has been recognized for over 30 years Effect of Feed Restriction on Metabolic Diseases: flip-overs. It is most common in males when their Early fast growth in modern broilers is associated with growth rate is maximized. Mortality may start as early as increased stress on the birds and can result in metabolic 3 to 4 days, but most often peaks at around 3 to 4 weeks diseases and skeletal disorders that lead to economic of age, with affected birds being found dead on their back. losses due to reduced animal performance, high mortality Mortality may be found at 1.5 to 2.0% in mixed-sex flocks rates and carcass condemnation at slaughter houses [70]. and as high as 4% in male flocks only [78]. Poultry The benefits of early feed restriction are the monetary nutritionist suggested that the high growth rate in modern

savings obtained by improved feed conversion, reduced broiler chicks is the main reason for this problems. In the sudden death syndrome [71], reduced death losses, experiments of Bowes et al. [79] by feed restriction about ascites [29] and reduced skeletal disease [72]. 25 % of ad libitum feed intake showed that SDS Ascites: The growth rate or body weight gain in broilers libitum feed intake groups 3.33 %. But in some has been shown to positively correlate with incidence of experiments no significant difference were observed ascites. Broilers genetically selected for fast muscle between control and feed restriction groups [24,23]. growth seem more susceptible to ascites compared with The reduction in BW for the high-density group was slow-growing strains. Manipulation of the early growth attributed to an increase in metabolic stress, because cycle of broilers, with a subsequent compensatory gain, there was an increase in mortality (SDS and ascites) in seems a practical and viable method to minimize losses broilers fed the high-density ration in contrast to those caused by ascites. In this context, various feed restriction fed the low-density ration [80]. programs have been tested. Acar et al. [73] studied the effect of early age feed restriction on the subsequent Leg Disorders: In growing birds of meat-type strains, growth and the incidence of ascites in broilers. A feed which have been selected over the past 50 years for fast restriction regimen was used from either 4-11 growth, the most common skeletal defects occur in leg (feed restriction) or 7-14 (feed restriction) days of age, bones and joints. It has been generally assumed that rapid consisting of limiting daily intake of the birds to 75% of weight gain has been a major cause of TD. Despite the ME required for normal growth. It was concluded that evidence that there is no genetic correlation between TD

although ascites mortality could be significantly reduced and body weight [81], nutritional evidence suggests that in early feed-restricted birds, there was a decrease in body dietary regimens that depress growth rate decrease the weight and breast meat yield in restricted vs. full-fed birds incidence of TD [82]. The retardation in growth rate can increases in the incidence of ascites in broiler chickens be achieved by either qualitative or quantitative food coincide with continuing genetic and nutritional restriction [83]. Robinson et al. [72] demonstrated that improvements in enhanced feed efficiency and rate severe feed restriction in the second week of growth of growth. Ascites is a condition in which the body cavity significantly reduced the incidence of skeletal disease in accumulates serous fluid, leading to carcass broiler chickens. These researchers reported that in three and is also referred to as acute death syndrome or occurrence in feed restriction groups 0 % and in adGlobal Veterinaria, 8 (5): 449-458, 2012 455 separate experiments, the incidence of skeletal disease 4. Nir, I., Z. Nitsan, E.A. Dunnington and P.B. Siegel, was three-fold higher in full-fed birds compared to birds that were feed restricted. A reduction in the incidence of leg disorders and sudden death syndrome was also observed in broiler chickens exposed to intermittent light or a step-up lighting regimen [84,85]. One strategy to reduce leg weakness includes manipulating the rate of growth. Altering dietary energy and protein levels, implementing early feed restriction and offering various feed forms have all been strategies previously used to

manipulate the growth rate in broilers. The use of low-density rations has been shown to significantly reduce the early growth rate of broiler chickens; however, Scott [80] found that broilers fed a low-density ration were heavier than those fed a high-density ration at 35 d of age. Regulating broiler lighting programs is also a management factor that can be manipulated to lessen the occurrence of skeletal abnormalities. By increasing exposure to darkness, the growth rate of broiler chickens can be reduced. In conjunction with this reduced rate of growth, a corresponding decrease in the incidence of leg abnormalities and metabolic disorders has been reported [84]. In addition, Classen et al. [86] suggested that metabolic changes associated with darkness may benefit broiler skeletal quality. CONCLUSIONS In general, the potential of feed restriction programs as a managements tool, related to decreasing the incidence of metabolic disease, carcass fat deposition, reduce maintenance requirements and improvement of feed efficiency in broiler chickens production. Also can be lead to economical saving in cost of feeding in broiler chicken production, thus may be usefulness for commercial broiler chicks production farms. Quantitative and Qualitative Feed Restriction on Growth

Characteristics of Male Broiler Chickens M. Urdaneta-Rincon1 and S. Leeson2 Department of Animal & Poultry Science, University of Guelph, ON, Canada, N1G 2W1 ABSTRACT Four experiments were conducted to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative feed restriction on the performance of male broiler chickens. In the rst experiment, broilers fed identical pelleted diets were feedrestricted from 5 to 42 d by giving 95, 90, or 85% of the feed consumed ad libitum by control birds the previous day. In a second experiment, broilers were fed pellet or mash diets from 1 to 7 wk. In Experiments 3 and 4, broilers were feed-restricted to 90% of the ad libitum intake of a control group during different intervals. Results from Experiment 1 indicated that live body weight at 42 d was signicantly different between unrestricted and restricted broilers (P < 0.01). A reduction in mortality was noted (Key words: broiler, feed restriction, growth, feed efciency, carcass quality) 2002 Poultry Science 81:679688 INTRODUCTION It is generally assumed that when birds eat more, they have greater body weights at market age. Barbato (1994) stated that the control mechanisms of feed intake posthatch are related to genetic selection for body weight. The improvement noted in market body weight has been attained due to an increased feed consumption, which is related to genetics (Havenstein et al., 1993) and supported by nutrition.

This improvement in body-weight-for-age of modern broiler chickens, due to an increased growth rate and associated higher nutrient supply, has led to more frequent occurrences of metabolic and skeletal disorders (Robinson et al., 1992) and increased fat deposition (Yu and Robinson, 1992). Feed restriction programs have shown the potential to reduce the incidence of ascites (Julian, 1997; Tottori et al., 1997) and sudden death syndrome (SDS) (Blair et al., 1993; Gonzales et al., 1998a). These conditions are more commonly observed in fast

Received for publication July 17, 2001. Accepted for publication December 7, 2001. 1 Permanent address: Universidad del Zulia, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Avenida Goajira, Ciudad Universitaria, Maracaibo, Estado Zulia, Venezuela. 2 To whom correspondence should be addressed: sleeson@ uoguelph.ca. 679 when feed intake was reduced (P < 0.05). In the second experiment, broilers fed mash had lower body weights and breast meat yields at 42 and 49 d (P < 0.05). Cumulative mortality at 42 and 49 d was reduced in broilers fed mash (P < 0.05). Results from Experiment 3 indicated that body weight and mortality were not signicantly

different (P > 0.05) at 42 d across treatments. There was a signicant (P<0.01) linear improvement on feed conversion at 42 d due to duration of feed restriction. Breast meat yield at 42 d was less in broilers subjected to mild feed restriction (P > 0.05) (Experiments 3 and 4). Broilers appeared able to recover from mild feed restriction, and there was always an associated reduction in mortality. growing broilers that are fully fed. Broiler chickens fed ad libitum likely consume energy at two or three times greater than their maintenance needs (Boekholt et al., 1994), and so fat deposition is increased. This fact is of economical concern because fat represents an undesirable and uneconomical product. To produce a leaner bird and reduce the unfavorable effects of fat on human health, there is interest in the poultry industry to reduce fat deposition in broiler carcasses. Results obtained from feed restriction programs to reduce the carcass fat content in broiler chickens have been inconsistent. Reduction in abdominal fat pad content has been noted by Plavnik and Hurwitz (1991), Jones and Farrell (1992), and Santoso et al. (1995). However, others have failed to conrm this effect (Yu et al., 1990; Fontana et al., 1993; Deaton, 1995; Zubair and Leeson, 1996). Such inconsistency may relate to different feeding strategies applied, which may affect the birds response to feed restriction. Improvement in feed efciency noted with the use of

feed restriction programs is due to reduced overall maintenance requirements. This reduction seems to be due to a transient decrease in basal metabolic rate of feedrestricted birds (Zubair and Leeson, 1994) and is linked with a smaller body weight during early growth, leading Abbreviation Key: SDS = sudden death syndrome.680 URDANETA-RINCON AND LEESON to less energy needed for maintenance (Marks, 1991). Consequently, there is current interest in the use of feed restriction programs to modify bird growth patterns and decrease their maintenance requirements, which should improve feed efciency. In an attempt to evaluate bird responses to continuous mild feed restriction and to alleviate some of the metabolic disorders affecting modern broiler chickens, four experiments were conducted with different feed textures and levels of feed restriction imposed for different intervals. MATERIALS AND METHODS General Procedures (All Experiments) In all experiments room temperature was maintained at 30 C from 0 to 5 d and was then gradually reduced according to standard brooding practices. Lighting was provided 23 h/d. At Day 5, all birds were wing-banded and individually weighed. Pen feed intake and feed efciency were calculated. Control birds (ad libitum) and feed-restricted birds received the starter diet from 1 to 21 d, grower diet from 21 to 35 d, and nisher diet from 35 to 42 d of age (Experiments 1, 3, and 4) (Tables 2 and 3).

