t-,/rrr',r47c

5l
body weight gain werc rcduced ro smc exl.nl, Tley @nclud.d lhat lhe lolerance of
thc biomN wd @nsid@d 8ood, provid.d baeic nutie .equireBents werc m.t-
Halda$/l-Valte. ?r zl (19E6) includ.d singl. @U protein havi.e 69% crudc
prcrcin i! Ihe dicts of brcileB at 5yo l.vel- They obsdved d in€r€e in thc bodt
wcieltt al Oo €nd of 42 dlys @mpared *iO thlt of brcilcF siven diets conbining
nsh meal dd helt m@l (1481 Vs 1340d. FCR wN inprcved wirh mioobial
prorein (2. I Vs 2.26).
Lyurskanov and Sokolov (1986) comparcd the biomass produced $rough
rwo direrenl yeasl st aiN viz., Condido ttopicalis and Cardida r.o(i grown on
wood hyd.olyaie ed sDgd cane viDas€ m€dia respectively- They found thar th€
medium did nol caus€ significel change in crude, true ed diSeslible prolein, lhe
values of which were 50-2-61-30/0, 43.1-44.80/o ar'd 40-5-41.770, rcspecrively. Thc
biological value ofboth slrains was hid r,'8irg 69.4-71.1 perctnt.
Viklorov et zl (19E7) inv.stiS .d d. p.orein quality ofnep.in (midobial
prcducr) rhroud a r.eding tri.l in which m.prin wB rcptacd wirh fish met in rhc
ralion of brcilq chicls at 0, 25, 50, 75 lrd 100 o/o l.vels. It wa found rhar thc
.ve68e daily weidt Sain w.s high in sll thc Broups f.d rnepritr. Ir was cdctuded
llEr ire tneprin had no advcBe erects on mctabolism ud hetlh ofchicks.
clavez e/ ar (1988-l) produced rwo kitrd or fungal biomass protein, one
irom glucose slbsrrate (lW) and othcr f.om molasses substrale (2w) as the main
carbon sources. 'fte bioloSical trial conducted on wsnling rats rev@ted rhar lhe
yeasl prolein had highest PER but signi,icantly lower lhan calein @nlrol d'er, ils
value was sigificurly grealer thsn lW wi(h simil& pmrein inrake. Torul. yeasr
showed a signilicotly hiSher PER value lha, lW, althougb prorein inLke wa3
low€r. The NPR EIus beinS gr.arly influlnced by inrate lev.ts, prcvcd to b.
nuch lss Etul m6ue of !rcr€in qu.lity. Thc lW md 2W di.L rere infqic to
rh€ Torul. y6t od tftweas y8t di.ls in dry m.rrd diAqribitily, Diseribitiry of