All diets were formulated to meet NRC (1994) nutrient requirement recommendations. All mortalities were collected daily, and dead birds were frozen prior to postmortem analyses. At 42 (Experiment 1) and 42 to 49 (Experiments 2, 3, and 4) d of age, random samples of 8 (Experiments 1 and 2) and 10 (Experiments 3 and 4) birds per pen were taken and processed at the University of Guelph plant according to the research farms standard guidelines. Viscera were manually removed, and the abdominal fat pad (fat surrounding the gizzard, intestines, and adjacent abdominal muscles) was weighed. Chilled carcasses (considered as the birds without viscera, head, feathers, and shanks) were weighed; the breast skin was removed, and the two main breast muscles of each side of the carcasses were carefully excised and weighed (Leeson et al., 1991). Experiment 1 Three hundred sixty 1-d-old male broiler chickens of commercial strain (Ross/Ross) were randomly allocated to one of four treatment groups of 90 chicks each. Treatments were subdivided into three replicates of 30 birds each, located in 2.44- 1.83-m oor pens. All birds were fed ad libitum to 5 d of age using a starter diet (Table 1), formulated to meet the nutrient requirements according to the NRC (1994). Chicks on Treatments 2, 3, and 4 were feed restricted to 95, 90, and 85%, respectively, of ad libitum intake of the control birds on the previous day, from 5 to 42 d of age. Individual body weights were measured at 5, 7, 14, 21,

28, 35, and 42 d. Regression analysis of the complete growth data for each treatment was used to create prediction equations, which allowed extrapolation of growth from 42 to 50 d and expression of the predicted daily body weight at any given age relative to feed restriction. Experiment 2 Three hundred sixty 1-d-old male broiler chickens of a commercial strain (Ross/Ross) were randomly allocated to one of three treatments of 120 chicks each. Each treatment consisted of four replicates of 30 birds, located in 2.44- 1.83-m oor pens. All birds were fed ad libitum to 49 d of age using starter, grower, and nisher diets (Table 2), respectively. Starter diet was offered from 1 to 17 d, grower diet from 17 to 35 d, and nisher diet from 35 to 49 d of age. Control birds on Treatment 1 were fed these three sequential diets in a crumble-pellet-pellet form. Birds on Treatment 2 were given feed as mashpellet-mash, and those on Treatment 3 were given feed as mash-mash-pellet for the starter, grower, and nisher diets, respectively. Individual body weights were measured at 17, 35, 42, and 49 d. Feed consumption and feed efciency data were recorded for the starter, grower, and nisher intervals. General Procedures (Experiments 3 and 4) In each experiment, 360 1-d-old chicks male broiler chickens of a commercial strain (Ross Ross) were randomly allocated to one of six treatments of 60 chicks each.

Each treatment consisted of two replicates of 30 birds each, located in 2.44- 1.83-m oor pens. Individual body weights were measured at 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, and 49 d. Experiment 3 All birds were fed ad libitum to 4 d of age using the starter diet (Table 3), formulated to meet nutrient requirements according to NRC (1994). At Day 5, all birds were wing-banded and individually weighed. Chicks were fed ad libitum (control) or feed-restricted to 90% of the ad libitum intake (recorded the previous day for the control birds) from 5 to 9 d (Treatment 2), 5 to 14 d (Treatment 3), 5 to 19 d (Treatment 4), 5 to 24 d (Treatment 5), or 5 to 29 d (Treatment 6), respectively. Experiment 4 All birds were fed ad libitum to 13 d of age using the starter diet (Table 3), formulated to meet the nutrient requirements according to NRC (1994). At Day 14, all birds were wing-banded and individually weighed. Chicks were fed ad libitum (control) or feed restricted to 90% of ad libitum intake from 14 to 17 d (Treatment 2), 14 to 20 d (Treatment 3), 14 to 23 d (Treatment 4), 14 to 26 d (treatment 5), or 14 to 29 d (Treatment 6), respectively. Experiments were arranged as a completely randomized design with pen as the experimental unit. All variables data were subjected to analysis of variance. Body weights in Experiments 1 and 2 were subjected to a nested design procedure analysis (SAS Institute, 1990). MultipleBROILER FEED RESTRICTION 681

TABLE 1. Diet composition for Experiment 1 (%) Starter Grower Finisher Ingredients Diet 1 Diet 2 Diet 3 Soybean meal (48%) 37.40 29.06 23.73 Corn 45.85 43.74 48.34 Wheat 8.00 18.84 20.00 Animal-vegetable fat 4.64 4.50 4.34 Limestone 1.70 1.74 1.59 Dicalcium phosphate2 1.20 1.00 0.90 Salt 0.29 0.29 0.29 Vitamin-mineral premix1 0.75 0.75 0.75 D, L-Methionine 0.17 0.09 0.06 Calculated analysis ME (kcal/kg) 3,096 3,141 3,181 Crude protein (%) 23.03 20.21 18.18 Lysine (%) 1.33 1.11 0.96 Methionine + cystine (%) 0.90 0.73 0.64 Calcium (%) 1.00 0.94 0.86 Available phosphorus (%) 0.45 0.40 0.37 1 Supplied per kilogram of diet: vitamin A, 8,800 IU (retinyl palmitate); vitamin D3 , 3,300 IU; vitamin E, 11.0 IU (dl--tocopheryl acetate); riboavin, 9.0 mg; biotin, 0.25 mg; thiamin, 4 mg; pantothenic acid, 11.0 mg; vitamin

B12, 13 g; niacin, 26 mg; choline, 900 mg; vitamin K, 1.5 mg; folic acid, 1.5 mg; ethoxyquin, 125 mg; manganese, 55 mg as manganous oxide 60%; zinc, 50 mg as zinc oxide 72%; copper, 5 mg as copper sulfate 25%; iron, 30 mg as ferrous sulfate 30%; and selenium, 0.1 mg. 2 Contained 23% Ca and 20% P. comparisons among means were made using Tukeys standard range test (Steel et al., 1997). Estimated body weight at which feed-restricted birds reached ad libitum body weight of 42 d was extrapolated by linear regression (SAS Institute, 1990). Variables in Experiments 3 and 4 were subjected to orthogonal contrast analysis (Steel et al., 1997). Occurrence of SDS and ascites in Experiments 3 and 4 were subjected to ANOVA (Steel et al., 1997). TABLE 2. Diet composition for Experiment 2 (%) Starter Grower Finisher Ingredients Diet 1 Diet 2 Diet 3 Soybean meal (48%) 36.12 30.44 25.44 Corn 57.02 61.88 66.78 Animal-Vegetable fat 2.74 3.76 3.93 Limestone 1.79 1.61 1.61 Dicalcium phosphate2 1.06 1.03 0.99 Salt 0.31 0.31 0.31 Vitamin-mineral premix1

1.00 1.00 1.00 D,L-Methionine 0.10 0.11 0.09 Coban 0.05 0.05 0.05 Stafac 0.05 0.05 0.05 Calculated analysis ME (kcal/kg) 3,050 3,150 3,200 Crude protein (%) 22.31 20.00 18.00 Lysine (%) 1.27 1.10 0.95 Methionine + cystine (%) 0.82 0.74 0.64 Calcium (%) 1.00 0.92 0.90 Available phosphorus (%) 0.42 0.40 0.38 1 Supplied per kilogram of diet: vitamin A, 8,800 IU (retinyl palmitate); vitamin D3 , 3,300 IU; vitamin E, 40 IU (dl--tocopheryl acetate); riboavin, 8.0 mg; biotin, 0.22 mg; thiamin, 4 mg; pantothenic acid, 15.0 mg; vitamin B12, 12 g; niacin, 50 mg; choline, 600 mg; vitamin K, 3.3 mg; folic acid, 1.0 mg; ethoxyquin, 120 mg; manganese, 70 mg as manganous oxide 72%; zinc, 70 mg as zinc oxide 72%; copper, 10 mg as copper sulfate 25%; iron, 60 mg as ferrous sulfate 30%; and selenium, 0.3 mg. 2 Contained 23% Ca and 20% P. RESULTS Experiment 1 Broiler performance in relation to different levels of feed restriction is shown in Table 4. Body weights of birds

at 28, 35, and 42 d were signicantly different for most treatments (P< 0.05), and birds fed ad libitum were heav-682 URDANETA-RINCON AND LEESON TABLE 3. Diet composition for Experiments 3 and 4 (%) Starter Grower Finisher Ingredients Diet 1 Diet 2 Diet 3 Soybean meal (48%) 36.12 30.44 25.49 Corn 56.82 61.68 66.53 Animal-Vegetable fat 2.74 3.76 3.93 Limestone 1.79 1.61 1.61 Dicalcium phosphate2 1.06 1.04 0.99 Salt 0.31 0.31 0.31 Vitamin-mineral premix1 1.00 1.00 1.00 D,L-Methionine 0.11 0.11 0.09 Coban 0.05 0.05 0.05 Calculated analysis ME (kcal/kg) 3,050 3,150 3,190 Crude protein (%) 22.31 20.00 18.00 Lysine (%) 1.27 1.10 0.95 Methionine + cystine (%) 0.82 0.74 0.64 Calcium (%) 1.00 0.92 0.90 Available phosphorus (%) 0.42 0.40 0.38 1 Supplied per kilogram of diet: vitamin A, 8,800 IU (retinyl palmitate); vitamin D3

, 3,300 IU; vitamin E, 40 IU (dl--tocopheryl acetate); riboavin, 8.0 mg; biotin, 0.22 mg; thiamin, 4 mg; pantothenic acid, 15.0 mg; vitamin B12, 12 g; niacin, 50 mg; choline, 600 mg; vitamin K, 3.3 mg; folic acid, 1.0 mg; ethoxyquin, 120 mg; manganese, 70 mg as manganous oxide 60%; zinc, 70 mg as zinc oxide 72%; copper, 10 mg as copper sulfate 25%; iron, 60 mg as ferrous sulfate 30%; and selenium, 0.3 mg. 2 Contained 23% Ca and 20% P. ier at all ages. The reduction in body weight depended on the level of feed restriction applied, with the smallest body weight noted in birds restricted by 15%. Overall weight gain (Table 4) followed the same pattern as for body weight. Feed intake differed commensurate with the goals of the restriction program (Table 4). Feed conversion was not signicantly different (P > 0.05) among control and feed-restricted treatments, although the birds fed ad libitum had a numerically superior feed conversion (Table 4). Mortality was only signicantly different between birds fed ad libitum and those feed-restricted by 15%. There was a trend of reduced mortality with the application of feed restriction, with the highest mortality noted in birds fed ad libitum. There were numerically less SDS and ascites mortalities in feed-restricted birds (Table 4). Carcass characteristics are shown in Table 5. Control-fed birds had the heaviest (P < 0.05) carcass weights and

breast meat yields, and a progressive reduction in both parameters was noted with increasing feed restriction. Abdominal fat pad weight was not signicantly different across treatments (Table 5). Breast meat as a percentage of the carcass was reduced by feed restriction (Table 5). TABLE 4. Broiler performance in relation to feed restriction, Experiment 1 Weight Feed Feed Feed gain intake intake:weight Mortality SDS2 Ascites Body weight (g) restriction1 (g) (g) gain (%) (%) (%) (%) 28d 35d 42d 042 d Ad libitum 1,354a 1,838a 2,401a 2,359a 4,155.7a 1.68 5.6a 3.3 2.0 5 1,213b 1,662b 2,201b 2,159b 3,915.6ab 1.76 4.5ab 1.1 0.0 10 1,164c 1,564bc 2,063bc 2,057bc 3,711.2bc 1.75 3.2ab 2.2 0.0

15 1,118c 1,509c 1,997c 1,956c 3,513.4c 1.78 1.1b 1.1 0.0 SEM 20 23 38 49 75 0.03 0.7 0.5 0.4 acMeans within a column with no common superscripts differ signicantly (P < 0.05). 1 Starting at 5 d of age. 2 Sudden death syndrome. The estimated time at which feed-restricted birds reached the 42-d body weight of birds fed ad libitum was calculated. Birds that were feed-restricted to 95, 90, or 85% of ad libitum feed intake reached the 42-d control body weight at 45, 47, and 48 d, respectively. Experiment 2 Body weight and feed conversion of broilers given feeds of varying texture are shown in Table 6. Body weights at 17, 35, 42, and 49 d of broiler chickens fed textured diets throughout were signicantly improved (P < 0.05) compared to those fed mash diets at various times. No signicant difference (P > 0.05) was observed in

weights of birds fed mash diets (Treatments 2 and 3). Feed:gain during the starter period was improved in broilers fed textured diets compared to those fed mash diets; however, during the nisher period, feed conversion was improved (P < 0.05) in broilers previously fed mash diets in the starter and grower periods. Cumulative feed conversion to 42 d or 49 d was not different among treatments (P>0.05). Feed intakes and mortalities of broil-BROILER FEED RESTRICTION 683 TABLE 5. Carcass characteristics of broilers at 42 d of age previously subjected to different levels of feed restriction, Experiment 1 Feed restriction Breast Abdominal Breast meat (%) Carcass meat (g) fat pad (g) (% of carcass wt) Ad libitum 1,849.2a 397.7a 49.1 21.5a 5 1,716.1b 346.1b 46.1 20.1ab 10 1,625.8bc 316.3bc 46.5 19.4b 15 1,518.5c 292.2c 44.4 19.2b SEM 20.4 6.1 1.2 0.2 acMeans within a column with no common superscripts differ signicantly (P < 0.05) TABLE 6. Effect of feed texture on body weight of broilers, Experiment 2 Body weight (g) Feed intake:weight gain

Treatment1 17 d 35 d 42 d 49 d 017 d 1735 d 3542 d 4249 d 042 d 049 d 1. C-P-P 576a 2,087a 2,658a 3,249a 1.34a 1.81 2.42a 2.46 1.82 1.90 2. M-P-M 479b 1,956b 2,414b 2,973b 1.52b 1.66 2.32ab 2.65 1.76 1.88 3. M-M-P 490b 1,842b 2,413b 3,001b 1.45ab 1.80 2.08b 2.23 1.79 1.86 SEM 5 13 16 23 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.11 0.02 0.02 a,bMeans within a column with no common superscripts differ signicantly (P < 0.05). 1 Diet type: 1 = crumble-pellet-pellet; 2 = mash-pellet-mash; 3 = mash-mash-pellet.

TABLE 7. Effect of feed texture on feed intake and mortality of broilers, Experiment 2 Feed intake (g) Mortality (%) 049 d SDS Ascites Treatment1 042 d 049 d 017 d 1735 d 3542 d 4249 d 042 d 049 d (%) (%) 1. C-P-P 4,452.7a 5,872.2a 4.9 3.4 5.5a 1.9 13.9a 15.7a 7.5 2.5 2. M-P-M 4,122.5b 5,546.9b 4.2 0.9 0.9b 0.9 5.9b 6.8b 1.6 0.8 3. M-M-P 4,151.8b 5,524.5b 2.5 4.3 0.9b 0.9 7.6ab 8.5ab 2.4 0.0 SEM 56.6 66.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.5 1.4 1.6 1.2 0.5 a,bMeans within a column with no common superscripts differ signicantly (P < 0.05). 1

Diet type: 1 = crumble-pellet-pellet; 2 = mash-pellet-mash; 3 = mash-mash-pellet. ers fed diets of alternating texture are shown in Table 7. Feed intakes to 42 or 49 d of broiler chickens fed textured diets throughout were signicantly increased (P < 0.05) compared to those of birds fed mash diets at different periods. Mortality during the starter and grower periods was not signicantly different (P>0.05) across treatments; however, a signicant reduction (P < 0.05) in mortality was observed during the nisher period (35 to 42 d) for broilers fed untextured diets at some time. A signicant reduction in cumulative mortality to 42 or 49 d (P < 0.01) was observed when broilers were fed mash diets during the starter and nisher periods (Treatment 2, Table 7). Mortalities from SDS and ascites were not different across treatments (P > 0.05), but there was a trend toward decreases in these disorders in mash-fed birds. Carcass characteristics of broilers at 42 and 49 d under qualitative feed restriction are shown in Table 8. Breast meat yields at 42 and 49 d were signicantly greater in chicks fed only textured diets, and no differences were observed among treatments using mash diets at different periods (Table 8). There was less abdominal fat in mash-pelletmash fed birds at 42 d (P < 0.05), although no difference was observed at 49 d of age (P > 0.05). Experiment 3 Broiler performance in relation to different periods of

restricted feeding at 90% of ad libitum feed intake is shown in Table 9. Body weights of chicks at 35, 42, and 49 d of age were not signicantly different (P> 0.05), even though birds fed ad libitum were always numerically the heaviest. Feed-restricted birds grew more slowly, and this situation depended on the duration of feed restriction. Reduction in growth rate was noticed as early as 14 d (data not shown). At this time, reduction in the growth was 3.7, 15.6, 17, 17.3, and 16.6% for the 5 to 10, 5 to 15, 5 to 20, 5 to 25, and 5 to 30 d feed restriction periods, respectively. By 35 d, restricted-fed chicks were 2.8, 0.5, 1, 1.7, and 5% smaller than chicks fed ad libitum (Table 9), suggesting compensatory growth according to the larger differences observed at an earlier stage. At 49 d these differences were further decreased (1, 1, 0.2, 0.6, or 3%, respectively), indicating that an older market age gives more opportunity to achieve normal body weight. Feed conversion showed a signicant linear effect (P < 0.01) among ad libitum and feed-restricted treatments at 42 d (Table 9). No signicant effect (P > 0.05) was observed in684 URDANETA-RINCON AND LEESON TABLE 8. Carcass characteristics of broilers fed different feed textures, Experiment 2 Carcass weight Abdominal Breast meat (g) fat pad (g) (g) Treatment1 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d

1. C-P-P 2,048a 2,494a 50a 69 452a 551a 2. M-P-M 1,792b 2,278b 44b 61 390b 481b 3. M-M-P 1,881ab 2,338ab 45ab 72 402b 495b SEM 21 27 1.3 2.2 5.8 8.5 a,bMeans within a column with no common superscripts differ signicantly (P < 0.05). 1 Diet type: 1 = crumble-pellet-pellet; 2 = mash-pellet-mash; 3 = mash-mash-pellet. mortality across treatments at 42 d. At 49 d, there was a signicant linear reduction (P < 0.05) in mortality related to restriction (Table 9). Mortality from ascites was not different (P > 0.05) across treatments. Restriction of feed intake resulted in a signicant linear decline in mortality from SDS (P < 0.05). No signicant differences were observed in SDS among the various feed-restriction treatments. Carcass characteristics of broilers at 42 and 49 d are shown in Table 10. At 42 d, ad libitum fed birds had

superior (P < 0.05) breast meat yields, and a progressive reduction was noted as the period of feed restriction was extended (Table 10). At 49 d, there was no signicant difference in breast meat yield (P>0.05) across treatments. Breast meat as a percentage of carcass weight decreased linearly (P < 0.01) at 42 d in response to restriction (Table 10). No signicant differences were observed in breast meat as a percentage of carcass weight across treatments at 49 d of age. Neither thigh portion nor abdominal fat pad was affected by feed restriction at 42 or 49 d (P > 0.05) (Table 10). Experiment 4 Broiler performance of birds feed restricted to 90% of ad libitum intake for different periods starting at 14 d of age is shown in Table 11. There was a signicant linear decline in 35-d body weight related to days of restricted TABLE 9. Performance of broilers subjected to feed restriction for varying time periods starting at Day 5, Experiment 3 Feed Feed intake:weight restriction Body weight (g) gain Mortality (%) Total mortality SDS Ascites Days 35 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 042 d 049 d 049 d Ad libitum 1,744 2,357 2,967 1.70 1.75 10.05 11.7 8.3 1.65

510 1,696 2,316 2,931 1.66 1.71 6.66 8.32 4.9 1.65 515 1,725 2,340 2,934 1.65 1.69 8.33 8.33 3.3 1.65 520 1,727 2,309 2,959 1.64 1.70 8.33 8.33 4.9 1.65 525 1,734 2,303 2,947 1.62 1.69 8.33 8.33 4.9 1.65 530 1,676 2,296 2,875 1.60 1.69 5.05 5.05 1.6 0.00 SEM 11 16 20 0.01 0.01 0.63 0.77 0.8 0.5 Linear NS NS NS ** NS NS * * NS Quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS * P < 0.05, y = 10.794 0.1903 (total mortality); **P < 0.01, y = 1.69 0.0036 (feed:gain). feeding (P < 0.05, Table 11), although body weights at 42 and 49 d were not signicantly (P > 0.05) different across treatments. At 21 d, reduction in growth was 12.3, 9.4, 12.5, 13.0, and 12.7% for birds feed-restricted from 14 to 17, 14 to 20, 14 to 23, 14 to 26, and 14 to 29 d, respectively (data not shown). By 35 d of age, the weights of feedrestricted chicks were reduced by 2.2, 5.1, 3.8, 3.5, and 6.8% for these same treatments groups (Table 11), whereas by 49 d of age 0.8, 1.9, 0.2, 0.7, and 3.9%, respectively, were observed (Table 11), again indicating some growth compensation. Allowing a longer period to attain market age seems to increase the opportunity for feed-restricted birds to attain normal weight for age. No signicant effect of restriction period (P > 0.05) was noted in feed conversion at 42 or 49 d, but feed-restricted birds tended have improved feed conversion compared to chicks fed ad

libitum (Table 11). No signicant differences (P > 0.05) were observed in mortality across treatments at 42 or 49 d of age (Table 11). Treatment had no effect on mortality from SDS or ascites (P>0.05, Table 11). Carcass characteristics at 42 and 49 d of age are shown in Table 12. There was a signicant (P < 0.05) linear decline in breast meat yield due to feed restriction at 42 d (Table 12), although no signicant differences (P > 0.05) were observed at 49 d. Thigh, abdominal fat pad, carcass weight, and breast meat as a percentage of carcass weight were not affected by feed restriction (P> 0.05) at 42 or 49 d of age (Table 12).BROILER FEED RESTRICTION 685 TABLE 10. Carcass characteristics of broilers subjected to feed restriction for varying time periods starting at Day 5, Experiment 3 Feed Carcass Breast meat Abdominal Breast meat restriction weight (g) (g) Thigh (g) fat pad (g) (% carcass wt) Days 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d Ad libitum 1,896 2,293 419 517 540 655 43.7 56.5 22.1 22.5 510 1,847 2,280 399 502 531 644 45.3 56.9 21.6 21.9 515 1,822 2,277 397 503 537 642 42.4 50.0 21.7 22.1 520 1,870 2,287 396 510 547 633 43.4 67.4 21.1 22.2 525 1,881 2,289 397 497 542 653 47.5 63.1 21.6 21.6 530 1,868 2,210 375 477 531 635 50.7 64.1 20.6 21.6 SEM 14 8 5 6 5 5 1.4 1.7 0.2 0.2 Linear NS NS * NS NS NS NS NS ** NS Quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS *(P < 0.05).

**P < 0.01). DISCUSSION Quantitative feed restriction clearly affected body weight, mortality, and most carcass characteristics (Tables 4 and 5). The degree of change in these parameters depended on the level of feed restriction used. There was a reduction in body weight at 42 d of about 8, 14, and 17% for chicks restricted to 95, 90, and 85%, respectively of ad libitum feed intake, relative to the previous days intake of the control birds. Such a reduction in body weight is in accord with results from Khantaprab et al. (1997), Roth et al. (1993), and Santoso et al. (1993a). The level of reduction in breast meat yield was more severe than that for body weight, being 13, 20, and 26.6%, respectively. This nding suggests that feed restriction specically reduced breast muscle growth (Khantaprab et al., 1997; Gille et al., 1992) and that this effect again depends on the level of feed restriction. It is also possible that reduction in breast meat yield in feed-restricted birds might be due to lowering amino acid intake linked with decreasing energy levels. Results suggest that the growth rate of broiler chickens is related to feed intake, which supports the statement that improvement in body weight TABLE 11. Performance of broilers subjected to feed restriction for varying time periods starting at Day 14, Experiment 4 Feed

Feed intake:weight restriction Body weight (g) gain Mortality (%) Total mortality SDS Ascites Days 35 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 042 d 049 d 049 d Ad libitum 1,841 2,479 2,992 1.66 1.74 1.66 1.66 0.0 1.6 1417 1,801 2,409 2,967 1.65 1.73 1.66 1.66 1.6 0.0 1720 1,747 2,316 2,934 1.62 1.69 4.99 6.66 1.6 0.0 1423 1,772 2,369 2,985 1.64 1.69 6.66 6.66 4.9 0.0 1426 1,776 2,381 2,969 1.63 1.69 3.33 3.33 0.0 0.0 1429 1,715 2,337 2,873 1.61 1.68 3.33 3.33 0.0 0.0 SEM 11 17 24 0.02 0.02 1.05 1.22 0.6 0.3 Linear * NS NS ** NS NS NS NS NS Quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS *P < 0.05, y = 10.794 0.1903 (total mortality); **P < 0.01, y = 1.69 0.0036 (feed:gain). of birds is highly correlated to feed consumption (OSullivan et al., 1992). Abdominal fat deposition was not signicantly affected by the implementation of feed restriction, conrming the results of Santoso et al. (1993b), Fontana et al. (1993), Deaton (1995), and Zubair and Leeson (1996), although feed-restricted birds usually had a numerically smaller abdominal fat pad. The fact that there was no signicant reduction in abdominal fat deposition in this experiment suggests that even feed-restricted broiler chickens are still overeating and that the level of feed intake may control

de novo lipogenesis (Rosebrough and McMurty, 1993). The most noticeable difference in growth was that up to 14 d of age, when restricted birds had reduced growth of 13, 17, and 19%, respectively, for Treatments 2 to 4 in Experiment 1 (data not shown). This nding may result from the fact that proportionally more nutrients are used for growth rather than for maintenance (Leeson and Summers, 1997). After this period, differences between the growth curves progressively decrease over time. The two main metabolic disorders affecting contemporary broiler chickens are ascites and SDS, and these pathologic conditions are closely related to rapid growth rate686 URDANETA-RINCON AND LEESON TABLE 12. Carcass characteristics of broilers subjected to feed restriction for varying time periods starting at Day 14, Experiment 4 Feed Carcass Breast meat Abdominal Breast meat restriction weight (g) (g) Thigh (g) fat pad (g) (% carcass wt) Days 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d 42 d 49 d Ad libitum 1,896 2,340 406 537 561 683 46.0 56.2 21.4 22.9 1417 1,860 2,320 391 503 543 666 49.4 63.5 20.9 21.7 1420 1,793 2,260 378 501 531 652 43.5 57.7 21.0 22.1 1423 1,838 2,364 380 503 548 660 49.8 64.2 20.6 21.3 1426 1,867 2,336 390 512 552 681 50.0 70.4 20.8 21.9 1429 1,823 2,239 375 494 535 657 55.6 61.5 20.5 22.0 SEM 10 19 5 6 5 6 1.3 1.3 0.2 0.2 Linear NS NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS *P < 0.05.

and increased feed intake. In the rst experiment, implementation of feed restriction did not signicantly reduce the prevalence of these disorders, which is in agreement with observations of McGovern et al. (1997) and Robinson et al. (1992) but contrary to those of Julian (1997), Tottori et al. (1997), and Gonzales et al. (1998a). Such variance in the occurrence of these disorders among researchers may to be related to the severity of feed restriction used and to other uncontrollable factors such as bird strain. It is likely that more severe under-nutrition is required to signicantly decrease the incidence of SDS. Changing feed texture in Experiment 2 signicantly inuenced body weight, feed intake, mortality, and most carcass characteristics (Tables 6, 7, and 8). The control birds fed textured diets throughout had superior performance compared to birds fed mash at any time. Body weights of birds fed mash were reduced by about 9 and 8% compared to pellet-fed birds to 42 and 49 d, respectively. Improvement in body weight in pellet-fed birds is in agreement with observations of Plavnik et al. (1997) and Hamilton and Proudfoot (1995). Increased body weights of birds fed pelleted diets may be linked, to some extent, to increased feed consumption. Nir et al. (1994) stated that increased feed consumption is positively correlated to the quality of pelleting when compared to mash feed. Mortality was greater in birds fed pelleted diets than those fed mash, which is in agreement with Nir et

al. (1995). The increased mortality observed in birds fed pelleted diets might be linked to reduced bird activity (Nir et al., 1995) because these birds spend less time and energy on feeding. However, Jones et al. (1995), who fed mash or pellet diets to 42 d of age, reported no signicant differences in mortality between mash- and pellet-fed birds. Mortality from SDS and ascites were not signicantly reduced in Treatments 2 and 3 (Experiment 2), although a trend to reduce these disorders was noted. Nir et al. (1995) did show feed restriction to reduce the incidence of ascites. Abdominal fat pad size was signicantly decreased in birds fed mash-pellet-mash diets at 42 d of age, suggesting that the qualitative restriction applied was enough to lower the rate of lipogenesis (Rosebrough and McMurtry, 1993) in mash-fed birds. Breast meat yield at 42 and 49 d was reduced by 13 and 11% and by 13 and 10% in mash-fed birds, respectively (Treatments 2 and 3, respectively, Experiment 2). These results are contrary to observations of Jones et al. (1995) who showed no deleterious effect of mash feeds on breast yield. In Experiments 3 and 4 feed-restricted birds were able to attain normal market body weight at 42 and 49 d of age, which suggests that growth compensation occurred. The duration and severity of the feed restriction used in Experiments 3 and 4 allowed birds to attain market body

weight for age. The energy to support accelerated growth may come from a reduction in the overall maintenance energy needs (Yu and Robinson, 1992) or from a decrease in needs for basal metabolic rate as previously observed in feed-restricted birds (Zubair and Leeson, 1994). Cristofori et al. (1997) restricted the feed of broilers from 7 to 21, 7 to 28, and 21 to 35 and showed that restricted birds did not compensate in nal body weight. This nding is in contrast to the results obtained in current experiments in which complete compensatory growth was attained by feed-restricted birds. These differences might have occurred due to the more severe degree of feed restriction applied by Cristofori et al. (1997) as they allowed only 1.5 Mcal ME/BW75/d. This nding indicates that the severity of feed restriction is as important as duration of restriction for growth compensation in broilers. During Experiment 3, in which feed restriction was applied at an earlier age, feed conversion at 42 d was signicantly improved when longer periods of feed restriction were used. Similar results have been reported by Deaton (1995) and Cristofori et al. (1997). No improvement in feed conversion was observed at 49 d in Experiment 3 or when restriction was initiated later (Experiment 4) in agreement with the results of Roth et al. (1993). However, there were numerical improvements observed in Experiment 4, in which feed conversion is numerically

related to duration of restriction. The improvement in feed conversion noted with the use of early feed restriction was likely due to reduced maintenance requirements. This nding perhaps relates to a decrease in basal metabolic rate (Zubair and Leeson, 1994) associated with a smaller body weight during early growth. Feed restrictionBROILER FEED RESTRICTION 687 of birds at an earlier age signicantly reduced mortality at 49 d in Experiment 3. This effect was not, however, observed in birds that were feed restricted, starting at 14 d (Experiment 4). It appears that the application of a feed-restriction program at an early period (5 d) is more effective for reducing the growth rate of birds and also for decreasing mortality caused by metabolic disorders. The implementation of an early 5-d feed restriction program signicantly reduced the prevalence of SDS, which is in accord with observations of Gonzales et al. (1998a) and OkSuk et al. (1998), who began the restriction period at 5 or 8 d, respectively, but contrary to the ndings of Robinson et al. (1992), who restricted feed at 7 d of age. Reduction in the prevalence of SDS seems to be related to a decrease in growth rate and to a reduction in activity (Gonzales et al., 1998b), which suggests some reduction in maintenance requirements. Mortalities from SDS and ascites were not affected when feed restriction began at 14 d. These results are in agreement with the observations of Robinson et al. (1992) and McGovern et al. (1997). It seems that feed restriction must be started early to

improve liveability. Breast meat yield was signicantly reduced for feedrestricted birds at 42 d of age but not at 49 d. Reduction in breast meat at 42 d during the third experiment was about 5% for chicks that were feed restricted from 5 to 10 d, 5 to 15 d, 5 to 20 d, or 5 to 25 d and was 11% from 5 to 30 d, suggesting that longer periods of restriction promote greater reductions in breast meat yield. During the fourth experiment, breast meat reduction was 4, 6.9, 6.4, 4, and 8%, respectively, for birds that were feed restricted from 14 to 17 d, 14 to 20 d, 14 to 23 d, 14 to 26 d, and 14 to 29 d., indicating again that feed restriction reduced breast muscle growth (Khantaprab et al., 1997) and that this effect is related to the duration of feed restriction. No differences were observed in thigh portion yield in either experiment at 42 or 49 d, indicating that the feed restriction did not affect this parameter. Similarly, no signicant differences were observed in abdominal fat pad size in either experiment at 42 or 49 d. It seems that a more severe and longer time of feed restriction is necessary to signicantly reduce abdominal fat content. Breast meat as a percentage of carcass weight was only signicantly affected in feed-restricted birds at 42 d during the third experiment. This nding follows the same trend as for breast meat yield. It is concluded that continuous feed restriction slows the growth of broilers and reduces mortality and these

effects are now quantitatively predictable. By using mash diets at any time also reduces growth rate, which may be associated with reduced mortality. Feed restriction for various times early in growth at 90% of ad libitum feed intake allowed birds to achieve complete growth compensation. Implementation of feed restriction at an earlier stage (5 d) resulted in more benecial productive parameters than did feed restriction starting at a later stage (14 d). Application of mild feed restriction, early rather than late, in broiler chickens is suggested due to the improved EFFECTS OF FEED RESTRICTION DURING STARTER PHASE ON SUBSEQUENT GROWTH PERFORMANCE, DRESSING PERCENTAGE, RELATIVE ORGAN WEIGHTS AND IMMUNE RESPONSE OF BROILERS S. MAHMOOD, S. MEHMOOD, F. AHMAD, A. MASOOD1 AND R. KAUSAR2 Department of Poultry Science; 1 Department of Veterinary Anatomy; 2 Department of Zoology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan ABSTRACT Effects of feed restriction during starter phase on subsequent growth performance, dressing percentage, relative organ weights and immune response of broilers were studied. One hundred and twenty day-old (Hubbard) broiler chicks were reared in a group for one week (adaptation period). At day 8 of their age, these chicks were randomly divided into 12 experimental units of 10 chicks each. These units were further

allotted randomly to four treatment groups A, B, C and D such that each treatment received three replicates. The chicks in group A were fed ad libitum and served as control. Whereas the birds in groups B, C and D were kept on a feed restriction programme of different durations i.e. 1 hr feeding with 3 hrs off, 1 hr feeding with 5 hrs off and 1 hr feeding with 7 hrs off, respectively, from 8th up to 28th day of age. After 28th day of age, all the birds were fed ad libitum up to the age of 6 weeks. The birds in group A consumed significantly more feed compared to the birds kept under restricted feeding programme. However, restricted birds utilized their feed more efficiently than controls. The dressing percentage and relative weight of heart, liver, spleen, gizzard, pancreas and intestine remained unaffected due to the treatments. The immune response against Newcastle disease and Infectious Bursal Disease at 30th day of age was found to be low in the feed restricted group. Key words: Broilers, feed restriction, growth performance, dressing percentage, relative organ weights, immune response. INTRODUCTION The diet of an average person in Pakistan is generally composed of cereals and vegetables, which are deficient in protein especially of animal origin (Anonymous, 2005). This adversely affects the general health and mental development of the people. The poor nutritional status is mainly due to inadequate production of good quality food and lack of purchasing power of an average person. Animal protein sources like mutton are very expensive, whereas beef has a

limited use due to its high cholesterol contents. Broiler meat, therefore, may help in abridging the gap between supply and demand of animal proteins because it is the quickest and economical source of human food of high biological value. The efficient and economical broiler production depends upon a number of conditions such as genetic make up of the birds, housing, feeding, disease prevention and marketing of broilers. The success of rearing broilers for maximum weight gain not only depends upon the strain of the birds and management but also on feed quality. It is believed that 70 to 75% of total cost on broiler production is incurred on feed (Mahmood et al., 2005). Therefore, any improvement in the performance of broilers due to diet can inevitably have a profound effect on profitability of broiler farming. Feed restriction in broilers can improve feed efficiency, reduce feed cost and mortality along with the production of quality meat at cheaper rates (Zubair and Leeson, 1996). Moreover, it can reduce the chances of metabolic disorders like ascities syndrome, a common problem in broilers, which otherwise may lead to high mortality and make the enterprise unprofitable (Arce-Menocal et al., 1995).

Various methods of feed restriction such as intermittent feeding, skip-a-day feeding, appetite suppression with glycolic acid (Pinchasov and Jensen, 1989), time of restriction (Samara et al., 1996) and quantitative feed restriction (Lee and Leeson 2001) are used in broilers to improve their efficiency of feed utilization and weight gain. The feed restriction for suitable periods may prove an effective method to achieve the benefits of compensatory growth through a change over to normal feeding. In many physical feed restriction or diet dilution studies, there are reports of body fat deposition, although this effect seems variable (Zhong et al., 1995). However, the optimum period of feed restriction has received little attention. The present 138 Pakistan Vet. J., 2007, 27(3): 137-141. project therefore, was planned to investigate the effect of different durations of feed restriction on growth, dressing percentage and immune response of broilers. MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred and twenty day-old (Hubbard) broiler chicks, purchased from the local market, were reared in a group for one week (adaptation period). At day 8 of their age, these chicks were randomly divided into 12 experimental units of 10 chicks each. These units were further allotted randomly to four treatment groups A, B, C and D, such that each treatment received three

replicates. The chicks in group A were fed ad libitum and served as control. The birds in groups B, C and D were kept on a feed restriction programme of different durations i.e. 1 hr feeding with 3 hrs off, 1 hr feeding with 5 hrs off and 1 hr feeding with 7 hrs off, respectively, starting from 8th upto 28th day of age. After 28th day of age, all the birds were fed ad libitum up to the age of 6 weeks. The birds were maintained in a thoroughly cleaned and disinfected poultry house. Each replicate was kept in a separate pen measuring 3 x 4 sq.ft. during the experimental period. Saw dust was used as litter material. The birds were kept under similar managemental conditions like space, light, temperature, ventilation and relative humidity up to the age of six weeks. Fresh and clean water was available ad libitum during the experimental period. The brooding temperature was maintained at 35C during the first week of age and was reduced by 2C/week until it reached 25C. The birds were fed commercial broiler starter mash up to the age of 4 weeks and thereafter broiler finisher crumbs up to the age of 6 weeks. The birds were also vaccinated according to the schedule mentioned in Table 1. Table 1: Vaccination schedule of the experimental

birds Age Vaccine Route 7 days Newcastle disease Intraocular 12 days Gumboro Intraocular 20 days Gumboro Drinking water 22 days Newcastle disease Drinking water 32 days Gumboro Drinking water The data on initial body weight, weekly feed consumption, body weight and mortality, if any, were collected during the trial. The data thus collected were used to calculate weight gain and feed conversion ratio. Blood samples at 30th day of age of two birds from each replicate were collected to study immune response against Newcastle and Gumboro diseases. At the end of experimental period, two birds from each replicate were selected randomly, weighed and slaughtered for their dressed, abdominal fat, heart, gizzard, liver, spleen, pancreas and intestinal weights. The data recorded for different parameters were used to calculate dressing percentage and relative weights (g organ weight/100g body weight) of heart, liver, spleen, gizzard, abdominal fat and pancreas. Cost of production of broilers in each group was calculated on per Kg body weight basis to see the economics of production of the birds for each group.

Statistical analysis The data thus collected were subjected to statistical analysis using completely randomized design. The differences in the means were compared by least significance difference test (Steel et al., 1997). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The mean values (+ SE) for initial body weight, feed consumption, final body weight, weight gain and feed conversion ratio for broilers of four groups are shown in Table 2. The weight gained by the birds in group A (control) was significantly (P<0.05) higher than that of the other groups kept under different feeding regimes. The lowest weight gain was observed in the birds of group D, which were kept under one hour feed with seven hours off during 2nd to 4th week of age. However, the weight gain of birds in group B (1hour feed with 3 hours off) and group C (1- hour feed with 5 hours off) were not statistically different from each other. These results show that the broilers kept under restricted feeding programme gained less weight than those kept under ad libitum feeding. Newcombe et al. (1992) and Palo et al. (1995) also observed that feed restricted birds gained less weight than full-fed control birds. Similarly, Cabel and Waldroup (1990) reported

that feed restriction resulted in reduced weight gain. The probable explanation of the lower body weight in the feed restricted birds may be the decrease in feed intake compared to the ad libitum fed birds. The result of the present study are not in accordance with those of Fontana et al. (1992), Zhong et al. (1995) and Zubair and Leeson (1996), who observed similar weight gain in feed restricted and ad libitum fed birds. However, Ohtani and Leeson (2000) and Lee and Leeson (2001) reported higher weight gain in feed restricted birds than those fed ad libitum. Probable explanation of these differences may be the difference in feed restriction schedules used in these studies. 139 Pakistan Vet. J., 2007, 27(3): 137-141. A significant difference was recorded in the feed consumption of birds kept under different feed restriction regimes (Table 2). The birds in group A (control) consumed significantly (P<0.05) more feed compared to the birds kept under restricted feeding. The lowest feed consumption was observed in group D (1hour feed with 7 hours off) during second, third and fourth weeks of age, which may be due to longer period of feed restriction than those of other feed restricted groups. Mahmood et al. (2005) reported that birds subjected to longer period of feed restriction consumed

less feed than those in which feed was restricted for shorter period. However, Ohtani and Leeson (2000) reported that feed intake was higher in feed restricted birds than ad libitum fed birds. The difference in the results of these studies may be due to the difference in the durations of feed restriction. A significant (P<0.05) difference among feed conversion values of different groups was observed (Table 2). Birds kept under different feed restriction durations utilized their feed more efficiently than those fed ad libitum (group A). Among the feed restricted groups, the best feed conversion ratio was found in the birds of group B (1-hour feed, 3 hours off), followed by group C (1- hour feed, 5 hours off) and group D (1hour feed, 7 hours off), respectively. Significantly (P<0.05) poor feed utilization was observed in ad libitum (group A) fed birds than the feed restricted groups. These results show that birds kept under 1- hour feed with 3 hours off utilized their feed more efficiently than all other groups including control. These results are in agreement with the earlier findings of Cabel and Waldroup (1990), Newcombe et al. (1992), Deanton (1995), Zhong et al. (1995) and Lee and Leeson (2001), who observed better feed conversion values in birds kept on restricted feeding

compared to ad libitum fed birds. Scheideler and Baughman (1993) reported that feed efficiency was not affected in broilers maintained under restricted feeding versus ad libitum feeding at 42 days of age. The difference in the results of these studies may be due to differences in the experimental conditions during the conduct of the studies. Mean values regarding various slaughter characteristics and relative organ weight of the broilers from different treatment groups have been shown in Table 3. Statistical analysis of the data regarding dressing percentage and relative weights (g organ weight/100g body weight) of heart, liver, spleen, gizzard, abdominal fat, pancreas and intestine did not show any difference in the mean values among the treatment groups due to any feed restriction programme when compared to those of control group. Based upon these results, it can be inferred that feed restriction did Table 2: Mean values of final body weight, weight gain, feed consumption and feed conversion ratio of broilers kept under various feeding regimes at 6 weeks of age Parameters Treatments ABCD Weight of chicks at 8th day (g) 104.6 + 3.40 106.3 + 2.66 105.0 + 2.42 107.3 + 3.86 Final body weight (g) 1842 + 77.84 1820 + 94.52 1820 + 88.22 1713 + 93.05 Weight gain (g) 1737a + 9.17 1714b

+ 11.59 1715b + 19.97 1606c + 23.39 Feed consumed (g) 3816a + 82.38 3392c + 43.00 3482b + 52.85 3380c + 23.50 Feed conversion ratio (g feed/g wt. gain) 2.19a + 0.05 1.97d + 0.02 2.03c + 0.01 2.10b + 0.02 The values in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different (P< 0.05). Table 3: Mean values of dressing percentage and relative weight of giblets (g/100 g of body wt.) of broilers kept under various feeding regimes at 6 weeks of age Parameters Treatments ABCD Dressing percentage 66.77 + 3.31 65.31 + 2.42 65.12 + 2.99 65.25 + 2.74 Liver weight 2.40 + 0.20 2.38 + 0.21 2.43 + 0.23 2.46 + 0.09 Heart weight 0.39 + 0.04 0.41 + 0.03 0.40 + 0.04 0.46 + 0.05 Gizzard weight 1.46 + 0.12 1.45 + 0.03 1.46 + 0.09 1.48 + 0.07 Spleen weight 0.10 + .009 0.13 + .011 0.11 + .012 0.12 + .014 Pancreas weight 0.21 + 0.026 0.22 + 0.016 0.24 + 0.027 0.29 + 0.028 Abdominal fat weight 1.81 + 0.15 1.61 + 0.16 1.42 + 0.18 1.37 + 0.09 Intestinal weight 2.79 + 0.30 2.81 + 0.20 2.95 + 0.24 2.99 + 0.31 The differences in meal values for all parameters among four groups are non-significant (P>0.05). 140 Pakistan Vet. J., 2007, 27(3): 137-141. not exert any adverse effect on the mean values of the dressing characteristics of the broilers. Similar findings have been reported with respect to the effect of feed

restriction on the dressing percentage by Azahan (1984) and on liver, heart, spleen and gizzard weights by Mahmood et al. (2005). Average antibody titers against Newcastle disease and Infectious Bursal disease in the birds of four groups are presented in Table 4. The birds kept under feed restriction programme showed lower immune response when compared with those fed ad libitum. The lowest value of titer against Newcastle disease was observed in group D (1- hour feed with 7 hours off), followed by group C (1- hour feed with 5 hours off) and group B (1hour feed with 3 hours off). The best immune response against Newcastle and Infectious Bursal disease was recorded in the birds fed ad libitum. This indicates that as the duration of feed restriction was increased, the immune response against Newcastle and Infectious Bursal disease decreased. A probable explanation of the reduced antibody titer against these diseases in the birds kept under the feed restricted programme may be the fact that fasting and stress might have stimulated secretions of corticosteroids, which are powerful inhibitors of immune cell proliferation including that required for the response to a vaccine (Dibner and Knight, 1998). The effects of stress on immune function have also been documented by Siegel (1987), who

observed that stress of high temperature depressed the immune function of birds by impeding production of antibodies (Thaxton and Siegel, 1972, 1973) and effective cell-mediated immunity (Zulkifli et al., 1997). The phagocytic potential of chicken microphages was also decreased during heat exposure (Miller and Qureshi, 1992). Results of the present study are in line with the findings of Dibner and Knight (1998), who reported that feed restriction retarded the immune system of broilers. The poor immune response of broilers restricted for longer duration may be attributed to the stress due to feed restriction during the experimental period. Table 4: Antibody titer against Newcastle and Infectious Bursal diseases at 30th day of age in broilers kept under various feeding regimes Diseases Treatments ABCD Newcastle 682.66a 362.66b 37.30c 26.66c Gumboro 426.66a 170.66b

53.33c 53.33c The values in the same row with different superscripts are significantly different (P<0.05). During the entire experimental period, two birds died from control group (fed ad libitum) and one from group B (1-hour feeding with 3 hours off). Ascities was the cause depicted after postmortem of the dead birds. No mortality was observed in the feed restricted groups C (1-hour feeding with 5 hours off) and D (1-hour feeding with 7 hours off). It indicates that feed restriction may be helpful to reduce mortality from ascities. Acre-Menocal et al. (1995) also observed that ad libitum feeding of high energy diet increased the mortality, whereas restricted feeding reduced the mortality significantly. The total costs of feed of broilers of groups A, B, C and D were Rs. 1482, 1326, 1378 and 1326, respectively (Table 5). The total live weight gains were 52.14, 51.40., 52.34 and 48.18 Kg in the respective groups. As the experiment was conducted at the Poultry Research Centre, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, the cost of production of broilers per Kg live weight was calculated excluding the cost of labour. Miscellaneous cost summed up as Rs.400/group, which

included, cost of electricity, gas, litter, disinfections, vaccination and medication. The results of the study exhibited that feed cost/kg live weight gain was lower in feed restricted birds (Group B, C, and D) than ad libitum feeding (Group A) birds. The broilers were sold on live weight basis at the rate of Rs. 43 per Kg. Thus, the net profit per Kg live weight was Rs. 4.61, 7.09, 6.74 and 4.69 in groups A, B, C and D, respectively. This indicates that the net profit per Kg live weight was higher in the birds kept under feed restricted programme than ad libitum fed birds. Among the feed restricted groups, the birds of group B (1 hour feeding with 3 hour off) fetched more profit compared to those of other feed restricted groups (C and D), indicating that reduction in off feed duration resulted in better profit margin. Based on the findings of the present study, it can be suggested that feed restriction for duration of 1- hour feeding with three hours off during 2nd, 3rd and 4th weeks of age in broilers may help to improve feed utilization than those kept for longer period of feed restriction (1 hour feeding with five hours off and 1 hour feeding with seven hours off during 2nd, 3rd and 4th weeks of age) or those fed ad libitum. REFERENCES

Anonymous, 2005. Economic Survey. Finance Division. Economic Advisor Wing, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad. Arce-Menocal, J., C. Lopez-Coello, E. Avila-Gonzalez and J. F. Tirado-Almendra, 1995. Restricted feeding of broilers to reduce mortality from ascites. Vetrinaria-Maxico, 26: 225-229. Azahan, E., 1984. Response of broilers to a restriction in feeding time. MARDI Res. Bull., 12(3): 361-365 (Nutr. Abst. Rev., 56(6): 3248). 141 Pakistan Vet. J., 2007, 27(3): 137-141. Cabel, M. C. and P. W. Waldroup, 1990. Effect of different nutrient restriction programs early in life on broiler performance and abdominal fat content. Poult. Sci., 69: 652-660. Deaton, J. W., 1995. The effect of early feed restriction on broiler performance. Poult. Sci., 74: 1280-1286. Dibner, J. J. and C. D. Knight, 1998. Nutritional programming in hatching poultry. Why a good start is important. Poult. Digest, 54(4): 22. Fontana, E. A., W. D. Weaver, B. A. Watkins and D. M. Denbow, 1992. Effect of early feed restriction on growth, feed conversion and mortality in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 71: 1296-1305. Lee, K. H. and S. Leeson, 2001. Performance of broilers fed limited quantities of feed or nutrients

during seven to fourteen days of age. Poult. Sci., 80: 446-454. Mahmood, S., S. Hassan, F. Ahmed, M. Ashraf, M. Alam and A. Muzaffar, 2005. Influence of feed withdrawal for different durations on performance of broilers in summer. Int. J. Agri. Biol., 7: 975978. Miller, L. and M. A. Qureshi., 1992. Introduction of heat shock on protein and phagocytic function of chicken microphage following in vitro heat exposure. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol., 30: 179191. Newcombe, M., S. H. Fitz-coy and J. M. Harter-dennis, 1992. The effect of feed restriction and Eimeria maxima infection with or without medication on growth and feed intake in broilers. Poult. Sci., 71: 1442-1449. Ohtani, S. and S. Leeson., 2000. The effect of intermittent lighting on metabolizable energy intake and heat production of male broilers. Poult. Sci., 79: 167-171. Palo, P. E., J. L. Sell, F.J. Piquer, L. Vilaseea and M. F. Soto-Salanova, 1995. Effect of early nutrient restriction on broiler chickens performance and digestive enzyme activities. Poult. Sci., 74: 1470-

1483. Pinchasov, Y. and L. S. Jensen., 1989. Comparison of physical and chemical means of feed restriction in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci., 68: 61-69. Samara, M. H., K. R. Robinson and M.O. Smith., 1996, Interaction of feeding time and temperature and their relationship to performance of the broiler breeder hens. Poult. Sci., 75: 34-41. Scheideler, S. E. and G. R. Baughman, 1993. Computerized early feed restriction programs for various strains of broilers. Poult. Sci., 72: 236-242. Siegel, H. S., 1987. Effect of behavioral and physical stressors on immune response. In: Biology of Stress in Farm Animals. An Integrative Approach. P. R. Wiep Kema and P. W. M. Van-Adrichem (eds)., Martinus Nighoff Publishers, Boston, USA, pp: 39-54. Steel, R. G. D., J. H. Torrie and D. A. Dickey, 1997. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A Biochemical Approach. 2nd Ed., McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc. New York, NY., USA. Thaxton, P. and H. S. Siegel, 1972. Depression of secondary immunity by high environmental temperature. Poult. Sci., 51: 1519-1526. Thaxton, P. and H. S. Siegel, 1973. Modification of

high temperature and ACTH-induced immunodepression by metyrapone. Poult. Sci., 52: 618624. Zhong, C., H. S. Nakaue, C.Y. Hu and L. W. Mirosh, 1995. Effect of full feed and early feed restriction on broiler performance, abdominal fat level, cellularity and fat metabolism in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci., 74: 1636-1643. Zubair, A. K. and S. Leeson, 1996. Changes in body composition and adipocyte cellularity of male broilers subjected to varying degrees of early-life feed restriction. Poultry Sci., 75: 719-728. Zulkifli, I., M. B. Hair and A. M. Fauzi, 1997. Antibody response to infectious bursal disease vaccination in fasted broilers under high temperature and humidity J. Vet. Malaysia 9: 2931. Table 5: The effect of quantitative feed restriction on the economics of production of broilers kept under various feeding regimes Parameters Treatments ABCD Cost of chicks 180 180 180 180 Feed consumed (Kg) 114 102 106 102 Feed price/Kg (Rs) 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Total feed cost (Rs) 1482 1326 1378 1326 Miscellaneous cost (Rs) 340 340 340 340

Total cost (Rs) 2002 1846 1898 1846 Total live weight (Kg) 52.14 51.40 52.34 48.18 Sale price/Kg live weight (Rs) 43.00 43.00 43.00 43.00 Cost/Kg live weight (Rs) 38.39 35.91 36.26 38.31 Profit/Kg live weight (Rs) 4.61 7.09 6.74 4.69

Quantitative and qualitative feed restriction on growth characteristics of male broiler chickens
1. M Urdaneta-Rincon and
2. S Leeson
+ Author Affiliations

1.Department of Animal & Poultry Science, University of Guelph, ON, Canada.

Abstract
Four experiments were conducted to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative feed restriction on the performance of male broiler chickens. In the first experiment, broilers fed identical pelleted diets were feed-restricted from 5 to 42 d by giving 95, 90, or 85% of the feed consumed ad libitum by control birds the previous day. In a second experiment, broilers were fed pellet or mash diets from 1 to 7 wk. In Experiments 3 and 4, broilers were feed-restricted to 90% of the ad libitum intake of a control group during different intervals. Results from Experiment 1 indicated that live body weight at 42 d was significantly different between unrestricted and restricted broilers (P < 0.01). A reduction in mortality was noted when feed intake was reduced (P < 0.05). In the second experiment, broilers fed mash had lower body weights and breast meat yields at 42 and 49 d (P < 0.05). Cumulative mortality at 42 and 49 d was reduced in broilers fed mash (P < 0.05). Results from Experiment 3 indicated that body weight and mortality were not significantly different (P > 0.05) at 42 d across treatments. There was a significant (P < 0.01) linear improvement on feed conversion at 42 d due to duration of feed restriction. Breast meat yield at 42 d was less in broilers subjected to mild feed restriction (P > 0.05) (Experiments 3 and 4). Broilers appeared able to recover from mild feed restriction, and there was always an associated reduction in mortality.
Abstract Feed restriction strategies are proven to be effective in increasing the growth performance and carcass parameters of broiler chickens. The objective of the present experiment was to evaluate the effects of feedremoval for three hour time periodon growth performance and carcass parameters of relatively older male broiler chickens. Twenty days old male broiler chickens (n=80) were allocated into 16 floor pens. Birds in eight pens were fed ad libitum while those in

other eight pens were fasted for 3 hours per day (13.00-16.00) during 21-42 d experimental period. There was a slight feed intake reduction (P<0.01) due to feed restriction during 21-25 d, but not thereafter. When feed was offered after three hours of deprivation, birds consumed significantly (P<0.01) higher amount of feed within first two hours, compared to the feed intake of ad libitum group during the same time period. Birds fed ad libitum were heavier (P<0.05) on day 42 but not on days 25, 30 and 35. Feed restriction significantly reduced the weight gain between 35-42 d (P <0.01) and the total weight gain (P<0.05) from day 21-42. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) between 30-42 d was significantly (P<0.05) lower under ad libitum feeding, and also overall FCR from 21-42 d was affected by the feeding regimes. Restricted feeding increased the total giblet weight (liver+heart+gizzard) (P<0.10), the carcass weight (P<0.01) and dressing percentage (P<0.05) while reduced (P<0.01) the length of the small intestine relative to carcass weight. Restricted feeding tended to reduce (P<0.10) the percentage of abdominal fat. The results conclude that feed restriction for three hours per day from days 21-42 increased dressing percentage while reducing abdominal fat content of matured male broiler chicken. KEY WORDS broiler, carcass, feed restriction, growth.

INTRODUCTION A profitable broiler feeding strategy should maximize final body weight and lean tissue production using minimum amount of feed. Studies of Plavnik and Hurwitz (1985, 1988 and 1991)proposed that early feed restriction strategies increased the growth and feed efficiency with reduced carcass fat. Those studies showed that early growth retardation resulting from feed restriction in broiler chicks induced an accelerated growth termed as compensatory growth, when feed was given ad libitum after a period of restriction. However, later studies have shown that though in general growth was compensated, final body weight of the restricted birds could be low (Leterrier et al. 1988; Cabel and Waldroup, 1990; Ballay et al.1992; Bruno et al.2000) or similar (Calvert et al. 1987; Summers et al. 1990; Pinchasov and Jensen, 1989) or even higher (Cherry et al. 1978) compared to ad libitum fed counterparts. Similar inconsistencies have been reported in relation to feed efficiency (Palo and Sell 1995; Cabel and Woldroup, 1990) and carcass or abdominal fat (Cabel and Woldroup, 1990; Santoso et al. 1995; Plavnik and Hurtwitz, 1985). A number of recent studies have attempted to use restricted feeding strategies to reduce the metabolic disorders such as ascites (Acar et al. 1995;Buys et al. 1998; Balog et al. 2000) and leg weaknesses (Su et al. 1999; Carter et al. 1994; Robinson et al.1992). Except for the study of Balog et al. (2000)all other studies restricted the feed or nutrient intake of broilers during early ages and then offered ad libitum allowing compensatory growth. Balog et al. (2000)deprived feed for broiler chickens for 16 hours up to day 42. Final weight and the breast meat yield of the broilers on restricted feeding regimen were lower than ad libitum fed counterparts. Proudfoot et al. (1983)also reported similar adverse effects due to feed deprivation for 8 or 12 hours. Possibly, mild feed restriction strategies are more appropriate to achieve the beneficial effects of feed restriction without the reduction of final body weight. Also, severe restrictions for longer durations can be criticized as for being unethical and affecting animal welfare. Sudden death of heavy broilers during hot-humid hours of the day due to heat stress is common in broiler flocks reared under hot-humid conditions. Metabolic heat production

associated with feeding and digestion can be a significant contributor for the heat stress of broilers, particularly during hot hours of the day. Denial of feed during hot hours of the day may be helpful to reduce the metabolic heat production and thus may be an animal welfare promoting practice at least under hot humid rearing conditions. Therefore, in this study feed was restricted for three hours from 13:00 to 16:00 h; i.e., the hottest hours of the day. Since the temperature reduces after 16:00 h, increase in feed intake was assumed to have less pronounced effect on heat stress. The objective of the present study was to determine the effects of three hours of feed restriction during later stage of male broiler chickens on growth performance, carcass traits and abdominal fat content.

How to Put Weight on Broiler Chickens


By G.K. Bayne, eHow Contributor

Print this article Broiler chickens start life as a baby chick.

Broiler chickens are raised primarily for their meat. The goal of the backyard grower is the same as those that raise broiler chickens commercially; putting weight on the bird as quickly as possible. Broilers are also known as frying or fryer chickens. Broilers are harvested at various ages for Cornish hens, nuggets and chicken parts. Broilers raised at home are generally purchased as chicks.
Read more: How to Put Weight on Broiler Chickens | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/how_6817333_put-weight-broiler-chickens.html#ixzz2Lu24ATLZ

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen